Daniel, welcome to the Bitcoin Infinity Show. Nice to have you here.
Great to be here.
You're one of the guests I've had on my wish list for a long time.
We last saw each other in Amsterdam, if I'm not mistaken.
That was after Madeira, right?
Yeah. So we've been talking about doing this for a long time.
But yeah, so for our listeners that do not know who you are,
can you give us the TLDR on Daniel Batten, please?
No problem. So I'm a climate tech investor. Before that, I was a technology entrepreneur
and I was running two different climate tech funds. And at some point I asked a question,
which was a dangerous question. Could we be doing more? And the answer was yes. And I realized that
we were doing nothing about reducing methane emissions. We were doing nothing about
using existing technologies better. And I thought, well, what if we had a focus on reducing methane
emissions and we used an existing technology and that led us to bitcoin mining on landfills
through a process of elimination and then started a fund and moved to costa rica to be at the hub
of one of the places in the world where there's just massive leaks of methane from landfills
everywhere and we have the chance to turn into a power and to do bitcoin mining with it because
it's decentralized, it's cheap power. You're basically turning pollution into a really
effective power source. And along the way, I just got interested in, oh, what is this thing called
Bitcoin anyway? So I found out about Bitcoin mining before I found out about Bitcoin.
And it was only through then subsequently talking to people like you and others and finding out more
about Bitcoin that it got me curious. So it was really like a backdoor entry in a way to Bitcoin.
but I just got absolutely fascinated by mining.
Along that route, I also read a whole lot of information
about mining from unreliable sources
and then I was reading a lot of basically misinformation
about Bitcoin mining at the same time.
But because I was approaching it from first principles,
it was relatively easy for me to tell,
okay, this is correct.
Bitcoin mining can accelerate the renewable transition,
can mitigate methane, can stabilize grids,
has all these amazing properties.
And then I was reading things that would say the opposite.
And I was saying, hang on, these just aren't anchored in facts at all.
And so I started saying so.
And that got more attention than I thought.
And then before I knew it, I was giving talks and conferences and writing articles, debunking a lot of myths, but also promoting the real story about how Bitcoin mining is really a powerful force for utilizing human energy and resources just a lot better than we have done in the past.
Oh, this angle is so super interesting to me because for a Bitcoiner, it's an odd one, but it really shouldn't be.
But the misinformation you say is simply mind-blowing how much misinformation that has been spread about Bitcoin mining in particular.
I mean, there's not at all as much FUD about the AI revolution now, for instance, that uses a lot more energy.
But people want that because they want to generate silly cat videos on trampolines and cats on trampoline videos and stuff like that.
And therefore, they're not annoyed with that for some odd reason.
But when you're trying to revolutionize the monetary system, it's a different story.
So the misinformation, I mean, I think most Bitcoiners, the circles I'm in with this Austrian economics angle and Capistan and all of that,
But we sort of, at least we feel we figured out why there's so much misinformation.
And we're very skeptical to anything a government says.
And I wanted to pick your brain on climate science in general.
Because the way I see it, and I even had this in a talk, that there's like these different methodological approaches.
So, and the talk was basically about how we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater
when we throw the science out the window.
We shouldn't throw out science in general out the window.
So what I said in the talk was something along the lines of, yes, the earth is getting warmer.
The data on that is pretty clear.
Whether humans are guilty or not of doing this is debatable.
But what can be argued from a priori praxeological arguments is that it's absolutely a stupid idea to let politicians do something about it because they are useless at doing stuff about anything.
They're always counterproductive.
So I'd like to know your angle into this, like how much of climate science is actual science and how much of it has a political agenda behind it?
How much is just human incentives, fear mongering and headlines selling and stuff like that?
Yes.
So I think there's two things going on here.
And the first one is that if we look at how the renewable energy transition, for example, has been handled and some of the actions we've taken.
So what's one action?
One action was to close down all the nuclear facilities.
in hindsight not a great idea let's say as an understatement in fact it's taken us in the
opposite direction where now we're using dirtier forms of coal and burning wood so it's actually
taking us backwards so that's one thing now you could say it was done for good reasons because it
was in response to the fukushima disaster however i think that what humans have a history of doing
is kind of lurching from one side to the other and so in response to that event i actually met
the guy I've talked multiple times to the person who coordinated the response effort from the
American and the Japanese nuclear safety engineers to that and asked very specific questions because
you're getting it as you know it's very hard to trust what you read anywhere and often it's with
an agenda so I thought well what better way than to talk to the person who actually led that
response effort very honorable guy very smart guy no agendas whatsoever and he just told me
told it like it was. And he said, look, there was a huge amount of disinformation.
People would say things such as we found these trace elements which could be traced back to the
nuclear reactor in Fukushima in California. Now, that's technically true. What wasn't said,
it was one part per quintillion and it was insignificant. And so we had these stories
that it was poisoning seaweed and all the rest of it, which I myself got alarmed by back in the days
when I used to be more trusting of what I read without scrutiny.
But then again, it makes wonderful headlines,
but it didn't really relay the true picture.
And he said, look, it was actually, it was a disaster.
There were a whole lot of things that contributed at once,
but the response to it, because it got so highly politicized
and there was so much misinformation and fear,
we ended up doing things which made no sense.
So we didn't have a rational response.
Should there have been a response to it?
Yes.
Should we evaluate things?
Of course.
but it was a really a knee-jerk reaction that took us in the opposite direction.
Another example of where, and I want to be fair to politicians as well,
so I want to cite one example where they have got things right
but I'm going to cite some areas where they haven't as well.
Another area where they have not got things right is the incentivisation
and giving subsidies for renewable energy
where you're incentivising the generation of energy
but you're not incentivising the use of energy.
So whether that do it meant that a whole lot of people were incentivised
to set up wind or solar operations in different parts of the world where the power could not be
effectively delivered back to the grid. So you had all these white elephants and it happened in Spain,
it happened in Portugal, it happened in Darwin in Australia, it happened in Texas, happened in Greece,
happened in Scotland, happened all around the world that you just had these huge pockets of
renewable energy that were just wasted. Now, I'm a great fan of renewable energy when it's used
effectively and it's in the right place because it's a very cheap form of energy.
