Matt O'Dell. How are you, sir?
How's it going? Pleasure to be here. Thanks
for thanks for joining. I appreciate it. I'm loving the Citadel Dispatch
logo in the background.
Yeah. So as we were talking, you know, for those who don't know you, of course, I'll have information in the show notes. I'm gonna get you to do a bit of an introduction so they understand sort of the breadth and depth of what you're working on.
But I have thus far talked to
some fantastic Bitcoiners,
builders,
economists,
futurists, global
executive consultants,
you know, kind of an OGOG,
guy named RU Sirius who was advocating
for
the beauty and the power of cyberspace in the eighties and nineties and got his take on what has transpired versus what he thought would. And so the conversation I'd love to have with you today,
because you do span,
an array of,
not for profit, open source initiatives,
venture capital, you've built,
you know, products of your own, you've talked and worked with a ton of builders, is to sort of give us a sense of
how we should orient our expectations with regard to freedom technology
broadly,
Bitcoin specifically,
and ultimately what it does for us in the world where all of us, you know, we're
we're recording this on June 16 and there are missiles flying between Iran and Israel.
Who knows, you know, what the truth is these days, but depending on the source of media.
And so the point being there, what do you trust? Who do you trust? To what degree do you trust any of it? So
let's let's start here.
Give us a sense for those who don't know you outside of Bitcoin or circles, because inside they certainly will,
of what are your key areas of focus? So
before I got into Bitcoin
was
more or less you could categorize myself as a disenfranchised youth. I
didn't think the prospects were high for,
the society and the future that we've found ourselves in.
And then I discovered
Bitcoin.
And that was in, you know, the Snowden era environment. So
2008
hit first, 2008 hit. I was like, can't trust the finance guys. They're building up a house of cards over there, and they just lie to you and pretend that they know exactly what's happening when they don't.
But I was like, we could trust big tech. And then 2013 rolled around and
snowed and revealed that we couldn't trust big tech and that they were in bed with
corrupt federal government. And that that was definitely a low point. And at the same time, I was assessing Bitcoin.
And Bitcoin became this avenue of hope for me. It became
a direction that we could actually
affect actionable change and have control over our lives and have true agency.
And further than that, it was just the greater open source movement. So Bitcoin as an open source project was kind of what brought me into open source in general and how it empowers individuals.
So from that point forward, I just dove deep down the rabbit hole of Bitcoin and open source,
and I tried to pick it to pieces and see where it would fail.
And I came to a relatively simple conclusion.
The power of these projects and the scale of these projects rely on the fact that they're software and they're tech based,
but the success of them relies on individuals. It's a movement of of people.
And so when you look at it from that perspective,
you really come to the conclusion that
the two things we need are better education and better tools.
And so everything
that I've focused on since then have revolved around that simple thesis, better education and better tools. And so that's really broad. I,
volunteered with the Human Rights Foundation training activist for seven plus years.
I cofounded Bitcoin Park in Nashville and now in Austin,
which is a in person
community space focused on building and and education.
I cofounded OpenSats, which is a five zero one c three focused on,
supporting open source projects.
I'm one of, the original partners of ten thirty one,
which we we fund for profit businesses that operate in the space. A lot of them have an open source focus. We're very proud of the fact that we invest in full stack open source businesses
where other investors wouldn't. And then last but not least, I found myself,
semi involved in politics and policy,
as one of the founding three board members of Bitcoin Policy Institute.
And that came as a realization that you couldn't just ignore politics and that the early cyberpunk movement had a two pronged strategy
on one side on the tools and the education and the other side on fighting legal battles.
And that really came to head last year when
privacy focused open source devs started getting thrown in the gulags.
And I was starting a family and realized that if I wanted to be
a productive American and not have to look over my shoulder all the time, we needed more effective policy. And to say nothing of, I think, the education
I mean, you know, you you
I
I will say in in no small part or the reason I'm doing what I'm doing,
based on
your your early podcast work.
And so
maybe with that, I think tell me if I'm wrong, Matt, but your,
rabbit hole recap, TFTC
TFTC First, I presume, these are projects that you started very early in you you know, you weren't, quote, working in Bitcoin perhaps, but you were you were educating on Bitcoin. So when did when did those kick off? How how far back do those go? So it's a little bit
confusing, and it's an it's often misconceived.
So TFTC
is Marty's project.
Rabbit hole recap is something the two of us started together seven years ago.
A weekly show that we haven't skipped a single week.
I've had a child. Marty had two children. Marty's father died. We evacuated for COVID. Bitcoin fell 80%.
Never skipped a week. Always there's always a rabbit hole recap. We like to joke that Bitcoin could go to zero and there'd still be a rabbit hole recap. Right. And then I launched my own podcast, it'll dispatch maybe four years ago.
And that's more focused on
direct education while rabbit hole recap is more focused on news and keeping up to date on the different developments around Bitcoin.
Now if
you put that in perspective of my greater journey,
I started being heavily focused on Bitcoin
a little over a decade now.
And the that first three or four years,
I was operating under the assumption
that
Bitcoin was gonna be made explicitly illegal in America.
And so I took OPSEC and privacy very seriously.
I didn't publicly associate with Bitcoin at all.
And then the 2017,
the twenty seventeen fork wars happened between Bcash, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin, and I became a little bit more active, but still under NIM.
And then,
when it looked like Hillary was gonna lose to Trump the first time, I basically came to the conclusion
that and this whole time I was, you know, my my my main
my main money, like, I was working not in Bitcoin. I was just Bitcoin was a hobby.
And then in
when it when it started to become obvious that Hillary was gonna lose, that twenty twenty election and that we were gonna have Trump, I didn't think necessarily that Trump was gonna be, you know, directly positive for Bitcoin, but there was enough chaos and confusion going on that I came to the simple conclusion that
Bitcoin wasn't gonna be made explicitly illegal for at least four years as long as Trump was president. There was too many other priorities that were going on in legal battles that were being fought outside of Bitcoin, and we could fly under the radar.
And at that point, I made the calculated
the calculated risks to become more public with Bitcoin. And then within a year or two, I went full time Bitcoin. Shout out to Marty. I, said I am amazed that I didn't know, you know, that I made that mistake that that that wasn't his project, but I know you you guys have tag teamed a lot. And so but I think what's interesting all, about all of that synthesized
is if we do go back to 2015,
so the ten years that you've been
very, very active. There's the aspect of, okay, depending upon who's in power, this thing, Bitcoin specifically, could be attacked, could be made quote illegal.
