Now money is energy and information. Because bitcoin is money, I think sixty percent annual growth is conservative. Countries with abundant excess energy, they could be very wealthy countries. You raise capital, you allocate a portion to buy bitcoin, which will pay back the principle, and then you invest into a revenue generating activity like mining bitcoin or building new energy in front also mind bitcoin which will pay the cupunt off.
What do you think about bitcoin treasury companies?
Hard to say?
All right, Samson Mark, We had a lot of topics to talk about, so thanks for taking the time to come talk to me.
Thanks for having me on.
We're here in DC at Bitcoin and Policy. Bitcoin policy put up by Georgetown University. So I want to talk about politics and regulations, and I want to talk about the keynote Sailor had yesterday talking about tokens, which is typically nottset that we hear in the bitcoin space. Something you've worked on for a really long time, Nation state adoption, and what's going on in El Salvador. I want to get into the the bitcoin protocol. I want to get
into the NOTS versus core debate. So there's always something going on in bitcoin. Oh man, it keeps its exciting, you have to find something. So here we are, we're in DC, both of our first time year. I guess, first of all, how do you think about how are you Canadian? Yes, okay, I find this sometimes maybe Canadians and Americans look at this a little differently because of
you know, the country euro Upon. But how would you look at the way you think that bitcoiners should be working with governments or not working with governments or asking the governments.
Well, that's an interesting topic because a lot of bitcoiners are often criticizing what we're doing because we engage with governments. That's top down. We have two strategies top down bottom bottom up is aqua getting the unbanked into a financial system, and then top down we engage with governments, politicians, regulators. We've been meet with central banks. But the question is like, why do you want the governments to have Bitcoin? And I think it really comes down to what kind of
world do we want to live in. There's a number of dimensions to this. One is in countries with abundant eccess energy, they could be very wealthy countries, and Bhutan is a great example of that. They're just converting excess hydro into money. They are using that money to build a new airport, but it shows the promise of that and for any energy rich country, that is your path
to prosperity. Much like in the UAE, you don't pay taxes if you're in an AMORTI the government gives you money, and that could be the case for like Canada for example. But moreover, most governments need money. It's like a big machine that consumes money. Like today the government in the US is shut down, right, yeah you would notice it, but yeah, yeah, you would notice it. But bitcoin prices up,
but maybe that's uncorrelated. But governments need money, and when they need money and there there is no money, that's when they look to different ways of getting it, like wealth taxes, taxing, unrealized capital, gains, seizure of money for whatever reason from the citizens, or various other creative ways
to take money from people. So I think if you can get a government to adopt bitcoin, and if they have energy even better they can mine bitcoin, then you kind of wean them off the wheel of taking money from people for lack of a more eloquent way.
To put it.
So that's one thing. The other thing is, obviously we want to be protected as bitcoiners. We don't want our bitcoin taken from us. We don't want to be blamed. And if you look back in history, there are many examples of you know, groups or ethnicities that are blamed for various problems, usually economic, right, many many examples in history, and I can see like, if we are in a fourth turning and things do get bad, who do you blame? It is the bitcoiners because maybe we're okay, We're doing
okay because we have bitcoin. And the counter to that is really getting more bitcoin adoption. And the government can encourage a lot of bitcoin adoption. They can say bitcoin is usable for payments because most people don't want to go against the government. Right, So if you can get the governments to embrace bitcoin as money, more people will have bitcoin. So if you think of it, you don't want a witch hunt. And how do you avoid or
avert a witch hunt? You make more witches, right, more bitcoiners.
Witches in the government, Yes, exactly.
And also I think if you get the government to understand bitcoin, and there are a lot of Congress people and you know, like people like RFK Junior that understand it, it's kind of fixes itself. Bitcoin does change people's thinking and the way they view the world. And I think if you have enough of that, in a critical mass of that, maybe it's possible to change government for the better.
I don't really see any other way of doing that because the nature of government is to you know, take and redistribute at the fundamental core.
Right.
Ideally, I don't know if you're for smaller government, but ideally it's just administrative, you know, like, you know, make sure the borders are safe and people can live safely. But then it always scope creeps into more and more and more things, more programs, more free things, and then it kind of spiles out of control and you have thirty seven eight trillion dollars a debt. So I think this is kind of the reason why you do want
governments to embrace bitcoin. Is not that we want to give the government lots of bitcoin, but we want them to understand it, use it, have ways to get bitcoin that is not taking it from people, and learn about bitcoin and learn the ethos of bitcoin.
Yeah, yeah, I love that. Sailor his keynote yesterday, he said that he thinks everything really changed twelve months ago, and that's what's the new administration that came in. Yes, we can see how the previous administration, I mean what an all universe were into if Kamal had one and the kind of extended what the Biden regime had been
doing where that would have gone. But you know what Sailor's talking about is you sort of had basically everyone in the government was very hostile so bitcoin at crypto Yes, And as Frank I did that fireside job Frank Day on stage and he said, you know something I say quite often was the government's not a monolist. It's a bunch of people in the government. But under the Bid administration, very few lead in bitcoin er weren't invested in bitcoin.
In today Trump administration, from Trump himself all the way down with the cabinet, they're all bitcoiners. Yeah, so I think that's a pretty big thing. What do you think about though, like with the laws right, so, like I think more of a constitutionalist, where like the law should be preventing the government from infringing back to having a small government. Yes, I think like in the in America with a Second Amendment, So it's not that there's no
policy of guns. The policy is don't infringe on my right to have guns. Yes, sorry, So like I think of like I see some of the states, we've had six states put through rules that say a right to self custody, a right to mining, right to open networks.
But then at the same time, with new technology, if we look back, like the telecom or on the internet days, there were rules put into place that protect the industry to allow it to grow. Yeah, and so a lot of rules that they put in place could act hurt it as well.
So how do you navigate that?
I think it has to do with the evolution of technology, right, Like when the Constitution was written and the amendunce were passed, you didn't have central bank send government money predominant in the world.
But Jefferson was warning us about that.
Yes, but you know when money is centralized and largely digital and very controllable, then a lot of those rights are no longer guaranteed because if you have no ability to have your own money, like let's say the right to bear money, then can you have free speech? Right? Can you actually you know, pay for your internet bill to post something? Can you bear arms if you cannot buy arms or if they have a social credit score and they go, yeah, you can't have this now, right, so that you.
Can't pay to drive to the assembly, right, Yeah, it all hngdes on pains.
Yeah, but it was kind of assumed that money would be bearer until suddenly it wasn't. And I think bitcoin fixes a lot of this. And I think perhaps it was Trump's experience, you know, being attacked by the other side that made him understand maybe a bearer asset is good. And you do see him piling into bitcoin, unfortunately a bit too much in the crypto side, but you know, nobody's perfect, but definitely it's on the right track that he is for bearer instruments, and I think this is
kind of the way to fix that. But it's kind of sad that you have to pass laws for the right to having self custody or other things like that when it should be a given that you should be able to have money as a sovereign individual.
