1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:10,520 To even introduce a moral caveat to the argument is now moving of, like, the boundaries and how Bitcoin has worked up to this point. 2 00:00:10,760 --> 00:00:14,420 And I think you're regressing and ceding ground to people who would want to attack the network. 3 00:00:14,920 --> 00:00:15,920 Bitcoin's not a democracy. 4 00:00:16,680 --> 00:00:17,780 Bitcoin is anarchy. 5 00:00:18,240 --> 00:00:19,720 It is rules, not rulers. 6 00:00:20,100 --> 00:00:22,220 You're running a node because you're validating transactions. 7 00:00:22,620 --> 00:00:28,420 Everything after that, the influence in what your node has, very quickly compresses to almost nothing. 8 00:00:28,420 --> 00:00:34,600 you are attacking the network you're threatening to orphan miners you're threatening to reorg the 9 00:00:34,600 --> 00:00:39,980 chain you are threatening to change the rules which everyone had previously agreed upon 10 00:00:39,980 --> 00:00:50,860 rob hamilton the third the giggler how are you doing doing great how are you i'm good the uh 11 00:00:50,860 --> 00:00:57,760 the quote-unquote bitcoin civil war is heating up again we've got a thought proposal podcasters 12 00:00:57,760 --> 00:01:02,400 being blamed, which I'm very angry about. As the bugle boys will tell you, this is the most 13 00:01:02,400 --> 00:01:07,040 honorable job you can have in Bitcoin. What's going on? It's a priest-like calling. 14 00:01:07,680 --> 00:01:11,520 To become a podcaster truly is like being a monk. Yeah. 15 00:01:13,440 --> 00:01:15,840 We're keeping Bitcoin afloat. People just don't realize it yet. 16 00:01:17,040 --> 00:01:22,000 That's right. All of Proof of Work actually, podcasters are the underlying substrate of 17 00:01:22,000 --> 00:01:25,440 Proof of Work. How have we got dragged into this fork wars? 18 00:01:25,440 --> 00:01:33,440 Well, let's maybe catch up for those at home who don't have the full background and context. 19 00:01:33,440 --> 00:01:52,560 There has been, I would say over the past two and a half years, a growing frustration among users of Bitcoin who are not fans of the Bitcoin blockchain being used for non-monetary data. 20 00:01:52,560 --> 00:02:00,240 This is inscriptions and ordinals and all of that stuff that gets tied into Bitcoin. 21 00:02:02,040 --> 00:02:15,580 And as a refresher, the way Bitcoin works is that if a transaction is valid by the rules of consensus, 22 00:02:15,580 --> 00:02:21,480 even if your personal node doesn't see it before, it will accept that transaction in a block, right? 23 00:02:21,480 --> 00:02:24,020 a very simple example of this is 24 00:02:24,020 --> 00:02:26,240 I technically can make a Bitcoin transaction 25 00:02:26,240 --> 00:02:28,320 that doesn't pay any fees to the miner 26 00:02:28,320 --> 00:02:29,860 right 27 00:02:29,860 --> 00:02:31,460 I could just have no fee 28 00:02:31,460 --> 00:02:34,580 if a miner would have put that into a block 29 00:02:34,580 --> 00:02:36,480 it would get accepted and confirmed 30 00:02:36,480 --> 00:02:38,380 by the rest of the network even though you never would have 31 00:02:38,380 --> 00:02:39,900 seen it before because by default 32 00:02:39,900 --> 00:02:42,540 nodes will not relay they will filter it out 33 00:02:42,540 --> 00:02:43,940 they have no incentive to include it 34 00:02:43,940 --> 00:02:45,740 they have no incentive to include it exactly 35 00:02:45,740 --> 00:02:47,380 and so 36 00:02:47,380 --> 00:02:49,380 that is kind of the 37 00:02:49,380 --> 00:02:51,360 baseline of just 38 00:02:51,480 --> 00:02:54,180 how inclusion of transactions work in Bitcoin. 39 00:02:54,500 --> 00:02:57,900 Now, I would say myself and others 40 00:02:57,900 --> 00:03:00,340 have very regularly pointed out 41 00:03:00,340 --> 00:03:02,680 that if you wanted to stop this behavior 42 00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:04,900 of pictures on Bitcoin, 43 00:03:05,280 --> 00:03:08,660 you are going to require a consensus change in some way. 44 00:03:08,820 --> 00:03:11,440 Because as long as these are consensus valid, 45 00:03:12,060 --> 00:03:13,900 miners are optimizing for revenue, 46 00:03:14,120 --> 00:03:16,880 and they're going to include these things in a block. 47 00:03:16,880 --> 00:03:30,360 It looks like a pseudonymous user, Dathan Ohm, has come forward with a soft fork proposal, which goes to do that. 48 00:03:30,520 --> 00:03:40,880 Now, before I even jump off into that, there was a post on the mailing list a Bitcoin developer named Portland Hoddle put forward and said, 49 00:03:40,880 --> 00:03:46,260 Hey, I have an idea. Let's reduce the output of all transactions to 520 bytes. 50 00:03:46,260 --> 00:03:50,940 And this would basically be a very clever way of reducing op return at the consensus level. 51 00:03:51,340 --> 00:03:58,220 Because an op return where you're posting data is actually part of the output of the transaction. 52 00:03:58,420 --> 00:04:03,020 So if you make all outputs must be 520 bytes or smaller, you're effectively curbing op return. 53 00:04:04,260 --> 00:04:14,380 Luke Dasher proposed in reply to this his own idea of a consensus change that would include more things than just the op return stuff. 54 00:04:14,380 --> 00:04:22,920 Dathan Ohm has come forward saying that since that BIP, that proposal on the mailing list 55 00:04:22,920 --> 00:04:27,820 didn't have any pushback, that there was enough consensus to start writing up a BIP. 56 00:04:28,380 --> 00:04:34,560 At the bottom of this proposal, though, it does say credits to Luke Jr. for the original 57 00:04:34,560 --> 00:04:38,800 draft and advice of what this larger consensus change, which has now been proposed. 58 00:04:39,480 --> 00:04:42,060 Well, I just, I think it's worth looking back a little bit. 59 00:04:42,060 --> 00:04:46,520 So this whole debate that's happened for the last 18 months, maybe even two years at this 60 00:04:46,520 --> 00:04:51,540 point, it's been a long time, all came down to whether filters actually work, I think. 61 00:04:51,640 --> 00:04:54,960 If filters worked, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. 62 00:04:55,440 --> 00:04:57,980 So is this the fact that they're now trying to do a consensus change? 63 00:04:58,040 --> 00:05:02,980 Is that almost an admission on that side that filters don't work the way they at least want 64 00:05:02,980 --> 00:05:03,340 them to? 65 00:05:04,360 --> 00:05:07,960 Well, I'm going to give the charitable steel man interpretation of their side. 66 00:05:08,680 --> 00:05:13,680 They believe specifically the most recent release of Bitcoin Core, version 30, 67 00:05:14,440 --> 00:05:20,320 changed, and to be clear, I am specifying a championing and a steel manning of their argument, 68 00:05:20,320 --> 00:05:25,300 not my personal belief, is that with the updates that were made in version 30, 69 00:05:26,160 --> 00:05:31,720 the default node client will no longer filter operaturns smaller, 70 00:05:32,740 --> 00:05:34,720 sorry, larger than 100 kilobytes. 71 00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:39,160 the previous limit in the default software was 83 bytes. 72 00:05:39,900 --> 00:05:44,040 They would say proponents of doing a consensus change 73 00:05:44,040 --> 00:05:49,780 would be that this kind of makes the default reference implementation malicious 74 00:05:49,780 --> 00:05:51,560 from their perspective, 75 00:05:51,880 --> 00:05:55,400 and that now you must do a consensus change to stop this. 76 00:05:56,100 --> 00:05:59,100 The deeper point that I would pull the thread on 77 00:05:59,100 --> 00:06:00,760 to your point about filters working or not, 78 00:06:00,760 --> 00:06:08,460 But filters, from my perspective, don't work if there's economic demand for those transactions. 79 00:06:08,460 --> 00:06:19,240 A really great example of this was larger op returns were being included in blocks prior to there even being a version 30. 80 00:06:19,680 --> 00:06:27,220 Miners would set custom configuration flags and build their own node software to be more permissive and open and would allow these transactions to get through. 81 00:06:28,140 --> 00:06:30,820 You also have projects like Peter Todd's Libre Relay 82 00:06:30,820 --> 00:06:33,880 that were relaying these transactions 83 00:06:33,880 --> 00:06:36,080 and preferentially peering to get to miners. 84 00:06:36,500 --> 00:06:40,520 And then the actual best example out in the free market 85 00:06:40,520 --> 00:06:41,860 of the Bitcoin block space market, 86 00:06:42,020 --> 00:06:42,900 you can view it that way, 87 00:06:42,960 --> 00:06:43,800 that every 10 minutes, 88 00:06:44,200 --> 00:06:46,500 there's four megabytes of block space available in the market 89 00:06:46,500 --> 00:06:48,220 and people who pay the fees bid them. 90 00:06:49,640 --> 00:06:52,140 The mempool of unconfirmed transactions, 91 00:06:52,280 --> 00:06:54,260 the pending ones, was so empty 92 00:06:54,260 --> 00:06:56,680 that miners realized that they could actually 93 00:06:56,680 --> 00:06:58,700 start making more revenue on margin 94 00:06:58,700 --> 00:07:00,840 if they lower their minimum fee rate 95 00:07:00,840 --> 00:07:04,060 from one sat per V-byte to 0.1 sat per V-byte. 96 00:07:04,200 --> 00:07:08,120 So even though 99 plus percent of nodes 97 00:07:08,120 --> 00:07:10,500 were running a filter that did not allow these transactions 98 00:07:10,500 --> 00:07:12,280 that were paying too little of a fee in, 99 00:07:12,720 --> 00:07:14,020 they still got included in the blocks. 100 00:07:14,600 --> 00:07:16,620 So the moment there's economic demand there 101 00:07:16,620 --> 00:07:18,780 and the miners are trying to profit maximize, 102 00:07:19,360 --> 00:07:21,320 the filter argument starts to fall apart. 103 00:07:22,300 --> 00:07:23,220 From my perspective. 104 00:07:23,840 --> 00:07:25,620 Yeah, no, that makes sense. 105 00:07:25,620 --> 00:07:30,300 And so if you need like a proliferation of potentially even over 99% of nodes doing this 106 00:07:30,300 --> 00:07:32,460 for filters to actually work, like Notts did quite well. 107 00:07:32,540 --> 00:07:35,180 It got to, I don't know, 20% of all nodes. 108 00:07:35,460 --> 00:07:36,340 I'm sure there was some- 109 00:07:36,340 --> 00:07:37,600 20, 22, something like that. 110 00:07:37,680 --> 00:07:37,740 Yeah. 111 00:07:38,060 --> 00:07:39,600 And there's probably some funny business in there. 112 00:07:39,700 --> 00:07:43,800 I don't think, I don't even know how you account for that, but like it did sort of surprisingly 113 00:07:43,800 --> 00:07:44,020 well. 114 00:07:44,100 --> 00:07:45,340 It definitely caught me off guard. 115 00:07:45,780 --> 00:07:48,220 How has Core 30 gone since that launch? 116 00:07:48,240 --> 00:07:50,840 Because obviously that is kind of the crux of this whole issue. 117 00:07:50,840 --> 00:07:55,700 So Core 30, as of right now, is the number one client deployed on the network. 118 00:07:55,700 --> 00:07:58,280 It's kind of, it's a little over 10% now. 119 00:07:58,840 --> 00:08:01,060 Mononaut's been keeping a close eye and track on it, 120 00:08:01,240 --> 00:08:04,520 with the number two implementation actually being Core version 28. 121 00:08:07,160 --> 00:08:09,000 Can you give some context to that? 122 00:08:09,040 --> 00:08:10,920 Like normally when Core release an update, 123 00:08:11,200 --> 00:08:13,240 they're obviously nowhere near as contentious as this one. 124 00:08:13,560 --> 00:08:15,680 How quickly do people actually upgrade? 125 00:08:17,400 --> 00:08:20,500 Oftentimes, people aren't rushing to upgrade. 126 00:08:20,840 --> 00:08:25,080 Just realistically, like, you... 127 00:08:25,080 --> 00:08:28,000 The way Bitcoin Core version releases work is every six months, 128 00:08:28,560 --> 00:08:29,220 they just... 129 00:08:29,220 --> 00:08:30,720 Because Bitcoin is a never-ending project. 130 00:08:30,900 --> 00:08:32,680 It's not like they're trying to hit quarterly earnings 131 00:08:32,680 --> 00:08:33,640 or trying to do something. 132 00:08:33,760 --> 00:08:36,680 So they set a rough heuristic that every six months, 133 00:08:36,880 --> 00:08:38,900 we're just going to take everything that's been merged 134 00:08:38,900 --> 00:08:41,520 in the past six months and tag that into a release. 135 00:08:42,620 --> 00:08:44,980 Most of the time, unless there's like a brand new feature 136 00:08:44,980 --> 00:08:45,780 you're looking for, 137 00:08:46,480 --> 00:08:48,300 you're not rushing to update right away. 138 00:08:48,400 --> 00:08:50,120 The beauty of Bitcoin is that it's backwards compatible 139 00:08:50,120 --> 00:08:52,840 and that you can run an older version of the Node software. 140 00:08:53,880 --> 00:08:55,480 The Bitcoin Core team, though, 141 00:08:55,900 --> 00:09:00,080 will actually do patches like a minor release. 142 00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:02,800 So instead of like version 28, it'll be 28.1. 143 00:09:02,980 --> 00:09:05,300 They'll do minor releases backdating. 144 00:09:05,440 --> 00:09:07,460 So if they make a security fix in version 30, 145 00:09:07,840 --> 00:09:10,260 they'll go back to version 29 and 28 146 00:09:10,260 --> 00:09:11,840 and also patch those up as well. 147 00:09:12,360 --> 00:09:13,700 So the kind of standard, 148 00:09:13,820 --> 00:09:16,060 you can do it from like a end of life support 149 00:09:16,060 --> 00:09:18,600 or like the three most recent versions, 150 00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:21,900 Whatever's the most recent and the two previous ones are the ones that get patched. 151 00:09:21,980 --> 00:09:27,940 So now there's a version 28.3, which has all of the security patches from version 30, right? 152 00:09:29,320 --> 00:09:31,220 Typically, it doesn't go this fast. 153 00:09:31,300 --> 00:09:34,720 I think, in particular, this release has gotten so much attention. 154 00:09:35,360 --> 00:09:39,520 People that wanted to signal support for Core may have upgraded sooner, 155 00:09:40,100 --> 00:09:45,360 just like people were upgrading to run the latest version of Knots to signal that support. 156 00:09:45,360 --> 00:09:50,640 so I would say it's happened way faster than normal but I don't have the hard data in front 157 00:09:50,640 --> 00:09:54,660 of me for how long that usually takes. This episode is brought to you by AnchorWatch. 158 00:09:55,000 --> 00:09:59,320 The thing that keeps me up at night is the idea of a critical error with my Bitcoin cold storage 159 00:09:59,320 --> 00:10:03,680 and this is where AnchorWatch comes in. With AnchorWatch your Bitcoin is insured with your 160 00:10:03,680 --> 00:10:08,960 own A-plus rated Lloyds of London insurance policy and all Bitcoin is held in their time-locked 161 00:10:08,960 --> 00:10:13,260 multi-sig vaults. So you have the peace of mind knowing your Bitcoin is insured while not giving 162 00:10:13,260 --> 00:10:17,600 up custody. So whether you're worried about inheritance planning, wrench attacks, natural 163 00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:22,860 disasters or just your own silly mistakes, you're protected by Anchor Watch. Rates for fully insured 164 00:10:22,860 --> 00:10:28,440 custody start as low as 0.55% and are available for individual and commercial customers located in 165 00:10:28,440 --> 00:10:33,220 the US. Speak to Anchor Watch for a quote and for more details about your security options and 166 00:10:33,220 --> 00:10:39,600 coverage. Visit anchorwatch.com today. That is anchorwatch.com. Do you wish you could access cash 167 00:10:39,600 --> 00:10:44,360 without selling your Bitcoin. Well, Ledin makes that possible. They're the global leader in Bitcoin 168 00:10:44,360 --> 00:10:49,240 backed lending and since 2018, they've issued over $9 billion in loans with a perfect record 169 00:10:49,240 --> 00:10:54,320 of protecting client assets. With Ledin, you get full custody loans with no credit checks or 170 00:10:54,320 --> 00:11:00,560 monthly repayments, just easy access to dollars without selling a single sat. As of July 1st, 171 00:11:00,560 --> 00:11:05,240 Ledin is Bitcoin only, meaning they exclusively offer Bitcoin backed loans with all collateral 172 00:11:05,240 --> 00:11:10,780 held by Ledin directly or their funding partners. Your Bitcoin is never lent out to generate interest. 173 00:11:11,520 --> 00:11:15,940 I recently took out a loan with Ledin. The whole process was super easy. The application took me 174 00:11:15,940 --> 00:11:20,500 less than 15 minutes and in a few hours I had the dollars in my account. It was really smooth. 