Talk to us a bit more
about
what sort of footing
FreedomTech was on ten years ago. Like, what
what was the vibe and and the outlook and and maybe what did good look like? What was a what was a good outcome for someone to be able to reclaim
privacy, control of their money? Because then, of course, I wanna talk about sort of the current state of the state of affairs, state of the union.
I mean, so 2033,
it's weird. Like, part of it was,
you know, Snowden had just happened.
And Snowden was hiding first in China and then in Russia. Basically, the only two countries that you could hide from the US government, the long arm of the US government.
And those revelations, I mean, especially as a young adult, were just brutal. It was just we have you bagged and tagged. They were brutal. Yeah. Yeah. We have you bagged and tagged, and you have no agency over your lives.
But Bitcoin was still very much in it was very much in the shadows. It was very quiet.
There were no suits involved yet.
You could go on every server no services at KYC AML.
And it was very much personal responsibility. It was like the wild west. It was completely wild west. I mean, I remember the first Bitcoin cold storage wallet I created.
I printed out a paper wallet, and then I destroyed the printer because the printer might have memory, but there was no hardware wallet. So
seed words didn't exist yet. Like the things that people take for granted didn't exist. People were getting rugged left and right.
Mt. Gox hadn't happened yet. I don't remember exactly when Mount Gox happened. Maybe that was late twenty fourteen, but the writing was starting to get on the wall.
But people were losing their money on random custodial services all the time. There was absolutely no real law enforcement involvement.
Silk Road hadn't been taken out yet. It was about to be taken out.
Yeah. So,
like, Coinbase didn't even exist. I think Coinbase came a little bit later. So it was a completely different environment. And I I enjoyed the fact that there was just no rules, and you kinda could just make your own destiny.
As much as you remember,
did it Yeah. Yeah. Feel well, did it feel like that could continue? Or,
you know, I'm asking you to rewind history, but did do you think that
did did did you guys know it was it was a a flash a flash, point in history? No. I I think so at that point, my conclusion, my thesis was, like, Bitcoin would be, like, black market money. And even if it was just used as,
a method to deposit and withdraw from online gambling sites, which were illegal back then, now they're legal,
that it would have significant value. But I it was hard to comprehend the true big picture. I mean, I remember thinking,
like, $10,000
was moon math. Like, it was ridiculous math. Like, there was no shot. Like, if
that that was like your you would do the dream calculation. You take the stack, you multiply it by 10,000.
And, you know, the idea of BlackRock ETFs and and Larry Fink being on CNBC talking about Bitcoin was, like, completely out there.
Governments stacking
strategic Bitcoin reserves is completely out there. And I think also
there was an assumption
that
a completely wrong assumption, that this
that we could
continue in the shadows as, like, a niche project for longer.
Maybe not forever, but for longer. Now in, like, 2016
or so was when you started to see
the ID requirements, the KYC AML start getting implemented on different exchanges. And at first, it was really pushed back on by the community. They said never use it.
And it was very much, you know,
a massive success
on the government enforcement side in that within two years,
pretty much every service had it. And if they didn't, they were getting whack a mole one by one. Mhmm. Mhmm. To the point where now when someone new comes in, they just assume that's the status quo. And I would say
that if you look if you wanna look at it from the positive angle,
basically,
in a regulatory environment scenario,
Bitcoin has been slowly captured
and trending in the wrong direction
for
about ten years, probably like 2015 to 2025,
early twenty twenty five. And this is the first year that that trend has tangibly reversed.
Now
people shouldn't get complacent
and there's still a lot of
a lot of fights to be had.
But in terms of regulatory environment, it was literally a decade of just
worse and worse and worse and worse and worse and worse.
And then this year happened, Trump got sworn into office,
and a lot of his support came from Bitcoin and the adjacent crypto community, and you started to see that get pushed back to a degree. Was that inevitable? And and, specifically, do you feel like
different technological or protocol design decisions could have been made
to avoid that, or was that just the way it was gonna go in terms
of of the ability now largely for government to not stop Bitcoin, but to control
many of the the aspects of its flow and usage?
I mean, I think in hindsight, it was inevitable. I think
three years ago, even the writing was pretty much on the wall.
I mean, and you can go back one of the cool things about rabbit hole recap is it's like a time machine. Every week, you could just
my unfiltered thoughts on the subject and, the haters will say I got plenty of things wrong and I did. And the truth of the matter is I got plenty of things right, but no matter what If you didn't, you'd be a spook.
Exactly. The no matter what, it's my unedited, unfiltered thoughts every week for the last seven years. Absolutely.
And,
the strategy became relatively obvious and and
has been successfully executed. And I think in hindsight, it was pretty much inevitable. I mean, there's basically there was two paths we could go down.
There was a path where,
you saw widespread attempted bans on Bitcoin
throughout world governments. And in that situation,
Bitcoin operates in a much smaller scale,
but in the shadows.
Or you see embrace and capture,
and that's the trajectory we saw. And there's definitely pros and cons
on both sides.
But I I think all said and done, if you look at it from
the angle of
someone who wants to see Bitcoin and these technologies being used as tools for freedom,
we are probably in the best timeline. It is hard to complain about where we stand today,
given all the potential trajectories that we could have went down.
Absolutely.
Continuing to look back a bit, and you mentioned Snowden, certainly speaking of flashpoints, that was a hell of a flashpoint.
What else would you put alongside or close to Bitcoin in terms of
impact,
within the FreedomTech sphere broadly
over these past ten years? Does anything sort of clock in at an equivalent or or close,
level of importance?
I mean, I it's a little bit controversial, but I I think,
the single biggest success has been widespread usage of signal,
the encrypted messenger. I had a feeling you might go there. Absolutely agree. And what's fascinating about that is not just the actual tech,
which isn't perfect. It makes certain trade offs but gives you a reasonably secure environment
that is easy to use convenient and has all the features people expect from a modern messenger. So you're usually with with any of these kind of tools you're looking at a trade off balance that
reduces convenience in the sake of freedom.
And and signal
strikes a a very solid balance that has has
resulted
in significant usage of it.
Now
one of the more fascinating parts is not necessarily the tech side. It's how the actual
project was structured as a relatively
sustainable independent nonprofit,
which does there's not really many other examples of that. Definitely not at the scale of signal.
To the point where they actually are on the front lines of doing policy work and,
Meredith Whitaker, their new CEO, came out of big tech,
is one of the best people to ever speak in mainstream media about the importance as a privacy
Very impressive. As an open source software.
