This episode of epicenter, Bitcoin is brought to you by vulturo the goal to Bitcoin exchange trade gold, to bitcoin, instantly and securely starting at just one milligram, go to V or.com to deposit, some Bitcoin, and start trading today. And by shape-shift with no No signup required. It's the easiest way to buy and sell gems.
Dash, new bits mineiro and other leading cryptocurrencies go to shape-shift dot Iota instantly convert your old coins and to discover the future of crypto currency exchanges. Hi, welcome to epicenter Bitcoin the show, which talks about the Technologies, projects and startups, driving decentralization, and the global cryptocurrency Revolution, my name is Sebastian quechua, and my name is Franco and grain.
We're back again today. All guests that we've had before attempts once and many of you will know him, he's been very vocal in the Bitcoin Community, making people very angry on Reddit. And then the last episode, we call them the big coin by posture. And he's been busy keeping that up but he's also done a lot of really interesting work in particular. He's written an opinion, a white paper on this whole idea of sort of blockchains before. Bitcoin, which is very
interesting. So, thanks for coming on today, Tim. Hey, thanks again for having me, guys. Appreciate it. So yeah you have a you always keep up this enormous volume of writing which is very impressive and you have you've written some some really important I think sort of thought pieces on the kind of evolution of the space among other things. You've written this white paper on consensus as a service. Can you talk a little bit about what this sort of, you know what
the main idea of things? Sure. So last year I was continually struck by this, this notion that we are identifying people on both sides of transactions through these different on ramps and off ramps, but we aren't doing any doxing on validators and understand, you know, the whole purpose of Bitcoin was couldn't trust. Anyone couldn't trust the validators, so we use proof of work, but if you're continually to doxing everybody, but the validators. Why Why bother using, you know,
Bitcoin itself? Why not do some kind of database and it was towards the end of the year. The it's I began seeing a number of different startups emerge. And then earlier this year, the it's kind of did a different approach. They did a basically a, it's called now permission during a gated validation within the network and that's specific to specific use cases. This is not to say that it's the only approach. And even compete with Bitcoin like in my view.
Let's Bitcoin be Bitcoin and not try to turn it into a million different things that it's not particularly suited for based on its capital expenses that are involved with proof of work. And so it led me to write this report I guess that two months ago and this is main thesis is okay, guys. Well, it's the end of the day. How are we going to do? Validation is our is one approach.
Much better than the other or they both have different different advantages and disadvantages and my I guess General take over over viewer, take takeaway, is that? There is no one-size-fits-all. They both have trade-offs and that they'll probably both coexist so they different customers want to use both. Yeah, absolutely.
And I guess this is the idea though, because many people seem to think in the Bitcoin space, that the very idea of having A blockchain or doing any of these things, sort of, but separated from Bitcoin, that doesn't work. And that makes no sense. Why do you think that idea is so held by so many people? Well, number one, they own a lot of Bitcoins so that they wanted to be that way because they'll hope that those coins.
Appreciate, that's totally fine. You know, if, if you were around 100 years ago, 115 years ago and you're like, oh I I think the the aeronautical vehicles are, are the way forward and you start. Testing and then make sure you might have been writing your thesis and they became big. But you may have just invested in companies or a company that
didn't pan out too well. So I think that there's a lot of also ideological reasons, you know, there's a number of people out there who think that Banks and Wall Street and all this other you know the traditional Financial sphere just can be destroyed. I'm not going to say that there won't be margins will be eroded or there won't be entire divisions removed like back officer or something that I Speak to that. I really don't know.
But, you know, Banks each have their own, you know, in my experience of talking with different banks. The last three four months has, they've all had their own teams, internal teams working sometimes, multiple different groups of people working on how to integrate this technology. So, just like you had pgp and SSL and Linux and open source software in general, these ideas that were forked in merged within Enterprises 15, 20 years ago.
I think it'll end up happening with this Tech to, I mean, You don't, you don't necessarily need a Bitcoin like blockchain though, to do all those things and I think that that Ruffles some people's feathers because they bought into this, this narrative that's prevalent on Reddit and it conferences that the only one and the way the truth and the light, the the one and only Savior for four or Ledger. If you will is the Bitcoin letter, maybe, maybe that is the
case. But I have some doubts and we could talk about some of those in this, if you like So, I mean, it seems to me that we're talking about a very different thing. And it's often important to sort of like conceptualize that, right? Because when you, when you start talking about a ledger where you have different entities that are known and you know, we've done some podcasts with well, hyper Ledger or areas that are both sort of tackling that space. Then it's a really different
thing. Right, from where a network, where it's open. In and sort of people in China, can mine on it, on anybody can turn their machine on and participate, right? And it's it's trying to solve a really different problem. Yes, for sure. The, the Bitcoin solves a problem for cypherpunks, how can you do, how can you process transactions? I can Section 1, how can you process transactions without a third party? You trusted third party.
And if you already, I fear a fear of financial institution, you your, your starting assumptions are different. You already have identities of your customer base, your staff, your partners, and your payment processor.
So you don't necessarily need proof of work, but you don't need a centralized database to there's still advantages of a distributed Ledger. Resiliency such as the ability to conduct transactions without having to worry about necessarily counterparty risk for a variety of reasons that are trying to be tackled by like you said like hyper Ledger Eros and Claire Maddox, maybe at the end of the day we end up with the weird Fusion between distributed databases and
distribute the ledgers for some of these companies. I don't think that the company, these large institutions are going to going to disappear. I mean they they all have enormous amount of capital to use to either buy any of these companies. That have traction or to create their own own systems that create this utility and enhance, you know, whatever customer services reduce costs of what?
Yeah, yeah. So I think that regarding the sort of Bitcoin Reddit narrative that are the Bitcoin maximalism as we might call it. I think part of that is also, you know, every all these companies that are doing these really Innovative things with Ledger's sort of all get dropped into like the Bitcoin space, where they I have been inspired by a Bitcoin to do the touch things are doing now, but their
interests don't lie with you. Like you said, the cypherpunks are not in line with the cypherpunks. So and I mean, I think you've seen this before in other Technologies as well. I mean, just look at Linux, you know, it's powering all Apple and Android phones. And, you know, Apple is very much a close technology now. So I think that's sort of part of the problem also is that we, there's no line between what Bitcoin is trying to achieve.
Achieve and what is perceived to be like for it says, with Hyper Ledger is trying to do or areas or these other permission Ledger's that we can get into that later. Yeah, I mean, actually, one of the funny things about this is that when you look at this coin desk state of Bitcoin report and they said, like, if you see fundings for Bitcoin startups, the includes like Ripple in there, and things like that. If it's just, is quite funny, right?