Yeah. What do you think about some of these dragnet surveillance orders in today's day and age you had mentioned earlier, like, for example, I go through the border, they opened my phone. Now they can see my account pass orders, or they could see my private keys and things like that.
Yeah, Well, I don't think there are enough protections right now in this day and age, and at a global level, especially where it's the world is ready for money being information. So you missed my keynote after Sailor, but I was talking largely about the equation being changed now money is energy and information because bitcoin is money, and this changes so many different things because money has never really been
information before and money has never been energy before. Right Kenry Ford theorized in nineteen twenty one, he said, let's have an energy currency, But it wasn't until the dawn of bitcoin that we actually had in energy money. But that means you need energy because energy is money. Like I gave the example before, if you have energy as a country, then guess what, You're a rich country and you have money.
Yeah.
But with bitcoin it changes it because it's not just oil in the ground or whatever. You could have nuclear reactors and have money too. But the information part is different because money as information means you can teleport money anywhere around the world. Capital controls no longer exist, and I believe right now we're seeing countries kind of grappling with that new reality. In Korea, they're trying to push
for a Korean Wan stable coin. Is that going to be only transactable in Korea and subject to the same limits or is it free flowing. If it's free flowing, then you don't have capital controls anymore. And I think this is kind of where the battle is, Like the internal conflict is do we have free money or do
we want control money and controlled economies? And you know, to that extent, you need more protections too, Like I was saying, like when you cross the border, if someone could take your phone and take your information or look at your information, they can take your money. And how do you prevent that because you know someone looked at it,
how do you prove that they stole it? Like ideally, you know, as a bitcoinner, you know if someone ever looked at your seed, treat it like it's gone, or if your device is compromised, then you know, move your funds immediately. But as we get more and more bitcoint adoption, you know that learning curve is applied to billions of people around the world, and I think you need some protections.
And the protections really come down to more sovereignty, like making sure people are independent, reducing the surveillance state, right, like what happens if a camera somewhere catches you with your seat phrase and the guy with the camera, can you know, steal your funds. There's always that possibility. But the world we're going in is tilting more towards the surveillance side rather than to more freedoms. So this is
an interesting point in time where we go. But definitely government seem to be cognizant of all these changes and you know, protect the people, at least you hope they will.
We talked a lot about the name name drop to talk a lot about the American politics. What about Canadian politics?
I mean, our prime minister is a former central banker and heavily tied to the world that comic forum and all those organizations. But we'll see. We have peer Polyev, which I've met before, who I've met him before, and he understands bitcoin. He has bitcoin like yeah, but unfortunately he didn't win the last election.
Yeah, So I did miss your keynote. I wanted to see because I want to be more prepared for this. I love the framing note. Bitcoin is information and so a lot of times we try to compare their technology to things that we understand so we can make sense of them and they are like those things, but they're also more that's kind of what you're framing. So I'm gonna go back and watch it. For everyone listening, I'm gonna put it in the show notes down below, so
you go watch that keynote as well. Unfortunately I missed it because I was coming up periated ready to have Sailor come up here. But I did watch his keynote, So let's talk about that for a minute. A lot of buzz going on here in DC about about the keynote. A lot of things that I thought were really good. One thing that seems to be creating a lot of buzz in the bitcoin community specifically, was he spent quite a bit of time talking about, I guess, tokenization of
real world assets. Every day we see headlines about inflation and dead and diminishing control over our own money. That's why I always come back to bitcoin, because it's built for generations, it's built for legacy. But protecting your bitcoin legacy the right way is not always simple. It demands discipline, focus, and the right partner. That's why I personally use Unchained Signature.
It's a premium private client service for serious bitcoin holders who want expert guidance, resilient custody, and an enduring partnership. Now Signature, you're paired with your own dedicated account manager, someone who understands your goals helps you every step of the way. You're going to get white glove onboarding, same day emergency support, personalized education, reduce trading fees, and priority
access to exclusive events and features. Unchained collaborative custody model is designed to provide the same security as the world's biggest bitcoin custodians, but for those who prefer to hold their own keys. Now. I've been using and recommending unchained for years. I even got my parents to set up with them. So if you want to get set up, check out unchained signature at unchained dot com, slash mark Moss and as a loyal listener, I got a discount for you. Just use code Moss ten at checkout to
get ten percent off your first year. Because your bitcoin isn't just for life, it's for generations.
Well, I think there is a place for it, and the world definitely is changing to embrace you know, real world assets tokenization more so. But at the same time the trad file world is evolving too, so I think soon you'll have twenty four to seven trading of equities, and then the question really is what is the benefit of tokenization, And I see a really interesting path from there because it's always a competition. Right if the origin of you know, stocks were bearer, you have a piece
of paper and that's your stock and the company. I think real world assets could be very interesting if they're tokenized in a way that they can be bearer, because then you can have distributed ownership. But the question again is does the system as a whole want that.
Well, it made it illegal, so I would guess.
Well, yeah, so well with the see but going to that kind of a world is very interesting, not just twenty four to seven trading because I think the old system will evolve in that way, but having a real benefit, which is something is bearer and being able to be okay with that. But like you said, it's not something
that the system wants. But what Sailor's point was more so like, I think it's okay now to tokenize things, And the critiques on his talk were more about why are you talking about all these other crypto projects and why you can tokenize on those crypto projects, right, And also he mentioned Katie Perry a bunch of times, and it was funny because people were messaging me and saying what was that about, Like what was he going on about? And I was backstage, so I didn't really hear what he was saying.
Well, he was saying that somebody like a Katy Perry, yeah, could create tokens for fine clubs. Yes, he said that a country club could tokenize new memberships, and so you could have influential people musicians, movie stars, athletes, country clubs taking assets that maybe couldn't create a goal before and now they could.
Yeah. I listened to the talk after, so I did. I caught most of it. But the problem he was saying it didn't work before because I guess he was implying the administration was kind of hostile to that, which
we talked about too, right, like the Biden administration. But he said, if you have like regulatory frameworks and there's safety for people, then you kind of removed the fun part of it, which then anyone can just go live and launch a token, right and if you have the protections, then you're going into the realm of it being regulated by something like the SEC. Maybe it's like the fun
token securities commission, fun token commission or something like that. Right, But then you do that and you had you add some friction back, right, And there's no way, I think, for any organization to do that. Like Sailor also said, forty million businesses need access to the market.
Right, Let's let's stick on the fan club stuff right there? Sure, ygam because I think what he was saying, and I believe Truck put forward this year in one of his executive orders. But the Digital Token Act is to allow these thinks to happen without being considered a security and without the sec oversight, so they're not really a security. And so like I can already charge people to join my membership, why couldn't I just tokenize that without it
being in security? And I think that's what he was saying. He there's mine country club membership that happens to be tokenized. Isn't really a security. I don't craze any value whether I paid to join your Katie Prairie Bank club and I get a token or I don't get a token. I don't know if that creates any more value for you.