The learning curve is coming down very rapidly, so you can deploy very rapidly with very minimal
cost. It does have issues. It has issues when you cannot transport that power. It has issues
because it doesn't have spinning reserve capacity, which means that if there's a freak event,
it doesn't have the same resilience to be able to power down generally, which means you've got
have things like Bitcoin mining to counterbalance that. And it has issues with variability. Those
issues have been kind of plastered over as if you're not allowed to say, look, it does have
these drawbacks. It has positives, but you've got to look at it in totality. And what's been
a disappointment has been that, again, it's been very highly politicized, whether you're either
pro-fossil fuel or pro-renewable, but you can't look at a grid and say, well, what's the goal?
What are we really trying to achieve here? So that's another example where a lot of that energy
has been just squandered. And then a third example I'll give is in New Zealand, where I'm from,
where there was an effort to decarbonize the grid. But part of that effort was to stop doing
new gas exploration. Because gas is fossil fuel, we don't want to be doing fossil fuel anymore.
Now, gas has about, relative to coal, it has about 40% of the emission intensity of coal.
So it's significantly less. But because we stopped doing new gas exploration,
then we had a shortfall of energy on the grid. So guess what we did in order to meet that? We
imported coal from China, right? So even with those stated goals of decarbonizing the grid,
the action that was taken was vastly ineffective. So there's been a lot of, I think, the misapplication
of subsidies. There's been some knee-jerk reactions. There's been misinformation. I think
the issue with being a politician really is that you get swayed too much by human emotions and the
science gets lost in the process. Now, I have seen some examples when politicians do occasionally
get it right. Costa Rica is one good example where they did a very good job of Costa Rica had been
basically farmland for a long time and there was a big initiative to reforest. And that reforestation
has meant that ecotourism is now one of Costa Rica's major export earners and it's also just
a more beautiful place to live. I probably wouldn't have wanted to live here 40 years ago
when it was mostly farmland.
I do now.
So there have been cases where it's worked well,
but there's certainly been cases
where politicians have got things incredibly wrong.
Yeah, even a blind hen can find a golden pebble,
as they say.
So yeah, it's interesting,
but you still use terms like,
to me, coming from the Austrian economics camp,
it's funny to me when you use terms like,
the transition and we as in like is there such a thing as the transition like i i know everyone's
in on this but there's lately there's been in a lot of countries like this realization that these
climate goals are uh they're fantasy numbers all of them they're utopian they cannot be reached
uh so they're trying to like just kick the can down the road to the next guy and and not talk
about it too much right now because someone is going to have to take the fall for it and say that
and blame someone for why we couldn't reach the target or whatever or why it wasn't important in
the first place. What are your thoughts on the whole climate change circus, political circus?
Yeah, I think that you say some things that are correct there and it's not just with climate
change, it's also with fiat money printing as well where we see this habit of it's easier to
say something to kick the can down the road to get re-elected than it is to actually take some
serious action, which is say, look, we're off target and we've got to stop printing money.
That's hard because you're not incentivized for that behavior because you'll get kicked out of
power for being negative or being the one who said this emperor has no clothes, for shattering the
illusion or for forcing governments to spend responsibly. So it's a really challenging position.
I honestly don't know what I'd do if I was in that political situation.
I'm not a politician and I'm glad I'm not.
But sometimes I think, well, what would you do in that situation?
I'm not sure I had a good answer to that.
No, me neither.
And I see it as an inherent flaw with democracy itself.
Like maybe it isn't this cure-all that it was promoted as, you know, because it has this inherent flaw that you're incentivized to lie just to get reelected.
And every politician is, and it's kind of, or not kind of, it's very sad.
I mean, also, I think we've been talking about this before, but the fiat money is really the root cause of all environmental problems, perceived or actual.
It doesn't matter.
they're all at the end of the day caused by the same phenomenon, which is over-consumerism,
which in my view is a direct result of fiat monetary printing.
Going back to sound money standard is all about not misallocating resources anymore.
It's all about removing the theft and the lying and the insincerity from the equation altogether
and get resources.
When you have an asset that keeps appreciating in value you are less incentivized to spend frivolously on shit you don need And do you think that a Well I see this firsthand because we have a business
model as a fund, which is to take power from landfills. So we see the end result of consumption
on a regular basis, on overconsumption. And as you've done, if you trace back to say, well,
why is it that we are consuming things that we don't need on a regular basis? There's two reasons.
The first reason is, yes, because you have a fiat monetary system that incentivizes consumption
over being prudent with your resources. There's a second reason, though, that happened earlier,
and that was in the 1920s, when a guy called Edward Bernays was recruited by a number of the
large industries at the time who were concerned that we were going to, basically humans wouldn't
want to consume resources anymore because they had automobiles, they had different mechanics to be
able to do different things for them. Clothes dries, I think were starting to come in washing
machines that were early prototypes, but they're starting to get quite good. And people were
starting to get worried and say, well, won't there become a point where people need to consume less?
and what Edward Benaze was charged with doing was leading from a need-based economy to a desire-based
economy and his uncle was Sigmund Freud and he consulted Freud about human desires and
Freud gave him some tips on how to do it and over the course of the next 10 years
there was an economic revolution there's a great documentary about it called Century of the Self
where basically the needle was turned and we created this desire-based economy
where you now have an entire advertising industry, pharmaceutical industry,
just about every industry, which is playing to human psychological triggers.
But it's all predicated on feeling incomplete and feeling inadequate.
So the premise of that is I'm incomplete.
I have some gap inside me, but by buying your product, I can fill that gap.
That happened in the 1920s. So you put together that psychological manipulation with a fiscal manipulation through a monetary system that encourages consumption because it's only going to lose value anyway. And that's how you get these massive amounts of overconsumption and environmental ruination. So it comes from a combination, I would say, of psychological manipulation and fiscal manipulation.
Do you think the two were connected? Like was one a product of the other?
Yeah, don't know. I haven't done enough research to see that, but it's an interesting question.
Yeah. Speaking of psychology, you've made an excellent little lecture video about how to debunk FUD.
Because you've experienced like people don't want to be orange pill, do they?
Like we're all wondering why normies, what's taking them so long to get this.
Like it's pretty obvious theft is bad.
Like it's not, counterfeiting is not good for anyone.
Like to me, it's obvious, but to most people it isn't.
So why did you make this?
What was the incentive behind it and what's the main ideas in it?
Well, a couple of things.
Firstly, it was that, as you know, I've done quite a lot of debunking of FUD, mainly around energy FUD or environmental FUD around Bitcoin.
But not only that, also, I started going into other areas as well and finding that that was quite effective because I was using the same tactics of counteracting FUD.
And then I could see that some people were just getting angry or exasperated or impatient or coming across as a zealot or an evangelist.
And that wasn't effective.