I've gotta find out to be extremely misleading as it is. Yeah, totally. People speaking of VC funding, so yeah, as of today we've had about 800 million dollars, put into this ecosystem. Have a post about this about a week or so ago and if you just do the cost of customer acquisition. So typical Bank in the u.s. it cost about $1200 on board people. And if you just do the division on 10 users, again, the whole, you know, thesis with Bitcoin is you get to be your own bank and
your own bare asset. But if you look at the address, The entities on on the Bitcoin Network itself to unchain side. There's only about three hundred. Seventy thousand individuals or entities that actually control any, you know, any number any large amount anything larger than one Bitcoin basically you can go to the Bitcoin really say the distribution of this 99 98.9% of all Bitcoins are held
by by these entities. So if you just do the math on that it's about 2400 dollars per individual actually sorry about 22. Hundred dollars per person or entity, which is about twice as much as Banks do for customer acquisition. So, my might not be a Perfect Analogy, but the basically, these are spending enormous amount of money on trying to get people to do something that they don't want to do, or individuals prefer using trusted third
parties, like coinbase and zap. Oh, and I understand, you know, nobody wants to sit there and have to go through the hassle of securing. Their own private keys. But if you're using these trusted third parties, why don't you? There's not a whole lot of
advantage of using them. Versus a large bank and this is not to say one is better than the other, but if you just look at the actual metrics of it, if these exact go and clean base end up having to get licenses and do all the same rigmarole as Banks do at the end of the day you just end up with a less less secure bank and again maybe maybe things will change in the future but that's kind of the way it's played at the last I guess, six years or so. Yeah.
I mean of course you still have the option right with Bitcoin to not do that. Like there's a lot of threads now about coinbase wanting to, you know, prevent you from sending certain point or coins to certain addresses, or you received it from certain addresses, like, gambling sites. They'll close down your account and then you're staying. Like I was told and maybe this is completely wrong.
But, you know, there s VB, is they have basically 10 controllers, 10 people, monitoring the blockchain active, We any time looking to see where transactions are are going or where they've been received following basic us, believe that they work on behalf of coinbase again. Yeah, just what I've heard from multiple really good sources and
that makes sense. You know, hey you want to you want to track Providence to see if it came from illicit trade in. The reason I'm saying, it makes sense, is they want to keep their banking license or being chartered and so forth. So like they have it in incentive, not to have that revoked, so they go and look at the stuff. So I'm not The coinbase is going to become a closed ecosystem, but yeah, for now you're right, you can withdraw a coins and send them to different addresses
and so forth. But if you already dachshund people on both sides, if you send wines from from coinbase to zap, oh why do you need Bitcoin? Why can't you use one of these other Ledger systems? There's no reason to go through a minor in China to do that. I mean, I agree with you, right? There, is this 10 cm and I think the bitlicense stuff is totally in that direction. R. I mean, I'm not exactly sure if that's still in there. But for at least a while, it said in there, right?
That bitlicense companies, that get a bit license, will need to do kyc on both parties or both sides of each transaction, right? So, and actually, in the digital gold book, it was also written a basic about you said, now that coinbase has had for a long time. They've had to, you know, basically try to figure out where you send money. And make sure that it's below a certain amount of things like that. And and otherwise they would have to perhaps reverse your
payments and things like that. And there are sometimes reports that happening on Reddit. Is it all the time? I saw some of that this week actually. Yeah. Right so and of course if you take this further, write a mean, if there will be a point where maybe it says, like oh you can't send from coinbase to some unknown address and if that happens on a wide scale, then, yes, I mean that really sort of rates Bitcoin at some point but I personally don't think I think that will happen.
I think we're probably will happen is just a drives people to using wall, etcetera, run locally because they're you just can't do that. Yeah. But those people are not who are those people, right? Those are not the masses, those are. Yeah, I mean, of course, it remains to be seen to what extent this breakthrough and I mean I think that's that's one of the one of the interesting things that one of the ways I think about this, But it stays is really ambitious Gamblin.
Bet to have this Global decentralized, cryptocurrency, peer-to-peer cryptocurrency, and it's a long shot. It's a hard thing but it's a revolutionary, huge idea, right?
It's a huge idea that people keep their wealth may be in developing world and other countries in Bitcoin and, but a lot of startups that are sort of implicitly making that bit and then there are others and Laughing, that's where the permission letter idea comes in. That's a well there's something interesting about this technology but we're not going to make this bet that it's going to like power this new world currency. But we'll use it for something
else. And then that's sort of obvious in near and it's not nearly as risky because you don't you don't make out of it. Sure, obviously I have no crystal ball, a lot of again and this is not to be saying that these are bad or entrepreneurs are bad in this space but almost all I don't say almost all significant portion of the funding has gone into it. So far is based on Forex plays basically, you know the bitpay, one of the guys was just talking
this last week that hey we hold as many Bitcoins as we can. We try not to sell them at least not on exchanges because we're Thing that it will appreciate and therefore investors make money off of the appreciation. Well, that's just an asset manager. That's just a 4X play. That's not, that's not that's not payments. I mean if you go to Angel list right now there's just under his a big pay said they are basically trying to speculate on the Bitcoin price. Yes yes.
I mean I've heard it like 4 other five. I've heard it since the last fall but this is the first time anyone said it in public, you know hey we're holding on to as many coins as we can as a result end up having you know large amount. Out of of underwater coins on their books. And again, maybe it turns out well and you know, they make a lot of money because it goes at, you know, 10,000 some like that. But that's a 4X B, that's not a
payments bet. And so as a result you end up like Robert Sanders pointed this out last year, basically, the whole ecosystem of the Holy Ghost, a significant portion of the ecosystem is relying on price appreciation. So they're holding onto these coins and having to rely on VC
funding on Fiat cash. Another National currencies actually build the The system itself there was one criticism of the article I wrote I guess a week or so ago about how you know miners over the last two years have received about 1.1 billion about 1.1 billion dollars worth of rewards, you have the wealth transfer from parties one party to another in the form of the seniority of this block reward and you know they didn't they're not spending that.
You don't the only company I believe that's actually spending that is bitfury on and on other Investments improvements to the ecosystem. Everyone else's is effectively cashing out which is great for Them. But the point is all these other startups are still having to rely on VC funding to actually build it. So Robertson's analogy was like it's like relying on People's Bank of China to actually build your economy rather than using your own domestic currency to actually build up.
So again, you know, people in practice versus people in theory, people, in practice, our want to use this informational commodity to speculate on as an asset rather than, as an actual virtual cash or virtual currency, So Perhaps, Perhaps them startups should rather be mining and using that mining reward to fund their companies rather than getting VC money because it looks like, like, like miners are making more money than the startups are. Yeah, it's a zero.
Okay, so the question is, is it what's your thesis like is? Are you, are you willing to bet? Like so mining is is a force play. You are literally converting one National unit of account for virtual unit of account with the hope it's going long. On one currency in short on the other. And so, you know, are you willing to play with variance? Is that the dance you willing to do? Or are you willing to bet on the they'll be uptake through some other consumer-facing product.
And again, I'm not saying one is better than the other we know mining zero-sum. The only people who actually really make money are those who either steal electricity or have some subsidized electricity somewhere in China or Georgia or something like that. So yeah, there's trade-offs and I'm not going to say one's better than the other. I certainly can't do that. Kind of judgment. It's time for a word from our sponsor of all tor.com.