There is some value, I would say, So there is value in tokenization if it is a bare asset, right, Maybe equities no, but definitely a membership token is and is it really bare? Is it transferable? Can you give your Katie Perry fan club membership to me? Right? And this is something that most entities don't want. They don't want that fluidity and liquidity. They want to lock you in.
So if someone did want to do that and it's fully transferable, then and they honor that transfer, then that is better than the old system where you cannot have that liquidity or transferability. So maybe he's right in that sense. But then usually when things are tokenized or you know, tradeable, someone wants to regulate that too. But if you can avoid that and it is free flowing, then yes, you
can have your fun and tokenize anything. There is a danger, of course of people scamming, but that's always been a danger, yeah, right, and you have laws that's rod, yes, But you open up a bigger can of worms because now anyone can make any fan club and how do you know that that's the real Katy Perry Frank club?
Right? Right? Okay, so then you should And then you also mentioned that the forty million businesses that can't raise capital because of costs millions of dollars to take two years to go public. Yeah.
Well, if you think about it, why do we have all the regulations in anscoie public because there were bad actors before and we had to protect the people. So it really comes down to it, can you regulate forty million businesses all going public? And how exactly mechanically would you do that? Do you just step out of the way and say it's like a fang clup token, it's free for all.
Well, I think you would. So again, I think what happens is here we are in DC and we have all these legislators. Yes, and their job is to legislate. Yes, we have lawmakers and their job is to make laws. And so you mentioned earlier the scope creek. So what happens is is probably good intentions. Yeah, let's have some consumer protections. But then over years of continuing to make
lots of legislations, it's prey right. So like if if in this digital token bill, if a company was able to raise money, maybe it's up to a Serpa amount five million, ten million, one hundred million go to bed numbers, and I had to make disclosures and you had to see captable din ourship. But I could just create top and raise money really quickly and not go to the
whole sec in. I mean that could be beneficial. Now, if I defraud you, I broke a law, there's a law for that, right, So I think the laws that we currently have now sort of could catch all of that maybe. And then at the same time and then it's like, do we believe in the nanty state? Yeah?
I mean this is the crucks at the issue, right. What will end up? As you could say, forty million businesses can now raise capital, and then some things bad will happen and there will be an outcry to Longleg Harris to say protect us, right, and they will start implementing some lightweight protections, and then they add more and more and they eventually end up with the exact same system we as the public company, with the same costs, same overhead, same complexity.
What sailors when we interviewed up here, we talked about it, as he said, you can always have that argument like, hey, maybe the government should make electricity illegal because I shocked to myself. Yeah, and maybe we should raise the driving limited age to sixty because people courge somebody to card. So you're never gonna get away from that, and so you always have to sort of look at the good
and the bad in those things. And a few people electrocute themselves what most of us have light he so that's pretty good, right, a few people maybe dying car accidents, but like we can move around the world and that's pretty good, right. So I think that's kind of what he was calling for. I think also what I was hearing was it sounded like he was actually trying to make a clear distinction that bitcoin is a commodity and everything else is maybe non security, but some form of
a company and should be completely different. I thought I heard him maybe trying to really designate that differently.
Well, if you listen carefully, he's basically implying that all the other crypto projects, blockchain projects, or corporations that well, actually he said it. He said there he set up a Swiss foundation and they're pretending to be decentralized. And now that you agree with that, it's true. I mean, they are corporations, right, that we're pretending to be decentralized. And you can argue was it ethical or not ethical because at the time the regulations were that, you know,
if you're a security, you should register. Right at the time, the laws were very clear. Ethereum was very obviously a security if you go back and listen to their pitch to investors. But of course they're kind of grandfathered in and now it's a free for all everyone, like Tron is a company now, right, So it just it just changes with the time. But the danger is the pendulum
swings the other way. And I've heard a few people here in DC kind of mention the same thing, like if you swing it so far here and everything is good and you're able to do anything, and you know, Tron is listed, then what happens when the Democrats come back into power and they seek to, you know, punish some people that may have gained from that, and the pendulum goes hard the other way. So I think there has to be some balance, Like, yeah, I.
Agree, and but I think, like maybe I just heard whatever I was biased here, But like I said, I think you've verged in that he didn't sort of make this distinction. They're all some sort of quasi company and maybe maybe not a security, but it's not Bitcoin. And the reason why maybe I lasted onto that is I talk about it today when I was up on stage. But what I'm afraid of is when these lawmakers are now making laws to regulate this, they lump it together.
But bitcoin can't do what the other ones can do. So they could regulate these things happening on crypto, but you can't apply that to bitcoin. So I do want the lawmakers to understand these are different things right moving forward.
But the SBR was very encouraging that I would credit David Sachs with that. You know, there's the SBR crypto stoppal. This is to be added to or accumulated budget neutraally, this is to be disposed of, held until disposed.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I could keep going. I have a lot of thoughts on like even token ice in RWA.
But if you want my opinion, the best way would be to deregulate everything so you focus more on education. There's no reason why you can't educate people to think critically for themselves, like what is a scam, what is not a scam, and that you know you're probably gonna lose money if you invest in one of these cryptotokens and let the market sort itself out because you can't really regulate it like, how would you regulate all coins?
You can't write either you do it or you don't, because there's like I don't even know how many there are now, Like last count I heard like twenty thousand.
I think, well that was coin marketcap dot com. There's nineteen point five million.
Okay there you gone to that find milling and you can't regulate those. How can you regulate forty million businesses that all want a mini IPO or whatever it is to raise capital, right, and then you factor in external actors not like at that point you can't really know is this an American business or company?
Right? For sure?
It could be some guys in Pakistan or India. Masturating is an American company raising money from Americans. You can't control that. So I think what it comes down to is you have to be okay with educating and the free market. And that's the only way I can see this vision of Sailor playing out in a way that works.
Yeah, and our founding fathers said as much, and they said that, you know, really this only works with an educated people, and so we have to educate on what's going on, but we also have to be educated on the real world. At both you know both times, and so to your point, like rather than trying to kick out all the risk, couldn't be educated demand simbrisk Yeah right, Like yeah, let's like I said, I have a lot I could think about RW tokens that we can get into.
The bear instruments are important if I think about it from a first principles level. I also just think like how much value is an add right? So for example, we know Kraken is now doing like tokenized shares, But to your point, if I don't have this bear instrument with his ad any value. Just recently, I've never dosed before, but my friends send me some tickets for Ticketmaster I just sent to somebody else, and so I just log
in my account and I reassigned it. Yeah, I mean that's kind of like a token, But I don't think it happened on a blockchain.
It's happened in the database, right, well, unless it's the Bitcoin blockchain. Most things are kind of central, right is that that? That's my entire point, So like how much value are they adding? And then you think about like.
Well, let's token is real estate, but like there's no global market or liquidity for that, so like how am I gonna if it's not fungible? So how do I measure a token on a duplex at Daytona Beach, Florida to five hundred unit building in Vancouver like COPI you know, So it's.
Like, well, the other thing is if you have the token and you lose a token, did you lose your house?
No?