175 00:11:21,140 --> 00:11:26,540 So if you need cash but you don't want to sell Bitcoin, head over to ledin.io forward slash WBD 176 00:11:26,540 --> 00:11:33,640 and you'll get 0.25% off your first loan. That's ledin.io forward slash WBD. If you already self 177 00:11:33,640 --> 00:11:38,240 custody of Bitcoin, you know the deal with hardware wallets. Complex setups, clumsy interfaces, 178 00:11:38,600 --> 00:11:43,920 and a seed phrase that can be lost, stolen, or forgotten. Well, BitKey fixes that. BitKey is a 179 00:11:43,920 --> 00:11:48,640 multi-sig hardware wallet built by the team behind Square and Cash App. It packs a cryptographic 180 00:11:48,640 --> 00:11:53,700 recovery system and built-in inheritance feature into an intuitive, easy-to-use wallet with no 181 00:11:53,700 --> 00:11:59,780 seed phrase to sweat over. It's simple, secure self-custody without the stress. And Time named 182 00:11:59,780 --> 00:12:06,740 BitKey one of the best inventions of 2024. Get 20% off at bitkey.world when you use the code WBD. 183 00:12:07,280 --> 00:12:15,460 That's B-I-T-K-E-Y dot world and use the code WBD. Okay, and then so this is now being proposed, 184 00:12:15,600 --> 00:12:24,980 is it bit444, is that correct? It's not technically correct. And so to explain this, 185 00:12:24,980 --> 00:12:29,520 Luke is the original maintainer of the BIF repo, 186 00:12:29,520 --> 00:12:31,480 the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal Repo. 187 00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:33,480 He was assigned that, I believe, by Gregory Maxwell 188 00:12:33,480 --> 00:12:35,980 back in, like, 2010 or 2011. 189 00:12:35,980 --> 00:12:38,780 For the... Amir Takhi put... for the initial BIP, 190 00:12:38,780 --> 00:12:40,080 someone had to maintain it. 191 00:12:40,080 --> 00:12:42,780 They... Luke took that job. 192 00:12:42,780 --> 00:12:47,080 A little over a year ago, a couple other maintainers were added 193 00:12:47,080 --> 00:12:49,080 because Luke was so busy, he's only one person. 194 00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:50,880 They wanted to have more support structure 195 00:12:50,880 --> 00:12:52,880 to be able to assign BIPs and do things. 196 00:12:52,880 --> 00:12:58,480 there was an internal message among the BIP maintainers saying, 197 00:12:58,740 --> 00:13:01,120 should this be BIP444? 198 00:13:01,260 --> 00:13:03,600 And they have an internal process where they say, 199 00:13:03,980 --> 00:13:05,320 okay, I want to sit and listen. 200 00:13:05,480 --> 00:13:07,360 And if anyone has objections, let us know. 201 00:13:07,400 --> 00:13:09,020 And if there's an objection, we won't give it the number. 202 00:13:09,500 --> 00:13:13,680 Luke saw this internal discussion and assigned BIP444, 203 00:13:13,760 --> 00:13:15,660 kind of jumping the process. 204 00:13:15,660 --> 00:13:17,160 So it's not officially signed it. 205 00:13:18,040 --> 00:13:21,260 444 is a really catchy way just to surmise what's going on, though. 206 00:13:21,260 --> 00:13:23,520 so memetically it's already been assigned that, 207 00:13:23,640 --> 00:13:27,560 but I know some of the other BIP maintainers are frustrated 208 00:13:27,560 --> 00:13:29,260 that it was prematurely assigned a number, 209 00:13:29,680 --> 00:13:32,680 especially when Luke is so closely tied to this. 210 00:13:32,760 --> 00:13:34,860 There's a rule that you really can't self-assign a BIP number, 211 00:13:35,440 --> 00:13:38,660 and Luke is the original draft of this BIP, 212 00:13:38,740 --> 00:13:42,260 so it's kind of in the gray area of self-assigning a BIP, 213 00:13:42,580 --> 00:13:43,860 even if he's not the literal offer. 214 00:13:44,500 --> 00:13:47,680 But even, like, I understand what you're saying there, 215 00:13:47,720 --> 00:13:49,220 but really, who cares about the number? 216 00:13:49,220 --> 00:13:51,260 but that's not the important signal here. 217 00:13:51,440 --> 00:13:53,760 Like what they're claiming is, 218 00:13:53,980 --> 00:13:56,240 this is like an emergency soft fork 219 00:13:56,240 --> 00:13:57,800 that needs to happen quite quickly. 220 00:13:57,980 --> 00:13:59,800 What do they actually want to include in that? 221 00:14:01,100 --> 00:14:02,880 Yeah, so this- 222 00:14:02,880 --> 00:14:04,240 Well, actually, probably a better way of framing that 223 00:14:04,240 --> 00:14:05,260 is what do they want to take out? 224 00:14:05,880 --> 00:14:07,240 So what they want to take out, 225 00:14:07,500 --> 00:14:09,360 let me just read it through here. 226 00:14:09,360 --> 00:14:13,780 The first one is op returns that are less than 83 bytes. 227 00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:16,000 83 bytes or less, right? 228 00:14:16,000 --> 00:14:23,660 So making the previous, before version 30, relay policy, making that consensus enforced, 229 00:14:23,820 --> 00:14:25,120 of 83 bytes being the maximum. 230 00:14:28,600 --> 00:14:34,240 Pushing data, I'm going to speak not in the literal technical terms, but just talk about 231 00:14:34,240 --> 00:14:34,880 the spirit of it. 232 00:14:35,520 --> 00:14:45,340 Basically, any sort of pushing of payloads that are larger than 256 bytes, which is how 233 00:14:45,340 --> 00:14:46,580 you push data onto the stack 234 00:14:46,580 --> 00:14:49,580 unless you're using 235 00:14:49,580 --> 00:14:51,560 an old legacy 236 00:14:51,560 --> 00:14:52,260 multisig. 237 00:14:53,120 --> 00:14:55,720 This is basically what they're trying to take out is how 238 00:14:55,720 --> 00:14:57,320 inscriptions people 239 00:14:57,320 --> 00:14:58,700 put a lot of data on chain. 240 00:14:59,680 --> 00:15:01,380 They put it 520 bytes 241 00:15:01,380 --> 00:15:03,420 at a time. They have decided 242 00:15:03,420 --> 00:15:05,440 Dathan and Luke and whoever 243 00:15:05,440 --> 00:15:07,460 helped write this bit has decided that 256 244 00:15:07,460 --> 00:15:09,380 bytes is 245 00:15:09,380 --> 00:15:11,320 not valid. That's 246 00:15:11,320 --> 00:15:13,500 the size of a key. So they're saying basically 247 00:15:13,500 --> 00:15:15,080 you can push keys in the stack. You can't push it. 248 00:15:15,080 --> 00:15:16,720 whatever random other stuff you want on the stack. 249 00:15:17,420 --> 00:15:21,700 They are also making invalid unspecified taproot, 250 00:15:21,860 --> 00:15:24,220 like script versions and tapleaf versions. 251 00:15:25,720 --> 00:15:29,680 So Segwit introduced these upgrade hooks 252 00:15:29,680 --> 00:15:30,920 and mechanisms to upgrade scripts, 253 00:15:30,980 --> 00:15:31,980 and we turned on taproot. 254 00:15:32,240 --> 00:15:36,540 We turned on Segwit v1 is a taproot address. 255 00:15:36,780 --> 00:15:39,020 They want to disable all of the ones that are undefined 256 00:15:39,020 --> 00:15:40,940 as well as all of the taproot tapleafs. 257 00:15:40,940 --> 00:15:42,800 They want to disable the taproot annex, 258 00:15:43,040 --> 00:15:44,580 which is a place where you can park data. 259 00:15:45,080 --> 00:15:51,580 Intentionally, it was thought to be able to be part of just over time, wanting to be able to have data to commit for... 260 00:15:51,580 --> 00:15:54,980 You can use it for, like, lightning symmetry. You can use it for, like, lightning protocol stuff. 261 00:15:55,060 --> 00:15:57,320 No one's using it today, though. So that's marked invalid. 262 00:15:58,120 --> 00:16:02,340 All of the op-success opcodes, which are basically how you do upgrades in TapScript. 263 00:16:02,700 --> 00:16:06,460 So if this were to activate, we could not upgrade Bitcoin for the next year. 264 00:16:06,580 --> 00:16:07,880 We couldn't add any new opcodes. 265 00:16:08,760 --> 00:16:13,800 And also removing op-if and op-not-if from Taproot. 266 00:16:13,800 --> 00:16:20,640 so you can't actually use any sort of if-then conditions within a tap leaf. 267 00:16:21,080 --> 00:16:24,620 The logic behind this is that if you're using an if branch, 268 00:16:25,140 --> 00:16:28,280 you could just make a new tap leaf that has the full condition over there. 269 00:16:28,400 --> 00:16:30,280 This is how taproot works where you can have one address 270 00:16:30,280 --> 00:16:32,340 that has many, many, many ways you can spend from it. 271 00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:35,800 Their rationale is if you're using a different spending condition, 272 00:16:36,080 --> 00:16:37,840 you don't need to use opif or notif. 273 00:16:37,880 --> 00:16:39,400 You can just use a different tap leaf. 274 00:16:39,400 --> 00:16:41,860 So that is the general summary. 275 00:16:41,860 --> 00:16:46,800 the ultimate target for that one is stopping the inscription envelope for how all of the ordinal 276 00:16:46,800 --> 00:16:52,220 inscriptions were being done. Okay. I want to get into some of what that actually means technically, 277 00:16:52,480 --> 00:16:56,420 but before we do that, I think the important thing to address here is that they're claiming 278 00:16:56,420 --> 00:17:01,480 that this is a temporary soft fork. Correct. And this will run for 12 months and then everything 279 00:17:01,480 --> 00:17:08,620 reverts to how Bitcoin works today, as far as I understand it. Yes. I mean, we're going to get 280 00:17:08,620 --> 00:17:10,540 into whether you think this fork will even happen or not. 281 00:17:10,600 --> 00:17:11,960 But if the fork happened, 282 00:17:12,780 --> 00:17:14,720 how much, like what odds would you ascribe 283 00:17:14,720 --> 00:17:15,820 to the fact that this is temporary, 284 00:17:15,940 --> 00:17:16,840 not a permanent thing? 285 00:17:17,600 --> 00:17:19,700 Oh, 100% it would be temporary 286 00:17:19,700 --> 00:17:22,020 because the idea would be this activation client 287 00:17:22,020 --> 00:17:24,280 would self-turn off the rules in a year. 288 00:17:24,820 --> 00:17:27,340 Now, what would happen is six months from now, 289 00:17:27,540 --> 00:17:28,220 there would be another, 290 00:17:28,440 --> 00:17:30,320 let's assume this activates six months from now, 291 00:17:30,720 --> 00:17:31,900 there's going to be another question of, 292 00:17:32,020 --> 00:17:32,880 do we extend this? 293 00:17:33,380 --> 00:17:35,780 But the default behavior will be deactivating. 294 00:17:35,780 --> 00:17:42,060 um so i think being as charitable as possible taking them at their literal word and how the 295 00:17:42,060 --> 00:17:49,220 code works it would by default if nothing else happens turn off in a year okay fair um and then 296 00:17:49,220 --> 00:17:53,760 let's get into the what this actually kind of stops in bitcoin so clearly what they've done 297 00:17:53,760 --> 00:17:58,700 is they've gone through every single place where you can put arbitrary data on chain and remove 298 00:17:58,700 --> 00:18:04,980 that ability but what implications does that have on how bitcoin actually works today um well a 299 00:18:04,980 --> 00:18:05,720 couple of things. 300 00:18:06,920 --> 00:18:08,800 There are users 301 00:18:08,800 --> 00:18:11,040 who are using Bitcoin 302 00:18:11,040 --> 00:18:13,220 today that fall 303 00:18:13,220 --> 00:18:15,320 into some of these categories that get invalidated. 304 00:18:16,880 --> 00:18:18,940 One of the prominent examples 305 00:18:18,940 --> 00:18:21,000 is Liana 306 00:18:21,000 --> 00:18:23,320 Wallet. This is 307 00:18:23,320 --> 00:18:24,900 they, I'm wearing 308 00:18:24,900 --> 00:18:26,760 my Miniscript shirt today. They use 309 00:18:26,760 --> 00:18:28,760 Miniscript with Taproot. 310 00:18:29,280 --> 00:18:30,580 And with Taproot, 311 00:18:31,000 --> 00:18:32,980 you can, they're, some of the 312 00:18:32,980 --> 00:18:34,900 versions of how they actually use the different Tap 313 00:18:34,900 --> 00:18:36,640 believes actually uses op-if and not-if. 314 00:18:36,840 --> 00:18:39,940 Because actually, you can save on fees 315 00:18:39,940 --> 00:18:41,000 and have a smaller transaction 316 00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:42,420 if you use an op-if or not-if. 317 00:18:42,800 --> 00:18:44,320 That actually is a way you can save money 318 00:18:44,320 --> 00:18:45,960 without going into the mechanics 319 00:18:45,960 --> 00:18:47,660 of the taproot control block and all that. 320 00:18:48,020 --> 00:18:49,540 There are cases where you actually 321 00:18:49,540 --> 00:18:50,980 have a smaller transaction 322 00:18:50,980 --> 00:18:52,900 and less data on-chain if you use an op-if. 323 00:18:54,680 --> 00:18:56,900 And that would be... 324 00:18:57,800 --> 00:18:59,320 Now, this is a contentious term. 325 00:18:59,580 --> 00:19:00,820 Some would say confiscatory. 326 00:19:01,960 --> 00:19:03,420 Technically, since it's only for a year, 327 00:19:03,420 --> 00:19:06,180 you're just freezing customers' funds for a year. You're not confiscating them. 328 00:19:08,580 --> 00:19:11,540 There are people who also use- 329 00:19:11,540 --> 00:19:14,080 Personally, I don't see a huge distinction between those two things. 330 00:19:14,260 --> 00:19:18,400 Like the thing that Bitcoin does is enshrines property rights. 331 00:19:18,700 --> 00:19:19,440 And if you're- 332 00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:19,460 Absolutely. 333 00:19:20,160 --> 00:19:24,760 Arbitrary, well, if you're purposefully freezing someone's funds for 12 months, 334 00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:27,960 that is a complete line for me. Like that's unacceptable. 335 00:19:28,960 --> 00:19:29,420 I would agree. 336 00:19:29,420 --> 00:19:33,800 That's if people are using Taproot today in this particular way. 337 00:19:34,340 --> 00:19:38,000 Certain Taproot could, yeah, not everything in Taproot, just certain ways people use Taproot. 338 00:19:38,000 --> 00:19:39,340 But people are using it this way right now, correct? 339 00:19:39,960 --> 00:19:40,080 Yeah. 340 00:19:40,100 --> 00:19:45,280 And so if anyone who is doing that, if this fork happens, those funds are frozen for a minimum of 12 months. 341 00:19:46,000 --> 00:19:46,180 Yeah. 342 00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:48,620 I mean, it's hard. 343 00:19:48,700 --> 00:19:52,000 This is where it gets a little bit tricky because I understand this is a soft fork. 344 00:19:52,180 --> 00:19:56,000 It's backwards compatible in the sense that old nodes will still be able to run. 345 00:19:56,000 --> 00:20:02,200 But have we ever had a soft fork before where funds can be frozen if you're using Bitcoin in a particular way? 346 00:20:02,520 --> 00:20:05,020 So there's one example. 347 00:20:05,640 --> 00:20:07,680 Let me answer that question and go back a step. 348 00:20:07,860 --> 00:20:17,760 So to answer that question, I think the only corollary I've been able to think of is back in 2010, Satoshi changed. 349 00:20:19,140 --> 00:20:21,520 He had a commit called MISC changes. 350 00:20:22,320 --> 00:20:36,908 And in there he actually disabled a bunch of opcodes the thing is no one was using them this is your opcat cat your ups op substring like multiplication division like he had all these other op codes that he disabled but no one had 351 00:20:36,908 --> 00:20:43,607 ever used them before and when you say no one do you literally mean no one no one no okay no one 352 00:20:43,607 --> 00:20:49,027 had ever used any of them because this is like this is in 2010 right like there was not as much 353 00:20:49,027 --> 00:20:57,207 developer mind share and like good tooling to do different things in Bitcoin. So no one had ever 354 00:20:57,207 --> 00:21:04,068 used any of these. And that's probably the closest. We disabled a bunch of things, but no one was 355 00:21:04,068 --> 00:21:07,947 using them. And it was a fraction of a fraction of the market cap of what it was today. Right. 356 00:21:07,947 --> 00:21:13,328 But with things like SegWit and Taproot, there was no, there was never a potential for that to 357 00:21:13,328 --> 00:21:17,607 freeze users' funds. So this would be like really discarding that first one, which was very early 358 00:21:17,607 --> 00:21:20,928 days this would be the first time that had ever happened and that kind of calls into question like 359 00:21:20,928 --> 00:21:26,987 i understand it's a soft fork but that doesn't feel like a soft fork to me that that isn't fully 360 00:21:26,987 --> 00:21:32,588 backwards compatible in that sense so let me um so two things before we go deeper about what a soft 361 00:21:32,588 --> 00:21:41,027 fork is um there is a clause uh dathan had updated getting feedback from people that there is basically 362 00:21:41,027 --> 00:21:46,428 an exemption for if a UTXO was made before this activates, 363 00:21:46,807 --> 00:21:49,627 you can spend the money out of that one time. 364 00:21:50,447 --> 00:21:52,668 So in theory, I could have my money frozen. 365 00:21:52,987 --> 00:21:55,967 I get one transaction to pull it out. 366 00:21:56,447 --> 00:21:58,487 It's technically complicated because if, let's say, 367 00:21:58,607 --> 00:22:00,787 if I have 10 Bitcoin at one of these addresses 368 00:22:00,787 --> 00:22:02,828 and I send one Bitcoin to you, 369 00:22:03,088 --> 00:22:05,747 I send nine Bitcoin back to myself and change, 370 00:22:06,148 --> 00:22:07,328 which means that nine Bitcoin, 371 00:22:07,467 --> 00:22:08,967 which usually has the same spending rules, 372 00:22:08,967 --> 00:22:11,607 would just get frozen for the year. 373 00:22:12,088 --> 00:22:14,027 So that's one piece to call out. 374 00:22:15,088 --> 00:22:15,947 But you can get around that 375 00:22:15,947 --> 00:22:17,727 by just sending it to yourself in a different... 376 00:22:17,727 --> 00:22:19,688 Yeah, you would do a full send to a new wallet, 377 00:22:20,068 --> 00:22:21,487 and then you can get around that. 378 00:22:22,588 --> 00:22:23,987 Now, for what a soft fork is, 379 00:22:24,068 --> 00:22:24,908 this is a soft fork. 380 00:22:25,507 --> 00:22:27,447 It is a restriction of the rules. 