So you know, there's different ways that you can use Bitcoin, some people use it as an investment and speculate on it. But if you're a Bitcoin business like us and you don't have a bank account, you don't want to be exposed to that volatility risk and you know, there's different ways that you can protect yourself against that. Some people have bank accounts we don't we only use Bitcoin with, you know, our advertisers
and suppliers. And we don't want to end up like a Bitcoin foundation and lose all of our money. When the price goes down, So we have to hedge and to do that. We use it Altura Soviet epicenter Bitcoin. We had to about 50% of our funds with v 4 in gold and it's super easy. And deposit is there instantly you can start trading just one milligram. So you know, there's no real barrier to entry and the great thing is where you can really run a business.
You can be protected from the volatility and you can do it without having fiat currency and without even requiring a bank account. And then you don't even need to provide KY see if you deposit up to five thousand dollars worth of Bitcoins per day. So will Tory, makes it super easy makes it super convenient and, and really gives you the option to be protected from the volatility and be a cryptocurrencies business because of all tor.com and start
trading. Today, we would like to thank vulture for their support of epicenter Bitcoin. Let's talk a little bit more about this permission. Ledger's case. So, I mean, one of the arguments is and I it It's an argument that kind of makes some sense is that if you have a bunch of people who are known, write a bunch of banks that operate. Is this Ledger Network? Why do you need in the first place? Like why is a blockchain necessary?
Then what value does it provide? If it's not that censorship resistant think that Bitcoin does? It's a really good question. I get this asked many times I think Roberts has actually done the most intellectual heavy lifting on this again. If people aren't just, did it really recommend just looking through the report, especially the last section, before the list of companies that I look at, I think the ins it's between like, page, 25, and 28 or so,
and they're actually the 20s. If you will, the 20s in his thesis. And I guess a couple other people at this point is the hey you could use this data layer as both. And to structure, whatever, kind of instructions do have this Turing completeness at several, these systems. Have not all not all the margarine complete obviously, but Aris, clear, Mattox. And I guess a couple other ones could modify to to use some kind of Turing complete virtual machine.
The idea is you get to basically use The Ledger itself as the settlement mechanism which speeds up settlement finality between numerous Different. Well in this case Financial image instruments like the this report again was is basically this focused on how can financial institutions use this for effectively settlement clearing.
And so you could reduce, you know, settlement time from from t, plus v, 2 T to 10 minutes or 10 seconds or whatever arbitrary amount of time you want to do and that supposedly will save people costs whether that does it along when we'll find out. So it's some point in the next six to 12 months, I think we'll have more data to See if it actually, you know, is a good
idea or not. So it's he idea here that the, because, of course, he could have some Central party, that just does Vicki the settlement and then they could do just as good of a job as using a blockchain - oh, is he is the advantage here that you don't. People don't want to trust and Central party to do the settlement and that's why using a ledger is better for that. Well, we already have, we have, we have Clearing Houses in cchs. Ccps were created.
You know, after 2008 to do just that, like, there was no Clearinghouse for OTC derivatives. And I know, at least it's clear backs. And, by the way, disclosure, I'm an advisor to both hyper Ledger and Claire Maddox. And just want to let people know that the idea was. I believe that clear Maddox is saying, hey, this network that we're creating is actually the Clearinghouse, or sorry. It is the counterparty, the is
distributed. So you have a In counterparty effectively and which makes being it creates a new Financial control and I'll you have segregated, the only have segregated facilities for you know a variety of different exchange of broker-dealer so forth.
But now that you have this other Financial control in which nobody can actually it becomes increasingly difficult to reverse those transactions or manipulate this transactions that could be actually a reduced costs and create more transparency within an organization with Bitcoin itself. There is no way to it from a technical standpoint. Point to actually prevent a 51% attack or history reversing attract. It's an economic incentive and economic issue.
There's no, you know, I think it was it Andreas Antonopoulos. He got, he got scolded on Reddit for saying, hey, we could rewrite the code or we could, you know, Blacklist different different nodes. That's if you can Blacklist, then you that you've kind of defeated the whole purpose of Bitcoin itself. Right. The whole purpose was it did its Dynamic membership? Our who are signing these coinbase transactions and if you're black listing them, then you're just going back to this
old system. So at least for censorship with these permission Ledger's, you know, they're assuming that, you know, irreversibilities the priority and you can actually contractually obligated make that happen with with, with gated with permission. Ledger's, you sacrificed some censorship resistance for that, but at the end of the day, financial institutions are more interested in irreversibilities. And censorship resistant. So why is that 51%?
Attack threat such an issue? I mean, like, let's say you want to do security settlement on the blockchain, because I mean, after all, so far, there hasn't been a proper 51% attack because it's been around for a long time is just that big possibility that it could happen such a big problem for this use case, it's two things. Number one, ignoring 51% for a moment, any given day, you are Have two or three pools and simply just have no incentive to add more transactions.
So you only have the coinbase transaction one transaction in a block. So you have, you know, thousands of transactions, of pileup, regardless of bees that don't get included. So you have a interesting game theory issue going on to where if you're trying to build a time-sensitive settlement product or something that ties in with the Bitcoin network, has a settlement product you're having to rely on these the suit Anonymous minor. So, actually, we actually pretty much know.
No, it's not to include or not to include or to sensory transaction so forth but the 51%. Yeah, who do you call if that happens? There's no terms of service. There's no contractual obligation to go through with this.
So, you're SOL basically just like, in two years ago, when you had that effective for, you know, for your 20 4 blocks that were thrown away that added up to be tens of thousands of dollars for something, for some customers, for some payment processors, in March 2013. And so, it was There hasn't been an attack because there's no release incentive attack. But if you start beginning to put large value transactions in bulk, you now have a new potential attack Vector.
I think that, you know, you've had guests on with Jonathan being or maybe at least you've talked to him on the off chain, if you will about this, you know what what are the ramifications of putting watermarks coins are colored coins or metal coins on to a Bitcoin like blockchain that are transferring octane assets are to trying to To settle off, chain assets.
There's again, you know, if it's already off chain and you having identified these different users and so forth, why would you go through these student on this validators? The it's there's no terms of service for its communal. That's a communal issue, right? Like, well, who do you call? If they reverse your transactions, what ends up happening? Is you go on, read it and you complain a lot. That's what happened there.
Was it? There was an instance, just last month, a user, or two months ago, a user accidentally sent was like, 85. For a transaction fee. And because a bit GO error with big go. And they sat there, there was for a whole day. There's lots of yelling and screaming. And finally, I was a bit main, they and they run a pool to Chinese pool and, and pool said, I will refund your cash.
Okay. And so, like, in the future, you know, I are you, are we gonna is NASDAQ ready to have to go on to Reddit and sit there and complain all day to have, you know, a hundred Bitcoin transaction or Watermark coin.