Right, you got to get it back to somebody, So it all goes back to you know, there are maybe some minor benefits to tokens doing real estate, but at then you have a register and.
I think a token is a fractional unit. Yeah, and you can already fractionalize it with with corporation and it she shares. Yeah. But let's jump up jump topics. Something that you've been working on for quite a while, and you actually talked about it in the beginning. When I talk about politics, this nation stated option and when you think about like the government's not a monolith. Can we just get a few more witches, as you said, or can we get a few more people that started in bitcoin?
So the first nation I think you started working with was El Salvador. Yeah, so I want to know more a bigger national state. But let's talk about Elsabdor for a minute. The sure El Saberger started off three four years ago. They made announcement the Good One conference in Miami that they're going to doop bitcoin and I it was this excitement. I've been down there many times. They started buying a bunch of bitcoin. It's worked out tremendous
for them. Yeah, they thought well that they did very well. They're going to do the bitcoin bond, which was the volcano. And it looks like everything's kind of been unraveling. Governments will never stop printing money, so inflation it's not going away now. If your money's not earning at least ten percent a year, you're losing purchasing power. And that's why I talk about bitcoin. It's the number one way to
beat in relation and secure your future. And the question I get asked almost every day is where do you buy your bitcoin? Now? For years, I've personally used River dot com and I only take on sponsors that I use and I trust, and I trust them because River's bitcoin only. They have one hundred percent reserve, and they keep your bitcoin safe in cold storage with no middlemen, and you can actually talk to a real person, a US based support dedicated manager. Now try getting that peace
of mind from coinbase. Of course you can't. Now the perks if you set up auto buys, you can pay zero fees plus. Instead of your bank paying you, you know, zero point four percent on cash, River pays you three point seven five percent on cash paid in bitcoin. So if you're ready to build your bitcoin position with confidence, go to River dot com, slash mark Moss and get up to one hundred dollars in bitcoin when you sign up. Because freedom starts when you own your money, and your
money starts with bitcoin. What's going on in l savad or the just did it uption?
They're hard to say. There hasn't been much direct communication, and it's become sort of a loyalty test, like who do you trust us or the IMF because Alsalva are saying they're buying, but the agreement with the IMF says we will not buy, and that is signed by the Minister of Finance and you know, at the direction of the President unless he did it without the President knowing,
which I don't think is possible. So there is kind of confusion now and a lot of bitcoinners are also asking questions like how is this possible, but the reality is like somebody is not being forthcoming here, either the IMF or the Minister of Finance or the President's and it just comes down to this loyalty test now being pushed out, like, you know, do you believe the IMF. That's what a lot of supporters of Al Salvad are saying.
But then you know, Al Salvador also said we're not buying anymore, so it puts us in a very difficult position and there's a lot of uncertainty. Also when they walked back at the Bitcoin law, which was a provision of their agreement with the IMF, that was kind of they've had to soften the bitcoin mall. So basically there is a bitcoin mall, but it is like voluntary, which is the legal tender. Yes it is in writing legal tender, but it's voluntary.
You're not unforcate or making anybody accept it.
Yeah, they didn't, but now it's not in there anymore. And there are other provisions there weakening the bitcoin law, but it does still exist in paper print format right. But the whole process of that being rolled out I think frustrated a lot of bitcoiners because it was this pushed out, you know, in night one evening and no communications were sent from the government. So you can understand
how people could be frustrated. If you move there with your family and you set up your life there, your business and everything, and the reason you move there was because it was this law and adoption of bitcoin, and things are being rolled back, it could be very frustrating me and I can understand that.
And then you mentioned earlier about a nation, it's the wells of a nation is typical has been on the energy that they had they had. I thought it was very interesting that you said that you could have the nuclear power plant and then create energy right by mining dew coin. And I thought it was very interesting. They had this volcano, which typically you think about savad or four nation with no exports, and now they have a volcano which is really useless. Well, they could use the
energy to my bitcoin. They have power. And then I started thinking about the indications that globally, so like Drew South Pacific, you have a toolls with the volcanos and they could have they could plug into that generate keep mine bitcoin, you starling, and like they could generate growing that that could redistribute the power of the world, which I thought it was pretty amazing, but then I think the whole volcano mining thing did that all fall.
Of fart as well.
Well.
It was supposed to be launching twenty twenty three and it just didn't happen, which is unfortunate because the structure that I put together was buying half a billion dollars worth bitcoin at that time, which would have been forty seven maybe fifty thousand dollars per coin, so that would have proved out this bitcoin bond model. But other countries are still interested in it, so we'll see what happens.
But going back to the conversion of energy to money, the biggest geothermal potential out there in the world is the Philippines and it is, you know, a developing country, so if they did move into the bitcoin bond program, that would have changed it. And the second biggest is Indonesia, another country that has a massive amount of geothermal potential, so they could become the next you know, Ua or Saudi Arabia. Yeah, and incredibly credibly wealthy if they decided to tap into that.
And Bitcoe, are you dropping to those nations.
We're reaching out. There have been forays into meetings, but we haven't nailed out a meeting yet, but Paraguay, where we just came back from, they are very interested in hydro bond so B. The ones that I designed for Alsavado were called volcano bonds Bass of volcanoes and Parbuay has four Taiwan hours of the year excess, okay, and they're interested to do something. So we know with the senator there and he's espalating the bosal up okay and the food chain, and I.
Want to know, I want to know more about the bonds. I'm gonna come back to that, but let's just stick on the al store for a minute. So, uh, the per the ifdo, which I thought Big one had gone up so much they could have paid off the IMF debt, I thought, But here they are taking on more IMF debt and per the terms of the new IMF debt, and they had to roll that back. As you said, in the IMF documents, it says that they can't buy
bick one anymore. Yeah. Uh, they said they're buying, but they used to announce their buis and now they don't announce any bodies.
So they still announced, but the other's still announced. There's an analyst Samny He did some analysis and so we theorized that it was transfers, internal transfers, and he kind of confirmed it, like they're sending it to finance and then sending.
It back to the wallet.
So there are other government of wallets that have bitcoin that are not public right now, right, so there there are current bitcoin reserves are public, but there's something else that they can draw from.
Yeah, would they like I mean, I guess maybe the governments don't need to report that, but I mean, would they come out with that poorly annually? Do I'm a document sent to a board their assets like.
Well, we'll see, but so far the emd of documents don't show their total holdings. It just says total holdings are unchanged, which kind of is corroberated by Sandy's analysis.
In the wall chain, an unchanged could be one they did sell but also they didn't buy. Yeah. God, okay, Well, as you said, I mean, if we back test what the bond could have been would have been amazing. So you sort of have as back tested. Now you're talking so so paaraway frame of how the bond works and how a nation state could benefit in that Canada as you said as a ton of energy, but how would a nation state the ton of energy Philippines in Indonesia benefit from a bond.