381 00:22:27,967 --> 00:22:30,727 Typically, the way soft forks are thought of in Bitcoin 382 00:22:30,727 --> 00:22:33,027 is that you take an opcode, 383 00:22:33,987 --> 00:22:36,267 let's say, like we added time locks. 384 00:22:36,767 --> 00:22:40,807 Peter Todd got time locks added in 2014. 385 00:22:41,807 --> 00:22:45,188 What we did to turn that on is we took an opcode 386 00:22:45,188 --> 00:22:48,747 that previously all it did was automatically pass. 387 00:22:49,088 --> 00:22:51,068 So it was the most permissive thing ever. 388 00:22:51,148 --> 00:22:53,148 We said instead of just pass no matter what, 389 00:22:53,487 --> 00:22:56,527 let's encode rules that enforce time lock logic, right? 390 00:22:56,527 --> 00:22:58,388 So you're taking this like infinite possibility 391 00:22:58,388 --> 00:23:00,047 and you're constraining it. 392 00:23:00,367 --> 00:23:02,607 That's a way of doing a soft fork. 393 00:23:02,967 --> 00:23:04,487 All of this is technically a soft fork 394 00:23:04,487 --> 00:23:04,908 because you're saying, 395 00:23:04,908 --> 00:23:07,388 hey, this thing that allows you to do things 396 00:23:07,388 --> 00:23:08,428 now can't do anything. 397 00:23:08,588 --> 00:23:10,588 So you're kind of like shutting it off. 398 00:23:12,267 --> 00:23:14,568 So it's technically a soft fork. 399 00:23:14,668 --> 00:23:15,507 I think to your point, though, 400 00:23:15,527 --> 00:23:17,688 we usually associate the reason 401 00:23:17,688 --> 00:23:19,767 why we prefer soft forks over hard forks 402 00:23:19,767 --> 00:23:22,707 is the maintaining of user rights 403 00:23:22,707 --> 00:23:24,627 and not breaking user space. 404 00:23:25,007 --> 00:23:26,987 Like that's a term that's a classic 405 00:23:26,987 --> 00:23:28,867 from just open source development 406 00:23:28,867 --> 00:23:30,987 is not breaking user space. 407 00:23:31,127 --> 00:23:33,107 You want to specifically make sure 408 00:23:33,107 --> 00:23:34,527 that you're not doing anything 409 00:23:34,527 --> 00:23:39,127 when you change the software that takes existing users property rights and infringes upon them 410 00:23:39,127 --> 00:23:45,148 and there's probably no software project in history more important in that sense than bitcoin um 411 00:23:45,148 --> 00:23:51,367 so where are we at with this because like obviously nots got a decent amount of people 412 00:23:51,367 --> 00:23:55,127 really hard to know how many how many bitcoiners were actually sort of supportive nots but if you 413 00:23:55,127 --> 00:24:00,767 just go from like node count as an example it's roughly 20 percent um obviously not all those 414 00:24:00,767 --> 00:24:05,388 people will be on board with the soft fork so let's say it gets like 15 percent of traction 10 415 00:24:05,388 --> 00:24:14,068 15 percent of traction like what happens then so um the fork would activate at a certain block height 416 00:24:14,068 --> 00:24:21,707 i am taking the proposal as it's written right now uh dathan has already talked about changing 417 00:24:21,707 --> 00:24:27,007 when it activates and other details which i think is just ill-advised if you're saying 418 00:24:27,007 --> 00:24:28,547 hey, I'm putting out some code, 419 00:24:28,888 --> 00:24:31,107 you'd be expecting, like, you have to now coordinate it. 420 00:24:31,367 --> 00:24:34,347 His proposal currently is February 1st. 421 00:24:34,547 --> 00:24:36,727 A block height that's roughly February 1st, right? 422 00:24:36,747 --> 00:24:39,428 Because block time is never exactly over 10 minutes. 423 00:24:39,588 --> 00:24:41,668 But if you, so February 1st, roughly, 424 00:24:42,188 --> 00:24:43,227 is when this would activate. 425 00:24:43,928 --> 00:24:48,027 And what would happen is that you would now have 426 00:24:48,027 --> 00:24:51,107 certain nodes on the network when a miner finds a block. 427 00:24:51,727 --> 00:24:54,588 The question is, that block that comes in, 428 00:24:54,588 --> 00:24:57,487 is it following BIP4444 rules? 429 00:24:58,328 --> 00:25:01,568 Is it following the rules of the new client? 430 00:25:01,747 --> 00:25:04,168 If so, nothing's changed. 431 00:25:05,068 --> 00:25:07,447 Where you would have something called a chain split 432 00:25:07,447 --> 00:25:10,388 is that let's say the miners have not upgraded 433 00:25:10,388 --> 00:25:12,408 and a new block gets produced, 434 00:25:13,068 --> 00:25:14,367 you would have a chain split 435 00:25:14,367 --> 00:25:19,607 because the 444 nodes would reject that block 436 00:25:19,607 --> 00:25:21,947 saying it's invalid because it violates one of these rules. 437 00:25:22,648 --> 00:25:24,568 And because it violates one of these rules, 438 00:25:24,588 --> 00:25:29,928 you would be in a position where some nodes on the network would accept the block and some would not. 439 00:25:31,287 --> 00:25:34,967 And at that point, it becomes a question for the miners, 440 00:25:35,408 --> 00:25:39,867 what block chain tip, the most recent block, are they going to build on? 441 00:25:40,408 --> 00:25:43,027 Miners can only build on one blockchain at a time. 442 00:25:43,467 --> 00:25:46,047 They can't dual mine two different ones. 443 00:25:46,588 --> 00:25:50,227 So you would then have a conundrum of what would happen. 444 00:25:50,388 --> 00:25:52,047 And there's a bunch of game theory we can go through there, 445 00:25:52,047 --> 00:25:56,568 But that would be the decision point is a new block would get found if this activation client launched. 446 00:25:57,068 --> 00:25:59,007 The code has been released. 447 00:26:00,307 --> 00:26:13,227 Funny enough, like Bitcoin technical lore, it was the code was pushed to the UASF organization, which is where in 2017, Shaolin Fry put out the UASF client. 448 00:26:14,828 --> 00:26:19,928 So this same exact repo that hasn't been touched in eight years had just gotten an update with this new code. 449 00:26:21,127 --> 00:26:21,568 Yeah. 450 00:26:22,047 --> 00:26:32,987 I would speculate that someone who previously was involved with the UASF efforts, which Luke is known to have been involved in those, would have given up access to the org to let Dathan push that code. 451 00:26:33,408 --> 00:26:34,227 I don't know. 452 00:26:34,627 --> 00:26:39,987 But that would be a reasonable straight line suspicion because Luke was a very big proponent in putting forward the UASF client. 453 00:26:41,207 --> 00:26:46,188 Yeah, I mean, we obviously, we can't know, but that seems like an easy conclusion to draw. 454 00:26:46,828 --> 00:26:46,987 Right. 455 00:26:46,987 --> 00:26:59,107 So if that happened and obviously a proportion of the hash rate would likely go to this new version, like you would imagine some of the ocean miners would probably move over. 456 00:27:01,928 --> 00:27:07,568 Obviously, this is kind of, oh, do we get to the point where this is just like longest chain tip wins? 457 00:27:07,568 --> 00:27:12,747 or what happens if, say, 30 blocks get added to Bitcoin as we know it today 458 00:27:12,747 --> 00:27:18,408 and then 30 blocks later another one is found on Bitcoin 444 version? 459 00:27:19,247 --> 00:27:21,867 So that's an important distinction, right? 460 00:27:21,967 --> 00:27:25,347 To make the math easy, let's just say it's at block height 100. 461 00:27:25,987 --> 00:27:27,828 So at block height 100, let's say we're going back, 462 00:27:27,928 --> 00:27:30,148 like it's at block height 100 just to make the numbers easier to say. 463 00:27:30,487 --> 00:27:32,648 At block height 100, this activates. 464 00:27:33,507 --> 00:27:37,188 And let's say we get to block 130 with these new rules. 465 00:27:37,568 --> 00:27:41,047 Block 131, even if it is BIP444 compliant, 466 00:27:41,947 --> 00:27:43,688 the BIP444 nodes are going to reject it 467 00:27:43,688 --> 00:27:47,267 because blocks 100 through 130 are invalid. 468 00:27:47,428 --> 00:27:49,627 So what you would actually have is two separate chains being built. 469 00:27:49,627 --> 00:27:50,027 Yeah. 470 00:27:50,568 --> 00:27:53,707 And the question then becomes, 471 00:27:53,987 --> 00:27:58,727 where is the hash rate and the mining pools actually working on? 472 00:27:59,047 --> 00:28:02,668 The only public statement we've gotten from any mining pool 473 00:28:02,668 --> 00:28:06,287 is F2 pool, which is 12% of the network, 474 00:28:06,287 --> 00:28:07,908 has said they're not going to run this. 475 00:28:09,207 --> 00:28:09,688 Right? 476 00:28:11,648 --> 00:28:13,347 The game theory, though, would be, 477 00:28:13,668 --> 00:28:15,987 and this is for me to charitably steel-man 478 00:28:15,987 --> 00:28:18,767 the proponents of the UASF, 479 00:28:18,888 --> 00:28:21,227 this UASF's proponents to champion it, 480 00:28:21,287 --> 00:28:21,947 like steel-man it, 481 00:28:22,307 --> 00:28:24,507 is that even if initially 482 00:28:24,507 --> 00:28:30,088 the UASF chain does not have enough hash rate, 483 00:28:30,648 --> 00:28:33,247 there is a game-theoretic outcome 484 00:28:33,247 --> 00:28:37,867 where because their rules are tighter 485 00:28:37,867 --> 00:28:40,507 and let's say like 10 blocks goes by, 486 00:28:41,148 --> 00:28:42,148 what you're going to have happen 487 00:28:42,148 --> 00:28:46,928 is that if the other miners went over to the UASF chain, 488 00:28:47,347 --> 00:28:52,727 they would basically roll back the entire non-UASF blockchain. 489 00:28:53,227 --> 00:28:54,507 Because what would happen is you, 490 00:28:54,668 --> 00:28:55,908 let's say those 30 blocks get found 491 00:28:55,908 --> 00:28:57,908 and then all the miners push over to the other side 492 00:28:57,908 --> 00:28:59,748 and they start mining and catching up 493 00:28:59,748 --> 00:29:01,827 and that becomes the longest chain tip. 494 00:29:02,607 --> 00:29:04,467 the 30 blocks that were mined 495 00:29:04,467 --> 00:29:06,967 violating the USF rules disappear 496 00:29:06,967 --> 00:29:08,707 because all the nodes reject them 497 00:29:08,707 --> 00:29:09,467 and they're no longer invalid. 498 00:29:09,547 --> 00:29:10,827 This is what's called a reorg, 499 00:29:10,928 --> 00:29:11,928 a reorganization. 500 00:29:13,547 --> 00:29:15,087 Typically, it's never really talked about 501 00:29:15,087 --> 00:29:16,767 outside of like a 51% attack. 502 00:29:17,127 --> 00:29:18,928 Like you could have 51% of the hash rate, 503 00:29:19,327 --> 00:29:20,867 make your own blockchain over here 504 00:29:20,867 --> 00:29:21,827 and then publish it all. 505 00:29:21,967 --> 00:29:22,928 And then you would wipe out 506 00:29:22,928 --> 00:29:23,727 all of the transactions 507 00:29:23,727 --> 00:29:24,748 that happen on the other chain. 508 00:29:25,527 --> 00:29:26,547 The game theory though, 509 00:29:26,547 --> 00:29:28,027 is if you're running a USF client, 510 00:29:28,267 --> 00:29:31,148 is that you're doing a tightening of the rules, 511 00:29:31,148 --> 00:29:33,888 which means that all blocks that you would find 512 00:29:33,888 --> 00:29:36,627 are also valid on the non-UASF nodes, 513 00:29:36,847 --> 00:29:38,947 and that's where you can get this reorg dynamic to happen. 514 00:29:40,307 --> 00:29:42,707 It's really a question of how attach rate would be going over there, 515 00:29:43,068 --> 00:29:46,447 and I haven't seen any mining pool 516 00:29:46,447 --> 00:29:49,367 or large-scale miner come out in support of this yet. 517 00:29:50,107 --> 00:29:51,668 So if that did happen, though, 518 00:29:51,668 --> 00:29:54,347 would we be in for very large reorgs? 519 00:29:54,867 --> 00:29:55,087 Yeah. 520 00:29:55,928 --> 00:29:58,307 So then the question, it would be a very large reorg. 521 00:29:58,408 --> 00:30:00,068 Let's take that 30-block example, right? 522 00:30:00,527 --> 00:30:03,168 That would be a five-hour, roughly five-hour rework. 523 00:30:03,367 --> 00:30:06,207 If it's one block every 10 minutes, six blocks an hour, 524 00:30:06,327 --> 00:30:08,568 30 blocks is five hours, six times five is 30. 525 00:30:09,707 --> 00:30:12,787 That would be a five-hour rollback of the on-chain history. 526 00:30:13,168 --> 00:30:17,188 Now, what can be done as a counter to this 527 00:30:17,188 --> 00:30:20,068 is what's called a URSF, user-rejected soft fork. 528 00:30:20,767 --> 00:30:23,727 You effectively, what you could do is just pick a block 529 00:30:23,727 --> 00:30:26,787 after the UASF activates, find a block, 530 00:30:26,867 --> 00:30:29,188 and say we're checkpointing so that for this 531 00:30:29,188 --> 00:30:32,307 to be on my blockchain, at block height 101, 532 00:30:32,767 --> 00:30:34,367 you have to have this block hash. 533 00:30:34,607 --> 00:30:37,188 And this block hash violates the 444 rules. 534 00:30:37,287 --> 00:30:39,888 So you effectively then, if a URSF were to happen, 535 00:30:39,947 --> 00:30:41,047 that would permanently split the network. 536 00:30:41,408 --> 00:30:43,847 But to even put forward a URSF, 537 00:30:44,227 --> 00:30:45,428 you'd have to actually see a threat 538 00:30:45,428 --> 00:30:48,947 or a real credible demand for the UASF to begin with. 539 00:30:49,248 --> 00:30:51,107 And a reason to want to reject it. 540 00:30:51,107 --> 00:30:53,807 And I haven't, to be transparent, 541 00:30:53,928 --> 00:30:55,967 I haven't seen the support yet from anyone. 542 00:30:56,847 --> 00:30:58,347 So as it stands right now, 543 00:30:58,347 --> 00:31:00,807 Do you just think this will never happen? 544 00:31:01,727 --> 00:31:03,847 As of today, with the information I have, 545 00:31:03,928 --> 00:31:06,188 I don't see this happening. That's my personal opinion. 546 00:31:07,347 --> 00:31:13,188 I have tried gauging interest. 547 00:31:13,267 --> 00:31:14,767 And so... 548 00:31:16,227 --> 00:31:19,928 The last time a UASF that wasn't... 549 00:31:20,008 --> 00:31:24,307 A contentious UASF was proposed was back in 2017. 550 00:31:24,767 --> 00:31:26,467 This was called SegWit2x. 551 00:31:26,467 --> 00:31:29,447 it was basically a compromise with Usegwit 552 00:31:29,447 --> 00:31:30,607 and doubling the block size, right? 553 00:31:30,627 --> 00:31:31,508 It was a couple of things. 554 00:31:32,207 --> 00:31:35,347 And with Segwit2x, what you had happened was 555 00:31:35,347 --> 00:31:38,827 there was a lot of speculation on if this was going to happen or not. 556 00:31:39,267 --> 00:31:43,688 And then Bitfinex listed a futures market 557 00:31:43,688 --> 00:31:47,287 for what the price of this UASF token would be worth. 558 00:31:48,527 --> 00:31:50,227 It ultimately fizzled out. 559 00:31:50,367 --> 00:31:52,408 There was like, what people would do, just to be clear, 560 00:31:52,408 --> 00:31:53,928 is if you had one Bitcoin on Bitfinex, 561 00:31:54,248 --> 00:31:55,527 you'd have one Bitcoin, 562 00:31:55,527 --> 00:31:57,447 and you'd also get this future 563 00:31:57,447 --> 00:31:59,648 and you'd be able to sell that future 564 00:31:59,648 --> 00:32:00,347 and buy more Bitcoin. 565 00:32:01,168 --> 00:32:01,607 Right? 566 00:32:02,248 --> 00:32:04,227 And that was a strong signal 567 00:32:04,227 --> 00:32:07,027 because the miners are not going to want to mine 568 00:32:07,027 --> 00:32:09,688 on a blockchain where the token is worth less 569 00:32:09,688 --> 00:32:10,947 than the other chain. 570 00:32:11,027 --> 00:32:11,627 If you have a split 571 00:32:11,627 --> 00:32:12,787 and you have to figure out which is Bitcoin, 572 00:32:13,267 --> 00:32:15,008 the miners are more likely to build on the one 573 00:32:15,008 --> 00:32:16,008 that's going to make them more money. 574 00:32:16,347 --> 00:32:18,748 And if everyone's selling a UASF fork, 575 00:32:19,148 --> 00:32:19,707 they're not going to, 576 00:32:19,748 --> 00:32:21,047 even whatever reasons, 577 00:32:21,107 --> 00:32:22,068 they're not going to want to mine 578 00:32:22,068 --> 00:32:23,607 for 10 cents on the dollar. 579 00:32:24,107 --> 00:32:24,347 Right? 580 00:32:24,347 --> 00:32:27,388 So I've been trying to suss out. 581 00:32:27,508 --> 00:32:29,367 It's also just an expression of economic demand. 582 00:32:29,487 --> 00:32:30,688 You may hear the term economic nodes. 583 00:32:30,767 --> 00:32:33,807 It doesn't matter that you have 10,000 nodes spun up on AWS. 584 00:32:34,248 --> 00:32:40,127 It's how much throughput and how much validation is that node processing? 585 00:32:40,307 --> 00:32:43,347 So the nodes at Coinbase, way more important 586 00:32:43,347 --> 00:32:48,047 because those nodes are validating millions of Bitcoin in the UTXO set 587 00:32:48,047 --> 00:32:50,508 from everything they custody and have on their exchange. 588 00:32:50,787 --> 00:32:54,327 That is inherently more important than someone who just spun up a node on AWS 589 00:32:54,327 --> 00:32:56,027 and doesn't have any funds tied to it, right? 590 00:32:56,248 --> 00:32:58,787 And the expression of a futures market 591 00:32:58,787 --> 00:33:01,227 is the ability for economic actors to say, 592 00:33:01,327 --> 00:33:02,547 what do they value more? 593 00:33:02,928 --> 00:33:05,047 Miners can still choose to mine on whatever chain they want, 594 00:33:05,207 --> 00:33:08,487 but it gives them price information 595 00:33:08,487 --> 00:33:12,467 because the proposal of a user-activated software 596 00:33:12,467 --> 00:33:13,888 brings market uncertainty. 