That's worth, you know, you know, I must have value, like Apple stock, you know, put some 150 billion dollars of Apple stock on the network and you'll have new incentives to potentially reverse it, because miners aren't really effectively destroying enough Capital to protect that. There they no way for them to recognize that that colors exist
and so forth. Maybe there's some, maybe there's some solutions, that, you know, see some proposals for for getting mining pools, color, or Lair, or Watermark to wear, but that y goes through this rigmarole. Why use is proof of work network. If you're already have the identities of all the different parties, All right, so one of the issues would be the bullet, a hypothetical. Somebody said we want to start trading stocks on the Bitcoin blockchain using colored coins.
And then now there is a 51% attack something like that and the ownership is changed, right? Like let's say I managed to steal some Apple stock this way. Then what happens, right? Does that mean like for example, am I going to be able to use the owner? Ship of this cryptographic token to now, receive the Apple dividends and stuff. Or does that mean? Because actually, I stole it and somebody can prove. I stole it that even though in our own this cryptographic token, I don't actually own the
underlying asset, right? So that seems to be a big issue. Sure. Yeah. So I really couple articles last year with the help of some people like like Jonathan Roberts Sam's.
The idea is this is if you in the instance it's somebody ends up. With a good or in this case a dividend, it's not there's the companies left with two choices right there left was either paying that dividend which then makes them liable to basically being sued by either knowingly paying a criminal or somebody that doesn't want to wear number two, if they don't pay and they, you know, reverse that transmitter trying to reverse it or they just cut off that that
coin or whatever it might be, then it defeats the purpose of using a decentralized network, right? So, I think the See the funny quote, I've heard most recently, he's with IBM in Samsung doing that partnership with with the washing machine Richard Brown. It was an on-call Richard Brown. If you guys aren't familiar, is got a great blog. He works over at and UK at IBM and this is his own personal
view. I believe was, what happens what happens if we put these digital these virtual Wallets on on these different machines, these different appliances and they end up in. We have these Bearer instruments flying around in one day you wake up in your washing machine somehow. Ended up with property titles in Deeds to, you know, homes and hospitals and stuff like that. Like, why what do you do in this instance? So it raises up a bunch of, not a bunch of really good
questions. But then a day, if you have real world, identity attached to any of these things, you don't necessarily need to use a proof-of-work blockchain for this. So, if you have to turn to reverse those transactions or go to court and say, hey Court, you know, my property Deeds sitting on a washing machine, a thousand miles away, you know, what do I do? Or you know what my heart my house. But the the fire in my washing machine is bald my house. Like I get it back. Yeah.
Or you know you see this already happened with big we've had between 2009 and 2014 and had about a million Bitcoins that were lost stolen, see is distributed. We ended up with was out there. The rightful owner, legitimate owner, however, you want to Define it. And so, this devolves into questions of bona, fide ownership and Nema dot. Like, it was a really good law article written earlier this year. Talking about encumbered Lines or coins that lack good title.
And since we've had, you know, like I said, a million coins and been lost on Steve's and Andre lost or Source re-released on and so forth and they're mixed and pooled. It creates a problem for for those who have clear tie, like who knows if this ever gets big enough to actually sue people for, but there could be a chance a case made the it's even coins that you guys might have were proceeds of an illicit
transaction. There's no way to effectively cleanse these tokens from encumbrance from previous illicit, or accidental trades and so forth. So we end up having is you have an economy that grants to a standstill because none of its Exempted from Nemo dot. Even got Switz are our currencies in the world are is once they go through a custodian, they're magically cleanse, we don't have that yet. In the Bitcoin World, maybe
there will be one at some point. But this this this Bearer instrument is just dual sided, right? You have the ability to be your own paying, but at the same time, You lose that somehow. If you lose a credential that practically you lose access to not just the coins as a Arts early, the assets as they are today, but in the future, maybe homes, the cars boats and so forth, but I mean, how is that? If cash, I mean, if I get a receipt you know I pay
something. Someone gives me a ten dollar or ten years or whatever that at one point were stolen and maybe that number is recorded somewhere, still? That's that's now my money, right? Nobody's going to come and Take it away. Sure sure. So this is not going to similar way. No. Also. Right now there's a principle called me MoDOT. It's actually longer it's a Latin phrase and I've written about it three or four times. I'm not the lawyer. I talked to the lawyers.
Have been looking into this including Ryan Strauss and there's a guy Perkins Foy Perkins boy named. I think his George Fogg who wrote an article that was quoted in the financial times. A few months ago, the general idea is, hey, legal tender laws. Apply to what we have these National currencies and I'm not defending legal. Laws per say I'm saying, but the way it works is Cash is specifically Exempted from having to deal with this
Providence issue. Because just as you said, if it if your cash was at any time, proceeds or took part in illicit trade, the economy would grind to a standstill because you just wouldn't know what to use this cash for. Oh, I just, let's go to leave it there, right? But Bitcoins are virtual currencies at this point, still haven't gone through that kind of vetting process. There's no such thing as a custodian that cleanse Azure provides exemption to is encumbered coins, if you will,
or encumbered virtual assets. Maybe there will be at some point but they're not. So yeah, I think that's something that's the legal Community within the legal profession. Within the Bitcoin Community is debating. You see it on Twitter occasionally I'm sometimes interjected because I think it's I think it's a very interested in Bitcoins recreated all that all the problems we've had the last 400 years but with the intermediaries as custodians with currency.
So and we get to see it, you know, in a very compact 67-year form. So it's a very it's a very interesting way of looking at history and seeing why intermediaries were created in the first place and why, you know, what's the purpose of disintermediating, if we keep on creating the same, intermediaries today's magic word is hype hyp e head over to. Let's talk Bitcoin.com to sign in enter the magic word and claim your part of the listener reward. So what were the interesting
parts of your white paper? Or the thought part that I really liked is the way that you sort of. Look at the entire spectrum of Ledger Technologies from the fully decentralized to the fully centralized. And on one end we have like Bitcoin type technology on the other end. We have the existing banking system and Of the things that you do in the white paper. And you quote mayor Roy, who's got this really nice chart of sort of the the different levels of tokenization.
I would say that we have sort of in this Bitcoin ecosystem but it's a broader sense like the financial technology in ecosystem, can you talk about some of the different levels and the use cases that we would have in each level are going from like for instance like the hyper Ledger type of Technology. E all the way down to Bitcoin work. We see this going in, like maybe some lunch shots like ten years. Wow, long shot, ten years so that's really good questions.
Yeah, so for the, for the listeners mayor Roy, he published this really interesting two different charts. If you look on the paper, it's on page 13 and 14. Basically, he takes, you know, different assumptions. What are you what are your your
investment thesis? What is your invention thesis if you will from token gnosticism, which would be I guess heiress and Hyperlite Your ticket the currency maximalism some kind of cryptocurrency work run wins out for everything the Bitcoin maximalism hyper Bitcoin has Asian hyper Bitcoin is a shinza theory. The Bitcoin takes over everything and anything and everything. You know the the financial industry is completely in
upheaval and destroyed so forth. So, you know, the the there's different levels of this and the VC thesis so far at least the public stuff has been towards, you know, big Coin maximalism at least cryptocurrency maximalism and even to some extent, hyper Bitcoin ization. So there hasn't been a whole lot of funding really in token agnosticism and I think that's not because these are bad or stupid or anything. That's has more new like the narrative has been.