Basically, the bitcoin bond is what Strategy and SLOR are doing, but with sovereign debt instead of you know, corporate debt or preferred shares. It's the exact same thing. You raise capital, it's a dollar denominated, you allocate a portion to buy bitcoin, which will pay back the principle, and then you invest. For Alsalvador was half into a revenue generating activity like mining bitcoin or building new energy infra also mine bitcoin,
which will pay the cupon off. So it's basically a way to buy bitcoin for countries that have no good way to buy bitcoin right or are more impoverished. But for Alsalvador was tricky because you have to kind of figure out how to allocate the existing energy that they had, because to build a new geothermal climb takes ten years, maybe maybe five years, maybe ten years, but you can kind of like move stuff around, shift things around, and
squeeze out some energy to mine. But for Parkway, they have a massive amount of access right now, so they could raise and start mining tomorrow.
Okay, they have sex, they raise what ten billion or start with a billion to the billion, and then so the five hundred million goes into the mining equipment and you actually start mining. Yeah, and then five hundred million by bitcoin buys Bigcoin. And then is that a five year.
Bond or a ten year bond or I like a ten year about ten year bond because yea, theoretically in five years the kigir on bigcoin could be zero, right, but ten years you're definitely gonna be up. So the key is that the bild the five zero over five years worst case scenario, west case scenario, it could.
Be okay, okay, but not likely.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, okay, point zero one chance.
Yeah, just just for the record, sure edything in Alley Sailor looks says to be precise twenty nine percent over the next twenty one years. Yeah, that's what he says, thirty percent. I think it continued the fifty percent of the least for the rest of the decade. I think there's a case to be made or argued for potentially even seeing why the Kaggart could actually start to accelerate a little bit as bigger money comes in and we start to tap into these big ghost calendar. Sam has
bit quite twenty four model and a tapers right. Yeah, yeah, I have a model.
We haven't published it yet. O, we should publish it. But it's called the it'll be called Omega sixty basically sixty percent of growth every year based on a sixty percent medium. Yeah.
You're the one pushing the god candle.
I mean the god candles ten K. It's already happened many times. Yeah, Omega candles the next one hundred K, one hundred k.
Yeah. So I mean we're starting to talk, we're starting to chip into the dam holding back, you know, three indred trying to fixed endgup. Yeah, and if a big enough chumper that comes into two shoe on dollar asset, you think they can move a lot. So okay, so ten years just to be safe, and then it's all it needs to do is double because then that pays off the bond. Ye, it'll more than double. I get. But but you're banzered. But worst case scenario. Yeah, right, Well, when you're.
Pitching to governments, you should actually try to be as conservative sure possible. Sure, even for me, I think sixty percent annual road is conservative.
Yeah, So then they pay off the bond, and they get all the infrastructure and the mind bitcoin from that, and the revenue is gener.
But also I structured in a way where you recoup the principle after five years and then let's say bitcoin triple, then you have more bitcoin left otor right, so then you share that bitcoin upside with the investors.
Yeah, but there are.
Many permutations here. The key is that investors have some extra exposure to bitcoin, not just the base cube partner, right, and it ideally scales what bitcoins, you know, astronomical growth.
Yeah yeah, I mean as opposed to a traditional bond. Right now, today I just have to beat money back. Yeah, but I didn't make any more money to pay off the money.
So so, but if you look at it, like a lot of Latin American countries are in debt to IMF or whoever, and this is really the only way for them to get out of debt. We we presented we prepared a debt for Argentina and it's like you know, making its way up the food chain. But we did some projections and we think if they did a sort of a DCA bond doing a billion a year, they could probably pay off their debt I think one hundred
plus billion dollars of debt in thirty years. If they did a lump sum bond issuance of what was it, thirty billion in bonds in one year this year, they will pay it off in ten years. They will be debt free in ten years.
Wow. Wow, So that's going to Mila. Yeah, and most like Trump and bassent you know, the US wants to open up those swap lines to Argentina, so they're gonna have some money and there. Maybe Trump's pro bitcoin stance could get down there a little bit. Maybe we'll go for that.
Argentina is also an entry bridge too, so they could you know, outside of that program, they can do bitcoin money.
Yeah. Okay, now you're talking about South American countries, Alsabador, Argentina, Paraguay, et cetera. Another thing that you're trying to tackle is unbanked people. Yes, per the IMF. I mean, it's got the years where I thought it was like a billion or a billion or a billion and a half people adults actually not people adults, and a one that weren't bank You say, maybe the numbers higher. I'm guessing a lot of that's probably in South America. I'm guessing that's
coming from number one. Most people don't have permission to join than unreay documents, we're in a sanctun country, or they're so core they can't afford a bank account.
Well, the thing is banks don't want customers. It's too risky for them now to have customers. Right, That's why it's kind of weird to say. It's true, like it's harder today to get a bank account than ever before because of all the regulatory requirements. Right. Compliance teams are growing in size, and it's risky. Like unless you're putting a lot of money at the bank, you're a cost center to them. You're not a revenue generating you know, lender to the bank at that point. So there is
no encouragement to bank the unbanked. And this is why I think stable coins are becoming so prevalent, because they're the last mile. If you look at tether in Latin America, people just call it digital dollar. They don't know it's tether, they don't know who Paulo is. It's just the digital dollar that they can get on their phone, and that's good enough for them because for them, that's their bitcoin.
That's the thing that protects them against the inflation of the peso or whatever bolivar or the currency that they have, and we just have to get them to understand that, you know, bitcoin is better than that. So it's a it's a process, I think, and it won't.
Be long before they just call it a dollar. Yeah, and not even digital.
Well in Bolivia they're pricing things in the grocery stores in the USCT really yeah.
Interesting, So as part of your big initiative to bank the n banked is to give them access to digital dollars, well, do to reap or what's there through awfua A.
How are you in that, Bob, So I would say we're approaching the USDT users in lat M. There's four hundred, maybe four fifty now a million users of us ET. Unfortunately a lot of them are using all coin wallets. But I think we are the first bitcoin wallet that has stable coin support. So in Aqua you can receive stable coins from other chains. It'll swap it to liquid tether.
That's the base of Aqua. It's a liquid wallet, and then from there you can swap it to liquid bitcoin, send it out over lightning, or swap it to bitcoin mainchain and put in cold storage. So that's kind of how we plan to onboard them. Do local integrations, integrate with local payment providers where they can like, you know, send picks to their aqua wallet and get the pick. Stable coin dpicks.
What's that?
It's the stable cooin of the Brazilian currency. Yeah, the Brazilian digital bank currency cult base. But there are a lot of these systems in place in lack America. You just have to build the right wallet that integrates all the on and off remds and connects it to bitcoin. Yeah, and that's what awkoy is.
So markets are you n So far?
We have a lot of users all over the world, but Brazil and Argentina are two of our bigger ones.
What I love about that is I think about stable coins as a very necessary step. Bitcoins just isn't good for short term money. It's just two balter for shorter money. The stable coins solve that problem. But also it's like this gateway drug where it's like I don't know about this magic internet money, but oh dollars, okay, fine, Yeah, over time they're like, why do these dollars keep buying
me less and less and less? But this bitcoin buys me more and more and more, and then they can see them compared to each other exactly.
