# Bitcoin's 3 Biggest Challanges | NEHA NARULA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1uCIwn-4s4

[00:00] There's no way to make your coins quantum safe right now.
[00:03] Like really quantum safe, right?
[00:07] Let's not hold that up on a philosophical conversation about like what to do about Satoshi's coins.
[00:12] We don't have to answer that to do this.
[00:14] Let's do this.
[00:16] This is the most important thing to do right now.
[00:17] Nha, thank you so much for being here.
[00:21] I'm really excited to chat with you.
[00:23] We've been talking about this episode for a while now.
[00:24] Several months this has been, I feel like, uh, coming up.
[00:26] Yeah, really excited to be here, too.
[00:28] I really like your podcast.
[00:30] I think it's really good.
[00:32] Uh really interesting conversation, so I'm excited to be a part of it.
[00:35] Thank you.
[00:35] That means a lot.
[00:38] Um so you are, of course, just to kind of position you a little bit for this conversation, you're the director of the digital currency initiative at MIT Media Lab.
[00:46] Yes.
[00:46] Um, and the digital currency initiative does lots of interesting things in sort of the Bitcoin and broader digital asset space, but there they were also quite early I think relative to some of the other organizations that do things like say fund Bitcoin developers, which is one of
[01:01] The things you do.
[01:02] Yes.
[01:02] I love talking about this history actually.
[01:05] It's really fun and really interesting.
[01:07] Um, so the digital currency initiative or the DCI, we're a part of MIT.
[01:12] We are a part of the media lab at MIT.
[01:14] So we're part of this academic institution.
[01:16] I actually went to graduate school at MIT.
[01:17] So, um, yeah.
[01:17] Uh, so I did my PhD there.
[01:20] Uh, the DCI was started before I finished graduate school.
[01:24] So, I had nothing to do with the founding of it.
[01:26] I came around a bit later, but I think it's really interesting to talk about how it was created because it's a very MIT story.
[01:33] So, there was this undergraduate at MIT, Jeremy Rubin, who I think you've had on this podcast.
[01:38] And, um, he was super interested in Bitcoin and he met this Sloan student, Dan Ellitzer.
[01:44] They started the MIT Bitcoin Club.
[01:47] They started the MIT Bitcoin Expo.
[01:50] And uh Jeremy at the time convinced the director of the media lab that like, hey, we need to be doing more.
[01:54] We need to be doing more stuff.
[01:57] Bitcoin's the future.
[01:58] This is going to be really exciting.
[02:00] It's going to change the way money works.
[02:00] Convinced him and
[02:02] then started the digital currency initiative at MIT.
[02:05] So Jeremy is actually the progenitor of this thing.
[02:08] I wasn't there, but I kind of give him credit for this.
[02:10] Yes.
[02:10] I mean, obviously, you know, he was a student.
[02:12] He had to get a lot of people on board.
[02:15] Good for him.
[02:16] Yeah.
[02:16] He got the ball rolling.
[02:18] I want to give him credit for that.
[02:19] So, you know, did a lot to bring Bitcoin to MIT and to, I guess, orange pill a lot of people, though we didn't use this that term at the time.
[02:25] Um, and, uh, what was also happening simultaneously was there was the Bitcoin Foundation.
[02:30] So, I don't know if you remember the Bitcoin Foundation.
[02:33] Um,
[02:35] I've heard about it.
[02:35] I wasn't there when it was relevant, but
[02:38] yeah, me neither.
[02:38] Um, but underwent a lot of drama.
[02:39] um you know various like directors getting elected and and and getting pushed out and things like that and basically the Bitcoin Foundation kind of collapsed.
[02:49] What what was the original just for folks who might not be familiar like like who started the Bitcoin Foundation?
[02:53] What was the original goal of the
[02:56] even know?
[02:56] I don't know.
[02:56] I didn't I wasn't actually there.
[02:58] I know Patrick Mk was the executive director at the time.
[03:03] And and was the idea to fund Bitcoin development?
[03:05] The idea was that it was there to work on Bitcoin to fund.
[03:10] So they employed three Bitcoin developers at the time.