597 00:33:14,467 --> 00:33:16,047 You don't know which side's going to win. 598 00:33:16,327 --> 00:33:17,388 You don't know what's going to happen. 599 00:33:17,727 --> 00:33:19,527 Are people going to sell early because they're not sure? 600 00:33:19,527 --> 00:33:21,807 It provides a lot of instability, 601 00:33:22,008 --> 00:33:24,267 just uncertainty of Bitcoin as a network architect 602 00:33:24,267 --> 00:33:47,428 And that's usually what Bitcoin's prided on is like, TikTok, next block, every 10 minutes block's going to happen. And only in these kind of consensus fights do you have this uncertainty. And the futures market is a way to try and price that uncertainty. It also gives an option for if you are a believer in this user activated software, the only way today that you can buy UASF Bitcoin is with the futures market because it doesn't exist on chain yet. 603 00:33:47,428 --> 00:33:52,347 So if you buy Bitcoin today, you are buying economic support for both chains. 604 00:33:52,388 --> 00:33:58,408 Because remember, in that block height 100 activation, let's say in block 99, you have 10 Bitcoin and there's a chain split. 605 00:33:58,648 --> 00:34:01,188 You get 10 Bitcoin on each side of the chain split. 606 00:34:01,947 --> 00:34:06,347 So if you buy Bitcoin, you're giving economic expression to the entire network. 607 00:34:06,347 --> 00:34:11,488 But if you want to explicitly signal, hey, I really want to support this UASF effort, 608 00:34:11,488 --> 00:34:17,127 the only way you can actually buy and show signal economic demand for that is through a futures 609 00:34:17,127 --> 00:34:22,968 market. What if you could lower your tax bill and stack Bitcoin at the same time? Well by mining 610 00:34:22,968 --> 00:34:28,387 Bitcoin with blockware you can. New tax guidelines from the big beautiful bill allow American miners 611 00:34:28,387 --> 00:34:33,808 to write off 100% of the cost of their mining hardware in a single tax year. That's right 100% 612 00:34:33,808 --> 00:34:39,367 write-off. So if you have $100,000 in capital gains or income you can purchase $100,000 of 613 00:34:39,367 --> 00:34:44,488 miners and offset it entirely. Blockware's mining as a service enables you to start mining Bitcoin 614 00:34:44,488 --> 00:34:49,367 right now without lifting a finger. Blockware handles everything from securing the miners to 615 00:34:49,367 --> 00:34:54,327 sourcing low-cost power to configuring the pool, they do it all. You get to stack Bitcoin at a 616 00:34:54,327 --> 00:35:00,008 discount every single day while also saving big come tax season. Get started today by going to 617 00:35:00,008 --> 00:35:06,227 mining.blockwaresolutions.com forward slash WBD. Of course none of this is tax advice, speak to your 618 00:35:06,227 --> 00:35:10,547 accountant or tax advisor to understand how these rules apply to you and then head over to 619 00:35:10,547 --> 00:35:16,188 mining.blockwaresolutions.com forward slash wbd and you'll get one week of free hosting and 620 00:35:16,188 --> 00:35:20,988 electricity with each hosted miner purchased. What Bitcoin did is brought to you by the massive 621 00:35:20,988 --> 00:35:27,527 legends Iron, the largest Nasdaq listed Bitcoin miner using 100% renewable energy. Iron are not 622 00:35:27,527 --> 00:35:32,027 just powering the Bitcoin network, they're also providing cutting-edge computing resources for AI 623 00:35:32,027 --> 00:35:36,148 all backed by renewable energy. We've been working with their founders Dan and Will for 624 00:35:36,148 --> 00:35:40,127 quite some time now and have been really impressed with their values especially their commitment to 625 00:35:40,127 --> 00:35:44,948 local communities and sustainable computing power. So whether you're interested in mining Bitcoin or 626 00:35:44,948 --> 00:35:50,227 harnessing AI compute power, IREN is setting the standard. Visit iren.com to learn more which is 627 00:35:50,227 --> 00:35:55,668 I-R-E-N.com. This episode is brought to you by River and they've just launched a very cool new 628 00:35:55,668 --> 00:36:01,008 product where you can automatically buy every price dip. Their zero fee recurring buys are a 629 00:36:01,008 --> 00:36:05,847 proven way to build wealth with Bitcoin and you can now supercharge them and buy up to 100% more 630 00:36:05,847 --> 00:36:11,008 Bitcoin if the price is dipping at the time of your order. It's a great tool to buy more Bitcoin 631 00:36:11,008 --> 00:36:16,948 at lower prices and while your cash is waiting to be deployed you earn 3.75% interest on it paid in 632 00:36:16,948 --> 00:36:22,248 Bitcoin. River is built to last with security at its core and is the only Bitcoin exchange in the 633 00:36:22,248 --> 00:36:28,727 US with proof of reserves. To open an account go to river.com forward slash wbd and earn up to $100 634 00:36:28,727 --> 00:36:35,047 in Bitcoin when you buy. That's river.com forward slash WBD. This episode is brought to you by 635 00:36:35,047 --> 00:36:40,387 Bitcoin Mina. On December 8th and 9th, I'll be in Abu Dhabi for Bitcoin Mina along with 10,000 636 00:36:40,387 --> 00:36:45,427 other Bitcoiners. There's an amazing lineup of over 200 speakers sharing Bitcoin insights and 637 00:36:45,427 --> 00:36:50,027 innovation from all over the world. And if you're looking for the ultimate VIP experience with 638 00:36:50,027 --> 00:36:55,508 exclusive networking plus premium food and drink, then grab the whale pass and the whale night party 639 00:36:55,508 --> 00:37:00,347 even include surfing so you know i'm going to be there tickets are on sale now use code wbd to get 640 00:37:00,347 --> 00:37:09,887 10 off at checkout on all past types the website is mina.b.tc and use code wbd for 10 off yeah so i 641 00:37:09,887 --> 00:37:15,407 was quite new to bitcoin in 2017 i got i got in in 2016 but i was pretty light touch and i was just 642 00:37:15,407 --> 00:37:20,527 following along sort of the tail end of the box size walls and it wasn't really until bitfinex 643 00:37:20,527 --> 00:37:25,047 launched that futures market and you could actually see where real demand was that i felt 644 00:37:25,047 --> 00:37:29,067 any kind of confidence in which way this was going to fall. And I find it funny that I've 645 00:37:29,067 --> 00:37:33,207 obviously seen you on Twitter trying to build these futures markets and trying to sort of go 646 00:37:33,207 --> 00:37:38,848 people into betting you. People are calling it like fiat games, but I think people either forget 647 00:37:38,848 --> 00:37:44,348 or don't understand that this was a really important dynamic in 2017. I think it's a thing 648 00:37:44,348 --> 00:37:51,027 that people in Bitcoin do where the term fiat, I get it sometimes with insurance. Insurance is fiat. 649 00:37:51,027 --> 00:37:53,768 It's like, well, insurance predates fiat by thousands of years. 650 00:37:54,188 --> 00:37:56,527 Sorry, like this predates fiat currency as a concept. 651 00:37:56,648 --> 00:37:59,547 You can't just call things you don't like or don't understand to be fiat. 652 00:37:59,727 --> 00:38:03,848 That's not how the etymology of words even mean anything, right? 653 00:38:05,527 --> 00:38:08,627 The futures market too, I think this is a really important point. 654 00:38:08,768 --> 00:38:14,968 I'll hammer it home again is that the only way today you can economically express interest 655 00:38:14,968 --> 00:38:19,027 to want to signal to miners that this is the chain that has more value 656 00:38:19,027 --> 00:38:22,207 before the fork happens is a futures market. 657 00:38:22,688 --> 00:38:24,127 If you buy Bitcoin today, 658 00:38:24,567 --> 00:38:27,387 you're economically supporting both sides of the chain. 659 00:38:27,587 --> 00:38:30,828 If you want to actually short the non-UASF chain 660 00:38:30,828 --> 00:38:34,328 and economically signal and support the UASF chain 661 00:38:34,328 --> 00:38:35,688 is a futures market. 662 00:38:35,688 --> 00:38:39,308 And miners, at the end of the day, are profit maximizing. 663 00:38:39,748 --> 00:38:42,828 That's just baked into being selfish and maximizing. 664 00:38:43,148 --> 00:38:45,027 That's just how Bitcoin works. 665 00:38:45,027 --> 00:38:51,907 And if you're going to actually want to try meaningfully sway your voice and consensus, 666 00:38:51,907 --> 00:38:52,867 that's an important thing. 667 00:38:52,907 --> 00:38:56,348 Because otherwise, what you're going to have happen is like when Bitcoin Cash forked off, 668 00:38:56,387 --> 00:38:57,788 which is unrelated to the futures market. 669 00:38:58,127 --> 00:39:01,587 But UASF was going to activate, and so Bitcoin Cash forked off. 670 00:39:01,887 --> 00:39:05,587 People just took their Bitcoin Cash chain, sold it, and bought more Bitcoin. 671 00:39:07,027 --> 00:39:10,727 So avoiding the futures market doesn't solve the problem. 672 00:39:11,567 --> 00:39:12,427 If the chain split happens, 673 00:39:12,927 --> 00:39:15,727 people will freely economically transact 674 00:39:15,727 --> 00:39:16,907 in their own self-interest, 675 00:39:17,288 --> 00:39:18,448 whether you like it or not. 676 00:39:18,768 --> 00:39:21,027 You want the futures market to exist 677 00:39:21,027 --> 00:39:23,668 because you want to avoid a messy breakup 678 00:39:23,668 --> 00:39:24,828 and a chain split and a divorce 679 00:39:24,828 --> 00:39:27,148 if it could be clearly economically signaled ahead of time. 680 00:39:28,007 --> 00:39:29,707 UASFs are a market uncertainty event. 681 00:39:29,948 --> 00:39:32,107 Futures markets bring price certainty to that, right? 682 00:39:33,007 --> 00:39:34,567 It's not gambling. 683 00:39:34,927 --> 00:39:35,828 It's interesting too, 684 00:39:35,828 --> 00:39:38,348 because as I've said here, 685 00:39:38,567 --> 00:39:40,127 I have very high conviction 686 00:39:40,127 --> 00:39:43,848 that it's not going to happen. 687 00:39:44,007 --> 00:39:45,707 So for me, I don't view it much as gambling. 688 00:39:46,487 --> 00:39:47,448 I view it as a certainty. 689 00:39:48,087 --> 00:39:49,848 And I've been very publicly transparent for... 690 00:39:50,648 --> 00:39:51,668 There are a lot... 691 00:39:51,668 --> 00:39:53,227 And this is the other thing too with a market signal. 692 00:39:53,547 --> 00:39:54,867 A lot of people will posture on Twitter, 693 00:39:54,987 --> 00:39:56,308 especially in the world and day now 694 00:39:56,308 --> 00:39:57,707 of like large language models 695 00:39:57,707 --> 00:39:59,607 and like the asymmetry of people can kind of like 696 00:39:59,607 --> 00:40:01,328 with a couple of lines of code 697 00:40:01,328 --> 00:40:02,707 make a really big social imprint. 698 00:40:04,047 --> 00:40:06,808 The LLM tokens can't actually participate 699 00:40:06,808 --> 00:40:08,927 in the futures market because you need Bitcoin, right? 700 00:40:08,927 --> 00:40:11,227 So actually having Bitcoin is how you actually express this. 701 00:40:12,047 --> 00:40:15,367 I built an on-chain futures market, 702 00:40:15,828 --> 00:40:16,927 which we don't have to get into, 703 00:40:16,987 --> 00:40:19,168 but it uses taproot and it uses op-not-if 704 00:40:19,168 --> 00:40:20,607 and you have different time locks. 705 00:40:20,788 --> 00:40:22,407 So you can, without a custodian, 706 00:40:23,127 --> 00:40:26,288 trustlessly verify and express an on-chain futures market. 707 00:40:26,468 --> 00:40:27,788 And I totally open sourced it. 708 00:40:28,027 --> 00:40:30,707 So anyone can go run off and have fun building on it. 709 00:40:32,407 --> 00:40:34,148 And the reason that works is because 710 00:40:34,148 --> 00:40:37,047 if Bitcoin, as we know right now, 711 00:40:37,047 --> 00:40:38,288 is to continue to exist, 712 00:40:38,288 --> 00:40:39,627 then those coins get frozen. 713 00:40:40,308 --> 00:40:41,067 That's correct. 714 00:40:41,227 --> 00:40:43,727 So the way the on-chain contract works 715 00:40:43,727 --> 00:40:46,087 is that to simplify it, 716 00:40:46,288 --> 00:40:47,927 there's two main spending paths. 717 00:40:48,207 --> 00:40:49,227 You have a spending path 718 00:40:49,227 --> 00:40:52,268 which violates the rules of BIP444 719 00:40:52,268 --> 00:41:05,495 and that expires let say in May And then you have a path that follows the rules of BIP444 that and I sorry I know it not officially called that but it just very catchy mimetically to call it that So you have 720 00:41:05,495 --> 00:41:12,455 the UASF, the side that the UASF is not enforced, and that expires in May, and then the side that 721 00:41:12,455 --> 00:41:17,595 enforces the UASF expires in June. Now, if you think the UASF client's going to work, 722 00:41:17,895 --> 00:41:22,595 you don't care that I can spend the money sooner a month before you, because those will be consensus 723 00:41:22,595 --> 00:41:28,155 invalid because I have an opt not if in there. So it's a way you can actually on-chain trustlessly 724 00:41:28,155 --> 00:41:32,875 finalize and settle knowing that you can actually express your interest. And you also can imply 725 00:41:32,875 --> 00:41:37,095 odds, right? So my initial proposal was I'll put up one Bitcoin, someone else puts up one Bitcoin, 726 00:41:37,095 --> 00:41:41,935 and then you have a 50-50 odds. I could put up two Bitcoin and you put up one Bitcoin, 727 00:41:42,095 --> 00:41:46,955 which then means you only need to be right 33% of the time, right, mathematically for it to express. 728 00:41:46,955 --> 00:41:49,895 no one has taken me up on it yet 729 00:41:49,895 --> 00:41:50,975 there's been a lot of 730 00:41:50,975 --> 00:41:52,035 well that's gambling 731 00:41:52,035 --> 00:41:53,715 and to that I say 732 00:41:53,715 --> 00:41:56,335 I'm very highly confident 733 00:41:56,335 --> 00:41:57,375 and I want to be able to sell 734 00:41:57,375 --> 00:41:58,995 the UASF coins today 735 00:41:58,995 --> 00:42:01,715 I would love to lock in a sell today 736 00:42:01,715 --> 00:42:03,055 I don't want to have to wait 737 00:42:03,055 --> 00:42:03,855 to get on an exchange 738 00:42:03,855 --> 00:42:06,235 and move UTXOs around then 739 00:42:06,235 --> 00:42:08,195 and deal with all the uncertainty 740 00:42:08,195 --> 00:42:08,895 of block production 741 00:42:08,895 --> 00:42:09,915 I just want to sell them today 742 00:42:09,915 --> 00:42:12,835 and so I'm trying to pull the demand forward 743 00:42:12,835 --> 00:42:15,115 which I think a lot of the people 744 00:42:15,115 --> 00:42:16,835 who are on the side of the UASF 745 00:42:16,835 --> 00:42:19,675 aren't a fan of, because this is an important piece. 746 00:42:20,115 --> 00:42:22,295 If you promote, you want to do a UASF, 747 00:42:22,775 --> 00:42:24,255 and you put all this effort 748 00:42:24,255 --> 00:42:27,355 and put it on the developer mailing list and on a BIP, 749 00:42:27,415 --> 00:42:29,115 and you're trying to get miners to activate 750 00:42:29,115 --> 00:42:29,955 and trying to do an update. 751 00:42:30,275 --> 00:42:33,655 If the effort fails, you haven't lost any Bitcoin. 752 00:42:34,395 --> 00:42:37,095 You get to kind of like asymmetrically attack the networks, 753 00:42:37,215 --> 00:42:39,335 like the resources, the time and resources of people 754 00:42:39,335 --> 00:42:42,315 to try and coordinate a hostile, contentious, 755 00:42:42,595 --> 00:42:43,555 user-activated software. 756 00:42:44,095 --> 00:42:46,355 But then if it all fails and no one mines on it 757 00:42:46,355 --> 00:42:48,055 and everything just stops, 758 00:42:48,135 --> 00:42:50,095 and you come back with your tail between your legs 759 00:42:50,095 --> 00:42:51,055 back onto the main chain, 760 00:42:51,215 --> 00:42:52,395 you haven't lost any Bitcoin. 761 00:42:53,095 --> 00:42:56,155 So the futures market is actually putting in economic costs, 762 00:42:56,215 --> 00:42:58,215 saying, oh, you really believe this is going to happen? 763 00:42:58,795 --> 00:42:59,355 Let's do it. 764 00:42:59,675 --> 00:43:02,835 So the proposer of the BIP, Dathan Ohm, 765 00:43:02,915 --> 00:43:04,615 has agreed in spirit, 766 00:43:04,855 --> 00:43:07,255 but not formal details on doing this with me. 767 00:43:07,435 --> 00:43:08,895 I haven't found anyone else, though. 768 00:43:09,475 --> 00:43:11,815 And I think that's a very weak economic signal, 769 00:43:11,995 --> 00:43:13,155 if no one else, because I'm willing to. 770 00:43:13,555 --> 00:43:15,915 And inbound, people have, I haven't asked for it, 771 00:43:15,915 --> 00:43:17,095 people have come to me saying, 772 00:43:17,615 --> 00:43:20,655 hey, I have 30 Bitcoin, 50 Bitcoin, 100 Bitcoin 773 00:43:20,655 --> 00:43:21,815 I'm willing to put into this bet. 774 00:43:22,095 --> 00:43:24,155 So I now have an order book of people 775 00:43:24,155 --> 00:43:26,515 that want to sell the UASF fork chain, 776 00:43:26,655 --> 00:43:29,415 and I can't get any market liquidity 777 00:43:29,415 --> 00:43:30,215 on the other side of the bet, 778 00:43:30,255 --> 00:43:31,475 which actually shows you that, like, 779 00:43:31,955 --> 00:43:33,375 at least with Bitcoin Cash, 780 00:43:33,435 --> 00:43:37,195 you were able to sell it for, like, 0.25, 0.2, 0.1. 