So, I mean, I would
I would put that project
on a, a massive pedestal in terms of success and and pushing the freedom tech movement forward.
And then definitely a
a a solid mention for Tor.
Ironically, both of them got a lot of their funding early on from the US government,
because they had their own
yeah. They had their own needs,
in terms of private and secure communication.
But Tor has been a massively successful project.
Both in both cases,
they operate in a slightly different threat model than Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is designed to be robust against a hostile
US hegemony.
So if if the largest, most powerful government in the world, the US government, wanted to stop the Bitcoin network,
they'd it'd be very difficult for them to
if not impossible, but Mhmm. I don't like speaking in absolutes. And usually, if you speak in absolutes, you're wrong.
But with Signal and
Tor, they operate in this middle ground threat model where
they're relying on certain constitutional protections by The US. They fight them in in courts.
And if the US government ever wanted to really take them out,
they probably could relatively easily.
It just kinda comes down to whether or not a judge would let them do it or not. Mhmm. I mean, Tor is Tor is not
has not solved
in a in a decentralized way this a civil resistance problem. You could relatively easily flood that network.
And signal, I mean, you could it's as easy as just pulling that thing from app stores and then
95%
of users wouldn't be using it. And that does seem to be one of the most interesting dichotomies as you were talking about that I thought to myself, signal is, I think, without exception,
probably the most,
you know, so called normie friendly FreedomTech
project that I can think of.
It's been pretty straightforward for me to get friends and family to use it. I would not be able to say undoubtedly the same thing about Tor. You know, a, would they understand and appreciate the need for it? B, would they would they be able to use it? You know, Bitcoin, you know,
incredibly easy using something like Strike. If you're going to ask somebody to spin up their own Electrum server, different discussion, and it seems like
signal sort of sits there,
in the middle and that it's tremendous utility, as you say, a reasonable set of trade offs and
has have they just they've really nailed the user experience.
So if we then jump,
Matt, to sort of, you know, twenty twenty five State of the Union,
whether it's those projects and or others, would love to get your take,
again, from the standpoint of someone who is,
supporting grants, who's investing via ten thirty one, who's,
in constant conversation with the builders and the funders and the rest.
What stands out? Like, what is going really well,
in 2025
in terms of of freedom technology broadly? Look. I mean, I think it's easier to use Bitcoin than ever before, period. Full stop.
The negative is
that the overwhelming majority of people coming into the space are coming in through
regulated
financial
institutions that are keeping track of users and their transaction history.
But with that caveat,
self custody, Bitcoin has never been used easier spending Bitcoin or receiving Bitcoin has never been easier. The mobile app ecosystem is better than it's ever been before. The hardware wallet ecosystem is better than it's ever been before.
It's easier than ever to to run a Bitcoin node and and use the network in trust minimized way without trusting third parties.
So there's been overwhelming
successes, and it's easy to get disenfranchised
if you're in the weeds because,
a lot of times these things feel like they're moving really slowly. But, I mean, if you look back
even four or five years ago, we've made so much progress.
You'd have to be blind
blind not to see it.
Do you think we could say the same thing about
education and awareness and what I'm thinking of specifically
are
the ability to use Bitcoin,
but before that, the perspective or perception
that Bitcoin is for criminals, Bitcoin's not for me, that if it's not KYC, it must be dodgy. You know, do you have a sort of a perspective on
where we are on,
you know, has there been sufficient pain
in many ways
for
the typical individual to look at this and think, yeah, I do deserve to transact freely. I I don't,
want, you know, the government and other parties to know everything about everything I do. What's what's your take there? I mean, I think it depends who you're talking to.
So, like, I've traveled around the world a lot and worked with people,
based in different places.
And if it outside of the West, outside of America specifically,
it's easier for people to realize
the need for an independent money,
and the failures of government systems
than it is for Americans.
And
in America, what we're seeing
is
very much a frog boiling
kind of
situation
with that is heavily trusted,
that is heavily surveilled, that's heavily controlled, and that those practices are normalized. And that's way bigger than Bitcoin itself.
Absolutely. I mean, if you walk down any neighborhood street in America,
a significant majority of the houses will have a Amazon connected
always recording surveillance camera outside. And so what Orwell got wrong in 1984
is that the government wasn't gonna force us to install cameras. It was people were gonna go out and buy the cameras themselves and pay for the privilege to be spied on.
Victims and their volunteers.
Yeah. I mean, we're seeing KYC enter every aspect of our lives. Once again, not just Bitcoin. It's super normalized for people to expect their phone number that's tied to their identity to be used for a service, for instance.
Mhmm. They don't they don't think twice about that.
So
there's
but at the same time, the tools exist. The tools exist for people to take agency. And I I I strongly believe that you can't
it's you it's it's very difficult to convince someone that they need the tools if they don't actually realize themselves.
And I think if you're thinking about the scarcity of time and the scarcity of energy,
it's better spent
focusing on improving the lives of people that
seek improvement than
trying to convince
a a large,
you know, relatively
yeah.
Masses to to try and adopt something. Yes. And, I mean, I think,
you know, I I've I have often said and I contend that
Bitcoin is competing with Apple Pay in the West.
Right? That user experience is
incredible.
Now we as you mentioned, we know what's going on behind the scenes. Right? It's it's collected all, analyzed it all,
and everything that flows downstream from that, but it is incredibly difficult,
as you say, to get individuals to step away from that level of comfort. I mean,
I'm, you know, side note, I'm going through
trying to move to graphene,
OS on a Pixel phone away from my beloved iPhone after moving off Mac last fall, and,
you know, it's painful. There's some trade offs.
But, ultimately, I think
it is empowering. It's tremendous. I don't expect,
any significant percentage of the population to pursue that until until they're in a situation where perhaps they must. But,
well, continuing on that note, I mean, are there other projects like Signal that you think get that trade off between tremendous utility, privacy,
trust minimized, and great UX?
Who who who else is getting that right if you see some? I mean, you mentioned Graphene,
and I wouldn't put it on the signal level of trade off balance.
But they've made great strides,
in making it more convenient
to access,
that hardened OS than it was before. I remember, like, I was one of the first people to flash graphene,
and now they made it
relatively
straightforward
to take,
a a Google phone and de Google it and and use Graphene. Now, once you're in that ecosystem,
there's significant trade offs in terms of quality of life and convenience that I just don't think exist with signal. Like, signal, I convinced my 90 year old grandmother
to install signal because it's the only way she gets baby pictures. She has never installed a graph feed. Incentives are aligned.
Yeah. I would say loosely, and I also wouldn't put it on the level of signal because it's not open source. You're completely trusting it.