So at the top of ACO we have a bitcoin price and then it shows bitcoin. There are two bitcoin liquid Bitcoin, and then USDT. So if they're using it for USTT, they're always seeing the bitcoin price at the top, and they should eventually understand that. You know, maybe we should get some and you just swap it.
Real estate or bitcoin. Which one's better. Well, it's not about choosing one, it's about using both together. Because today sixty percent of American homeowners net worth is trapped in their home and there's no way to put it to work in bitcoin until now. Horizons help you unlock a portion of your home equity to buy bitcoin. And it's not alone. There's no new monthly payments and you stay in your home just as usual, but you leverage your
equity to get bitcoin exposure. Now what makes Horizon stand out, Well, there's no term limits. You keep one hundred percent of the upside of the bitcoin, and the bitcoin is yours to custody however you want, with no risk of forced liquidation. So if you've got equity but you don't want to refinance or take on new debt, but you would like some bitcoin exposure. Horizon could be the perfect option, so
check out. Joinhrizon dot com to learn more and get an extra five hundred dollars in bitcoin if you use my code moss MSS and you get funded again. Join Horizon dot com code moss to get an extra five hundred dollars in bitcoin. You used to work about to Adam back? Right? Yeah, yeah, what'll more? Cally you get at them back? Yeah? What do you think about bitcoin treasury companies? And Adam seems to be like all in, like both feet in. Yeah. Are you as excited about
them as he is? Or what's your view point on those? Oh?
I own strategy. I supported Sailor's goal from day one. I think it's how you look at it. Some treasure companies seem to be marketing to retail, right, Sailor's approaching a different market segment. He's going after fixed income. And I think this is where some bitcoins may sit on different sides of the fence, because if you're targeting retail, they feel like you're just taking advantage of people. But if you're targeting a bigger market and you're you know,
becoming this monetary black hole putting everything into bitcoin. I think that's good for bitcoin. That's why sports sailors initiatives. Yeah, yeah, what's your thinking go on? Uh, well, well you're biased.
IM sure, I'm biased because I'm involved in several of them. I think, first of all, it's it's a process. So, right, he's like six years into or whatever out of five years into it. Now, you're right. So it's like a process, and he was able to start with such a massive size. So I think I think phase one is get to a big enough asset base, yes, and that's probably at
least a billion and eight thousand big point. Then once you have the asset base, then you need to phase two, which is then creating securitize debt and credit instruments off of the big gooing of bout cheat. But phase one is sort of that bootstrappy moment, which is like, hey, we need volume on the stop, we need eyeballs. We can raise the money to get the asset phase. And then ultimately a two point that you made Sailor's customer
is not a bigcoinner. Say this customer somebody who wants indome. Yes, they're the opposite of a quick customer exactly like I can't hoddle for five years up seventy eight years old. I got to pay by bills tomorrow, right, so that I can't hollow bick them. So they're not a big one buyer. So that's his target. But I think in the beginning a lot of its companies are bootstrapping off with bigfoiners, and then bitcoin aers start asking questions like
why would it I perform bitcoin? Which is a great question to ask, That's what I would ask you, won't no, they certainly will.
You think so oh yeah, it's certain Well we'll see.
Yeah, I mean, I'll tell you why I think that. But let me finished stot. But uh, the bitcoinners should be asked that that's our paral rate. Why would I put my money inthing else? Again, be a bitcoin? However, most of the world doesn't think that way. Trad File says, will it beat inflation or will it beat the S
and B five founder? Yeah, And so I think if you can market to trad fy, then you have much bigger market and they're not trying to beat that paral way, right, So I think the big one person is a smaller person or smaller, but just morket. Why do I think it'll be bitcoin. It's because of the multiple rights so current and the metric that Sailor introduced is this M that number. It's a multiple to an asset value. It's no different than a price to book that you would
see in traditional finance. Right, try five? Why should it trade more than one? Right? So if it stays the same as bitcoin, it'd be one times and a half. Right. If it can go to one point two or one point five or two point zero, then it beats bitcoin, right, So why should it get more than one? Well, the reason why it gets to more than one is because they're using leverage. Ye. So if I borrowed fifty percent LTV a's my bitcoin, buy more bitcoin, I'm leveraged and
I'll probably outperformed by a big one. I'm gonna have to do it with provolatility, right, but I'll outperform bitclin Right. So it's adding leverage that gives us that out performance. How do we do that? First of all, if we look at like asset heavy businesses, so this would be banks, insurance institutions, oil companies, they're typically trading a one to two maybe a one to three priced book ratio, so
banks have leverage. Of course, the top ten bank trade a higher leverage than community banks, for example, but they're all trading greater than one typically, like when the oil christ snappture down for point eight, but like most of the time it's in that rage. So I think that's sort of like a range sailor thinks that if you watch his quarter two presentation, he you know, and you've been with it many times. He thinks in like ten to twenty year chucks, so not two months or five months,
ten year chunks. So in his charts they're modeled for ten years. And this is where a lot of MicroStrategy investors get very frustrated. And he's like, hey, we've doubled Bitcoin's performance in the last twelve months and five years. What about this quarter? This court Like I'm thinking ten years, right, So he breaks that chart and there's three levers. You have leverage. How much leverage will we apply it? And we apply the leverage prefers. So anytime I take on
debt numbers or I sell preferreds, that's the levers. Then you have the ar R of the bigcoin, and then the KGAR and then you have the how much after payout? So those are three very put in there. But if we get like a thirty percent KGAR and a thirty percent leverage and an eight percent yel, yeah, that would give him what he calls bitcoin factor. I think of two point nine or more. So he thinks that's the floor, right, it should trade it a minimum three times a bigcoin because of the leverage.
I think it could go higher if I said floor floor.
Yeah, I said the floor.
But if you look at a lot of other companies, it's your your pe ratio is sure, they're insane.
Sometimes no, right of first, I mean it should be twenty, right, so if you look at like the price to book of Tesla and now if I'm twenty thirty whatever, So no, he said that should be the floor. So two nine three times before, so that's three times the performance of bitcoin. Now he could easily get to more leverage. And we also probably both think that bitcoin does better than thirty percent.
So now we're at five or six times, right, and then you start thinking about, okay, what if we start buying these is a growth company and the astogy old bank because banks and oil companies don't have assets that are going up in a fifty percent of kag are So now should it be six or eight times? So I'm saying three times, and that's why I think the output film big one. Now will all of them do that?
Of course not, but I think most of the good companies should achieve at least a one and a half or two times, and they should most of the companies upfolder.
Right, So it depends on what time frame. If you're like an investor, I guess I'm looking at quarters right, Well, they shouldn't. Yeah, they should.
That's a big dismatch, I know.
But sailor, yes, he's looking at ten twenty. But I think eventually there is a time in which there is no more capital to sell to there be three hundred trillion. We'll see can three hundred trillion acts pitcoin?
Directly?