You know, since 2009 they take one Ledger is going to rule them all and is going to absorb all the purchasing power of all these different Fiat currencies and and so on and so forth, maybe that happens. But there's also a If a good chance that, that doesn't happen if it doesn't happen, then what, what, what can you invest in and what kind of start ups are out there to do that? So yeah, the report primarily looked at levels 2 & 3, Tok, agnosticism and cryptocurrency
maximalism. At least companies that would fall underneath that. I don't think that the people within those companies. I don't want to put words in her mouth, but I don't think that they are necessarily maximalist towards a particular token or currency. I think that they're more looking for this this you these Has requirements that these different companies have and maybe again I think the tokens themselves are just a red herring. Like maybe there is a use for
maybe there, isn't it? Disciplines on the business requirements. So what for whatever reason, though, if when you go to these meetups really, really smart people, all of them were much more brilliant than me, higher IQs and so forth, really good software designers, but on the finance and econ side, you know, I think that they could learn a bit from financing econ, gurus and in the actual sexual like
Financial world. But tend not to in fact, not to pick on point as but they had an article like villains Bitcoin last year and you know, the some of the villains I have there were these econ gurus who tried to, you know, give free advice to the the Bitcoin Community saying, hey, you guys might be interested in knowing what's happened before in history but you know, if I'll give you one small like that, I was in Singapore in November and I was a couple different events out
there for a week and One and one closed-door session. That was a VC, a lady who is, who's out in California, who works for VC firm. And she's like, oh, the hashcash reinvented rules of Economics, laws of Economics. We don't need to listen to these other guys and I was like, oh wait. So you're saying that the whole the whole world of economics has been overturned because a big fine. She said, yes, and stuff like
that. So I'm not saying all these are just like her but I think that there is a bit of Wishful Thinking then kind of Pervades this community, maybe that will change and maybe my sample size is way too small. Today's Show is brought to you by our friends at shape-shift shape-shift is the fast and easy way to trade all coins. And if you've been to their website lately, you've seen that, they now support gems, swarm, storage coin and master
coin. So you want to try some altcoins, you want to use exchange to do that. He still has a fax machine. Of course not. When you want to try some old coins, you go to shape-shift on iO and get it done in less than one minute with no account or sign up required. Okay, so is there here's how it
works. Yeah, there was a shape-shifter diode is used to currency when a cell and the Surrounded by, let's say you want to sell some of it those points because they're no longer cool, and you want to get some gems which you just saw this supporting. So then they give you an address to send in those ruins there. And you give me your your gems address and they put the shapes of conversion for you and put some directly into your wallet, super easy, super smooth.
And by the way, if you have a website you need to check out there Shifty button. So the shift button, basically you can put it on the website and it allows people to To donate a page you in any old coins and you just receive Bitcoin. It's super smooth and we use
that on our website. So you can give us all the points of all kinds of currencies and we just get Bitcoin. We don't have to worry about like having 27 different words on our phone and laptops, and have a whole bedrooms full of paper wallets because who would want that? So, ahead over the shapeshifters I/O and start trading small quantity and we would like to thank them for their support of epicenter, Bitcoin. Now if we look sort of the startup space, are you seeing or
should we expect as so? For instance, if Bitcoin doesn't work out or if we see the price stagnating over the next 70 year, for instance, can we expect to see more startup movie into the sort of level 2 territory into the token agnostics type startups where Bitcoin is not at the like sort of the center of attention. I think you'll have an easier way. I again once you start talking to financial institutions that have been destroyed like that's
a prediction. I got a 2014 is the year, the banks are district 2015 of years since banks have been destroyed. Well you ask why? And then you start talking to Banks signing out. Hey what do you actual business needs? What and what are the what are the reasons you haven't been killed by and we were killed by Bit Coin yet and you start seeing, you know, hey, maybe there's some solutions. I can provide some problems but maybe not, maybe none of this technology is actually
applicable to them. We certainly haven't seen any large production scale, companies have done that even though you know obviously I'm hoping you're betting on. If you will with my advising time, some of these companies do pan out but it didn't today. You know, there's specific business needs that. These companies have organizations have that need to be fulfilled. Are you able to build an actual product for that?
And it, you know, sometimes there's a token that might be you sometimes it won't be. Sometimes it may be big. My I have doubts about necessarily just be big point. It's a whole nother conversation though.
It's so as far as startups moving into space since I wrote that report looked at eight different companies, I've probably come across another eight nine, maybe ten startups and of receive some seed funding at some level have at least some relatively competent developers and then come on my radar that are trying to build products. So that's I suspected that will continue going on for as long as there's both capital.
And there's actual like meetings with financial institutions, whether the willing to have that Dialogue. So what's interesting there is the you know these companies have these business needs, okay? Once a criticism of I said the best coin space in general is that it's trying to find a problem to solve that isn't necessarily there. Well I one area that I think really needs to be solved is the
micro payments area? Like I really think that they're there can be a needs to be some really serious Innovation there and it can benefit a whole lot of interest Industries like whether it be paying payments For content, for instance, or you know, like paying for Wi-Fi, little things like that. What are your opinions? Like the biggest areas in which there can be Innovation using these types of Technologies.
Okay. So I can't speak for all of them because I feared a million different use cases the last year. I'm sure I'm sure everyone's at this point heard and scattershot of all these different use cases that are potentially use cases the Civil, we were the the group's I'm talking to primarily looking Back Office Solutions
like they have enormous costs. Deutsche Bank did a study and found the as a sector the banking sphere in the financial industry spends about twice as much of it was like seven point three percent on I.T costs. Relative 7.3 percent relative to their overall costs compared to other sectors to do like three point seven or something to that effect. So they're spending enormous on I.T costs. Why? Well number one you have to do a lot of reporting now and since 2008 to being compliant.
You need to be very transparent. So is there a way to reduce these costs centers? There are several banks that spend well, over 45 billion dollars a year on operating expenses and much as that's it related. So you have all these Acquisitions took place in the last seven years. The, it's the systems that don't interoperate is there a way that you can reduce those costs with these different Ledger's, that provide, not only settlement finality, but transparency, provide the report reporting
requirement. Fulfill the reporting requirements and so on, you know what I mean? I mean, maybe I should rephrase my question. What I meant to say is, is so consumer-facing. We're so like, for instance, micropayments can be used by consumers and, you know, there could be some great benefits.
There were some of the areas of innovation because I think that's where a lot of the Bitcoin startups are trying to focus on trying to find like these consumer-facing innovations that can benefit people but the nurse not finding them. Where do you think those those? Yeah. It becomes a but with Bitcoins thing like there's a website called but with Bitcoins.com it's great like basically that's what's happened with these consumer facing products. I wish them luck.