In fact, it was having the opposite response.
and that I thought, well, in order for Bitcoin adoption to really accelerate it,
there's a few things that need to happen across multiple fronts.
One is I don't feel Bitcoin has had its worldwide web moment yet,
just in terms of the complete usability of the tools.
We're still getting to a point where for you and I, we're content, we're happy,
we're the early adopters, but for the mainstream,
it's not yet easy enough to integrate into their lives.
They've still got to do some research to understand it.
So we haven't had that moment yet.
That'll be coming very soon.
But the other thing is that people don't understand the utility of it because they don't understand the problem that it solves.
And particularly in the West, they don't understand the problem that it solves.
And this is particular to the West.
And I've had many conversations with people in the global South who say, well, we don't have that problem in South Africa.
Within two minutes, someone in South Africa will see the value of Bitcoin because they have lived with currency debasement to such a great extent.
People in Lebanon or in Venezuela or in Argentina or Turkey, they get Bitcoin straight away.
Someone in a country where you don't have access to good banking rails, they understand
the value of Bitcoin immediately.
Someone who has had the financial system weaponized against them because they tried to protest
against death squads in Nigeria, they get it straight away.
Human activists get it.
Human rights activists get it.
People who have tried to send remittance payments back to their family and have had to pay between
5% and 15% fees to some middleman, they get the value of Bitcoin. But the people who don't get it
to the same extent are people in the West, because we have, for the most part, relative to other
countries, good banking rails. And of course, currency is still debasing, but it's debasing
at a slower rate where we don't notice it to the same extent, or it's easy to imagine that our loss
of purchasing power or the fact that we feel poorer is due to some other factor, particularly when we
have multiple economists and politicians telling us that it is. So I wanted to help people create
ways of engaging with Bitcoin's next wave of adopters. And so this kind of comes from,
because I look, I'm a technology adoption person. So I worked in technology companies for about 20
years and I saw how adoption cycles work. And you have this crossing the chasm moment where you have
the early enthusiasts and the innovators who adopt it first, but then you have this early
majority who's like about 48% of the population. And how they adopt technology is very different
to how you and I might have adopted Bitcoin. Even the way you adopted it, because you are
much earlier than I, would have been different. And the issue is that when we explain to other
people Bitcoin the way that it had relevance and interest and insight to us, there's a disconnect
because these people are different. They're not an audience of people who are going to do their
own research. They won't necessarily connect things together in the same way. And they may
not have some of the existing paradigms or understanding of economics that we might or
we might have gained. And so how do we meet those people? So really, the video was an attempt to say,
look, here's if we're really going to engage with Bitcoin's next wave of adopters. We've got a
couple of options. One is have fun staying poor. The other is we use the same techniques that
it worked on us on them either way we don't get adoption or we say look okay not everyone's going
to listen but there are some people who are open but it's up to us to find the language that's going
to invite them into a larger extent so i really wanted to share some of the things that i found
successful with a larger community of people so the end intention is to encourage more bitcoin
adoption faster yeah i highly recommend the video i mean there's a lot of great tips in it and it's
all based on human psychology and what works and what doesn't work, right? So what is the
most common error that people do when they try to orange pill another person? Is it that they
don't meet where the other person is, but where they are? What is it?
Yeah, that's actually the main one. There's two main ones, I'd say. And that is absolutely it.
It's about not finding out. The first action should not be to talk, but to listen.
So that's the first mistake.
It's not just about getting on your soapbox and telling them about how.
Look, I'll give you an example.
If you're going to talk to a corporate board of a major publicly listed corporation who's thinking about Bitcoin as a reserve,
then the first action should be to find out what their values are, how they make decisions,
and what their goals are for their business
and whether and how Bitcoin can fit into those things.
And if you don't take that action,
it's a very simple action,
it doesn't take a long time,
then you could have the most wonderful,
eloquent message in the world
about how monetary premium
is going to be sucked out of other assets into Bitcoin,
but it's just going to miss the mark.
Similarly, if you go to a pension fund
or a sovereign fund
and you talk about how Bitcoin
is going to be amazing as an asset class and how it's going to outperform all other assets.
It might sound like the right message, but it's totally the wrong message.
Most of these sovereign funds and pension funds already understand that Bitcoin has
exceptional potential as an asset class for them to invest.
They don't need to be sold on that for the most part, but there's a whole range of issues
that stop them from adopting it because they perceive it as too risky, such as they're
just not sure how to custody it or they're uncertain about the level of technical innovation.
or they're worried about how they will look or be perceived by the investors into their fund.
So these are the issues that they need reassurance about.
And we've just been missing the mark across the board by not really attuning ourselves
to what these communities of people care about need to hear to feel reassured.
So that's the first mistake.
And then the second mistake is being too attached.
It sounds ironic.
And it's like, have you ever, I'm sure you have, been in a conversation with someone where they were just too attached to trying to persuade you of something?
They were too intense to the extent they didn't really seem to be listening to you.
And they seemed to have an agenda that they wanted to change your perspective.
Well, I have to tell an anecdote here, if you let me interrupt you here, because that's a great one.
this is when the week where we formed the free madeira organization with andre and
funchal and jeff booth was there greg foss a lot of great other bitcoiners like a whole bunch of us
we all gathered for a week on the island and one of the things we did first early on we had a
meeting with the president uh and then he sent us out to to basically orange pill the major
institutions of the island so we were at the tourism board and and you know some financial
center here and in these beautiful old buildings official government buildings in funshal everything
beautiful everything uh very surreal week in in general and the thing is like i'm interested in
psychology too and i think um my experience from working at sea and and being on ships and stuff
a lot of that and being in bands for that matter and different groups.
I'm very interested in group dynamics and group psychology.
One of the things that happens with a flock of males, as you know,
is that an alpha is chosen pretty quickly.
We had an obvious alpha in Jeff because when he
speaks, people shut up and they listen to what he has to say
and he does the whole hand of Booth thing and then everyone's mesmerized by this
wise wise prophet that is in the middle of the room and we had all these meetings and jeff was
leading and everyone was enjoying themselves until we were going to have a meeting with the
energy company on the island so we went up to this office with a big mark a big oak table and a dark
wood room uh with a bunch of people in suits uh most of them in their 60s english very poor of
of course, and Jeff wasn't there because he had to do some board meeting or something.