And,
it doesn't offer the same security guarantees.
Where Apple has moved more recently,
at least narrative wise has been a breath of fresh air. I mean, I think you could
you know, one of the largest
encrypted messengers in the world or at least in America is iMessage.
Yes.
Now once again, we're trusting it because it's not open source and the security guarantees aren't as strong, but at least The advanced advanced protection feature, I assume, you're referring to it. I'm gonna call it. Yeah. Exactly. Where you, allegedly can end to end encrypt your cloud storage as well. Okay. You know, I think
yeah. At least, like, narrative wise, they're showing the case that one of the largest, most valuable companies in the world believe that privacy is a strong selling point and that customers actually care about it,
which I I think is an important piece of the larger picture.
I'm hesitant to give
Zuck any credit because I feel like it's a bit of a psyop, but the fact that WhatsApp has end to end encrypted messages, which once again,
security guarantees aren't as good as signal, but the number of users is way higher. Like, it's, like, 3,000,000,000 users or something. Out outside of the West,
it is de facto. Absolutely. Yeah. Faye Facebook the only thing that limits Facebook user growth is the amount of kids that are born every year because they've already fully saturated the global population. So the fact that they even have shitty end to end encryption in WhatsApp,
is is a massive win. But I think just to pull this all back,
the question that I think people that are focused on this stuff
and and don't wanna be disenfranchised don't wanna get disenfranchised and frustrated about it is we have to be realistic about what a
success situation looks like. What does winning look like? And I really think, like, winning
is, like, 5%
or higher of the global population
using the tools,
in a freedom focused way. And I think I think the actionable goal here should be trying to get that number higher.
But we have to we have to operate from a realistic point of view
that there's almost zero shot
that we'll ever see over 90% of people using Bitcoin as Freedom money, or we'll see them using secure encrypted messaging.
These types of things, they it it tends to be
some kind of curve where the very small minority is using them,
but
that anyone can access them at will and take agency over their lives is the key piece there. So as pain happens, as people start to realize that they need these tools,
having them available to them and accessible to them is the win in my book and not necessarily
broad widespread usage. Well, and I think to your point, I mean,
if
if we have better money and we have better communications,
any other categories? I mean, so, basically, what would be a third pillar, if anything? You know, if if we fix the money through Bitcoin, we fix communications through signal and noster,
what's left do you think? What where where are there other areas of I mean, I think just they're both communication, but you can't group you can't group nostril in with signal because they're trying to do two different things. Absolutely. Absolutely.
I think signal has shown us massive success. I also think the technical
implementation
of doing person to person
private
encrypted communication
is much more straightforward than trying to solve the quote, unquote social media
you know, our world is increasingly digital. We're we're moving more and more towards digital IDs.
Everything is surveilled. Everything is controlled. People live, you know, 60% of their lives scrolling their phones on centralized big tech platforms.
And I so I think the last big one,
the last the the last big pillar, we got the money on Bitcoin.
People have the ability to use Bitcoin as freedom money. Not everyone does. Most people don't.
We have the direct private communications with signal, or you can go more hardcore with something like SimpleX,
which still works quite well, strikes a different trade off balance,
is less centralized,
more secure in a lot of ways, but harder to use.
So we have, like, the direct message side kind of
at least technically sound, and the options are there.
The last piece is identity, which Nasr aims to solve and
one to many communications,
AKA social media and social media as type of situations where you're broadcasting out to the world. And in that situation, you want to be able to do without permission,
without centralized
single points of failure.
But also the last piece, which is gonna be incredibly important as we continue forward
is is trust minimized
verifiability and authentic
authenticity and integrity because we're gonna see more and more fake news. We're gonna see more and more deep fakes.
And right now, the current status quo, for instance, is if you're reading something on Facebook,
you are trusting that Zuck is Zuck is telling you that it's coming from the person that said it and that it hasn't been changed or altered. And that's just a ridiculous premise.
We need to be able to solve that. Now is laughable. Right? I mean, that was the way of doing things is, you know, some some deep fake AI has got a watermark and that's meaningless now. Never. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Great point.
So, you know, money one to one comms,
identity
one to many comms,
makes a ton of sense. If we shift then sort of staying in kind of current state of affairs,
if we shift to the builders and the businesses,
talk to us a bit about OpenSats,
why it exists,
what you guys,
Shijin and team
are doing, and ultimately,
why it's important.
Yeah. So,
I mean, with OpenSats
a few years ago, we diagnosed this problem, which is,
to my earlier point is it's easy to think of these things as tech projects, but but there it's a movement of individuals. It relies on people to actually build them out.
And those people
were just not very supported
and
there was great
inequality
in terms of how funds were getting deployed.
They were saying Did you think, Matt, real quick, do you think that's endemic to open source? I mean, when you guys spun up OpenSats, was this
my words not yours, was this
open source funding is broken, let's go fix it, or was this more of a,
a microcosm
of that broader open source problem?
It's a combination. Right? So first of all, the reason both ten thirty one and OpenStax exists is because in the greater crypto ecosystem, even though Bitcoin is is by far the most used, most valuable, most robust network,
in terms of funds deployed both on the for profit and nonprofit side, it was like 99 to one
shit coins versus Bitcoin funding.
And so that's why both ten thirty one and open SaaS exist.
It was to try and correct
that
that that imbalance,
but also on the ten thirty one side, it was our opportunity. It was that's our alpha. That's the reason we're able to get good valuations on some of the companies that will be the most profitable companies in the world is because the funds were being deployed elsewhere. Now on the OpenSats side, it also came with the extra caveat
that one of the biggest issues
with foundational open source projects is that they're very hard if not impossible to monetize,
and they're freely available to the world,
to be modified at will,
and distributed at will. And
as a result, they're very difficult to monetize and
the the way that a lot of that funding was happening was coming from large corporations. And you see that in the early days of the Internet, you see that,
with with Linux distros and Linux development.
Corporate capture is a very real concern and a real threat.
So
how do you alleviate corporate capture? You don't alleviate corporate capture by going on
defund
the captured developers campaigns. Those that's just not effective. What you do is you provide
more avenues of funding
that are more transparent
and more efficient,
more aligned, and don't are are harder to corrupt. And that's how OpenSats was born. OpenSats was born with this idea that most charities,
most most debt funding was coming from corporations and that's inherently biased
and becomes an issue because of broken incentives.