Good luck. But Micro payments isn't a new thing like that was trikes, 15. 16 years ago. In the.com bubble, there was many different company or not many, there was at least a good handful flus and beans were two of the ones that off the top of my head to try to do that. So you if the end of the day it comes back to you know, what are the frictions involved with that? Well, number one, obviously of interchange fees. But it's not do that for. Look at that for just a moment.
But instead, look at the frictions for the mental issues, of people wanting to go in and out having to calculate this, Nick Szabo wrote a paper on. This clay shirky wrote a paper. This is 15 years ago. They wrote different articles saying, what is the mental cost of calculation, or the mental calculation cost of going through a nickel and diming yourself, effectively on these different costs.
So I'm not saying that, there isn't a case, the I see people talking about preventing spam but for most people spams on a big issue for Most people not wanting to buy an ad is an issue that modeling by content. We already have microtransactions in the form of ads, like, Google is basically a micro transaction engine, credit cards are micro loans. If you will, although you have those interchange fees and that I know people like, oh, that's 35 percent.
Well, it's in the day you probably have to spend at least 35 cents for a Bitcoin transaction. Once once you have different things, play out such as the block toward having and and so forth. So I don't think Bitcoin on chain microtransactions are a Golden silver bullet, you know, consumer facing solution, maybe it is. But I haven't seen any good math on it that this is sustainable. And there's already plenty of
Angel list listed companies. Like, if listeners are interested as a website called Angel list you go there and you put your start up there and, you know, payment startups is over 1600 and mobile payments is like, just around 1000. So, even Norma's amount of competition that's coming in. That has nothing at all to do with a blockchain, maybe block change the solution, maybe it's not.
But It did in the day, you could be a, you know, it'll be an execution race, it'll be a customer acquisition race, there's a number of different variables. And in one thing that's not being recognized is, is groups like Facebook and even Ali Baba. They're getting money, transmitter licenses to be able to provide, you know, basically person-to-person peer-to-peer transactions for almost, no
cost. Obviously onboarding requires a bank account so that doesn't help people that are unbanked and underbanked but I don't think Bitcoin does either because you know people Well, that are unbanked and unbanked or underbanked they don't have access to cheap energy. So they're not competitive mining so they can't claims that
way. And number two, you know, many of these VC funded exchanges globally, different Emerging Markets. You need to have some kind of vetting process that they require vetting process through kyc a melt all C's. So in that process, you end up having to need a bank account in those countries, but those people don't have Banks and bank accounts to begin with, to get
on top of these platforms. So I don't think that Bitcoin is a solution for micropayments and maybe, not even for some of this in Final payments up, but obviously, I could be wrong. I know a line, Commerce did X and coins at pH. They've all claim to have a bit of traction. Even online Commerce. I was talking with one of the team members and based on the numbers actually sounded like they were doing more volume than Ali pay.
Sorry, bitpay, although bit pays been stagnant for over a year now I think it's like 12 15, hundred big ones so maybe maybe some of you heard of it beat Bigfoot bitpay right now. But still I think that until more people publish numbers in the actual math and Like the round trips and stuff like that. I think that we should be skeptical of gigantic claims,
without any evidence. Yeah, I mean, I think, obviously with Bitcoin, but there has been this big bad that so far, hasn't panned out in May in different areas and I guess it's hard to predict one of the things that sort of strike me about what you're talking about. Now, I was recently at an event and something similar came up and the guy was they make me
point. It was like, but If Bitcoin doesn't, you know, if because doesn't work out, if that's not the focus on, I mean, there are all these other people doing this new things, but then it's like selling it2 selling software to the, IT staff of a bank. But it's not doesn't have to same revolutionary excitement with it. But what do you think, what you
think of the scope of this? Do you think these permission Ledger's stuff in a sort of an optimal case would like Lee fundamentally change things or is this just like I've heard sometimes the comparison like better database technology which, you know, maybe it maybe one could build some significant businesses but it's not exactly you know, doesn't exactly get people excited or make documentaries about it or God knows what? Yeah, sure.
So Michael Casey Wall Street Journal and a call with him a couple months ago and he's like, oh it's not utopian though like where's the utopianism too? And so, yeah, it did. The day, you know, everyone has their reasons for why they were in this space and it seems to be a at least we. This is there's no argument that a lot of it originally was
politically motivated. So if you're politically motivated, and you're certainly not like the JAMA tonus is of the world of the Roger of Errors of the world. They want to you know not have to deal with these kind of trusted third parties that did exist today.
But the question is is is that actually going to play out like our laws going to Appear are human institutions going to disappear because of a Bitcoin like blockchain or Bitcoin itself and I'm skeptical that just because it does not help people, people aren't cypherpunks like in general like we could do lots of surveys to figure out what is it?
The normal populist like that. You're actually trying to sell this Tech to and they don't want to have to go through 47 different ways here, the private wallets, they don't want have to their keys, they don't have the epoxy, their laptops, or spend, you know, 37 hours looking at YouTube videos on how to, you know, do the Different steps to to get away. Or they said it towards like that. It's a lot of friction, JP Connick.
He just wrote an article. If you guys aren't familiar, he's the one who first wrote, the FED coin article many months ago, and he just wrote an article a couple days ago on, like, why has, why has the consumer adoption of for retail payments? Just not taken off and he actually cited some of the stuff I did on bitpay.
Some of the numbers there, but the general idea is you have these frictions, which one's work requires, which one requires more hoops, Go through using a simple credit or debit card in a developed country or going through all the Hoops, to get a Bitcoin and spend it and based on, you know, his thought process and his experiment or thought. Experiment is look, you just have to its mental gymnastics.
I have to go through all these different, all these different Hoops to get to bitcoin to sell it for another National growth. Effectively, sell it for another National currency. Why don't you just keep your dollars and spend those dollars through these micro loans, through credit cards and so forth. This is not to defend the incumbents or the status quo and you And the greatest, it's there was no margin to reduce cost of reduced and consumers.
It's an additional benefits. But if you're not providing those benefits, upfront and visibly to Consumers.
Why are they going to adopt it and so far that value proposition from payment processors hasn't hasn't Arisen so maybe that'll change but let's look at the facts just over a year ago about 18 months ago there was you know just just under around 20,000 Merchants it accepted Bitcoin today there's over 100,000 and during that time so you had a queen tickling Of actual users or Merchants accepting it, but you haven't had a Content bullying of users actually going through and
spending submitting these points. And it goes multiple reasons. Number one, the frictions and the hoops and summer to the the fact is that most of these people who own Bitcoin own it for an investment for speculative purposes, that's perfectly fine. But their time Horizons are different to the fact that they think the future utilities greater than the current utility and that's totally irrational understandable.
But as a result, all these companies that are betting on you know, transactional Just these payment processor. It's they're going to be left on left high and dry as I say. So yeah I think that wanting to disintermediate intermediaries at find. I have your own philosophy in the day. What's actually going to actually happen? Not just what you want to happen. Yeah, I mean, that's true, I
threw this. What I said, I feel that once you sort of take out the ideological, okay, libertarian ideas, which are Not everybody's political leanings. Especially I mean, specifically not mine, then you're left with. Okay? Then what's the point? Yeah, but I mean, I'm gonna have to disagree here and I think there is something to be said here. Well, that there's just one case that I think only Bitcoin can do and that is potentially massive and that's simply the idea.