So instead of listening to them and what questions they might have, they're all of a sudden attacked
by this group of ragtag Bitcoiners who are simultaneously trying to figure out who the
next alpha of the flock is. So you have Greg Foss throwing dollar bills on the table and you have
people talking on top of each other and it was a completely chaotic meeting and I think they were
more hostile to Bitcoin after it than before to be honest but it was a fun experiment yeah yeah
yeah look I had a similar experience one time look how I learned this was by failing completely
one time when I was at my first internet startup I had a chance to pitch to the board about
this new way we should release a software which was going to take us to the promised land and all
the rest of it. And I was really excited because it's like my first chance to ever pitch to the
board and the executive of the company. And I put forward all the ideas. And when I walked into the
room, everyone was kind of smiling and encouraging of me. By the time I walked out, they were all
frowning. So they were more hostile towards my ideas at the end of the meeting than the start.
and my general manager took me to one side
and he said, look, the logic was good,
but basically you came across as if you were saying,
you guys are all idiots for not seeing the world the way I see it He said next time care less about your outcome and care more about the people in the room And I was like yeah that good advice Graham Thanks for that And he said good because you going to come back
and you're going to pitch the idea again to them next week.
And you're going to take on board what I just said.
Before I could say, no, please, Graham,
I don't want to do that again.
He had already set it up.
I don't know how he persuaded them,
but they came back.
We did the meeting again.
I had the same presentation.
I maybe changed one or two slides.
The message was the same, but what was different was I was much more humble.
When I walked into the room, they were pretty hostile.
They had the same frowns etched on their faces they did the week before.
But by the end of the meeting, just by me listening, by me changing my disposition,
by me not being attached and listening to my ideas, they were nodding their heads in agreement saying,
yeah, Daniel's got some great ideas.
We need to take this on.
And they listened to me.
And that was a successful pitch.
I could not believe it because the only thing that changed, it wasn't even the message.
It was just my internal approach.
It was my mindset that had changed.
When was this?
How old were you?
Oh, this is many years ago.
I was probably in my late 20s.
Oh, no, but it's funny how you remember certain key moments like that where you get an insight.
It was an absolutely key moment.
Yeah, because for me, I didn't know that your approach and what you thought and your attitude could have so much difference to how you communicate. But it absolutely does. We are more influenced by someone's disposition, their body language, their tone of voice than we are about their actual content.
So you could have two people deliver the same content, but if one person's like, you know, I'm the oracle of truth, you guys need to hear this.
And the other person's like, well, I've got some things, some ideas you might be interested to hear.
It's going to lead to a very different presentation.
But no, and it reminds me, it goes so deep.
The only thing you can really do, like if you study free will and how absurd it is that it really can't exist unless there's a soul and stuff like that because of the lag of consciousness and the neuron has to fire off before the decision is made.
So who is really making the decision?
So if we have free will at all, I mean, I love the Hitchens quote, we have no choice but to have it. But if we do, the extent of free will is basically just you may be able to choose your focus on what thoughts to focus on, what to hone in on.
And if you can do that, it's so powerful, though, because the butterfly effects are everywhere.
Like if you choose to focus on one thought than another, you change your reality.
And we do not know to which extent the mind creates reality.
So it's much more powerful than people think.
Yeah, so I'll give you an example of how this looks in practice.
So I was having a meeting with a wholesale investor into our fund.
And he said, OK, so what are you up to at the moment?
And I said, oh, I'm actually researching Bitcoin right now because we think it has potential.
We may even form a fund around it.
And his whole body language changed completely.
And he folded his arms and he was like, I thought you were interested in doing things that were good for the environment.
And this was 2022 when it was like peak FUD around Bitcoin and energy and Bitcoin and the environment.
And I had a choice in that moment.
I could have either ignored it or I could have got into a debate with him.
But what I did was I said, well, sounds like you've heard some things about Bitcoin.
This is an area I've been looking at.
And I said, look, I can understand why you'd say that, because to be honest, that was my first impression when I first saw it.
I've been researching it for the last couple of months.
I'm happy to share what I found out if that's of interest to you.
And his whole body language changed completely.
he softened and he said, yeah, sure. Tell me what you found out. Now, what I said to him in response
was nothing about Bitcoin. But he was feeling hostile towards some ideas. And so it's like,
people don't change their minds rationally. People change their minds based on emotions.
People make decisions based on emotions and then they justify them rationally. So I could have
given the best arguments in the world about why he was wrong and why I was right. But he wouldn't
have heard a single one if I hadn't had that framing first. And I did three very important
things, which was not my nature to do, but I had to learn to do. The first one was to
acknowledge what the person had said. I hear what you're saying. Second thing is to make him not
wrong for having an opinion. It's like if two people have diverse opinions, then we tend to
lock on onto what's different. The difference is the opinions. But the question is, what can we be
in agreement with, well, I can agree that he has a right to express his opinion. I can say that I've
heard what he's saying. And if I'm in agreement that he's got a right to have an opinion and I
focus on commonality, which is, hey, I understand why he had it. I used to have it. That's what
caused the softening. And then I didn't presume that he wanted to hear what I had to say. I asked
him, well, if you're interested, I'm happy to share what I've learned. So I'm presenting it as
This is not in a difference of opinion.
There is a knowledge asymmetry here.
You know, I could have said, hey, I've studied this more deeply than you buster.
That would have had a different response.
But I implied that and gave him the frame and then he accepted the frame.
OK, you're right.
It sounds like you've studied this more deeply than I have.
You've given me the option to hear what you've learned.
Yes, I'm going to take that option.
So he's now accepted.
OK, there is a knowledge asymmetry.
Daniel isn't a raving evangelist who's going to try and push some ideas down my throat.
He does respect my position. He used to hold it himself. I'm curious to want to know what caused
him to change his mind. Very different frame. Now, people don't always respond and say, yes,
I'm curious. But if they don't, then there's no point me getting into further discussion.
So that's also a very good filter to work out whether someone's receptive, whether they're
intellectually curious or not. And if they're not, that's OK. I will save my energy for someone who
is open to learning more about Bitcoin. But from my side, I want to maximize the probability. It's
like maybe out of every 10 people, there might be two people who no matter how badly I talk about
Bitcoin, they'll be receptive to it. There might be two people who no matter how well and how
eloquently and how empathetically I talk about Bitcoin will be close to it. But there's six
people in the middle who, if I talk about it in a skillful way, in a respectful way, if I show
curiosity towards them and empathy towards them, they're more likely to hear my ideas.
Those are the people that I care about.
And if I can do something to optimize the chance that those six out of 10 will listen,
then that seems like energy well spent.
Absolutely.