And then those that weren't being funded that way were being funded oftentimes by charities that were not transparent,
that had very centralized structures,
and that were that were inefficient with capital, that they were using a lot of capital
for administration while OpenSats is is a 100% passed. So we don't take a cut of any donations. We operate on a pure Bitcoin standard.
But just to wrap up this thought, the key piece that I think a lot of people miss on OpenSats is we do fund mostly Bitcoin focused projects.
But even from the name,
the whole idea is to use Sats, the smallest unit of Bitcoin, to use Bitcoin
to fund
all sorts of open source projects. How do we throw fuel on the fire to make the open source movement more effective
and accelerate the process? We do that by
having a thousand flowers bloom and and and really getting funding out there to open source projects. So the only caveat the only two requirements to be funded by OpenSats are, one, you have to be an open source project, obviously.
And two, you have to be willing to accept Bitcoin. But you don't necessarily have to be a Bitcoin project. We funded Tor, for instance,
but they had to accept Bitcoin. Otherwise, they couldn't get funded by us. And if we flip then to the fully commercial side, be it ten thirty one, obviously, where you're a partner or elsewhere, What's
working
commercially? You know, what are the business models,
and perhaps the protocols
and technologies that sit at the lower layer
that you're seeing success with? Like, in in other words, if you're speaking to a a success with? Like, in in other words, if you're speaking to
a a founder, a builder,
perhaps a current,
business owner who, you know, has an inkling that they want to build in a different way on FreedomTech on open protocols,
what's working well today
commercially?
So
with OpenSats,
the measurement
is basically freedom go up. It's, you know, will this make
freedom focus systems more robust?
And is there proof of work there? On the ten thirty one side,
you know, we have a dual mandate. Our our first and primary mandate is to
make money for our investors and and return capital
significant,
appreciation.
And then our second mandate is also pretty much shared with OpenSats, which is how do we make these systems more robust?
Because a lot of our investors are ourselves included have very large Bitcoin positions,
and there is a nice circular feedback loop of more robust
censorship resistant,
Bitcoin protocol,
is is strictly better for us and and our Bitcoin holdings and our our future freedoms.
Now,
because of that, it's a very it's it's much more difficult
to effectively deploy capital. And we basically have to find kind of a balancing act. And what I've seen is,
first of all, is people love hype,
and this industry really loves hype.
And our edge is
that we mostly ignore the hype and focus on more fundamental,
business evaluation, which is,
can this be a profitable business?
Is there line of sight on an actual business model that's realistic?
And then
that's where we deploy
the majority of our money.
And then we reserve the right and have acted on it on taking
smaller checks and investing it in companies that are really pushing the limit, but maybe the business model isn't so obvious or
is harder to execute or will take more time to execute. And so I will give you a few examples.
The business models that work really well right now are just not sexy.
It's buy, sell Bitcoin is the number one
product in the world.
People want Bitcoin,
and they will pay you 1% to to buy it in a
reliable,
trustworthy
fashion. You know? They don't wanna get FTX. They don't wanna get BlockFi.
They don't wanna get Celsius or.
They they want a
yeah. They want they want a trusted company that and it is a trusted relationship
Certainly. That they can rely on to to buy and sell Bitcoin, and they'll happily pay a
fee. And that's by far the single biggest product. The second piece also kinda goes hand in hand on that, and we're seeing
a lot of demand for it right now, which is this idea of Bitcoin collateralized loans.
But in both cases,
what you're seeing is the strongest business model is companies that are able to,
sit in between
the traditional financial system, your banks,
and Bitcoin, and act almost as a centralized
regulated
translation layer between the two worlds.
And Strike is our key example there. We're the largest investor in Strike.
And so the way I think about that is it's it's where we are on the adoption curve of Bitcoin. We very much still live in a fiat world. And so that translation layer has a lot of demand and a lot of value.
And
a company that can execute well in that legal environment,
be available in a lot of jurisdictions,
be regulatory compliant,
be fast, effective, and convenient to use, and reliable to use will make a a significant amount of money.
And strike has been proof of that. Now when you start to go
further off on the,
in, like, the levels of adoption,
you start to see stuff like
StartNine, which we're the largest investor of StartNine, which is the this idea of self hosting everything that you host in the cloud, let's host at home. And it started with Bitcoin notes, but they it offers a lot more than that.
And so, for example, that's a business that,
is very promising
and the the business model but the business model is a little bit more difficult. They sell prebuilt
servers, but because it's open source, you can also just flash it yourself and not pay them a dime,
on your own computer,
which which is incredibly important from a freedom perspective.
And then they wanna sell premium services. But the question is is, like, how big is that demographic? And that demographic a TAM. Yeah.
It's not that large right now, but it could be quite large in five years or ten years. And so And if that were to happen, I mean, I think that's that's worth interjecting.
Yeah. Because I think about that often. I mean, I'm I'm using Emerald Love Start nine, but, it's just what I have.
And for all of them, I want them to do brilliantly, but that total addressable market is so small. What do you think, and again, this is a bit of an aside, what do you think needs to happen?
If you're willing to share it, like, what's the thesis? What's the what's the dependency in order for
you guys to look at that and think, yeah, we're gonna get a 10 x on that?
I think the number one thing is time and you just can't force it. And that's why I think it's important to be realistic
particularly if you're responsible for investor capital on how you assess that that basically liquidity premium, liquidity risk.
Because you're just you're you're locking up funds on something that's gonna take longer to build out. Valuation Yeah. Should be,
properly discounted as a result of that.
But it's something that we can't really force. It's a time thing. I think what we're seeing is
more and more of our lives are moving to the cloud,
which is just someone else's computer. There's a significant dependency there on not only on individuals, but also businesses.
And what's gonna happen is you're gonna start to really the pain points of that and the trade offs that are being made giving up that agency will become more and more obvious.
And at that point, more and more people and businesses will look to self host. And I so I I it's it's something that we just you can't really rush, and all you can do is just build the best product possible
and and build your business in a lean way so that you know, first of all, that you don't have to rely on future investments.
So try and get to profitability and sustainability
as quick as possible.
And second of all, that it's a long grind and that it's not like, you know, the sexy words of the day is vibe coding. Like, it's you can't vibe code a generational business. Like, you have to be willing to be in the trenches for ten, twenty years.
And you need to have investors that are aligned with you on that. And so we came at it from that perspective very early on. Our funds are all called low time preference funds.
The idea is that we're gonna be in the trenches with you for a while, and this is not,
your traditional VC
enter, expect push for an exit in two years, three years types of thing. And you just have to balance it off. Like, another example would be,
another example would be something like peach, which is no KYC
p to p to p buy sell
Bitcoin.