I think things will change, like if you'll get metiplanet. They have kind of a mote, right, But if the laws change and spot bitcoin is now not taxes heavily, I think it'll see a decline. But if you take that principle apply it to the broader market, you know, whenever it happens that a lot of that capital can go to spot. I think it'll change that equation, but for maybe maybe ten years, maybe twenty years, maybe thirty years, it could perform. But I think ultimately it equalizes it.
As some mooint I think. I think this is where the discrepancy is that most of the market's missing is going on. And you just said it. Actually so you said that he's going after institutional investors. Yeah, so the real product that's that micro strategy, micro strategy sold the teleto software strategy, it's a new product. Is selling credit instruments. Yes, that's where they're on. So they're selling ten percent yielding
products to people who would never buy bitcoin. They're not buying bitcoin, right, they're buying ten percent to yield the products.
But let me asking, Mark, do you see a point at which does it Okay, does the dollar co exist.
With bitcoin forever? Well? Or where was a long time? Well, let's say let's say fifty years.
Yeah, you think it coils is for fifty years?
Okay.
I'm of the cap, which is it does the mechanic co exist? Eventually? Something's got to give that people just want one thing.
But I nobody knows when I would use history as our guide, right, So the dollar took over the reserve status from the pounds sterling one hundred years ago and roughly, and that was about a forty year process. Yeah, so it didn't happen overnight. It was like a process. Right, But even today, one hundred years later, the pound sterling is still the third most used currency in the world and they produce no exports, have nothing of value about
the brom on the bus, but they're still there. Yeah, why is it still the third most use currency in the world, right, So I think I think so bitcoin could take thirty forty fifty years to become the reserve currency of the world, the United account of the world, but it doesn't actually mean that the dollar goes away. Alt.
Why is the pound sterling still there because bitcoin is still young? I would say, yeah, maybe it depends on your figure. Like if bitcoin is the best form of money ever created, and we have the ability to teleport bitcoin around the world in an instant, we can verify, you can't counterfeit it.
Maybe it changes the diameter. It does it does because it can be everything in one asset. Yeah, it can be the whole stack in one and so I'd agree. I've given where I think it is by twenty thirty, twenty forty, twenty fifty. I think after twenty fifty twenty twenty fifty to twenty fifty five, it becomes a unit to account of the world. And at that point maybe there is the meat for one hundred power refiats.
There are, we'll see. But I just know there's a lot of inefficiencies with your currencies, and we're going to see a lot more drop away. And you had in the past, you know, reboots of currencies, and I don't think that's possible today. Like if you're if your currency is hyper and plate inflating, you can't make a new one, you know, with bitcoin and stable coins, you just cannot sell it. Right, the alternative exists now, so I think you're gonna see fewer and fewer FIA currencies. Sure, we'll
just all roll under the dollar, the dollar rise. Yeah, and eventually to be determined, it either co exists or it doesn't.
Col I think there's twenty five or thirty years and then it becomes Union account and then the dollar or Robbly Vain the distance and I think we agree maybe a little bit different thro on time brain, but most of the same. But but we have. What I think is interesting is you take again three hundred trillion dollars of I mean, what does that number either pre troia like saying right of fixed income and if you think about it, right, like so I'm a simply ago first
and and I need the income. Right, so I have money a debt that i'd be in that yofa and currently that debt is based off for fiat debt. Yes, but what happens is that's paying me four percent. Let's say it was gonna pay me ten percent. Yeah, So I'm going to take the debt and I'm just going to move it. The debt doesn't go away, and he doesn't get extinguished, but it now moves to a bitcoin layer. So it's almost like the bedrock of this three hundred
trillion gets rug pulled and bitcoin goes under. So the three hundred trillion is still there, but now sit on a bitcoin layer. Yeah, that's a good point.
What could prolong with dollars lifetime is just so many debts are dollar denominated, Yeah, country, sovereign level and something that could that could mean they need dollars still.
That's the that's Brent Johnson dog milkshake theory. Whole basis is that all the debt is dollar denominated and it has to get extinguished, and so it has to get paid back when the dollar. Yeah, yeah, we're we're going long. But I want to I want to dig into the main topic I want to talk to you about.
So we first chatted about it.
Yeah, and that is that's at least the immediate future of bitcoin in the consensus or the protocol. And so there's a big debate that's going on in the bitcoin community. And this might be a little bit in a deef and maybe a little bit too much merdige for most of my community. So I'm sorry about this, but it's important topic. Bitcoin is sort of creating a division between Bitcoin Core that maintains the code based trying to go from B twin I to be thirty and some people
don't like that. And so now we have this not spin off that's trying to do something else over here. So let's freak what the heck is going on.
So it comes down to the core developers are changing a default and why it's causing such a stir. It's not really a technical thing like changing people like say, it's a technical discussion changing the default is not technical. You're removing it. You're changing the limit by removing the limit. It's really about telling other bitcoins what to do. And Core is the main implementation right now, so what they
change has a massive impact on the market. A lot of people just upgrade, like most people just blindly upgrade their software, and this is what people are kind of up and uproar about. And there's many different opinions on the detrimental effects of the upgrade. But to me, the crux is Core is changing a default, and I, as a node runner, don't want to be told what to do.
So people are moving to knots for many reasons. One of them is a protest vote, like, you're not telling me what to do because you know bitcoinners are very sovereign, and well why do they have to be.
Told what to do? But just can't every node runner stand be twenty nine?
They can, and a lot will stay on twenty nine. I'm kind of in a neutral faction. I'm just saying I'm not upgrading. I'm not gonna let you change the defaults. But the defaults do matter because when the rest of when like the miners upgrade and they go to thirty. Then that changes the network behavior because they run a lot on the defaults, and that is what a lot of the people in the knots camp are worried about that.
Now you just remove the limit and we're gonna have massive opera turns and spammer are going to spam and make a new collection of cat NFTs that are one hundred kilobytes to take advantage of that.
So one, why, I mean, why are they book going for between ninety thirty? As you said, it seems like they're making a change to accommodate and that will people censorly the minor so the miners can reap all money necessarily, but maybe for other Layer two applications, yes, right, so like layer two's and miners shouldn't be forced to create an innovay based off of layer one. Layer one shouldn't change for layer two. That seems like.
That's another part of it. I mean, I would seem like a good end. The rationale was another company in called Cetrea. They're polluting the utfsode set. So that's like kind of transactions that are you know, Bitcoin transactions. It's a big database and it's often stored in memory and then you have like the operatar, which is the thing that's sored on disc that can be discarded. You want to proven. But the concern is like, we don't want
them to make these UTXO transactions. We'd rather have to have an outperturn so we can get rid of it. So that's kind of one of their many rationales. It's a very complicated, multifaceted.
Yeah, I don't know debate. I believe that there's a lot of entering the consequences, so things could happen that we're not there for. We don't know until we know. I also believe that everything has trade off. Yeah, there's no free lunch right to get something to give something. So then if we go to knots now they have a way to handle that. But what's the trade off there? Now?