That's why I, just one of the reasons why I love that there are so many different
Bitcoin, type of Bitcoin evangelists, if you say so.
We are everywhere.
Yeah, sure. There's more and more of us are leaning towards libertarian, like freedom minded.
But we are in all political camps and in all cultural camps, really. You go to any village
anywhere on earth and you're bound to find a bitcoiner somewhere. The communities are small,
but they are truly everywhere.
And I find that super encouraging.
You should check out our latest sponsor, BitVault.
BitVault is real hardcore Bitcoin security.
They combine multi-sig with a time delay
so that they discourage thieves
from using five or 15 or $21 wrenches
to bash your head in.
This time lock function increases the risk for the thief,
discourages coercion
and makes the whole act less likely to happen.
Go to bitvolt.sv right now and check out their offers.
You can get a yearly subscription for $129, and it's a fantastic product overall.
Brush your teeth.
Our favorite hardware wallet is, of course, the Bitbox.
Check out our friends at Bitbox at bitbox.swiss.
There you'll find a bunch of different products, but the main one, the Bitbox O2 Nova,
with the Bitcoin firmware installed, is a fantastic hardware wallet,
and the software that comes along with it has a fantastic user interface.
It is one of my personal favorites.
It's easy to use and it's super secure.
It's my personal favorite hardware wallet.
It's super slick, super privacy focused and super easy to use.
So go to bitbox.swiss and use code infinity for a discount.
Check it out now.
So what's the biggest hurdle?
Like, what's the biggest hindrance?
Why don't, if we take the other perspective, if we take the perspective of the person being orange-pilled, what's hindering most people from getting it?
What's hindering them from swallowing the orange pill?
Why don't they?
Why is it so hard?
That is the right question to ask.
So this is something I've been thinking deeply about.
And there's a couple of things. The first thing is that it's a nascent disruptive technology. And our general human tendency, when we're faced with something which is new, is to be negative about it. And that's not because humans are negative. It's because that's very important for evolution.
If you encounter something new you haven't seen for the first time, then there's risk involved.
And this goes right back to back on the savannah.
You see a large animal on the horizon.
It's out of focus, so you're uncertain about it.
You don't know whether it's food or it's your food.
Now, in order for survival of the species, the algorithm should go, when something is unclear, assume in the negative.
because if you assume that you're its food and you're wrong,
the cost is you go hungry for a day.
But if you assume in the positive and you're wrong,
you assume that it's your food and it turns out you're its food
and you run towards it and you're wrong,
the consequence is you get eaten.
So that's not even a psychological tendency.
That's a neurobiological impulse which is very hardwired into us,
which is the presence of something unclear, uncertain, assume, and the negative.
So this is why the response to all nascent disruptive technology,
whether it's a telegraph, the bicycle, the radio, the internet,
the camera, television, computer, automobile, you name it, and Bitcoin,
will tend to be negative for a good 15 years or so.
And then people get to understand it more.
They have their fears alleviated.
Some of the early junk science gets debunked,
and people start to say, oh, actually, it's not that bad.
And in fact, it's really good because they understand its utility more and a lot of the fears they have get debunked as being unreasonable.
So that takes a little while.
So that's the first thing.
And so Bitcoin is a continuation of that pattern.
However, Bitcoin has an additional challenge that these other technologies did not have.
And that's that if you were slow to the party with the bicycle or slow to the party, you rode your horse for a little bit long before you got an automobile or you used your fax machine for a little bit longer.
in your print media before you jumped on the internet.
There was no great penalty.
There was no great cost to that.
But if you're late to the party with Bitcoin,
you see where I'm going here, right?
You had the opportunity to invest early.
You were smart.
You encountered it.
You dismissed it.
You saw other people do very well out of it.
And then it wasn't until 15 years later,
you reconsidered it.
Now you've got to,
you have this major hurdle,
which is that you have to admit that you were wrong.
there was a big financial cost to you being wrong. And so the psychological tendency is that that's
painful. The ego does not want to acknowledge I was wrong because in saying I was wrong,
I was saying, well, I missed out on a major financial opportunity. So it's easier for the
ego to go, well, sure, I missed it, but Bitcoin is just a Ponzi or it's just a bubble or I don't
like Bitcoiners and I don't want to be associated with that tribe. And if that's the way to make
money, then I'd rather make it honorably and ethically than this useless asset that's just
speculative and does nothing. So it's all complete nonsense and falsehood, but it's so much easier to
believe that for the ego than to acknowledge you were wrong and acknowledge the financial
consequence of you being wrong. Wasn't the case of the bicycle or the internet or the automobile.
So that is the additional challenge that we have. Yeah. And the saddest part about that is that
it keeps on, people's egos keep on preventing them from using the same, because it doesn't matter
when you came in.
Like these perceived disadvantages you have,
they're only disadvantages in relation to people who were before you.
But that's like reading the newspaper and comparing yourself to rich people.
Why don't I own a skyscraper in Dubai and so on and so forth.
But it's not in an absolute sense.
It's not a disadvantage.
It's just hop on the train and do whatever the last generation did.
hodl for 10 years
and you'll be better off
because the greatest lie
ever told is not only
that inflation is needed,
but that no inflation means zero percent inflation It doesn It means ever dropping prices because we get better at doing stuff And to me Bitcoin is just the lens to view the world through
that actually accurately reflects the deflationary nature of the free market, that we can actually see
that everything does drop in price if we just measure with the correct or see the world through
the correct lens and so so it's a very sad story if humanity is so uh i wouldn't say stupid but so
egotistical that we shoot ourselves in the foot by by by being unable to to take the humble approach
and and and to to ever think well maybe i'm wrong like it's it's truly sad if you want to find local
Bitcoin communities, other Bitcoiners, Bitcoin merchants and Bitcoin events in your area.
There's no better way to do that than through the Orange Pill app. Wait a minute. It's not the
Orange Pill app anymore. It's Club Orange. Club Orange is an omni app that includes a lot of
features, including a list of events, a wallet where you can send and receive sats over the
Lightning Network. You can even geosap areas so you can send sats to a whole bunch of people in
one single area. You can also tap zap while you're chatting to someone, which is a new feature that I
don't believe exists anywhere else. Overall, a fantastic app for connecting Bitcoiners all around
the world. So go to cluborange.org and sign up today. You won't regret it. It's not just a gay
dating app. It's everything else too. You can use it. Forget about that. Go and sign up.
cluborange.org. If you want to really secure your Bitcoin, you should check out the Bitcoin
Advisor. They have never lost a single set and they take care of your stack together with you.