And we've seen growth there.
The growth is
on a way lower scale and a way lower total absolute numbers than something like strike, which connects directly to your own bank account and is centralized and regulated.
But as we start to move into a world where Bitcoin becomes
more and more of this dominant reserve asset and people start really keeping their savings in Bitcoin, we expect to see more usage in something like that. And you manage the risk
basically by position sizing and valuations.
What about outside your portfolio? Is there any, you know, whether it's deals you looked at and think, wow, we should've wish we hadn't passed, wish we hadn't missed that one, or just things that have, you
know, taken off in the last twelve months or so? Like, what what else has got your attention at present? I mean, look, the best business in the world probably
right now, not just in the space is Tether.
And we are not investors in Tether.
That is a very closely held business.
Mhmm. But I mean, they're on track to make $24,000,000,000
in profit this year with, like, 70 employees.
So it's just on a whole another level.
Now I think even they realize
exactly what I just said, which is
these businesses tend to they you you have to balance them into where we are in the adoption curve
of Bitcoin specifically
if if they're Bitcoin adjacent businesses.
And so with Tether,
they're basically doing this arbitrage opportunity where right now,
there is massive demand for dollars outside of the traditional financial system globally. I mean, I was in Argentina,
but the whole country runs on Tether. It's like and and and the individuals chose it, not the governments. Absolutely.
The individuals
chose that they wanted dollars. And
because the governments didn't want them to have dollars,
the only option was to use something like Tether.
But
as Bitcoin adoption increases
and Bitcoin becomes more successful,
the the demand for Tether should subside and should reduce because why would you want something
that gives you dollar exposure when dollars are just strictly worse money than Bitcoin?
And how do I know that Tether agrees with that thesis? I know they agree with that thesis because they're using their profits to and they have over a 100,000 Bitcoin stacked.
And so they're positioning themselves
to make as much money as possible during this adoption phase
and then have a war chest of Bitcoin
to either evolve and offer different types of products, which we have seen them try and do,
or
just kind of rest on their laurels of, you know, one of the largest Bitcoin treasuries in the world.
Tax that, stay humble. Yeah.
Well and and maybe for those who aren't familiar,
talk to us a bit about,
you know, well, what is Tether? And and as you mentioned, it largely exists to address the
close the gap of access to dollars where dollars cannot be had. You know, like,
what are the trade offs? Talk to us about Tether and what those trade offs are as compared to Bitcoin.
And there's a centralized US dollar token,
and it's backed by US treasuries.
And They are the one fifth or sixth largest
treasury US treasury holders? I think they're lower than that, but they're still quite high. Yeah. And the US treasuries pay them an interest rate,
and people actually,
it kinda already got normalized that banks don't pass you down the majority of interest they make.
Because even if you're using Citibank or whatever, they're paying you, like, a half a percent, which is absolutely negligible compared to what they're getting. But Tether just pays no interest to the users,
and they collect that interest. So interest rates are up right now.
And as a result, they're just minting money. They're making a ton of money off of those treasuries that they're holding while being able to offer these US dollar tokens,
in a very cheap convenient package.
Now what is the trade off? The trade off is twofold. First of all, you have to trust the Tether
organization. They have frozen funds before in partnership with law enforcement.
You also have to trust them to maintain the reserve. There's no cryptographic
way to prove real world ownership of assets.
So it's strictly a trusted relationship.
If we've heard for years that their tether is is not operating in a full reserve basis, I think at this point now,
it's pretty obvious that they are, but you still have to trust them,
that that is the case.
The gov the they could get shut down.
Mhmm.
They
they can exit scam. They can just just because
a company has, you know,
ten years of proof of work, eleven years of proof of work and reputation doesn't mean that tomorrow that doesn't change.
So Bitcoin fixes these things. Big and then the last piece, by the way, is that it's tied to the dollar, which is incredibly corrupted and controlled,
and is at the whims of people that have continuously
devalued it. And over time, if you try and hold your wealth in dollars,
you will lose purchasing power over time. This is just a fact. As as
The US debt burden gets higher and higher, that printing will continue and that devaluation will continue and it's backed by that. So you're trusting effectively two entities. You're trusting the tether entity and you're trusting,
the US government and and central bank. Bitcoin fixes these things. It's money without trust.
It's money that you can spend and save without permission that,
is very difficult if not impossible to block,
which is very difficult to seize. You have to actually physically coerce someone 99%
of the time if they're holding self custody
Bitcoin to seize Bitcoin.
If they're holding it in cold storage, you have to
do you have to do a physical
extraction of that Bitcoin. You have to come in, put a gun to their head, and be like, give me your Bitcoin. Mhmm. You can't even hack it through the Internet. Right? Now if you have a hot wallet, that's different.
So Bitcoin solves these problems.
And then last but not least,
because Bitcoin is scarce and because it's incredibly hard to change by default,
it is reasonably
safe to assume
that the supply of Bitcoin will never increase.
And as a result, as adoption happens of this scarce asset, purchasing power has shown that it increases and you should expect purchasing power to basically increase forever.
Now there will it's a free market. There'll be hills and valleys and there'll be downturns.
But long term, if you hold Bitcoin as your savings vehicle, you should have more purchasing power in the future. You should be able to buy more meat. You should be able to afford better schools and better houses.
So Bitcoin solves all of these things,
that are inherently wrong with human controlled systems and human controlled money, but it's gonna take a while,
I think, for people to to truly grasp that. And right now, basically, we're in this
transition phase where certain business models are more effective than others.
But at some point, we leave that transition phase. And what I like to categorize it as, when more people are earning Bitcoin
than buying Bitcoin and more people are spending Bitcoin than selling Bitcoin is when that phase has fully transitioned over to a Bitcoin standard phase. At that point, different business models
will be effective than today.
And all the little
micro changes in between there are when different business models unlock and you have to kind of measure where you are on that cycle. Otherwise, you just get lost in hype and end up burning a bunch of investor money.
Yeah. And perfect seg. I mean, my next question is, okay, if we look ahead,
what are the greatest opportunities and challenges
to
building
profitable
successful businesses
on Bitcoin and and open protocols? Let's put it that way. Look. I think the number one, like, Bitcoin is the opportunity cost. Right? So
if you're a founder and you're investing 1 Bitcoin into your business
and 1 Bitcoin right now, who knows where it'll be in two weeks when you release this episode, but is that a $108,000?
The math in your head shouldn't be like, I need to make back
a $108,000
and then I'm in profit. The math should be, I need to make back a Bitcoin.