Are they censoring it or they put in a filter and choosing that to run certain things the filter which is another form of censorshow yes and no.
I mean, here's if the crux of it. One side is saying it can be filtered and the other side is saying it cannot be filtered, and they're both right because you can buycass filters. Filters are done at the node level. If the miners decide to mind a transaction, it'll go in the blockchain. So both are right. You can filter, the filters are undeterrent, but they can't be bypassed because miners can mine whatever you're filtering. Still, so
I think that it's a more philosophical discussion on development. Really, the developers don't want to fight a battle against SPAN. They would rather build cool new things. So no one's working on anti spam projections in bitcoin because they think it's a gay you can't win. And if you sit down with that on the back, I'll say, yeah, I've rationalized and reason through every single way to fight SPAN, and I've come to the conclusion that you cannot fight SPA.
So that's why they're saying, let's let it be the way it is. Well, you don't have to increase it to make it easier. No, you don't, And that's what these guys the Knots camp are saying. And I guess I'm also saying that you should deter it and you should fight the SPAN because let's say you're right, it's an arms race. The people kind of have spoken, the bitcoiners. They want arms to defend against the spam, so there should be is.
There really spam? So let let me frame that question up. So you just said that money has changed, it's now information. A lot of people say bitcoin has no value. Well, you may not see value, but I see value. And so then we think about free markets and we start to think about what goes into the block space, and it should be for monetary information. But what's a monetary information? It's all the information, and what information is the most valuable.
So if I'm willing to pay for that information more than you're willing to pay for the information, your information might be a monetary transaction, My information might be whatever message. I mean, shouldn't the free market just decide what goes into that Is it really spam if it's actually more valuable than monetary transaction.
So this is a really interesting little conundrum we've gotten ourselves in too. So the spammers have basically said, we're paying fees, so we're not spam. But the most important thing is spam is never from the perspective of the sender. It's from the perspective of the receiver, which in this case is the node runner. Stuff I don't want, right, stuff I don't want I okay, let's talk about email spam.
Talking about my sex message spam. Sure, every day I have approof for a new loan that didn't even apply for it.
Yeah, but you know that guy paid for his cell phone plan and whatever, and you know he paid to send it to you. It's not spam. But you think it's spam. Yeah, a point, it's the same like physical mail, like a junk mail. They paid the postage fees. It not spam. Spam is always from the perspective of the receiver, and in Bitcoin's case, it's a receiver. So Jae, let's go into like is it data? So bitcoin is information,
but not all information is bitcoin. If you download bitcoin the client in twenty two thousand and nine and you boot it up and you get some coins because you could mine back then on a CPU, and you send some coins to me, that's a Bitcoin transaction. If you stick a picture in there, you know that's not native
behavior of bitcoin, right. So people in the core side have said, you know, bitcoin is just a database, right, But it's a database of Bitcoin as the native data, and you can send and receive that native Bitcoin data. But if you start sticking other things, that's not what the software was meant to do.
I had never lived there from that angle, so I appreciate that perspective because to your point, I expect phone calls from people I know and want to hear from not doing lone applications every day, and it drives me crazy and up downloaded applications to build her. I can't stop it.
So so the spamas are saying, you know, you can't censor us. It's you're wrong to censor us. But my perspective is you shouldn't be here. Are you here in my holey or never go.
Do because this this space and my mail is not scarce, but the block space is scarce. Wouldn't true monetary transactions groud about or outpright your price them out?
Well, that's another argument too, like the fees are the filter. But we've also changed the economics, like during the block size war, we increased the block size the effective block space, right, we made we scaled the coin. We made transactions cheaper. But therefore, but we also made spam cheaper too, by a multiple And we're doing other things too, like removing
those limits that cores. Removing it makes it easier. So yes, you can say fees are the filter, but you've also just kind of opened the door and made it cheaper for them to send you the sms. So yeah, a lot of dynamics have changed, and you show, you show that you can bypass the filters. So now you kind of like showed people that were less savvy, less technical, that oh you can do this.
Now what about the precedents that's set that once I show that I can filter things, then the DOVERMA could say, oh, you can filter things, and I want you to filter out these o fact knocking blind addresses. We want you to fact this out with these mixer addresses and things like that.
But you can You can't really stop it, even if you get a mining pool to sense ay, like you know, Mark, your pool should censor these transactions, someone else will mind them. Right, The thing goes both ways. You cannot stop spam one hundred percent, but you also cannot stop transactions one hundred percent too.
So you know, I kind of fall in line with Sailor, which is maybe the best way to ruin something is to try to fix something.
Yeah, you hear his spiel on Yeah, if I want to destroy Big Quiet, way hire a bunch. You hire a lot of exaltators to make it better.
Yeah, make it better, yeah, not fix of the make it better right. And there was an inflation book.
Someone was trying to optimize bitpoint and they introduced an inflation bitcoin and that was there for two years, almost two years. So in that two year period someone could have inflated bitcoin supply.
It killed it. So it seems like it's like almost just ossify the code and if there's something critical, we could maybe see about fixing it, but like try to make improvements of like changing the blocks. I seems out all right, So I don't want to go too long on this, but you're in the Needer camp.
I lean more towards not. I think that there should be efforts to fight spam. Maybe it's not winnable, but there should be tools given to people like it. There are so many proposals for soft forks, for new features of bitcoin. Everyone wants to do something new with bitcoin. And it goes back to Sailor's point. You know, if you give developers unlimited resources, they're.
Going to try to build there. It's like the point I made earlier. Legislators legislate exactly, coders want to code exactly they need to build something, but go build layer two. Yeah. Yeah,
you've been around a long time. You understand at of deep level, what is from your perspective, your historical precedent that you've seen set, the block sized wars that you've went through, etc. Is this like it's a healthy reaction to the community to debate this and bindent ways around this, or is this like one of these could be critical and people should be like paying attention to worry about it.
I think it's good that people are discussing it and we're bringing things up. I think having one dominant client is not the best thing, So I think not existing and having twenty percent of the network is good. I think even better as you get a third implementation that's widely adopted and then you kind of a three way balance. It's like a triangle or separation of the powers in the government, right, So you can't force any change through without you other two clients getting major adopting it and
getting attraction through that way. So I think that's the best way to awsome five bitcoin. So you can't just ram a change through, and that's largely what this is about. Like corus able to set defaults because they are the primary dominant client.
Yeah, yeah, I don't like that. So this might be a healthy reaction. It's not mission critical.
There is balance and you know, no one group can push something through as a default.
Yeah yeah, okay, first you go on. I like that, all right, Sam, So I think we're gonna wrap it up. We covered a lot around unbanking the bank or banking. The mbad was Aqua nas to stay the adoption. I love the bond idea and palitic So anything else that you want to point people, what are you working on? If you're paying attention to download your wallet Aqua, give it a try.
Check out Aqua. You can look it up on Aqua dot net. Yeah, it's on the app store, Apple Android and we're on X gentree Calm I have, Yeah, I'm on X two.
Yeah.
Cool