They can't use your stack. That's impossible, but they can help you with inheritance planning.
They can help you huddle the Bitcoin long-term. So go to thebitcoinadvisor.com to find out more
and brush your teeth. It's an additional hurdle. There's no doubt about it. What was the quote
from Anne Rand? Is it everything always all at once? And I think this is what the solution is.
there's no one solution to this. It is everything all at once. So for example, some people have
responded, like there's a guy I'm coaching who has done something quite amazing. He's basically
orange-pilled a whole lot of charities who are now using Bitcoin. He's also orange-pilled
50,000 people who are now using Bitcoin because he has worked out that rather than talking about
Bitcoin, he's better just to target charities and people who like to give to charities and say,
well, rather than give once and that money gets squandered and gets used on something,
then the charity has to come back and beg the next year.
So your gift keeps on dying.
What if you could give and that gift would not die?
Because with Bitcoin, it's possible because you can give into a Bitcoin treasury and then
that can become the principal and then the profits from that can go into the charity.
It's just a fundamentally better business model.
Now, he doesn't lead with Bitcoin.
He leads with what if your gift to charity did not die?
and then people find out, oh, and by the way, we're using Bitcoin to do this.
And he's had like 98% of the people who were doing this were not Bitcoiners beforehand.
They find out that Bitcoin is a mechanism and then they will say things such as, wow,
I had no idea that Bitcoin was such a noble asset.
So this is a strategy where he hasn't had to talk to people about Bitcoin at all.
He's just had the approach of let's just keep people using it for something they care about.
And then they find out afterwards it's Bitcoin and then they get orange pill.
So that's another way that we can do it.
It's not all about using language.
Sometimes it's just getting people using it.
But there's a lesson here, which is to lead people to Bitcoin rather to lead to Bitcoin rather than to lead with Bitcoin.
And for different people, the message will be completely different.
So, for example, I'm not, but if I were talking to the Democrat Party in the US, it's like, well, find out what these people's values are.
Maybe they care about, or some people do, about social justice or about environmental justice.
So, show them how Bitcoin can be a tool for social and environmental justice.
Show how when you have a world where Bitcoin exists that more people can get more remittances and they tend to be poor people so that less goes to financial middlemen.
or middlemen show them how in a world with bitcoin it helps to reduce the wealth inequality
between nations in a very tangible way and bhutan's an example because rather than becoming an
indentured state the vassal state basically with a large imf loan they were able to avoid that
reality and stack bitcoin and now it's 40 of their gdp and they're using a small portion of that to
refurbish the airport now they're building an echoes city a mindfulness city it's like incredible
things. I mean, that's just such an appealing, insightful, inspiring message to so many people.
So these are the stories that will inspire people or the stories about how people are using it in
South Africa to avoid currency debasement, how people are able to run their taxi now without
getting robbed because they have Bitcoin, how people in Afghanistan, women in Afghanistan,
are able to set up businesses and pay women because they can get around the gender level
discrimination from the state because they have Bitcoin. And there's a whole raft of people around
the world who care deeply about these messages. And so Bitcoin just becomes a tool which enables
something which otherwise would have been impossible. And different people will respond
to different stories differently. So we have some incredible inspiring stories and sharing them,
but knowing which stories to share to whom when is really important.
Yeah, I absolutely agree. The first lesson you talked about there, the importance of listening first and talking later, that's very true for podcasting too. I just thought of that's a lesson I've been forced to learn over the years. I'm not sure that the lesson is entirely over yet. But yeah, it's definitely a good tip in all aspects of life.
I think there's also something to people, you know, not being, you know, there's always this, I always say that the orange pill is the remedy to the black pill.
But I don't think people are as black pilled as you might think they are if you are on the internet a lot.
And like being Bitcoiners, we are on the internet a lot.
And we see all of this.
it's the same brain thing fear sells like that's why headlines and and clickbait is always
on the fear spectra rather than no one clicks on happy things
but most people are too busy with their with their lives just having their normal careers
and their normal families and doing normal shit to even to even be worried about what
whatever it is, Israel, Palestine, or Ukraine, Russia, or inflation, or whatever the worry of
the day might be. So it might just be that people are too happy to even bother with Bitcoin because
they're not worried. They don't know how bad inflation is. They don't know how bad,
how much better their lives could have been. They're just happy going to work and taking care
themselves and their families. I think there's a lot of examples of that too, especially in
developed countries, of course, more than undeveloped ones, or less developed ones.
What are your thoughts?
Yeah, I think that's correct. And I've made this mistake myself. So last year,
I was giving a presentation online to 162 regulators and policymakers. And it was about
Bitcoin and energy and Bitcoin and the environment because policymakers and regulators have to go
through a checklist of things to get them comfortable with a nascent technology or a
new asset class. And one of them, of course, they've got their ESG box. And at the moment,
their understanding of Bitcoin is that it crosses that box. And the reason they believe that is a
lot of misinformation, which came from a certain Dutch central banker. Now, so I could either just
spend the whole time talking about why that information was wrong, but I don't do that
because that's defensive and the best you can get is to parity. And also, if it sounds like you're
spending too much time just attacking one person, then they're probably going to be thinking, well,
what's the other side of the story? So rather than do that, I spent more time on the positive side.
But the mistake I made, which luckily was picked up by the person who was curating that presentation, was I assumed that they had heard a lot of that misinformation, which actually they hadn't.
So whilst there's been a lot of misinformation out there, these were people who, because most of them were coming from places like in Africa or in the Middle East or in Latin America, basically outside the West.
And outside the West, they haven't heard, they haven't been dealt that same level of misinformation and FUD about Bitcoin.
So I got my audience wrong and I thought I needed to handle that.
And the person who was curating the event said, no, they don't have really any understanding of Bitcoin.
They haven't been fed that.
You can start assuming they're neutral.
And thank goodness I got that advice because otherwise I could have seeded some doubts they didn't even have.
That's hilarious.
You're right.
It's very easy just to assume, of course, the people you engage with or where you spend a lot of your time, that you think that that's representative of the whole world.
And we need to continuously remind ourselves that it's just not.
So, again, know your audience.
I mean, I tell people about the importance of knowing your audience, and I didn't take adequate time to know my audience.
And someone had to give me the coaching to say, you don't quite know your audience here.
You've made an assumption.
And, no, everything I said could have been brilliant.
But because I'd started at the wrong place, the presentation would have been less effective, but for that one thing.
It's hilarious.