Having like a Global Currency that you can sort of hold anywhere in the world. You know, you can travel pay with that, you, it's an alternate it's a better gold, right? It says a store of value that, you know, you can rely on and that's like finite and, you know, you can send anywhere you can transport across borders without being confiscated. And, you know, you can transmit it to the globally and that's I think, is a huge potential use case and I I think that's it's really compelling.
And I think also the thing is here, Bitcoin may all have all these flaws, but for this use case, the key thing is trust, right? The key thing is, you need to believe that it will actually still be around. In 10 years. It will be secure. It will have its value. And so if Bitcoin Fails Like, if some other guy comes with a better cryptocurrency like ether, maybe maybe with proof of stake, will be perfectly secure and scalable and cheap. Tetra.
But it will be I think almost impossible to take that place of Bitcoin applicant has today because people will be like I'll but the first thing failed. Why would I believe in the second thing? That's not to say that big could will succeed. It may not write. So I mean we've often talked about some of the security issues with Bitcoin but it at least has that shot. That something really big and I don't think that's necessarily so political it's partially political but I think There's a
real real strong utility there. I think that if in my personal opinion, if if I have the choice between Bitcoin and its current condition and something more similar to a Fed coin, and I mean, that's a terrible name. I like it would never use anything called fed going, but the what's common between the two and what I think is really valuable. It's just the ease of use and like that's that's four.
See what I find is most valuable with Bitcoin is being able to use across borders, like, pay people like that. That's like, that just blows me away and blows people away when when you first show them. So, I think that if I had a choice between 22 and made some mental gymnastics to say, okay, well, I'm going to like trust this government currency which I do. I mean, we all use government currencies every day. I'm probably would pick the
government currency. Yeah, but I think What's is also blow stomping that sort of blows me away to is the idea of a global decentralized, you know, peer-to-peer store of value and medium of exchange. That's just I think that's a mind-blowing thing. But nobody uses a museum exchange. Like we I think the between us three, we probably know everyone who actually spends Bitcoins like Theory like what's the transaction of volume on a given day of gold, like who are the wealthiest gold owners?
Well, like these are these are questions like the end of the day, you know, if it's supposed to be virtual cash, like that's what that's what the abstract and section. 1 are talking about, like, let's create, you know, an actual e-cash, digital cash. Some kind of some kind of method
for actual payments. Payments is actually, I forgot how many times was used, it was used multiple times throughout the paper was like 11 times a week, so like that whoever created bitcoin, had this view, that it could do, all these different things. But in practice, it's not being used for those things because people have different time Horizons. Dances and so forth. So maybe you're right. Maybe it could be used for this all in one Global Currency, but there's no reason why it has to
be Bitcoin itself. I mean, maybe it is, I mean, I agree with you actually add for as for payments are huge issues with it, right. The volatility is a huge issue for payment and then just that it's another currency it's a huge victory for payments, right? Like if you don't you don't want as a company to have like more currencies on your accounts and you need it.
But that's something different from I mean even one of the use cases that thing is you just like tax evasion for example in the future and things like that, you know, and and evading Capital controls like these are both huge use cases and I think they're very compelling now whether one likes him or not whether it's where people are attracted to that or not. But I think it's those are just obvious and big use cases. Right there, they already use cases.
But the question is, how many people actually want to do that and how many people are going to find you? I'm sure groups. You know, a lot of slack and comment saying oh Tim you're defending the state's, like look at, this is. Look at it from a pack. I think we're gonna get a lot of slack and comments for this whole. So like so coinbase.
They might as well go ahead there, their pitch deck leak their September. Pick stick week to the Press Free. Beacon did a couple articles on it, basically, like on slide two and they posted this slide. It said you can use Bitcoins. You big capital.
Rolls on sanctions on Russia. And then like a page later they had different and emblems of the different, like New York Department, Department of Financial Services us since in all these different organizations, they say that they're in compliant talks with so, but they got slapped claimed, he's got slapped because it's saying, hey, you know what you're talking about. Being a legitimate regulated
entity yet. Here you are saying, you're one of the features is it could get around sanctions. We know this. We know that it can be used for money laundering, like, I got cheated by an attorney this last week. Because I was quoted in article very early this week. Mark, karpeles, wrote this article saying no talking about exchanges. And mention how, you know, all points to be used for money. Laundering. And somebody asked for those, this reporter asked me for comment.
And I said, yes, you can use all coins for money laundering like coins. Probably, the biggest use case for Litecoin right now is probably for money laundering. And the lawyer got upset because I mentioned that without saying any statistics like look I used to do some stuff with an exchange, you know melodic and you start talking to other exchanges and you find out, you know, what are the different
altcoins being used for? Or and yeah, they're being used basically ends up happening, is people take their Bitcoin, they convert it to Litecoin, like on btc-e. They send it to like, shape shift or cripsy or something like that. They re convert it to bitcoin the cash out somehow, or they convert it to another coin. So it's, you need to use. If you're doing this, you have to use something that's highly liquid.
And it's, there's enough volume in any given day, especially on chain that yours just shows up as noise. It can't be detected again. I'm not encouraging that. In fact, I think that by you promoting that is a use case, you Create a bigger Target and you can pickling the community. So small, they expect accepting thinking that they could absorb.
The gigantic finds that HSBC or Barclays or any of these other guys is that they all pay, like billion dollar fines for this kind of stuff, and sometimes even some people sort of kind of sentences. It's like this so encouraging that I think is I understand it is a use case and people do use it for that. I'm not sure. That's something you should go out and sell. So, like normal people because maybe one more people just know, but I didn't know that. That was specifically
identifiable. Use case of like Point. Yeah. That's I mean, I always felt like when I dabbed that no use cases but I guess that's right. Maybe one. So let's talk a little bit about NASDAQ because recently there is a new story and it got a lot of attention that NASDAQ is planning to have some sort of stock trading on the Bitcoin blockchain specifically using open assets. To call which is colored coins.
Basically we've had flown via of coin prism on the show, who is the guy who created the open assets protocol that seems to? That seems to go against your argument. That it makes no sense use the Bitcoin protocol for things like that. What's your point of view here? Sure sure. That's a really good point real quick question to so it last month was that are interested in. NASDAQ announced that they're going to be throwing some of their private.
They have a several different markets and could put some of their private Market guess cap tables on on the Bitcoin blockchain using it looks like coin prism or at least open assets. I'm not sure if they're actually going to talk with the company but yeah so there's two things here. Number one it's unclear what that actually means are they actually going to do?
It's a hash of all the transactions and put it on the Bitcoin blockchain every day, every hour, every minute, you know, what are they trying to actually? Accomplish with it. That's not fully clear yet.