781 00:43:37,895 --> 00:43:39,415 I don't even think you're going to be able to sell it 782 00:43:39,415 --> 00:43:41,255 for 0.001. 783 00:43:41,415 --> 00:43:42,855 Like, there's just no economic demand 784 00:43:42,855 --> 00:43:44,655 on the other side looking for this chain at all. 785 00:43:44,655 --> 00:43:48,675 So you're just basically trying to get people to put their money where their mouth is and 786 00:43:48,675 --> 00:43:50,575 bet on the future of Bitcoin. 787 00:43:50,755 --> 00:43:53,735 But like you've had, so Dathan said he'll do it in principle. 788 00:43:53,995 --> 00:43:56,055 Have you had anyone else or is it literally just him? 789 00:43:56,495 --> 00:43:59,195 Because I know you called out Mechanic and Luke as well, I think. 790 00:43:59,975 --> 00:44:00,155 Yeah. 791 00:44:00,275 --> 00:44:01,335 And then they blocked me on Twitter. 792 00:44:02,255 --> 00:44:02,535 Okay. 793 00:44:03,355 --> 00:44:03,755 Interesting. 794 00:44:04,675 --> 00:44:08,855 So if this doesn't go through as a soft fork, what do you think they're going to do? 795 00:44:08,935 --> 00:44:12,375 Do you think they will hard fork or do you think they'll just come back tails between 796 00:44:12,375 --> 00:44:14,075 the legs and try something else? 797 00:44:14,655 --> 00:44:15,715 It's an interesting question. 798 00:44:16,075 --> 00:44:17,835 I could see both possibly happening. 799 00:44:18,535 --> 00:44:21,975 Luke, for a long time, has championed the idea of a hard fork 800 00:44:21,975 --> 00:44:23,955 to change the proof-of-work algorithm 801 00:44:23,955 --> 00:44:25,895 to remove the centralization of mining. 802 00:44:26,555 --> 00:44:27,955 He hasn't expressed... 803 00:44:27,955 --> 00:44:29,235 Fire the miners, right? 804 00:44:29,515 --> 00:44:33,955 This has been a long-held, I would say, heterodox... 805 00:44:34,875 --> 00:44:37,935 Sorry, unorthodox opinion Luke's had compared to other developers, 806 00:44:38,035 --> 00:44:40,115 but that's something he's always thought would be 807 00:44:40,115 --> 00:44:42,715 kind of like the real nuclear button. 808 00:44:42,715 --> 00:44:45,235 would require a hard fork though. 809 00:44:47,535 --> 00:44:50,975 The problem, you would have to basically fire the miners 810 00:44:50,975 --> 00:44:52,715 because otherwise if you're using the same chain, 811 00:44:52,995 --> 00:44:55,595 you're just another Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV 812 00:44:55,595 --> 00:44:57,515 where you're using the same hashing algorithm 813 00:44:57,515 --> 00:45:00,055 and very trivially, people can just reorg 814 00:45:00,055 --> 00:45:00,935 and attack the network. 815 00:45:01,075 --> 00:45:02,175 And that's not a great place to be. 816 00:45:02,775 --> 00:45:04,675 So is it possible? 817 00:45:04,895 --> 00:45:06,195 Yeah, I don't know what they're going to do though. 818 00:45:07,155 --> 00:45:09,055 It's interesting because I've also heard rumors. 819 00:45:09,175 --> 00:45:10,235 I don't know if these are true before. 820 00:45:10,535 --> 00:45:12,275 I just want to caveat that though. 821 00:45:12,275 --> 00:45:16,355 that the Ocean legal team are going around to other miners 822 00:45:16,355 --> 00:45:19,515 trying to kind of legally warn them 823 00:45:19,515 --> 00:45:21,915 against supporting the current Bitcoin chain. 824 00:45:23,555 --> 00:45:28,055 Yeah, so those are rumors I have heard as well. 825 00:45:28,255 --> 00:45:33,235 I'm actually pulling it up here on the mailing list. 826 00:45:35,555 --> 00:45:37,595 I'm pulling it up right here. 827 00:45:37,595 --> 00:45:42,575 so on the mailing list 828 00:45:42,575 --> 00:45:43,475 if you give me a second 829 00:45:43,475 --> 00:45:45,095 I think the 830 00:45:45,095 --> 00:45:47,335 someone had made a 831 00:45:47,335 --> 00:45:50,095 a comment to that effect 832 00:45:50,095 --> 00:45:50,535 that 833 00:45:50,535 --> 00:45:53,495 that someone was 834 00:45:53,495 --> 00:45:55,355 like someone at Ocean 835 00:45:55,355 --> 00:45:57,195 or people associated with Ocean 836 00:45:57,195 --> 00:46:00,135 were actually talking to 837 00:46:00,135 --> 00:46:00,795 mining pools 838 00:46:00,795 --> 00:46:04,575 I have never sat in on any of those conversations 839 00:46:04,575 --> 00:46:05,175 so it's 840 00:46:05,175 --> 00:46:06,855 I don't work at a mining pool 841 00:46:06,855 --> 00:46:08,695 so it's just speculation on my part too. 842 00:46:10,795 --> 00:46:13,035 But that is my understanding of it, 843 00:46:13,135 --> 00:46:15,035 that there's been a pressure. 844 00:46:15,895 --> 00:46:18,955 And to be clear, the pressure hasn't been for the UASF. 845 00:46:19,235 --> 00:46:21,515 The pressure up to this point, from my understanding, 846 00:46:21,595 --> 00:46:23,295 was just not running core version 30. 847 00:46:24,935 --> 00:46:29,975 So I don't know if that's changed anything with this proposal, 848 00:46:30,755 --> 00:46:35,095 but it's something I would say is relevant to keep in mind. 849 00:46:36,855 --> 00:46:42,415 Yeah, not a good look, I don't think. I mean, who knows if that's true, but if it is, certainly not a good look. 850 00:46:42,435 --> 00:46:47,355 Sorry, I have the exact quote now. Greg Maxwell on the mailing list said, 851 00:46:47,455 --> 00:46:51,395 Another issue which you have not mentioned is that prior to you making this proposal, Dathan, 852 00:46:51,955 --> 00:46:56,395 I received minutes from a meeting which noted that Ocean Mining was the true author of this proposal 853 00:46:56,395 --> 00:46:59,775 and would be presenting it under a false identity in order to conceal their involvement. 854 00:46:59,775 --> 00:47:02,515 so that is 855 00:47:02,515 --> 00:47:04,095 what Greg said 856 00:47:04,095 --> 00:47:04,895 and 857 00:47:04,895 --> 00:47:06,375 Dathan's response was 858 00:47:06,375 --> 00:47:07,855 you've fallen victim 859 00:47:07,855 --> 00:47:09,055 to some false rumors 860 00:47:09,055 --> 00:47:11,855 though I'm in direct 861 00:47:11,855 --> 00:47:12,955 communication with some 862 00:47:12,955 --> 00:47:13,635 Ocean employees 863 00:47:13,635 --> 00:47:14,435 and the BIP was 864 00:47:14,435 --> 00:47:15,715 originally drafted 865 00:47:15,715 --> 00:47:16,395 by one of them 866 00:47:16,395 --> 00:47:17,375 I am not affiliated 867 00:47:17,375 --> 00:47:18,415 with Ocean in any way 868 00:47:18,415 --> 00:47:20,395 so 869 00:47:20,395 --> 00:47:22,235 take that for what it is 870 00:47:22,235 --> 00:47:22,915 okay 871 00:47:22,915 --> 00:47:24,555 and I also know that 872 00:47:24,555 --> 00:47:25,715 Mechanic has 873 00:47:25,715 --> 00:47:27,215 come out and 874 00:47:27,215 --> 00:47:28,735 outright denied that 875 00:47:28,735 --> 00:47:29,335 and said that this 876 00:47:29,335 --> 00:47:32,935 isn't anything to do with ocean so i mean i don't want to get too far into like the speculation 877 00:47:32,935 --> 00:47:39,195 because we just don't know there's something that um mechanic said on one of his videos that i found 878 00:47:39,195 --> 00:47:45,975 strange and i want to see if i'm misunderstanding this um but he was talking about the transactions 879 00:47:45,975 --> 00:47:52,055 that can be included and have been included in because of v30 now um and one of the examples 880 00:47:52,055 --> 00:47:58,135 he used was like some AI generated porn video of a Bitcoin dev being put on chain. 881 00:47:59,175 --> 00:48:05,895 And I think Marathon with a pool that mined that block, well, they included that transaction. 882 00:48:06,215 --> 00:48:13,155 And he said that if this was still going through Slipstream, they would have refused that as a 883 00:48:13,155 --> 00:48:17,995 transaction. Again, who knows if that's actually true, but that's a claim that he made. But that 884 00:48:17,995 --> 00:48:22,235 That seems very counter to everything he's trying to do with Datum and Ocean. 885 00:48:23,595 --> 00:48:28,335 The idea of being policing how miners organize their block templates. 886 00:48:28,895 --> 00:48:29,235 Yeah. 887 00:48:30,235 --> 00:48:31,915 Yeah, I agree. 888 00:48:32,555 --> 00:48:35,855 If the entire, from my understanding, 889 00:48:36,595 --> 00:48:40,155 with Ocean and decentralizing Bitcoin mining 890 00:48:40,155 --> 00:48:42,415 and the actual template generation, right? 891 00:48:42,475 --> 00:48:44,195 So for those that aren't familiar, 892 00:48:44,195 --> 00:48:47,515 the way Bitcoin mining pool works is you usually have one node at the mining pool 893 00:48:47,515 --> 00:48:49,115 that organizes the block, 894 00:48:49,255 --> 00:48:51,355 and then they send the block headers to all the miners. 895 00:48:51,515 --> 00:48:53,235 You don't need the full block on your ASIC. 896 00:48:53,315 --> 00:48:54,875 The ASIC actually doesn't even look at the full block. 897 00:48:54,975 --> 00:48:56,615 It just looks at the header of the block, 898 00:48:56,675 --> 00:48:58,295 which has all of the commitments 899 00:48:58,295 --> 00:48:59,855 to all of the information that's relevant 900 00:48:59,855 --> 00:49:02,415 for doing the actual mining hashing operation. 901 00:49:04,975 --> 00:49:08,515 The mission with Datum and Ocean would be, 902 00:49:08,915 --> 00:49:12,115 the problem is that you have one node that organizes, 903 00:49:13,435 --> 00:49:14,635 let me just take, 904 00:49:15,115 --> 00:49:16,975 Mara is like 5% of the hash rate. 905 00:49:16,975 --> 00:49:20,455 So 5% of the hash rate has one node doing all of the work for it. 906 00:49:20,835 --> 00:49:25,635 Mara is probably a little different because they have their own mining pool and they own all of their own infrastructure. 907 00:49:25,835 --> 00:49:27,695 You and I cannot go sign up to use Mara's pool. 908 00:49:27,935 --> 00:49:29,115 It's all their own internal stuff. 909 00:49:29,235 --> 00:49:40,275 So maybe like a foundry that's at 25% roughly of the network would be a better example where you have a bunch of people that are mining and or Antpool, which is like 17%. 910 00:49:40,275 --> 00:49:43,335 So you have like Antpool, you have a bunch of people that go and organize transactions. 911 00:49:43,335 --> 00:49:44,755 but like all the mining at antpool, 912 00:49:44,875 --> 00:49:46,095 there's like one antpool node 913 00:49:46,095 --> 00:49:48,095 that's actually organizing the block templates. 914 00:49:48,235 --> 00:49:51,495 And the idea would be if you're making block, 915 00:49:51,695 --> 00:49:52,855 if you're trying to decentralize it, 916 00:49:52,895 --> 00:49:54,795 you wouldn't want to be emphasizing 917 00:49:54,795 --> 00:49:56,135 and celebrating choke points 918 00:49:56,135 --> 00:49:59,475 of kind of the block space market. 919 00:49:59,755 --> 00:50:02,215 It's kind of contradictory to the whole mission. 920 00:50:02,375 --> 00:50:04,615 I generally agree with that, 921 00:50:04,635 --> 00:50:06,575 but I'm quite sure if Mechanic was on the pod, 922 00:50:06,655 --> 00:50:08,435 he would have his own colored add on that. 923 00:50:09,395 --> 00:50:10,575 I mean, if you want to come on the pod again, 924 00:50:10,655 --> 00:50:11,475 Mechanic, you can do. 925 00:50:13,335 --> 00:50:15,675 I want to know, can we get a little bit think boy for a minute? 926 00:50:16,675 --> 00:50:25,055 Why do you think this sort of culture war has both come to Bitcoin in such a meaningful way over the last couple of years and then seems to just be accelerating at this point? 927 00:50:26,435 --> 00:50:38,215 I think there is a mix of earnest concern that, and earnest is from their perspective. 928 00:50:38,215 --> 00:50:46,475 Like, I would say Luke earnestly has consistently held this perspective and position in Bitcoin for a long time. 929 00:50:47,535 --> 00:50:55,455 And you have a lot of people cargo culting, following him, not fully understanding second, third order ramifications and things. 930 00:50:57,775 --> 00:51:00,515 Myself and many other people disagree with Luke. 931 00:51:00,515 --> 00:51:01,715 um 932 00:51:01,715 --> 00:51:03,775 the 933 00:51:03,775 --> 00:51:06,795 I think a lot of people 934 00:51:06,795 --> 00:51:08,215 were 935 00:51:08,215 --> 00:51:10,815 aimed to Bitcoin after the block size wars 936 00:51:10,815 --> 00:51:12,875 so they've been reading about it 937 00:51:12,875 --> 00:51:14,835 almost like hearing like oral history 938 00:51:14,835 --> 00:51:16,755 passed down by a fire of like this is what we did 939 00:51:16,755 --> 00:51:18,755 to take the Bitcoin network we ran the nodes 940 00:51:18,755 --> 00:51:20,515 and we ran the client and 941 00:51:20,515 --> 00:51:22,915 the Bitcoin bugle actually put out a funny article 942 00:51:22,915 --> 00:51:23,875 which was uh 943 00:51:23,875 --> 00:51:26,735 Bitcoin plus plus Gettysburg so Gettysburg 944 00:51:26,735 --> 00:51:28,975 I know you're not from America but Gettysburg is a 945 00:51:28,975 --> 00:51:29,895 I know, 946 00:51:30,015 --> 00:51:30,775 Civil War. 947 00:51:30,935 --> 00:51:31,215 Yeah, 948 00:51:31,435 --> 00:51:32,535 so doing like 949 00:51:32,535 --> 00:51:33,715 Civil War reenactments 950 00:51:33,715 --> 00:51:34,355 of like battles 951 00:51:34,355 --> 00:51:35,335 and I think that's what's happening 952 00:51:35,335 --> 00:51:36,175 is we're kind of having like, 953 00:51:36,475 --> 00:51:37,975 we're doing a live action role playing 954 00:51:37,975 --> 00:51:39,195 of like the block size war 955 00:51:39,195 --> 00:51:39,555 and we're gonna, 956 00:51:39,955 --> 00:51:40,995 like everyone's just trying to like 957 00:51:40,995 --> 00:51:42,415 rally together and reenact it 958 00:51:42,415 --> 00:51:43,875 like a muscle memory thing 959 00:51:43,875 --> 00:51:45,375 but it's mostly people 960 00:51:45,375 --> 00:51:46,275 who were not here 961 00:51:46,275 --> 00:51:47,415 in 2017. 962 00:51:48,535 --> 00:51:49,675 So I think there's a bit of like 963 00:51:49,675 --> 00:51:51,135 a social status game 964 00:51:51,135 --> 00:51:51,995 of also seeing 965 00:51:51,995 --> 00:51:53,755 I'm rebelling against the system. 966 00:51:53,955 --> 00:51:55,355 Bitcoiners are naturally disagreeable 967 00:51:55,355 --> 00:51:56,495 and rebellious to begin with. 968 00:51:56,495 --> 00:51:59,235 that is being focused internally 969 00:51:59,235 --> 00:52:01,075 around the governance of how Bitcoin works. 970 00:52:01,775 --> 00:52:04,735 And they were already discontent 971 00:52:04,735 --> 00:52:06,115 with how Bitcoin was working. 972 00:52:06,435 --> 00:52:09,335 And then version 30 gave them an opportunity 973 00:52:09,335 --> 00:52:12,095 to make this not about how Bitcoin technically works, 974 00:52:12,175 --> 00:52:13,275 but about a governance issue. 975 00:52:13,375 --> 00:52:16,175 So those meanies at core are doing things 976 00:52:16,175 --> 00:52:17,535 that are destroying Bitcoin as money 977 00:52:17,535 --> 00:52:18,915 and we need to take back the network. 978 00:52:20,795 --> 00:52:22,215 So I think it's a lot of that. 979 00:52:22,535 --> 00:52:25,155 And it's also just like social cloud bait engagement too. 980 00:52:25,155 --> 00:52:29,375 you post this stuff, you get a lot of like eyeballs, a lot of attention. 981 00:52:31,235 --> 00:52:35,735 It's kind of just like, you know, the price is flat, it's trending down a little bit. This is 982 00:52:35,735 --> 00:52:41,635 just something to keep everyone occupied. Like genuinely, like I don't view it as a big credible 983 00:52:41,635 --> 00:52:45,075 threat. I haven't seen a single mining pool come forward with it. I haven't seen a single business 984 00:52:45,075 --> 00:52:50,235 come forward saying they're running the USF client. Like this is not like, yes, you write code and 985 00:52:50,235 --> 00:52:54,955 you've released the code for a USF, but you have to actually have the miners and the economic actors 986 00:52:54,955 --> 00:52:56,135 of the network agree with it. 987 00:52:56,175 --> 00:52:58,035 Otherwise, you and I, Danny, 988 00:52:58,095 --> 00:52:59,275 could write a UASF tomorrow. 989 00:52:59,475 --> 00:53:00,755 That doesn't mean it means anything, right? 990 00:53:00,835 --> 00:53:03,135 And I just haven't seen the commensurate demand 991 00:53:03,135 --> 00:53:05,795 to actually facilitate a successful UASF. 992 00:53:06,295 --> 00:53:07,375 Maybe it's worth getting into 993 00:53:07,375 --> 00:53:09,555 what is actually needed on their side to do this, 994 00:53:09,615 --> 00:53:11,115 because we've not really talked about that. 995 00:53:11,215 --> 00:53:14,275 Like, obviously, the Luke and mechanics 996 00:53:14,275 --> 00:53:15,535 of the world running this isn't enough. 997 00:53:15,635 --> 00:53:16,675 What do they actually need? 998 00:53:17,235 --> 00:53:18,555 They need hash rate, 999 00:53:18,655 --> 00:53:21,175 and they need economic actors to enforce this. 1000 00:53:21,175 --> 00:53:23,595 For example, if Coinbase's node 1001 00:53:23,595 --> 00:53:27,195 just to be blunt, if Coinbase's node isn't running this, 1002 00:53:27,775 --> 00:53:32,135 they're going to accept whatever block has the most cash rate and work. 1003 00:53:34,175 --> 00:53:36,695 Now, if Coinbase hypothetically came forward and said, 1004 00:53:36,795 --> 00:53:37,915 we want to support this effort, 1005 00:53:38,375 --> 00:53:41,795 all of a sudden now you have 2 million plus Bitcoin 1006 00:53:41,795 --> 00:53:44,395 that are saying, we will not accept the other fork, 1007 00:53:44,895 --> 00:53:46,175 which is a meaningful thing. 