It reminds me, this knowing your audience stuff, it reminds me of, I spent one year in an electronics engineering course, like the bachelor's degree in electronics engineering.
I dropped out after one year, but there was one course we had, the university course, where a lady was talking about how to captivate an audience.
And I will never forget the lecture because people, after half an hour, one guy dropped off and then another guy followed.
And pretty soon there was just like five of us left in the room.
I didn't have the heart to leave, but she was so boring.
There was like nothing in there.
And it must have been devastating for her to just see everyone walk away when she was talking about that specific subject.
Wow, amazing.
Yeah, but some people, yeah, I mean, you can learn this stuff to a certain degree, but there's also some people are born speakers and some people definitely aren't.
And they have to work harder, I guess.
Well, I definitely was in the second category. And that's probably why I'm so interested in the science of it and so interested in coaching other people in it, because it didn't come naturally to me. But I saw firsthand that example of when I stuffed things up, how badly it went in terms of outcomes. And then when I got it right, how well it went.
And you've got to remember, I spent like probably three years of my life pitching for capital.
And the great thing about pitching for capital is you get instantaneous feedback, right?
Either you get capital or you don't.
Either you proceed to due diligence or you don't.
And so the company's the same, but depending on your message and your delivery of the message,
you'll get very different outcomes.
And so I went through this arc where over a nine-month period, that's how long it took,
I went from being told by one investment group that that was the worst pitch they'd ever heard, right?
They were brutal, to then basically kicking off the angel investment scene in New Zealand.
Same person, same company, but the message has evolved and the way I delivered it had evolved
because whilst I'd started off at a pretty poor point, the one thing I had going for me was I had people around me
who said at the point where I was ready to give up and say, I'm just not good at this,
so you need someone better.
They said, no, no, no, you've just been given some really good feedback.
Get your ego out of the way.
Take it as a recipe to improve, not an indictment of failure.
Get back up again, pitch again.
Hear what they've said, not to say Daniel's no good at doing this, but a recipe for how
the next one can be better.
And that one shift kind of got me to basically treat it like a game to the point where it
was successful.
So I think this is something that anyone who wants to learn can learn. And a lot of the people that I've coached in this stuff pre-Bitcoin, they were scientists, they were technical people, they were engineers, they were computer scientists, they were mathematicians, people who didn't see themselves as natural communicators. But because they understood the science of stuff generally, once they understood the science of how to communicate for influence, not to inform, they got it really fast.
Maybe this is actually another one of those hurdles to Bitcoin adoption, because I think this trait of self-reflecting
Changing and improving is something I see in all Bitcoiners.
We have the ability to self-reflect, or a lot of Bitcoiners do,
and then change their lives into something else.
I mean, that's what everyone living on a Bitcoin standard now
had to have done that at some point.
There's no way that you just stumble upon Bitcoin
and then you're a Bitcoiner without changing your life.
It requires you to change your life quite a bit to go on a Bitcoin standard,
especially if you have a family and stuff.
But for everyone, it's a huge leap, a leap of reason, I'd call it.
So maybe this ability to self-reflect, like we like to brag about how humble we are, I know, but maybe this is actually one of the defining traits that Bitcoiners have.
And maybe that's another hurdle to adoption that most people just don't self-reflect that much.
Well, yeah, it's a good insight and it's something that I've observed as well.
And it can be a hurdle, but it can also be an opportunity.
Because if we do have this ability to self-reflect, then we also have the ability to say, well, who's responsible for mass adoption of Bitcoin?
Is it the people who haven't adopted Bitcoin?
Are they responsible for seeing the light of day?
Or do I personally have a responsibility for communicating better to increase their chance of getting it?
And how we answer that question will have a pronounced impact on our behaviors and on
the results and how fast Bitcoin adoption goes.
If we say, well, this person's an idiot, so I'm not going to waste my time.
Well, OK, that may be true sometimes, but it's not true all the time.
But if we say, look, it's my responsibility to do triage, to work out who's going to get
it, who's not, and who's kind of in the middle, where if I change and I get curious and I
gamify this into more of a, I wonder, how could I get through to this person with this values,
not being attached to what they do, but how could I maximize my chance that even this skeptic would
see value in Bitcoin at the end of the conversation? For me, that's a fun game to play.
And if you treat it more like a fun game, then I think you're probably going to be more successful.
and it's a standard of,
we talk a lot about self-sovereignty
and radical responsibility taking.
So for me, part of that responsibility taking
is saying anytime that I'm blaming
some other thing in life,
whether it's another person
or an external circumstance,
I've lost my self-sovereignty.
Whereas every time I take responsibility,
then the self-sovereignty rises.
So if I can take responsibility,
I can't take responsibility
for what the person does with what I say.
But I can take responsibility for communicating
in such a way that I maximize the chance
that they can see the value in Bitcoin.
And I can take responsibility
for improving my communication
to the point where that's likely to happen
more often than not.
And I can take responsibility
for putting myself into environments
when I have the chance to meet with people
who can make a difference to Bitcoin adoption.
that that just fantastic advice i i love it so so a personal question on that like have you ever met a person that you disliked so much that you didn want to orange pill them oh that a good question bitcoin for enemies and everything and it
probably good it like this is the the the the asterisk here or whatever that that is probably
good for bitcoin if you pick if you uh orange pill even your enemies so i think it is i really do
It's so important because I think the answer to that is honestly no, I don't think I have.
I don't care.
Like if Bitcoin gets adopted by Pakistan, great, because then India will have to adopt it.
If it gets adopted by India, great, because then Pakistan will have to adopt it.
So it doesn't matter because of the way the world's set up.
We're not going to change geopolitics, but we can work with that in our favor.
And so it doesn't matter who does it first as long as they have enemies.
So it's actually good if someone adopts it who has geopolitical enemies, because then the enemies will have to adopt it. So if the U.S. does a Bitcoin strategic reserve, China will have to adopt it. I think China probably is forming a Bitcoin strategic reserve on the sly, but if that information ever gets out and we know with certainty that that's the case, that'll force Western nations to have to adopt it.
yeah that's uh i mean the on a more personal level i'd say that uh the question to ask yourself is
uh yeah i dislike this person but would i dislike him more or less or them more or less if they were
a bitcoiner or not so and probably you'd like them more if they were bitcoiners well you have
something in common right at least yeah and they at least there's a chance that they'll change if
they become Bitcoiners. Yeah. With the strategic reserves, I'm still skeptical. I mean, Bitcoin's
for enemies, but that doesn't mean I have to like my enemies. Like if I still want most of the
Bitcoin to be in the hands of individuals and not in the hands of institutions. The one phrase I
miss hearing from at all of these Bitcoin conferences now that I've traveled around for
almost 10 years here is not your keys, not your coins. People don't say that anymore. And like,
I'm going to reintroduce that and promote it because it's just as true now as it ever was.