So Bitcoin is the opportunity cost and Bitcoin
is the scarcest asset humanity has ever seen and has the highest compound annual growth rate of pretty much anything,
that we've ever seen.
So it's it's quite the opportunity cost and quite the burden. So
first and
foremost, you know, you need to be realistic on those expectations.
Second of all, you need to be incredibly lean. You have to keep expenses very low, and this is very different than traditional tech structures. When you build a traditional tech business,
you have cost balloon. You're willing to lose a lot of money
very quickly
for a while.
And then eventually in ten years or something, you turn on monetization.
In a Bitcoin world, you need to be profitable fast. And I'm not saying that you shouldn't still prioritize
growth. It just shouldn't be growth at all costs. It's reasonable growth
while trying to reach profitability
early, and that's profitability in Bitcoin terms. So you wanna keep expenses low. You wanna be profitable.
And then it kinda goes hand in hand, but you need to be willing to adapt and and be nimble. And so all of these things tend to benefit smaller teams with strong founders.
And a lot of what we do is basically assess the founding team
and see if they have,
the conviction and
and,
the willingness
to adapt on the fly.
And so
we could see successful businesses that are doing one their main business model is something today, but it's completely different
in ten years. And they could be successful through the entire transition.
Mhmm. We might see other ones that are just very successful today,
and
have built up a Bitcoin treasury. So when they become obsoleted,
there's still significant value there.
Or we can see the third piece, which is
a founder that is kind of in it for ideological reasons
and just runs in pure survival mode, and their business model doesn't really find any kind of successes until ten years from now. But the business has survived because it's a very small team and doesn't have money expenses,
and just runs, you know, very very lean. And those are basically
the three types of successful businesses you might see. And obviously, the first one is the most desirable. One that can
monetize heavily today while growing and then adapt on the fly and add new products and change their business model as we go through the transition and continue to
to be incredibly profitable in Bitcoin terms.
I think that's what is, you know, as an individual
using Bitcoin certainly as a business, the thing that's hardest to wrap
wrap our heads around is, what will we do if the money wasn't broken? Right? I think that's the question. Whether you're an individual, a business owner, a builder, an entrepreneur,
is
unlearning and relearning
how would I build a business if the money wasn't broken because the money is broken. You know, Fiat is broken. And so if you're going to put,
this this incredibly hard money to work, as you say, the the opportunity cost is tremendous. What about any thoughts, Matt, on
maybe it's an aspiration of mine. It is an aspiration of mine, but I'd like to I'd like to think
that we'll be able to reach
you know, I'm thinking about the CTOs, the product owners, the
the CXOs, the founders who
have a running business, have a have a going concern,
and they're looking around and thinking, I don't wanna collect all the data. I don't want that toxic asset. I don't want that liability.
I want
to adapt my business to where I want things to go, where I believe things are going. So, you know, certainly, there's the Bitcoin treasury approach for an existing
established legacy business
to adapt and adopt. Anything else that stands out? Like, what what do
going concerns,
have at their disposal
to, you know, to shift this and and and and basically allow their customers, their users to regain agency and trust?
You know, I think, first of all, on the Bitcoin treasury piece, obviously,
that's the topic de jour right now, and people are very excited about it.
And the reason is quite simple. You can make a lot of money very quickly. Absolutely.
And it's a very high time preference.
I you could argue that maybe there's a low time preference aspect to it that you know Bitcoin is scarce and
you you want as much Bitcoin as possible before other people realize.
But but I I and when you're talking about adoption cycle transitions,
you know, that is probably a I don't even know if you'd call it a business model, but that is probably a business model
that,
will be relatively short lived. I don't pretend to know how long that it's basically an arbitrage opportunity
on Fiat,
in this transition period.
And so I give you it will become painfully obvious and everyone will do it or or for other reasons?
Well, basically, instead of giving
cheap long term debt to another company
to a company to buy Bitcoin, you will buy Bitcoin.
Right. Right. Because that is actually the logical prudent move to make. Like, I would never personally, as a capital allocator, lend money to MicroStrategy.
I would rather buy the Bitcoin myself.
Now there's trillions of dollars of capital that he might be able to unlock before people come to that conclusion. But at some point, people are gonna come to that conclusion and realize
that they are actually failing the fiduciary responsibility
of of their investors or whoever their stakeholders are
by operating
by facilitating that type of arrangement or buying stock where they are then getting diluted and then buying Bitcoin with it. They're better off just buying the
Bitcoin directly. So what does that look like? Is that a three years thing? Is that a five year thing? I don't know. Maybe the heavyweights like MicroStrategy
can get away with it longer. I mean, it it was quite clever, the new preferred shared offerings that he's put out there,
that is trying to tap into the existing bond market. The infinite money gap?
Yeah. Like but it's that's the thing. It's not infinite
because Bitcoin's scarce. So the question is when does when does that clock stop? It will stop at some point. Now what I think is more actionable for people because I don't really think an actionable
takeaway is,
you know, go create a leverage Bitcoin equity play and try and tap into global financial markets. I think very it's
it's harder for some people to find massive success estimate. A lot of people won't,
and it's there's a time limit on it.
Is try and just have ethical profitable business models. Now
the big problem here
is
it is the harder path.
Yeah. It is by far the harder path. If you want the easy path, the easy path is offering a service for free on the Internet,
and surveilling your users and selling their data to advertisers and slapping advertisers all over. It's it's it's proven.
It's been hyper successful for the big tech companies.
Google has become, you know, one of the most valuable companies in the world off the back of that. Facebook has as well.
Investors up and down Sand Hill Road, which will throw money at you. Yeah. It is like the most obvious easy business model ever. Now for the first time ever,
because of Bitcoin,
there is a path
to charge your customers directly for services.
Give them a product that is compelling and reasonably priced
and make a reasonable living
off of that cash flow or off of that Sats flow off of that Bitcoin cash flow.
But it is the harder path. And particularly
if you
want to go the most ethical approach and the most
freedom focused approach that also usually involves open sourcing your entire stack. And so, like, I will use
I I I think what what we're gonna see is something similar
to Bitcoin adoption in general,
which is you don't see the successful incumbents do the transition.
Some of them might,
you know, say one thing and do something completely altogether and and
completely different, like actions speak louder than words, And they use it as a marketing message. And an example of that would be something like x,
which now you can pay for the product, but he's still surveilling you and selling all your data to advertisers in the primary. Only KYC.