1008 00:53:47,635 --> 00:53:50,335 You would want businesses to come forward 1009 00:53:50,335 --> 00:53:52,555 and say that they want to support this effort 1010 00:53:52,555 --> 00:53:54,415 for the economic demand, right, 1011 00:53:54,515 --> 00:53:55,655 that they're signaling for. 1012 00:53:56,035 --> 00:53:58,275 You're going to want a reasonable set of nodes 1013 00:53:58,275 --> 00:54:00,935 across the network that are also running this 1014 00:54:00,935 --> 00:54:02,275 to make sure the transactions propagate. 1015 00:54:02,595 --> 00:54:04,035 That is an important part of this. 1016 00:54:04,515 --> 00:54:05,535 And you need hash rate. 1017 00:54:05,935 --> 00:54:07,375 Because the miners are the ones 1018 00:54:07,375 --> 00:54:08,695 that are actually spending the capital 1019 00:54:08,695 --> 00:54:10,835 to advance the state of the Bitcoin blockchain. 1020 00:54:11,555 --> 00:54:13,555 And if no one's going to build on your fork, 1021 00:54:14,435 --> 00:54:16,715 you're going to fork and then you're going to stagnate 1022 00:54:16,715 --> 00:54:18,455 because instead of having 100% of the hash rate 1023 00:54:18,455 --> 00:54:20,635 blocks every 10 minutes, you get 1%, 1024 00:54:20,635 --> 00:54:24,935 which means that it'll take you six hours to find a block instead of 10 minutes. 1025 00:54:25,695 --> 00:54:30,275 So you would want this to all happen without there being... 1026 00:54:30,275 --> 00:54:31,815 This is actually a really important point, too. 1027 00:54:32,075 --> 00:54:35,635 You want this alignment and agreement prior to the activation, 1028 00:54:35,915 --> 00:54:37,135 which is why you would want signaling. 1029 00:54:37,295 --> 00:54:38,535 You can signal with your node. 1030 00:54:38,975 --> 00:54:41,095 Miners can signal that they're going to support this. 1031 00:54:41,415 --> 00:54:45,755 And the reason why you want that is, let's say this happens for 40, 50, 60 blocks. 1032 00:54:45,755 --> 00:54:48,255 is Coinbase going to roll back 1033 00:54:48,255 --> 00:54:49,415 their chain 1034 00:54:49,415 --> 00:54:50,775 six, seven hours 1035 00:54:50,775 --> 00:54:51,715 and all those withdrawals? 1036 00:54:52,075 --> 00:54:52,635 Because they're not going to be able to 1037 00:54:52,635 --> 00:54:53,115 Absolutely not. 1038 00:54:54,095 --> 00:54:54,355 Right. 1039 00:54:55,555 --> 00:54:56,035 Right. 1040 00:54:56,115 --> 00:54:57,555 We've had chain splits before. 1041 00:54:57,815 --> 00:54:59,115 Back in 2013 1042 00:54:59,115 --> 00:55:01,075 there was a bug 1043 00:55:01,075 --> 00:55:01,715 where the Bitcoin network 1044 00:55:01,715 --> 00:55:03,115 was down for like 30, 40 blocks 1045 00:55:03,115 --> 00:55:04,335 and 1046 00:55:04,335 --> 00:55:06,775 we were able to reunify the chain 1047 00:55:06,775 --> 00:55:08,015 but like 1048 00:55:08,015 --> 00:55:09,315 Bitcoin's a lot bigger now 1049 00:55:09,315 --> 00:55:10,855 and so 1050 00:55:10,855 --> 00:55:11,695 like 1051 00:55:11,695 --> 00:55:13,275 I think it's very unlikely. 1052 00:55:13,675 --> 00:55:14,655 Bitcoin wouldn't die 1053 00:55:14,655 --> 00:55:15,655 to be clear 1054 00:55:15,655 --> 00:55:17,215 if this happened, right? 1055 00:55:17,335 --> 00:55:18,315 If you're holding Bitcoin, 1056 00:55:18,395 --> 00:55:19,635 you're holding it for like 10 years, 1057 00:55:20,035 --> 00:55:21,035 like deep cold storage, 1058 00:55:21,135 --> 00:55:22,455 this action doesn't impact you at all. 1059 00:55:22,795 --> 00:55:23,935 Like even if there is an old reorg, 1060 00:55:24,135 --> 00:55:25,195 it doesn't bother you at all. 1061 00:55:25,895 --> 00:55:27,155 Just the funds that are moving 1062 00:55:27,155 --> 00:55:28,275 during this reorganization. 1063 00:55:28,495 --> 00:55:31,075 So they need hash rate, 1064 00:55:31,195 --> 00:55:32,215 they need economic support, 1065 00:55:32,335 --> 00:55:33,695 and they need that now. 1066 00:55:34,355 --> 00:55:35,795 Because they're proposing to activate 1067 00:55:35,795 --> 00:55:36,915 in like 83 days. 1068 00:55:37,215 --> 00:55:39,755 That is incredibly fast. 1069 00:55:40,015 --> 00:55:41,195 That's very, very aggressive. 1070 00:55:42,195 --> 00:55:43,695 Usually at least a year is given 1071 00:55:43,695 --> 00:55:45,155 to try and organize these things. 1072 00:55:45,155 --> 00:55:48,035 let alone they're not final with the code yet. 1073 00:55:48,035 --> 00:55:51,175 The actual final activation client code isn't totally done. 1074 00:55:52,255 --> 00:55:54,035 So they're not... 1075 00:55:54,855 --> 00:55:57,595 Miners and businesses and the DevOps teams at these companies 1076 00:55:57,595 --> 00:55:59,335 aren't going to be like, oh, here's the code. 1077 00:55:59,375 --> 00:56:01,855 Let me just load it up into my cloud infrastructure real quick 1078 00:56:01,855 --> 00:56:02,575 and get running, right? 1079 00:56:02,575 --> 00:56:04,855 They're going to want to look at what code are you actually changing, 1080 00:56:05,135 --> 00:56:09,535 which is a problem too because this UASF client 1081 00:56:09,535 --> 00:56:11,395 is based on top of a knots build, 1082 00:56:11,395 --> 00:56:16,475 which means you can't cleanly patch on this feature 1083 00:56:16,475 --> 00:56:18,055 into Bitcoin Core 1084 00:56:18,055 --> 00:56:21,375 which is where all of the real economic demand is running. 1085 00:56:21,935 --> 00:56:24,015 So that's additional engineering friction. 1086 00:56:26,215 --> 00:56:27,555 And one of the big criticisms of Nott 1087 00:56:27,555 --> 00:56:29,595 being that the code isn't reviewed properly 1088 00:56:29,595 --> 00:56:30,855 so essentially you have to go through 1089 00:56:30,855 --> 00:56:32,455 and review every single line of code. 1090 00:56:33,215 --> 00:56:34,095 Yeah, exactly. 1091 00:56:35,095 --> 00:56:35,535 Exactly. 1092 00:56:35,755 --> 00:56:37,075 So they need support and they need it now. 1093 00:56:37,155 --> 00:56:37,895 They need hash rate support, 1094 00:56:37,975 --> 00:56:38,775 they need business support. 1095 00:56:39,135 --> 00:56:40,175 They need a futures market. 1096 00:56:40,175 --> 00:56:47,395 They need people who are actually willing to put Bitcoin up on the other side of the bet to signal that they want to buy the UASF coin and sell the non-UASF coin. 1097 00:56:48,195 --> 00:56:51,395 And they need all three of those for this to be successful at this point. 1098 00:56:51,815 --> 00:56:57,195 Because otherwise, if they miss any of those, the chain's either going to stagnate or the chain's going to go and people are just going to market dump it. 1099 00:56:57,555 --> 00:57:01,435 And then the miners are going to switch back over to the other chain because it's not going to be worth it to them anymore to mine it. 1100 00:57:02,095 --> 00:57:04,835 Because they only get three Bitcoin per block for mining it in the block subsidy. 1101 00:57:04,835 --> 00:57:08,135 and if everyone's, like it activates 1102 00:57:08,135 --> 00:57:10,095 and everyone on the UASF chain 1103 00:57:10,095 --> 00:57:12,675 is moving coins around just to sell them, 1104 00:57:13,115 --> 00:57:14,035 to crash the price, 1105 00:57:14,455 --> 00:57:16,095 the miners aren't going to mine there anymore 1106 00:57:16,095 --> 00:57:18,555 because the three Bitcoin is going to be worth 0.03 Bitcoin 1107 00:57:18,555 --> 00:57:19,595 or whatever, right? 1108 00:57:20,615 --> 00:57:22,755 So they need all of these things to actually, 1109 00:57:23,055 --> 00:57:23,915 they need a futures market, 1110 00:57:24,035 --> 00:57:24,935 they need mining support 1111 00:57:24,935 --> 00:57:26,855 and they need economic node business support. 1112 00:57:27,295 --> 00:57:28,475 Just on this sort of, 1113 00:57:28,555 --> 00:57:29,815 this is an impossible question to answer, 1114 00:57:29,935 --> 00:57:32,635 but as a kind of a directional answer, 1115 00:57:32,955 --> 00:57:34,555 how many of the people who have been 1116 00:57:34,555 --> 00:57:36,195 sort of very vocally supportive of Knott's, 1117 00:57:36,235 --> 00:57:38,195 do you think are also going to be behind this soft fork? 1118 00:57:38,255 --> 00:57:39,595 Because I've definitely seen some 1119 00:57:39,595 --> 00:57:41,635 that have been very big Knott's proponents 1120 00:57:41,635 --> 00:57:43,815 say they're not in support of the soft fork. 1121 00:57:43,995 --> 00:57:44,095 Yeah. 1122 00:57:44,595 --> 00:57:47,035 I think that a lot of people 1123 00:57:47,035 --> 00:57:48,775 who were supportive of Knott's 1124 00:57:48,775 --> 00:57:49,675 because they disagreed 1125 00:57:49,675 --> 00:57:51,735 with the software governance of Bitcoin Core 1126 00:57:51,735 --> 00:57:55,055 are not in favor of a UASF. 1127 00:57:56,195 --> 00:57:57,795 So it's already, you're starting from a, 1128 00:57:57,995 --> 00:57:59,375 because no one who is, 1129 00:58:00,895 --> 00:58:02,695 people who are not running Knott's 1130 00:58:02,695 --> 00:58:04,435 are fine with things as is. 1131 00:58:04,555 --> 00:58:06,055 because that's the client they're running. 1132 00:58:06,235 --> 00:58:07,815 They're fine running the default client 1133 00:58:07,815 --> 00:58:09,855 of Bitcoin Core. 1134 00:58:10,655 --> 00:58:13,995 The people who would run NOTS, 1135 00:58:14,115 --> 00:58:15,115 that would be your contingent 1136 00:58:15,115 --> 00:58:16,555 that would be willing to fork over this, 1137 00:58:16,675 --> 00:58:17,915 and that, I think, is going to fracture. 1138 00:58:18,595 --> 00:58:20,255 There's no way to directly tell or know 1139 00:58:20,255 --> 00:58:21,535 at this point. 1140 00:58:22,595 --> 00:58:25,195 Once there is a final UASF client, 1141 00:58:25,375 --> 00:58:26,875 you will be able to run that 1142 00:58:26,875 --> 00:58:27,875 and signal to the network, 1143 00:58:27,975 --> 00:58:28,975 I'm not just a NOTS node, 1144 00:58:29,035 --> 00:58:30,355 I'm a UASF node. 1145 00:58:31,935 --> 00:58:34,175 But again, I think a lot of people 1146 00:58:34,175 --> 00:58:36,035 who for whatever reason 1147 00:58:36,035 --> 00:58:37,215 have their own disagreements 1148 00:58:37,215 --> 00:58:38,615 of how Bitcoin development is going 1149 00:58:38,615 --> 00:58:40,655 are not going to be okay with a UASF. 1150 00:58:41,355 --> 00:58:44,255 So that's to be seen on where that lands. 1151 00:58:44,255 --> 00:58:45,995 I find it really interesting. 1152 00:58:46,195 --> 00:58:48,055 The thing that is most interesting about this 1153 00:58:48,055 --> 00:58:49,835 is kind of the psychology of the people 1154 00:58:49,835 --> 00:58:51,635 that have been stirred up by all this drama. 1155 00:58:52,855 --> 00:58:55,075 Do you think it comes down to people 1156 00:58:55,075 --> 00:58:58,375 thinking they're more important to Bitcoin than they are? 1157 00:58:58,995 --> 00:59:01,115 Like obviously running a node matters, 1158 00:59:01,275 --> 00:59:03,835 but it matters to you far more than anyone else. 1159 00:59:04,175 --> 00:59:07,095 Running a node only matters for you. 1160 00:59:07,415 --> 00:59:09,395 It's a selfish endeavor to run a node. 1161 00:59:10,095 --> 00:59:13,275 The node, you run a node, 1162 00:59:14,015 --> 00:59:17,655 presumably because you are sending and receiving Bitcoin. 1163 00:59:18,455 --> 00:59:19,755 That could be once a year. 1164 00:59:19,935 --> 00:59:20,915 It could be once every five years. 1165 00:59:20,975 --> 00:59:22,195 It could be once every five minutes. 1166 00:59:22,735 --> 00:59:25,055 You're running a node because you're validating transactions. 1167 00:59:25,515 --> 00:59:29,395 You are validating that the blocks that are being found 1168 00:59:29,395 --> 00:59:31,615 and the transactions that are in those blocks 1169 00:59:31,615 --> 00:59:33,935 are following the rules of consensus. 1170 00:59:34,175 --> 00:59:36,395 everything after that 1171 00:59:36,395 --> 00:59:37,455 your 1172 00:59:37,455 --> 00:59:39,015 the influence 1173 00:59:39,015 --> 00:59:40,015 in what your node has 1174 00:59:40,015 --> 00:59:41,875 very quickly 1175 00:59:41,875 --> 00:59:43,095 compresses to almost nothing 1176 00:59:43,095 --> 00:59:45,775 and if it wasn't that way 1177 00:59:45,775 --> 00:59:46,895 it would be almost 1178 00:59:46,895 --> 00:59:47,795 like a proof of stake 1179 00:59:47,795 --> 00:59:48,715 of proof of AWS 1180 00:59:48,715 --> 00:59:49,475 who can spin up 1181 00:59:49,475 --> 00:59:49,955 the most nodes 1182 00:59:49,955 --> 00:59:50,395 on the network 1183 00:59:50,395 --> 00:59:51,075 to like do voting 1184 00:59:51,075 --> 00:59:51,955 like Bitcoin's 1185 00:59:51,955 --> 00:59:52,615 not a democracy 1186 00:59:52,615 --> 00:59:54,455 Bitcoin is anarchy 1187 00:59:54,455 --> 00:59:55,715 it is rules 1188 00:59:55,715 --> 00:59:56,395 not rulers 1189 00:59:56,395 --> 00:59:57,195 and the rules 1190 00:59:57,195 --> 00:59:58,155 are consensus 1191 00:59:58,155 --> 00:59:58,855 right 1192 00:59:58,855 --> 00:59:59,655 which is why 1193 00:59:59,655 --> 01:00:00,735 I think at least 1194 01:00:00,735 --> 01:00:02,655 to your point 1195 01:00:02,655 --> 01:00:03,015 on like people 1196 01:00:03,015 --> 01:00:03,915 believing they're more important 1197 01:00:03,915 --> 01:00:07,895 I think they would just misunderstand the role their node has. 1198 01:00:08,035 --> 01:00:12,115 It is a supreme guardian of the rules of the network. 1199 01:00:13,615 --> 01:00:16,835 Beyond that, it can't influence much outside of it. 1200 01:00:16,935 --> 01:00:19,135 By design, to be censorship-resistant money, 1201 01:00:19,635 --> 01:00:21,815 you necessarily, because if I could run stuff on my node 1202 01:00:21,815 --> 01:00:23,495 or a bunch of my buddy's nodes 1203 01:00:23,495 --> 01:00:26,795 and actually put serious pressure on how the network gets organized, 1204 01:00:27,255 --> 01:00:29,435 then I'd be able to censor transactions, right? 1205 01:00:29,655 --> 01:00:32,175 So it's just kind of like the asymmetry of Bitcoin 1206 01:00:32,175 --> 01:00:35,595 as a decentralized permissionless network 1207 01:00:35,595 --> 01:00:36,635 that you have these properties. 1208 01:00:37,955 --> 01:00:40,415 So I think maybe it's a little bit of education and enablement 1209 01:00:40,415 --> 01:00:42,095 for people to understand what their node's actually for. 1210 01:00:43,055 --> 01:00:46,555 I will say that the UASF effort is at least consistent. 1211 01:00:47,335 --> 01:00:51,435 A UASF is how a node can boss the rest of the network 1212 01:00:51,435 --> 01:00:52,635 at the consensus level. 1213 01:00:53,055 --> 01:00:55,035 So in that sense, it's ideologically consistent 1214 01:00:55,035 --> 01:00:57,895 and it is necessary but not sufficient 1215 01:00:57,895 --> 01:00:58,975 to actually change Bitcoin. 1216 01:00:59,975 --> 01:01:01,735 I want to bring up a tweet I saw 1217 01:01:01,735 --> 01:01:09,535 um i've actually i pulled this up on the show i did with marty and hodl and eric casein um but 1218 01:01:09,535 --> 01:01:15,655 this is from bit pain and i think this like this really summed up kind of one of my big concerns 1219 01:01:15,655 --> 01:01:21,755 about this whole thing um okay this is the part that i think is the most relevant it's once you 1220 01:01:21,755 --> 01:01:37,982 grant the state that you can take efforts to mitigate illegal illicit material they start demanding it including for money monetary transactions they don like and if you If you accepted that you have a community moral imperative to censor you don have a leg to stand on it all over and like to me that the big concern here is like if 1221 01:01:37,982 --> 01:01:45,922 if this kind of like c-spam narrative c-sam narrative um gets any real traction then 1222 01:01:45,922 --> 01:01:54,162 And how long until some government agency starts saying we have to censor these transactions? 1223 01:01:54,642 --> 01:01:54,742 Right. 1224 01:01:55,602 --> 01:01:56,582 I agree. 1225 01:01:56,802 --> 01:02:01,962 I agree with that base premise is that if you start providing this moral layer in which 1226 01:02:01,962 --> 01:02:06,302 how bytes are encoded into Bitcoin blockchain of being acceptable or not acceptable, 1227 01:02:06,922 --> 01:02:13,642 it's a very slippery slope that doesn't require much leaps in imagination to do that. 1228 01:02:13,642 --> 01:02:28,182 Now, to steel man from my understanding, the other side of the argument is that this is not about you. We are not gating the moral use of Bitcoin as money for monetary transactions. We are morally gating non-monetary use cases. 1229 01:02:28,182 --> 01:02:38,802 And they would argue that they're drawing a line at monetary versus non-monetary, that we will moralize and push out all the non-monetary stuff, but everything that is monetary will be held. 1230 01:02:39,142 --> 01:02:47,142 I would still put forward that you have now moved Chesterton's feds and made moral any part of the argument. 1231 01:02:47,262 --> 01:02:55,102 To even introduce a moral caveat to the argument is now moving of, like, the boundaries and how Bitcoin has worked up to this point. 