Paper Bitcoin is not Bitcoin.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that's why I still have group discussions with my friends or friends of friends and say,
hey, I'm just having this chat where I'm going to be talking about Bitcoin.
If you know some people who'd like to come along, come along.
And I typically do one or two of them a year and maybe it will be 20 people who come along
and who are all new to Bitcoin, all curious about it.
And for me, those events are just as important
as talking to policymakers, regulators,
people in sovereign funds.
Because as you say, for me, it's not about,
is it a big organization
and would this be better for Bitcoin price?
It's just one human at a time.
And you never know what the impact,
the flow on effect of one individual will be.
They could do more than a nation state leader for Bitcoin
because you just don't know what the,
it's the power of one, isn't it?
The power of one individual to use it in a different way
and to introduce it to a whole new community of people
who otherwise weren't using it.
Like a one person talking before
about the environmental movement,
imagine if someone who was a,
not just an environmentalist,
but a de-growther and an environmental activist,
prominent within an environmental organization suddenly realized that Bitcoin was a great asset I mean it going to make them uncomfortable People will be skeptical about them But just imagine now you got this whole community of people who had previously been attacking Bitcoin
who now will be curious, at least some of them. So that one person can actually do a lot of good
potentially. So I agree with you. I think that's the importance of the individual. And we should
never make an assumption that orange-pilling one person is more valuable than orange-pilling
another. It's just individuals at the end of the day. Absolutely. Especially if you take Kevin
Bacon numbers into account, like the degrees of separation between people are much shorter,
much smaller number than people think. So you don't know. If you tell someone about Bitcoin,
that person may tell someone else, that may tell someone else, that may tell Donald Trump.
Like, who knows? You don't know. Or Greta Thunberg, for that matter.
So what's going on with you in the near and midterm future?
You're going to keep on coaching? What other projects are on the horizon? What are your plans?
Yeah, two things for this year. So one is stepping away from doing so much on the front line with
FUD fighting and talking about Bitcoin and energy and really helping to empower a bigger
community of people. So it's more decentralized. So there's no central point of failure.
So it's much more, there's a whole community of people who are routinely holding the media to
account, but also educating these policymakers and regulators. So that's important. I'm stepping
away from doing that, coaching other people to do it. Part of the coaching as well is just finding
people who are leaders within the Bitcoin space and coaching those people because that's something
I've done for about 20 years. So coaching and leadership, coaching and pitching and
communication, some of these things we're talking about now. And then the other thing that I'm
really intent on doing is getting CH4 Capital its first project this year because we've been
talking about it for a while. I feel like we've been talking about it for too long.
It was an ambitious project to set up doing Bitcoin mining on landfills. I had to find out
about four things I knew very little about, Bitcoin mining, carbon credits, landfill gas
to energy projects, and infrastructure financing. And the best way to find out about four things is
not to try and find out about four things, but to recruit people who know those things much better
than you ever could. So we've done that. We've found the capital. We've found a number of sites
we can do it. So we've ticked off a number of things. And now we're in the final stage, which
is really finding those Bitcoin mining companies who are going to be enthusiastic miners on land
And why would a Bitcoin mining company want to set up on a landfill? There's a whole lot of really good reasons. Number one, it decentralizes the network more. It turns pollution into a source of money, which also means that because it's stranded energy, you tend to get power for about one cent per kilowatt hour. So it's very cheap.
It also means you have more capex to chase that, so there's more costs up front.
But the way the halving cycles and hash price is working, it makes a whole lot of sense because it's the model of if you can own the energy asset or at least own the infrastructure investment up front, then by the time you've fully depreciated that, you've paid off the interest on those assets.
then you can reap the reward from about year five onwards of that very cheap cost of power.
So you set up really well through multiple different halving cycles So it works well for the land landfall owner because they get to turn pollution into a monetizable asset it works well
for the bitcoin mining company because they get a low price of power and it works well for us
because we get a uncorrelated returns into the fund that's going to be a big focus this year is
i don't want to be coming back and jumping on your podcast next year and still talking about it i want
to be sharing some photos of our first installation that we have helped finance.
Yeah, yeah, that would be awesome. We'll see. Fingers crossed. I mean, yeah, well,
sounds hopeful. Speaking of miner centralization, geographical centralization is one thing, but
block templates centralization is another thing. Have you picked a side or whatever in the whole
core versus not debate?
And have you looked into ocean
and all of this?
Like, what are your...
I honestly haven't.
I've just, I've seen that
and I've thought I'm involved
in so many different,
not fights,
but I wanted to just,
I just, this is what I did.
I said, okay, I recognized
I could probably go into first principles
and form a viewpoint on this,
but it would take a lot of energy.
I'd have to do it very sincerely.
That would take time.
and then I'd have to have an opinion
and that would kind of defocus me
from where I think my energy is better spent
and that's in basically fighting the FUD
that I'm fighting right now
and just knowing there's probably
some other people smarter than me
who know more about that than I in that area.
So I've actually stayed away from that
for a very kind of,
in terms of my own personal focus.
And so what I say is,
look, I haven't researched it
well enough to have an opinion either way.
oh that's a that's a beautiful answer i think uh yeah so if if people want to know more about you
if they want to find out more about the projects where can they do that what's the best way to
follow you on x at ds batten and ch4capital.com and particularly whilst we are looking at more
investors we kind of got that sorted it's more bitcoin mining companies that we want to talk to
at this stage.
All right.
So if you're a miner,
talk to Daniel.
Daniel, I've enjoyed
this conversation immensely.
Is there anything else
you want to say
before we wrap this up?
I actually think
we've covered a lot.
I'm looking forward
to seeing you again
in Madrid.
Once a few months time.
Yeah, Madrid will be
the next time, I guess.
That's in May.
Yeah, yeah.
So you should,
Mad Bitcoins.
I don't know if I have the promo code or not, but use code infinity and see if it works.
It works on most, you know, honorable websites.
So MadBitcoin should be one of those.
We'll see.
But looking forward to seeing you.
Always, always a pleasure.
Thank you very much.
Likewise.
Thank you.
This has been the Bitcoin Infinity Show.
Like, subscribe, brush your teeth, tell your friends, and adieu.
Thank you.