Yeah. And the but not only that, like, the primary
the primary business model remains the ad model. Like, it's just not
and it's a closed ecosystem
and and you need you need to have an account to view stuff and the API is locked down and all this other stuff. But in his defense and in the defense of Facebook and the defense of Google
or Apple
is
they have very little to gain
operating in a more open and ethical way monetarily from a business point of view. They're already the
kings. So what will you see? You will see the challengers
adopt these models first because they need to compete and stand out and try and break those network effects. And we saw that with someone like MicroStrategy.
MicroStrategy
was a,
you know, a a older
All the time. Tech tech company that no one was really talking about. He was a, you know, a small fish billionaire.
He wasn't, you know, one of the richest people in the world, and he had everything to gain and not much to lose by trying to be competitive
and adopt Bitcoin. And so we'll see that across all these different
niches, I think.
And so one example, at least in the social context, would be something like primal. Right? And primal's entire
stack is open source Mhmm. Which a traditional investor would just absolutely freak out about.
Because if primal finds any kind of success, you will see copycats that literally just fork the stack,
and build out. But what is the argument? The argument is that primal will be able to build
a subscription revenue line
and value add service line that users will be happy to pay for and that we'll be able to pay for in Bitcoin so they don't have to give up personal information while they do it and they don't have a middle man in the process and you don't have the additional friction or the cost that comes with the middle man.
And that the brand equity
of offering that type of service will give you some type of moat that even if someone comes around and creates primal or whatever you wanna call your primal fork,
users will overwhelmingly
prefer to use the one that has a strong reputation and has been around for a while and keeps shipping features that they enjoy.
But it's a harder path.
No doubt. And I think it does. I'm thinking about my conversation a couple of weeks ago with, Rishanta Bakawala, who's the,
global exec I mentioned. He's a 30 sir thirty seven year veteran of publicist, you know,
advertising conglomerate around the world. And
his remarks in his newest book, etcetera, etcetera, are,
you know,
the trust is the brand mark,
that all companies need to be thinking about. And I think it goes to your point, which is if I trust PrimalEye, why would I take a knockoff unless I'm
you know, just don't value any sort of, quality of service. And I think, you know, I I think about Kaji. Kaji, however it's pronounced. I mean, that's been my search engine now for two, three years. I'd love to see them accept Bitcoin. I'd love to see them lose,
the overhead
of credit card network fees and and KYC. But any thoughts on, you know, that as a business model? It's just an alternative to the incumbents. You charge money for it. You are not the product. I mean,
do you see much upside for that, or are those going to be few and far between?
No. I I think there's significant upside,
and and we invest based on that belief. I mean, I think I think, you know, so Kagi is more traditional
web search.
Certainly. At least at least for now. But I the, you know, the real hype word right now is AI and LLMs.
And
twofold. First of all,
one good thing we see in that
is that there has been a willingness of people to pay for a reliable
first of all, there's real like Bitcoin, there's real costs involved.
Like, there's significant energy and capital cost involved with building out these systems. But even a completely dystopian company like ChatGPT is charging,
for that product and customers seem heavily willing to do that.
Now I think
it is very reasonable to assume
that there will be as we rely on these products more and more, there'll be significant demand for people to want more private freedom focused,
versions
of
of of these AI LLM tools.
And I think people will pay for them. And so my question becomes, how do you do that
in a way that reduces friction as much as possible?
And I think right now what that means is really probably a combination
of accepting
fiat payments
and Bitcoin payments and giving the user the option. I mean, if you're not accepting Apple Pay, for instance, like, you're gonna have significant slippage in terms of or or significant reduced conversions.
Yes. In terms of actually people paying for your product.
But I think there's I think there's a lot of demand there. I think
the meme
that, you know, every good meme is based in reality, but if you're not paying, you are the product is becoming more and more obvious to people. Now you you can pervert that because you can still pay for chat g p t, and you're the product.
You can still pay for x and you're the product. Have it both ways. Yeah. But at least people are more and more people are recognizing that and happy to pay. And and
in a lot of ways, it's almost a signaling mechanism
that the product is better because you're paying for it. And and the question just becomes what's the pricing?
Right.
Well, as we as we wrap it up, Matt, this is a big one, but you're the guy to answer it.
For those
listening, watching who may be on the fence, maybe they've got a
feeling in their gut that, you know, things are not as they should be. They're
they're curious. They're interested.
A,
what would you recommend they pay attention to
to better perhaps appreciate
why it matters
to move
toward
open
protocols and freedom technologies,
and and what are a couple of things or places you would have them do or or seek out to learn more? So why should they care? What should they look for? And and what are a couple places to get started?
So, I mean, I think first and foremost,
let me see.
You know, I don't think
I think it's impossible to be a perfect organization.
But I think in terms of,
perspective and understanding
where the need is right now and how much need is out there,
it's it's good to track what the Human Rights Foundation is doing. They put out a lot of good materials on that throughout the world.
They specifically have a financial freedom report that they put out,
once a week. I think it's financialfreedomreport.org.
And if I got that wrong, you can find it at hrf. Absolutely. Hrhrf.org
is like the main parent website. But they basically go through different stories around the world of why these tools matter,
and where they're being effective and where they're not being effective. Right? Which is a really nice perspective
piece.
And then the second thing is like, I'd be like, look, you know, I I think you gotta play around with the tools.
And I know myself personally,
my my greatest motivation
is is
trying my best
to realize a future that is better for my children to grow up in. And I think that comes with inherent personal responsibility.
And
if you are a parent, you have to take that personal responsibility on for your family
and and make sure you're as best situated as possible because there will be
this is not magic. This is not like everyone's life gets better. This is people who take agency of their lives will be in a better situation than those that don't.
And the best way to get more acquainted and
more fluent with the tools is to actually use them and play around with them. No one
watches ten thousand hours of driving podcasts
so that they learn how to drive. You get behind the wheel of the car and you drive, and that's how you learn how to drive. And it's the same thing with Bitcoin.
It's the same thing with adjacent freedom technologies. You have to actually use the tools, get comfortable with them, make mistakes,
improve your skills.
And on that front,
I have a webpage that I keep up to date, which is odell.xyz
that not only has all my contact information.
So if you have any questions for me, feel free to reach out on signal. I have that link there, but also a bunch of resources are linked there. A bunch of tools that I recommend are linked there. And I would just say,
play around with the tools and get comfortable with them. Wholeheartedly agree. Thanks so much, Matt. I really appreciate the time. It's been a pleasure.
And,
I will look forward to doing this again soon.
Thanks for having me, sir. Likewise. Take care, buddy. Bye bye.