1232 01:02:55,102 --> 01:02:57,242 And I think you're regressing in seeding ground 1233 01:02:57,242 --> 01:02:59,023 to people who would want to attack the network. 1234 01:02:59,982 --> 01:03:02,523 Yeah, and I don't even think the money, 1235 01:03:02,863 --> 01:03:04,863 sort of non-money transactions don't even matter in this. 1236 01:03:04,922 --> 01:03:06,582 It's that you're proving that you can do something. 1237 01:03:07,123 --> 01:03:10,162 Yeah, I think Mr. Hoddle had a really good tweet 1238 01:03:10,162 --> 01:03:11,843 where he said the most bullish thing 1239 01:03:11,843 --> 01:03:13,802 is a failed UASF attempt 1240 01:03:13,802 --> 01:03:15,762 to show how censorship-resistant Bitcoin is. 1241 01:03:16,363 --> 01:03:19,343 But even if some of the most predominant developers 1242 01:03:19,343 --> 01:03:24,782 who also happen to be CEOs of binding pool protocols, 1243 01:03:24,782 --> 01:03:29,442 right like could be seen you know having this big like effort to be able to push the scale 1244 01:03:29,442 --> 01:03:35,082 and having them fail would be pretty bullish for the censorship resistant kind of um resiliency of 1245 01:03:35,082 --> 01:03:39,863 bitcoin as a protocol that can't be cajoled and pressured using these like legal uh framings and 1246 01:03:39,863 --> 01:03:45,982 moral framings it's interesting because probably for over a year now the not side of this argument 1247 01:03:45,982 --> 01:03:51,462 have been claiming that core and you and shinobi and all these people have been like attacks on 1248 01:03:51,462 --> 01:03:53,523 Bitcoin. Well, Shinobi is Bitcoin Core, 1249 01:03:53,823 --> 01:03:54,222 but yes. 1250 01:03:56,543 --> 01:03:57,502 He's Bitcoin Core 1251 01:03:57,502 --> 01:03:58,282 and he's Adam Back. 1252 01:03:59,782 --> 01:04:01,382 They've been claiming that you're an 1253 01:04:01,382 --> 01:04:03,202 attack on Bitcoin. Do you think this 1254 01:04:03,202 --> 01:04:05,402 poses the risk of actually being an attack on 1255 01:04:05,402 --> 01:04:07,182 Bitcoin? I mean, 1256 01:04:07,462 --> 01:04:09,222 UASF is an attack on the network 1257 01:04:09,222 --> 01:04:09,922 by design. 1258 01:04:12,002 --> 01:04:13,462 And attack 1259 01:04:13,462 --> 01:04:15,302 because it's challenging 1260 01:04:15,302 --> 01:04:17,202 the existing consensus rules, right? 1261 01:04:17,402 --> 01:04:19,043 Like, now 1262 01:04:19,043 --> 01:04:20,882 to be charitable for the other side, 1263 01:04:20,882 --> 01:04:28,063 they would frame this as we are applying a hot fix to the network this is like an emergency patch 1264 01:04:28,063 --> 01:04:32,882 which is why they say that usually you have a year plus for uasf we're doing this in 90 days or less 1265 01:04:32,882 --> 01:04:38,043 because this is actually an emergency hot fix this is not an upgrade right this is like a secure 1266 01:04:38,043 --> 01:04:44,702 emergency security patch um you are attacking the network that's what you're doing you're saying i 1267 01:04:44,702 --> 01:04:47,063 you're threatening to orphan miners, 1268 01:04:47,462 --> 01:04:49,802 you're threatening to reorg the chain, 1269 01:04:50,182 --> 01:04:53,323 you are threatening to change the rules 1270 01:04:53,323 --> 01:04:54,802 which everyone had previously agreed upon. 1271 01:04:55,523 --> 01:04:57,982 You could say, I am doing it for good, 1272 01:04:58,563 --> 01:05:02,302 or I must do this now because the actual attacker 1273 01:05:02,302 --> 01:05:04,082 is core in version 30, 1274 01:05:04,323 --> 01:05:07,182 but from a consensus level, it is an attack. 1275 01:05:07,582 --> 01:05:09,202 Now, we've done it well before. 1276 01:05:09,762 --> 01:05:11,782 Technically, we did it with Taproot and with SegWit. 1277 01:05:12,102 --> 01:05:13,442 We made changes to the network. 1278 01:05:13,442 --> 01:05:15,843 Like we said, hey, we're going to make some changes and do some new things. 1279 01:05:16,442 --> 01:05:19,442 Those things were non-controversial. 1280 01:05:19,642 --> 01:05:23,642 They also were non-controversial because everyone who disagreed forked off with Bitcoin cash. 1281 01:05:24,222 --> 01:05:28,422 So a chain split in like a UASF, like this is almost kind of like a divorce. 1282 01:05:28,823 --> 01:05:33,722 Like it starts socially and people that were around in 2016 as the block size wars were heating up 1283 01:05:33,722 --> 01:05:37,523 would have kind of described this like escalating kind of like social tension in general. 1284 01:05:37,863 --> 01:05:40,823 And then ultimately it ends in a divorce and you have a chain split. 1285 01:05:40,823 --> 01:05:46,662 And then the people that don't fork off, they have better consensus on activating SegWit. 1286 01:05:47,762 --> 01:05:51,382 Bitcoin Cash forked off before SegWit activated because they didn't want to do that. 1287 01:05:51,722 --> 01:05:58,242 So ultimately at a governance level, this is how disagreements within the anarchy system, which is Bitcoin, get resolved. 1288 01:05:58,402 --> 01:06:03,882 People self-select, run different software of their own choosing, and opt out of rules or rule changes. 1289 01:06:04,742 --> 01:06:06,563 So it is an attack. 1290 01:06:06,902 --> 01:06:08,782 It doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad thing. 1291 01:06:08,782 --> 01:06:12,802 I'm just saying that like if you're changing the rules of Bitcoin, you are doing an attack on the network. 1292 01:06:13,242 --> 01:06:18,182 And, you know, depending on what side you fall on, maybe it's justified and maybe it's not. 1293 01:06:19,182 --> 01:06:21,143 We need the are we the baddies meme here. 1294 01:06:22,582 --> 01:06:28,722 If you had to kind of predict what happens next then, what do you think will happen? 1295 01:06:28,762 --> 01:06:30,002 You don't think this soft walk will happen. 1296 01:06:30,102 --> 01:06:33,523 So what do you think will happen to the vocal support of that? 1297 01:06:33,662 --> 01:06:36,502 And I'm really talking about kind of the mechanics and the loops of the world. 1298 01:06:36,563 --> 01:06:37,662 Do you think we'll see rage quits? 1299 01:06:37,662 --> 01:06:40,802 Do you think they'll come back to Bitcoin and change the messaging? 1300 01:06:40,982 --> 01:06:44,762 Or do you think even if this doesn't happen, they'll try something else? 1301 01:06:46,582 --> 01:06:53,602 If I had to guess, I believe they are going to fork off. 1302 01:06:54,742 --> 01:07:00,043 Because I believe they put a lot of time and effort and reputation on this framing. 1303 01:07:01,123 --> 01:07:01,862 It is... 1304 01:07:01,862 --> 01:07:03,282 And do you need to hard fork that? 1305 01:07:04,242 --> 01:07:04,602 Maybe. 1306 01:07:04,722 --> 01:07:06,282 Well, we'll start off with the UASF. 1307 01:07:06,282 --> 01:07:08,662 They may, after the UASF, say, 1308 01:07:08,843 --> 01:07:10,082 okay, we also need a hard fork 1309 01:07:10,082 --> 01:07:12,023 because we need to change the mining algorithm 1310 01:07:12,023 --> 01:07:13,043 or the difficulty adjustment 1311 01:07:13,043 --> 01:07:14,682 or any other odd number of things. 1312 01:07:16,002 --> 01:07:18,102 I know for sure they're going to do the UASF, though. 1313 01:07:18,242 --> 01:07:20,082 I take them at their word 1314 01:07:20,082 --> 01:07:21,482 and believe them that they're going to do this. 1315 01:07:25,502 --> 01:07:29,082 Now, from there, I would welcome them back. 1316 01:07:29,323 --> 01:07:31,242 I would love, maybe a controversial opinion, 1317 01:07:31,823 --> 01:07:34,043 I'd love for the Bitcoin Cash people to come back over 1318 01:07:34,043 --> 01:07:35,782 and just have one big happy family again. 1319 01:07:36,282 --> 01:07:38,823 Like, there's so much we agree upon. 1320 01:07:38,882 --> 01:07:40,282 I would rather us be together. 1321 01:07:41,722 --> 01:07:44,782 But at the end of the day, you can't force or control 1322 01:07:44,862 --> 01:07:47,063 who people associate with, and that's their own decision. 1323 01:07:49,063 --> 01:07:51,602 Now, for the larger future, like, 1324 01:07:53,802 --> 01:07:56,462 them as people, I don't pretend to understand 1325 01:07:56,543 --> 01:07:58,702 how Ocean's business or governance 1326 01:07:58,762 --> 01:08:00,002 or any of those things work. 1327 01:08:02,502 --> 01:08:04,302 Like, I don't, like, 1328 01:08:04,302 --> 01:08:08,982 they could attempt and fail and just everything keeps on going back to where it was before. 1329 01:08:09,382 --> 01:08:14,302 It could happen. I don't know. Right. That's much more of a question for them because they 1330 01:08:14,302 --> 01:08:21,362 would be able to more to finally say how they're going to act. And if we got the UASF, do you think 1331 01:08:21,362 --> 01:08:29,263 there'll be a URSF? Do you think there'll be a rejection of that? And with the reorgs being the, 1332 01:08:29,263 --> 01:08:33,342 I guess, prime issue there? Well, so here's the thing is that you would be able to pretty 1333 01:08:33,342 --> 01:08:39,002 quickly understand is that even a threat? Because after like five blocks, 10 blocks, 1334 01:08:39,322 --> 01:08:45,362 you're not going to have to worry about anything. Because you'll see where the hash rate is. 1335 01:08:45,763 --> 01:08:49,362 You'll see where the hash rate is. And you can run a node on each chain. So you can see I'm at 1336 01:08:49,362 --> 01:08:53,183 block height 100 and you're at block height 105. And you can just sit on the node and see what 1337 01:08:53,183 --> 01:08:58,942 block are they at. And I think as an actual heuristic, like with the actual like this is 1338 01:08:58,942 --> 01:09:01,023 over. This is my 1339 01:09:01,023 --> 01:09:03,143 personal theory. But after 100 1340 01:09:03,143 --> 01:09:05,063 blocks, this is an 1341 01:09:05,063 --> 01:09:06,962 important thing about how Bitcoin works. When a miner 1342 01:09:06,962 --> 01:09:09,163 finds a block, they have to wait 100 1343 01:09:09,163 --> 01:09:11,063 blocks before they can take that Coinbase output 1344 01:09:11,063 --> 01:09:13,123 and spend it. And once you 1345 01:09:13,123 --> 01:09:15,223 get to a point that miners are now able to withdraw 1346 01:09:15,223 --> 01:09:15,742 funds 1347 01:09:15,742 --> 01:09:18,623 that they've mined on this chain, 1348 01:09:18,862 --> 01:09:20,982 they're not going to reorg themselves out of money. 1349 01:09:21,523 --> 01:09:23,123 So after like 18 1350 01:09:23,123 --> 01:09:25,143 hours, if there's 1351 01:09:25,143 --> 01:09:26,942 not a serious split in hash rate, 1352 01:09:26,942 --> 01:09:29,583 I don't see it as a 1353 01:09:29,583 --> 01:09:32,102 likely to have a rollback. 1354 01:09:32,203 --> 01:09:32,763 And then at that point, 1355 01:09:32,822 --> 01:09:34,742 you don't need to do a URSF 1356 01:09:34,742 --> 01:09:37,482 because it's fine. 1357 01:09:38,183 --> 01:09:41,382 Exchanges could just pause withdrawals 1358 01:09:41,382 --> 01:09:42,882 for X blocks. 1359 01:09:43,683 --> 01:09:44,802 That's a great way an exchange 1360 01:09:44,802 --> 01:09:45,542 can protect itself. 1361 01:09:45,802 --> 01:09:46,083 They can just say, 1362 01:09:46,163 --> 01:09:47,123 hey, for the next X blocks, 1363 01:09:47,203 --> 01:09:48,342 we're going to hold off on withdrawals 1364 01:09:48,342 --> 01:09:49,822 because there's network uncertainty. 1365 01:09:50,763 --> 01:09:52,002 So that's a way of doing it. 1366 01:09:52,962 --> 01:09:54,583 If you're transacting in Bitcoin 1367 01:09:54,583 --> 01:09:55,703 and they're moving forward with this, 1368 01:09:55,703 --> 01:09:57,282 don't do a large Bitcoin transaction 1369 01:09:57,282 --> 01:09:59,782 until the dust gets settled. 1370 01:09:59,882 --> 01:10:01,342 Or just wait for more confirmations. 1371 01:10:01,643 --> 01:10:03,822 Instead of like six, which is like an hour, 1372 01:10:04,223 --> 01:10:04,942 maybe wait a day. 1373 01:10:05,583 --> 01:10:07,143 And then I think pretty quickly 1374 01:10:07,143 --> 01:10:08,282 the dust would settle after that. 1375 01:10:08,982 --> 01:10:10,502 But I think it would be way premature 1376 01:10:10,502 --> 01:10:14,223 to do a URSF when no one's in the futures market. 1377 01:10:14,382 --> 01:10:15,882 No one believes in the futures market 1378 01:10:15,882 --> 01:10:17,083 that this coin's going to be worth anything, 1379 01:10:17,163 --> 01:10:17,802 the URSF coin. 1380 01:10:18,302 --> 01:10:19,742 None of the miners have signal support for it. 1381 01:10:19,782 --> 01:10:21,322 None of the businesses have signal support for it. 1382 01:10:21,842 --> 01:10:23,842 I can't even find one Bitcoin of liquidity 1383 01:10:23,842 --> 01:10:25,382 on the other side who wants to bet 1384 01:10:25,382 --> 01:10:26,382 on the UASF coin, 1385 01:10:26,742 --> 01:10:28,102 and I have at least 100 1386 01:10:28,102 --> 01:10:29,542 that wants to bet against it, 1387 01:10:30,123 --> 01:10:31,602 I think it's way too premature 1388 01:10:31,602 --> 01:10:32,502 to do a UASF 1389 01:10:32,502 --> 01:10:33,362 or even think about it. 1390 01:10:33,703 --> 01:10:34,822 You might have pissed someone 1391 01:10:34,822 --> 01:10:35,542 off enough today 1392 01:10:35,542 --> 01:10:37,023 to get that one Bitcoin of liquidity. 1393 01:10:38,063 --> 01:10:39,382 I will happily take... 1394 01:10:40,063 --> 01:10:41,242 You name your... 1395 01:10:41,242 --> 01:10:42,063 You give me the coins. 1396 01:10:42,242 --> 01:10:43,643 I will very happily... 1397 01:10:43,643 --> 01:10:44,842 I can fill probably 1398 01:10:44,842 --> 01:10:46,882 just on my inbound interest 1399 01:10:46,882 --> 01:10:47,623 hundreds of Bitcoin. 1400 01:10:48,002 --> 01:10:49,242 And if it actually gets serious, 1401 01:10:49,442 --> 01:10:49,962 there could be more. 1402 01:10:50,842 --> 01:10:52,002 It's going to be interesting. 1403 01:10:52,063 --> 01:10:52,862 It's such a mess, man. 1404 01:10:53,962 --> 01:10:55,242 I'm looking through the BIP. 1405 01:10:55,382 --> 01:11:03,623 Right now, there's been a lot of discussion on the mailing list, as well as the repo of people kind of talking through about this. 1406 01:11:06,203 --> 01:11:13,382 Version 30 being now the largest node implementation, I'm looking at Clark Moody's dashboard at 10.76%. 1407 01:11:13,382 --> 01:11:23,002 It's hard to say where this support's really going to come from. 1408 01:11:23,002 --> 01:11:23,742 I don't know. 1409 01:11:23,882 --> 01:11:26,163 Like, I'm thinking through the game theory. 1410 01:11:26,322 --> 01:11:27,402 I talked about chain splits, 1411 01:11:27,782 --> 01:11:28,982 talked about futures contracts, 1412 01:11:29,143 --> 01:11:32,342 talked about mining, game theory, and reorgs. 1413 01:11:32,602 --> 01:11:35,402 I think it's been a good high-level summary 1414 01:11:35,402 --> 01:11:37,282 of all of the latest pieces, 1415 01:11:37,382 --> 01:11:38,462 but it's moving fast, too, 1416 01:11:38,602 --> 01:11:40,703 which is also just a... 1417 01:11:40,703 --> 01:11:41,703 As of this afternoon, 1418 01:11:42,143 --> 01:11:43,002 Dave Thinome was saying 1419 01:11:43,002 --> 01:11:44,882 that he was going to maybe change the activation height, 1420 01:11:45,002 --> 01:11:47,042 which it's really tough 1421 01:11:47,042 --> 01:11:48,602 because once you start changing it, 1422 01:11:48,822 --> 01:11:49,802 people take you less seriously 1423 01:11:49,802 --> 01:11:51,502 because you'll just, like, move the deadline again. 1424 01:11:51,502 --> 01:11:58,282 and so I think it's a signal of weakness. 1425 01:11:58,763 --> 01:12:00,822 So they're trying to figure out 1426 01:12:00,822 --> 01:12:01,663 what they're going to do next. 1427 01:12:03,002 --> 01:12:04,203 I would guess they're going to move that backwards, 1428 01:12:04,322 --> 01:12:04,822 not forwards. 1429 01:12:05,523 --> 01:12:05,683 Yeah. 1430 01:12:06,342 --> 01:12:06,723 All right. 1431 01:12:07,322 --> 01:12:09,063 I've also, I'm not allowed to, 1432 01:12:09,123 --> 01:12:10,102 there's a telegram room 1433 01:12:10,102 --> 01:12:12,563 where they talk about the fork and the opportunities. 1434 01:12:12,802 --> 01:12:15,242 I have been banned from talking about prediction markets 1435 01:12:15,242 --> 01:12:17,523 in there and talking about futures markets 1436 01:12:17,523 --> 01:12:18,942 because I've been trying to find someone. 1437 01:12:18,942 --> 01:12:40,002 So if they are trying to stifle the economic demand to express pro BIP444, pro UASF Bitcoin, I think they understand that there is an economic demand there. So I think that kind of like seals it. The money talks at the end of the day. You can do long debate threads and you can do long kind of like esoteric hypothetical what ifs. 1438 01:12:40,002 --> 01:12:45,422 a futures market is actually the market finding mechanism for resolving this. And the fact that 1439 01:12:45,422 --> 01:12:50,183 they're trying to choke the liquidity so no one can express pro 444 UASF sentiments, 1440 01:12:50,402 --> 01:12:54,782 it's not looking good for them. I saw you did start a prediction market as well. Was that on 1441 01:12:54,782 --> 01:13:00,002 predicts? Yes, I did. I did start a prediction market. I just tried to look at it, but it says, 1442 01:13:00,002 --> 01:13:06,223 it says the website's like temporarily down. They are. So as a funny note, I had never used 1443 01:13:06,223 --> 01:13:12,023 the website. Everyone was refusing to reply to me. So I went and made my own prediction market 1444 01:13:12,023 --> 01:13:19,002 on Predix, P-R-E-D-Y-X. I have no affiliation with them. It is entirely custodial, just to be 1445 01:13:19,002 --> 01:13:25,862 clear. Entirely custodial. I went and set up a prediction market on the likelihood of this UASF 1446 01:13:25,862 --> 01:13:34,203 activating and being the most built chain. And the percent is currently at 2%. 