The second thing is, if they actually try to put all the transactions that take place to treating transactions, obviously this from a logistics standpoint that does this won't happen because we know from block sizes, that as of today, you know, just the blocks are just not big enough to handle that kind of volume, maybe, at some point, they'll be solutions for
that. Obviously, you know, Gavin, and we can talk about that at the end, but Gavin's proposal and some counter proposals and stuff like that if you'd like. But, yeah, I think that fundamentally anytime That Watermark coin on a public Ledger using a private chain or quasi private chain. I think it's a different thing. But anyways I'll me and I public Ledger like Bitcoin. It creates this top-heavy protocol, basically you're cheating your your free writing off of everybody else.
Paying some kind of fee for what is nominally is you're creating extra value on the edges that's being protected by not enough value being destroyed. So, miners in the long run, as we've talked about destroy the Capital up to the point where, you know, a Bitcoin equals at creating a Bitcoin equals of a coin in the long run. Obviously there's margins and
there's fluctuations so forth. But in theory, that's what kind of actually practice it actually kind of is what kind of happens when you get price run up. So it goes up and when prices go down, people go bankrupt and so forth.
But it with color coins in these metal coins, is they create this top-heavy non-proportional disproportional reward mechanisms where pools or minors at these Farms are not destroying enough Capital to Act, you know, whatever, billions of dollars of assets that the actual assets represent from NASDAQ again. I don't know the specifics.
I think it's a little too sweet to be a little to speculate at this point, but I think that if they do, you know more power to them, they'll do trial by fire and maybe just like Patrick Byrne, who announces that? You do? Like a 25 million-dollar bond in the coming weeks and maybe even tomorrow or that they'll find out. Maybe even the hard way that the transactions don't go through, is they thought because there's no, there's no priority system.
Because there's no terms of service built into the network. Maybe you could have, you know, one-on-one relationships with the pools. But if you're using the pools to do that, why don't you just create one of these permission Ledger's systems? Why use proof of work at all? So, you know, I wish them all good luck and maybe they will completely disprove everything I've ever said that's a total possibility. I think that Robert Sam's is probably correct. Like why?
Why bother validating, you know, on either side of the transactions and not the validators who cannot protect It's you against irreversibility if there's incentive to do so. So let's before we wrap up here, I know this is come up again and again, and again in the show and people are probably getting tired of hear about it. But what's your opinion on the Block size? Increase the bait. Sure. So I have no horses in the race
again. Just full disclosure, I don't own any questions at this at this time. And that's not because I hate them or anything. I just, I just don't. Um, so I don't think I like to think that I'm fairly objective when it comes to that, obviously, people disagree. And think I'm very unobjective for not owning lots of Bitcoins or something.
But I think this is the both sides have had some pretty good points, obviously gathered and Mike who you guys have spoken to, they seem to really want to make Bitcoin become a large like they want it to be more successful with payments. They want the ability for it to compete. Did some scale relative to I guess? PayPal or even Visa even though those aren't necessarily the best direct comparisons. But there's a trade-off.
There's a cost to making bigger blocks and I was just talking to Brian before the show about this is, if you 20 make block and you fill it up and you need to do that your own node at home. You end up with like a terabyte of data throughout the year and if you do that, you know, if you need to connect with 8 10, 12, whatever the amount of nodes, your peers are that you're trying to send us this adds up, you just multiply it, right?
So you know, there is a possibility that from a hardware and even networks standpoint that there could be a lot of notes. But in practice what ends up happening is what we've seen, you know, from March 2014 to today, March, B14, that was about thirteen thousand nodes. Today, there's this under 6,000 and that's not even, you know, full one block notes. So somewhat one big block node so maybe maybe that Trend continues, maybe changes but
it's into the day. I think the other the other side of the argument there's to right or from races and privacy. If blocks be get bigger fewer, there could be fewer nodes because there's no incentive necessarily run it it's out of your own pocket. If that's the case then it becomes much easier to identify transactions especially if you're trying to do my laundry. I like it.
End of the day, you know, these various companies that are doing Contracting Services for governments for money laundry. They could end up representing, you know, five ten, fifteen percent of the network and makes it much more identify easily identifiable. So if you're concerned about privacy, then maybe that's something to take into consideration that bigger blocks, make it difficult to run nodes, therefore, reducing them notes, making it much more easy
to identify transaction. Potentially the other side also, says, is what the, a lot of the Chinese exchanges in miners. Have been talking about the last L, so is saying, hey guys, we understand, you want bigger blocks, but we just don't have the network to do that. Now, there's, there's two sides to that you have F to pool. One of the administrators from
active pool proton. The devil is saying, hey guys, we, you know, we'd like to have a bigger block but not, you know, 20, Mega or something like that because we just don't have the network capacity to propagate it because it will leads orphan races. I know if you maybe get on the show, if you will, you can find Avalon, says it ships. I just talked to him last Week, two about Network, networking issues. He just a lot of network analysis, now, especially for Chinese companies.
And he was talking about, you know, if these you have these net splits in China, because the, the peering agreements between China and the rest of the world, kind of kind of Muddy right now because of how the great firewall of China is. And so what you could end up having is you for what you do have is you have a Reliance on just a couple different nose in a couple different cities which could go out.
So you end up with, you know, half of the network ashrae coming out of just a few nodes and that's kind of dangerous. Even today. So I'm expecting them to propagate, really big blocks is another issue. He's actually trying to solve so maybe if you're looking for somebody who really understands the the Chinese side understands network analysis and and Mining, and so forth, he threw could probably be a good balanced approach to some answers there.
I think that there will be some kind of consensus if you will but it could lead to a split. Maybe you have as I say gal blocks and maybe you have different other different chain, a Chinese chain. And I certainly cannot predict that. But yeah, it'll be interesting in 6-12 months. Coming back in and revisiting that question. Yeah, absolutely. That's it interesting. Actually, we, I mean, we were aware to some extent, I mean nothing.
Mike also mentioned that that especially, yeah, especially if you have a really bad, really bad band. If it can be an issue for minor 7 larger blocks but it was in the way of some of the Solis especially that there's only. So few notes in China that plays such a central role there. Yeah, well, thanks so much for coming on. Dimmers are at the end of our show, we're going to have links to your papers and your prolific blog posts in the show.
Notes of people who, you know, who want to learn more about that can check it out. And I think I, the paper does a really good job at sort of giving an overview. That's really accessible about the sort of different ways. That block change, can be used and some of the use cases that people often talk about but that may actually not make So much sense for Bitcoin. So yeah, thanks for that. And thanks for coming on today. Hey my pleasure Hayden.
Well, we'll see if if I've been able to kill Bitcoin as people in mediclaim so I don't think I don't think I have the power to do that so I don't I hope it continues to go on so we can learn a lot. So you certainly keep trying. There's a node running somewhere must be taken down. So thanks a lot guys. Have a great week, cheers. Yeah, and thanks for listeners for listening. And we release episodes of represent a big con.
Every Monday, you can subscribe to it as an audio podcast on iTunes or through your favorite podcast app or on Soundcloud, you know, to get the video on YouTube or at youtube.com slash epicenter PC and we're going to be back next week. So until then, No. No.