1447 01:13:34,203 --> 01:13:39,482 oh damn when i checked a few days ago was it like seven or something well then i i go in there and i 1448 01:13:39,482 --> 01:13:45,763 put hundreds of dollars in and bid it down so i currently have i've put up 2.5 million sats to win 1449 01:13:45,763 --> 01:13:52,442 2.8 million sats so those are the odds like implying the size of the odds here um and so i go in there 1450 01:13:52,442 --> 01:13:58,822 every day and i just bid it back down because i'm pretty convinced it's no so um if you annualize it 1451 01:13:58,822 --> 01:14:01,242 I'm getting like a 30% yield on that Bitcoin 1452 01:14:01,242 --> 01:14:03,183 as long as the custodian doesn't rug me. 1453 01:14:03,742 --> 01:14:05,623 So I feel pretty confident. 1454 01:14:05,623 --> 01:14:07,123 And I haven't found... 1455 01:14:07,123 --> 01:14:08,842 Well, it's just making a bet. 1456 01:14:09,242 --> 01:14:09,703 I'm just... 1457 01:14:09,703 --> 01:14:11,302 I have high confidence in it. 1458 01:14:11,482 --> 01:14:13,042 So Predixite was fun, though. 1459 01:14:13,063 --> 01:14:13,822 I'd never used that before. 1460 01:14:14,023 --> 01:14:15,643 And so then I made a prediction market on 1461 01:14:15,643 --> 01:14:18,063 will Luke or Mechanic acknowledge a prediction 1462 01:14:18,063 --> 01:14:20,083 or futures market to be legitimate that is in motion 1463 01:14:20,083 --> 01:14:21,523 because they refuse to legitimize. 1464 01:14:21,563 --> 01:14:23,102 They just call it a big bet and I'm a liar. 1465 01:14:23,422 --> 01:14:24,402 They won't elaborate further. 1466 01:14:24,643 --> 01:14:26,042 So I made a prediction market on 1467 01:14:26,042 --> 01:14:27,922 will they legitimize a prediction market? 1468 01:14:28,822 --> 01:14:30,882 and then I made a prediction market on 1469 01:14:30,882 --> 01:14:32,982 like will Luke and Mechanic 1470 01:14:32,982 --> 01:14:34,782 acknowledge a prediction market as legitimate 1471 01:14:34,782 --> 01:14:35,442 because they just say 1472 01:14:35,442 --> 01:14:37,002 but what are the odds on that one now? 1473 01:14:37,643 --> 01:14:38,502 that's at 14% 1474 01:14:38,502 --> 01:14:40,822 so there's 14% on that 1475 01:14:40,822 --> 01:14:43,083 I did a prediction market on when they would actually release the code 1476 01:14:43,083 --> 01:14:43,962 which already resolved 1477 01:14:43,962 --> 01:14:45,583 they released it on November 7th 1478 01:14:45,583 --> 01:14:46,342 so that already resolved 1479 01:14:46,342 --> 01:14:47,703 I made a prediction market 1480 01:14:47,703 --> 01:14:51,322 will Dathan Ohm still do the on-chain futures contract bet with me 1481 01:14:51,322 --> 01:14:52,563 because I'm not sure if he's going to 1482 01:14:52,563 --> 01:14:54,242 that's currently priced at 19% 1483 01:14:54,242 --> 01:14:55,802 well that's free money for him 1484 01:14:55,802 --> 01:14:57,223 well that's what I said 1485 01:14:57,223 --> 01:14:58,782 it's free money for you buddy 1486 01:14:58,782 --> 01:15:04,242 I've been having fun with this idea of trying to constrain prediction markets as like gambling or 1487 01:15:04,242 --> 01:15:08,402 it's just information finds a signal in a way. And it's just one of these things that I've been 1488 01:15:08,402 --> 01:15:13,842 having fun since no one will take me on the trustless non-custodial auditable one to make 1489 01:15:13,842 --> 01:15:18,023 my own market elsewhere with different risk trade-offs. But I just want to price some risk. 1490 01:15:18,123 --> 01:15:23,422 It's all insurance, baby. I'm just pricing risk. That's a perfect segue to talk about Anchor Watch, 1491 01:15:23,422 --> 01:15:28,763 Rob. You're such a pro. How are things going at Anchor Watch? Doing great. Yeah, everything's 1492 01:15:28,763 --> 01:15:30,802 going great at Anchor Watch. A couple people have asked 1493 01:15:30,802 --> 01:15:32,203 all of these changes 1494 01:15:32,203 --> 01:15:34,502 and do not impact us at all. We use 1495 01:15:34,502 --> 01:15:36,442 pay-to-witness script hash and 1496 01:15:36,442 --> 01:15:38,643 there's no restriction on what we're 1497 01:15:38,643 --> 01:15:40,583 doing as it relates to this UASF so 1498 01:15:40,583 --> 01:15:42,462 our customers are not impacted. 1499 01:15:42,643 --> 01:15:43,523 Won't be an issue at all. 1500 01:15:44,482 --> 01:15:46,482 It's been going well heading into the end of the year. 1501 01:15:46,583 --> 01:15:48,263 We're looking to be launching some new vault 1502 01:15:48,263 --> 01:15:50,523 variants and product offerings as well as uninsured 1503 01:15:50,523 --> 01:15:52,623 custody around year's end 1504 01:15:52,623 --> 01:15:54,002 so keep an eye out for that. 1505 01:15:55,042 --> 01:15:56,462 Can you talk about what they look like yet or 1506 01:15:56,462 --> 01:15:57,683 is that still under apps? 1507 01:15:58,763 --> 01:16:25,583 I'm happy to. There'll be versions where customers only have to hold one key, where additionally, with uninsured, you'll be able to set it up in a way where we co-sign with you. But then it goes to your self-custody. And then a year later, if you lost your key, we can help recover it later. Right? So there's never, the only way that we could act to move funds without your permission is because the funds haven't, like you lost your key and you haven't been able to move funds for a year. 1508 01:16:26,583 --> 01:16:28,302 Also sitting at multi-institutional custody, 1509 01:16:28,942 --> 01:16:32,962 just kind of finding new ways to be able to meet customers 1510 01:16:32,962 --> 01:16:36,042 where they're at with their own preferred custody key model 1511 01:16:36,042 --> 01:16:40,203 and being able to, you know, meet people where they want, 1512 01:16:40,683 --> 01:16:41,102 you know, right? 1513 01:16:41,643 --> 01:16:42,663 At the end of the day, 1514 01:16:42,802 --> 01:16:44,922 we want to be able to help people secure their Bitcoin 1515 01:16:44,922 --> 01:16:45,782 however they see fit 1516 01:16:45,782 --> 01:16:47,942 and being kind of a tool to help empower them to do that. 1517 01:16:48,683 --> 01:16:50,583 You know this BIP, different BIP now, 1518 01:16:51,183 --> 01:16:53,882 that Jesse Posner and someone else from BitKey 1519 01:16:53,882 --> 01:16:55,723 as put forward, 1520 01:16:55,822 --> 01:16:57,282 which is basically a way of, 1521 01:16:57,362 --> 01:16:58,123 as far as I understand it, 1522 01:16:58,123 --> 01:16:59,362 you can explain how this actually works, 1523 01:16:59,882 --> 01:17:01,703 allowing collaborative custody, 1524 01:17:01,822 --> 01:17:03,942 but where you as the person 1525 01:17:03,942 --> 01:17:04,663 they're collaborating with 1526 01:17:04,663 --> 01:17:05,782 can't actually see 1527 01:17:05,782 --> 01:17:07,602 the Bitcoin transactions they're doing 1528 01:17:07,602 --> 01:17:08,982 if it's not including your key. 1529 01:17:09,462 --> 01:17:09,982 Is that something 1530 01:17:09,982 --> 01:17:10,782 you'll be able to implement? 1531 01:17:10,922 --> 01:17:12,482 And maybe if I've explained that badly, 1532 01:17:12,602 --> 01:17:13,882 maybe you should reframe it. 1533 01:17:13,902 --> 01:17:14,263 No, no, no. 1534 01:17:14,502 --> 01:17:15,462 So at the highest level, 1535 01:17:15,703 --> 01:17:17,502 I'm just explaining how most, 1536 01:17:17,922 --> 01:17:18,442 if not all, 1537 01:17:18,542 --> 01:17:19,822 collaborative custodians work today 1538 01:17:19,822 --> 01:17:22,902 is maybe I give you a key, 1539 01:17:23,042 --> 01:17:23,842 you set up a wallet, 1540 01:17:23,882 --> 01:17:26,683 this would be like an Unchained or a Casa 1541 01:17:26,683 --> 01:17:28,822 or a long list of many others. 1542 01:17:29,123 --> 01:17:29,402 Or a BitKey. 1543 01:17:30,042 --> 01:17:31,422 Or a BitKey, of course, yeah. 1544 01:17:31,523 --> 01:17:33,703 So the BitKey team, they worked on this. 1545 01:17:33,842 --> 01:17:35,342 The BitKey team was a lot of work on the BitKey team. 1546 01:17:35,802 --> 01:17:38,563 The way it works today is the service provider 1547 01:17:38,563 --> 01:17:42,342 to be able to help you transact 1548 01:17:42,342 --> 01:17:44,663 and maybe load up the app and see the balance, 1549 01:17:45,203 --> 01:17:47,462 they have to see all of the transaction data. 1550 01:17:47,542 --> 01:17:49,163 So you give them what's called an output descriptor. 1551 01:17:49,163 --> 01:17:51,023 This output descriptor is like the full body 1552 01:17:51,023 --> 01:17:52,322 of all of the metadata for the wallet. 1553 01:17:53,882 --> 01:17:59,102 The trade-off here, though, is that the service provider can see all of your transactions 1554 01:17:59,102 --> 01:18:01,982 and knows all of your deposit addresses and knows every time you use a transaction. 1555 01:18:02,523 --> 01:18:06,203 This new BIP would allow us to basically do a key exchange. 1556 01:18:07,242 --> 01:18:10,382 And by default, I can never see your on-chain activity. 1557 01:18:10,802 --> 01:18:15,143 But if you need me to sign to help you out, you can then reveal information to me that 1558 01:18:15,143 --> 01:18:17,002 allows me to use my key to sign your transaction. 1559 01:18:17,002 --> 01:18:18,962 So it allows for better default privacy. 1560 01:18:20,183 --> 01:18:23,242 I mean, that seems like a massive upgrade because the big trade-off with any kind of 1561 01:18:23,242 --> 01:18:24,723 collaborative custody is the privacy one. 1562 01:18:24,902 --> 01:18:26,723 If this is removing that, 1563 01:18:27,362 --> 01:18:28,942 that's probably a pretty huge for you. 1564 01:18:30,202 --> 01:18:30,902 No, I think it's a massive 1565 01:18:30,902 --> 01:18:33,303 upgrade in thinking 1566 01:18:33,303 --> 01:18:35,023 about the user experience and the privacy 1567 01:18:35,023 --> 01:18:37,163 trade-offs when it comes to self-custody, but having 1568 01:18:37,163 --> 01:18:39,042 someone able to help you in the event 1569 01:18:39,042 --> 01:18:41,183 you need help. And so your 1570 01:18:41,183 --> 01:18:43,402 default happy path could be just using your own keys 1571 01:18:43,402 --> 01:18:45,102 and the service provider 1572 01:18:45,102 --> 01:18:47,322 would never be able to understand or define anything 1573 01:18:47,322 --> 01:18:49,303 about how you're using Bitcoin. Not because 1574 01:18:49,303 --> 01:18:51,422 they're hiding it, it's because they actually 1575 01:18:51,422 --> 01:18:55,902 don't know. So I think that's a very good just like first principle basis of kind of like improving 1576 01:18:55,902 --> 01:19:01,202 the custody model for sure. I think it'll take some time for it to get into the ecosystem. 1577 01:19:01,942 --> 01:19:04,942 Ideally, we'd want to have hardware wallets supporting this so you can interoperate with 1578 01:19:04,942 --> 01:19:09,583 it. You'd want to be able to even use it with Bitcoin Core. Like you want to get a reasonable 1579 01:19:09,583 --> 01:19:15,402 proliferation of like the wallet and software to adopt this. But I think in a time like in a 1580 01:19:15,402 --> 01:19:19,862 realistically two years from now, maybe we'll start seeing it more widely adopted, 1581 01:19:19,862 --> 01:19:25,942 but definitely keeping an eye on that very cool i'm bullish on that bit less so on bit 444 we're 1582 01:19:25,942 --> 01:19:29,442 going to get a lot of hate for this rob but um i think it's an important conversation i'm glad we 1583 01:19:29,442 --> 01:19:33,822 managed to go and get into it um anywhere you want to send anyone apart from anchor watch before we 1584 01:19:33,822 --> 01:19:42,542 close out uh yeah i guess uh i'm rob one ham rob the number one ham on twitter i'm rob at primal.net 1585 01:19:42,542 --> 01:19:51,002 on Noster. If you are a big proponent of this UASF, in my pinned tweet, I talk about the 1586 01:19:51,002 --> 01:19:56,242 importance of futures markets. I've been tweeting out a lot about the actual on-chain contract. You 1587 01:19:56,242 --> 01:20:00,583 can start looking at the code and understanding, asking questions, getting audited. I would love 1588 01:20:00,583 --> 01:20:05,563 to be able to facilitate more market making. And what's great about it too is it's peer-to-peer. 1589 01:20:06,023 --> 01:20:09,223 I'm not just two individuals putting money together into a Bitcoin transaction. 1590 01:20:09,223 --> 01:20:14,263 like i and that code is fully open anyone can go run off and do this you don't need to involve me 1591 01:20:14,263 --> 01:20:20,282 at all um and i would encourage you if you're interested and you want to kind of uh if you 1592 01:20:20,282 --> 01:20:25,723 have high conviction and it's uasf working um hit me up on twitter and um we can talk about 1593 01:20:25,723 --> 01:20:30,143 going through the code and getting something set up love it man it's um it's we will definitely 1594 01:20:30,143 --> 01:20:37,602 get some hate from this it's interesting whenever you talk about either core 30 core in general um 1595 01:20:37,602 --> 01:20:41,822 Bitcoin knots, like the amount of comments I get is unusual. 1596 01:20:42,143 --> 01:20:43,982 I think there's probably a lot of bots. 1597 01:20:44,683 --> 01:20:50,482 My favorite, and since I am an avid follower of the 40 hours per week podcast program that 1598 01:20:50,482 --> 01:20:55,862 the Bitcoin Bugle does, I'll get YouTube subscription notifications when you come out with a new 1599 01:20:55,862 --> 01:20:56,102 show. 1600 01:20:56,402 --> 01:21:00,583 And it's wild that within three minutes of a show being uploaded, you'll get multiple 1601 01:21:00,583 --> 01:21:01,083 comments. 1602 01:21:01,882 --> 01:21:03,842 Like people who have obviously not watched it. 1603 01:21:03,842 --> 01:21:06,862 It's always the first comments that I get come through on a video are always about knots 1604 01:21:06,862 --> 01:21:07,422 pretty much. 1605 01:21:07,602 --> 01:21:16,623 Right, which makes you question how much of this is organic versus real user interest, which is why the futures market is beautiful. 1606 01:21:16,962 --> 01:21:23,163 Because a bot can't put up Bitcoin in a trustless, non-custodial smart contract. 1607 01:21:23,482 --> 01:21:26,982 But they can run LLMs all day and just kind of astroturf the ecosystem. 1608 01:21:27,683 --> 01:21:32,223 This will be a fun test when you upload this with my name as a key line hit and your podcast. 1609 01:21:32,223 --> 01:21:36,782 the amount of random unrelated comments that are going to show up within the first hour 1610 01:21:36,782 --> 01:21:40,362 of people who definitely didn't watch it and they don't comment on anything else and they have no 1611 01:21:40,362 --> 01:21:46,422 actual user footprint or anything um it'll be very interesting to see yeah the comments are like 1612 01:21:46,422 --> 01:21:50,523 definitely come in before they could have watched any of the video but but we'll see it's all good 1613 01:21:50,523 --> 01:21:55,822 it's all fun and games um everyone missed the part at the very you gotta you gotta just giggle 1614 01:21:55,822 --> 01:21:58,643 you gotta giggle giggling is free giggle 1615 01:21:58,700 --> 01:22:04,180 is legal and it's good for the soul you got to be doing some giggling i'll let you get back to 1616 01:22:04,180 --> 01:22:07,380 everyone will have missed this at the very start of the conversation but you're 1617 01:22:07,380 --> 01:22:15,880 not larping on twitter today you're actually larping yeah uh so uh lisa nifty nay uh is here 1618 01:22:15,880 --> 01:22:20,860 at the at bitcoin park for there's a bitcoin veteran summit and she was doing a lark the 1619 01:22:20,860 --> 01:22:23,900 live action role play how the bitcoin network works if you ever get an opportunity to go check 1620 01:22:23,900 --> 01:22:29,200 one out, I would highly recommend it. It's a lot of fun. But Danny made me abandon a room full of 1621 01:22:29,200 --> 01:22:34,780 veterans on Veterans Day to go do this podcast. And so they were none too happy about it. And 1622 01:22:34,780 --> 01:22:39,620 right after I got this call, I'm going to go run downstairs and host BitDevs. So I'll get a little 1623 01:22:39,620 --> 01:22:44,520 bit of redemption there. There you go. I'm sorry to all the veterans out there. But this conversation 1624 01:22:44,520 --> 01:22:48,880 was great, Rob. Thank you, man. And I'm sure we'll speak soon. We were going to do a show totally 1625 01:22:48,880 --> 01:22:52,580 different on the Hero's Journey of Bitcoin, but we'll have to park that one and we can do that 1626 01:22:52,580 --> 01:22:53,040 next time. 1627 01:22:53,580 --> 01:22:53,860 Absolutely. 1628 01:22:53,960 --> 01:22:54,420 Sounds like a plan. 1629 01:22:54,540 --> 01:22:55,340 Thanks, Danny, for having me. 1630 01:22:55,700 --> 01:22:56,140 Thanks, mate. 1631 01:22:56,280 --> 01:22:56,440 Bye.