[03:12] Gavin Andre who was the lead maintainer, you know, the one Satoshi sort of passed the reigns to, Vladimir Vanderlon, who became the lead maintainer after Gavin and Corey Fields.
[03:23] So they were working for the Bitcoin Foundation.
[03:25] um the Bitcoin Foundation like raised funding to do this and to also I think kind of be a voice in DC a little bit, you know, to kind of like advocate for Bitcoin politically, I think.
[03:37] So, yeah.
[03:38] I mean, like I said, this was before my time.
[03:40] So, this was when when was this?
[03:42] 2014.
[03:42] Yeah.
[03:42] 2014 was around when it collapsed and um and so uh again, I wasn't there firsthand.
[03:48] And I'm telling the story secondhand, but um you know what happened was they were like, "Oh no, these three developers who are critical to the success of the Bitcoin open source project are going to be out of a job.
[03:59] What do we do?
[04:02] And so a group of people were kind of trying to figure out, could we get some universities
[04:04] together to kind of like support them?
[04:07] Uh long story short, none of the other universities really worked out.
[04:09] We just hired them at MIT.
[04:10] So that's what we started the digital currency initiative around.
[04:14] So those three Bitco Bitcoin Foundation developers
[04:18] Yes. came to MIT. Yes.
[04:20] And we don't know what do we know why the Bitcoin Foundation collapsed just out of curiosity.
[04:22] Uh I think you can read about it online.
[04:24] I don't want to like go into the details.
[04:27] We'll have a lot of characters who were involved.
[04:29] You can you can uh you can go have a Yeah, you can go look that stuff up.
[04:32] Sounds juicy. Yeah.
[04:34] Uh I don't think I'm the right person to talk about it, but maybe we should do an episode on it.
[04:37] Uh and so anyway, so they came to uh to MIT.
[04:39] MIT has this like MIT is a really unique place, right?
[04:43] So it's an academic university but it's very technical and the motto of MIT is men's at manus so mind and hand okay
[04:55] and what that means is that like it's not just about learning the academic theory it's not just about like writing papers people get their hands dirty they build stuff they do stuff and there is a rich
[05:07] history of open source software at MIT.
[05:09] Richard Stallman was like a character.
[05:11] who was around for a long time the Keraros project was based out of MIT.
[05:15] W3C, the worldwide web consortium is based out of MIT.
[05:17] So, so MIT kind of has this like storied history of like not just being the academic research institution, but like actually supporting these open source projects.
[05:28] So, um, so it wasn't totally crazy.
[05:31] it wasn't totally crazy, but it made sense.
[05:33] Yeah.
[05:33] I it was it was like it was a like it was a nice story.
[05:35] So, they came to MIT part of the media lab um but not really local.
[05:39] um you know they were in different parts of the world and then uh you know it wasn't until a year later that I joined the DCI but the idea was that DCI was going to be a place that would bring together researchers um open source developers be a little bit interdisciplinary so we were in the media lab we're not in the computer science department and the media lab a lot of people are very confused about it because of the name they're like what does that mean is it marketing is it like newspapers no so the media lab was founded 40 years ago um and it was
[06:08] really where the people who founded the media lab um really saw the internet coming, saw technology coming and we're like this is going to change the way so many industries and so many businesses work and we want to be at the epicenter of that and so a lot of like really interesting crazy technologies have come out of the media lab.
[06:25] Eink like in your Kindle was developed at the media lab.
[06:29] Um, Guitar Hero, like the the game, it's a place where like art and design and hardware and science a and tech just like mix in like really interesting creative ways.
[06:43] So, the way I like to describe it is like down the hall from me on the third floor of the media lab is a group called Opera of the Future.
[06:49] They write operas.
[06:51] Like that's what they do.
[06:53] Like really interesting technology forward like cool operas but like operas, right?
[06:58] So, you know, there's someone who's like invented a broad that can detect breast cancer.
[07:02] It's like a creation lab.
[07:03] Yeah.
[07:05] But like really hardcore science and like art, like really real stuff at the core of it.
[07:08] So, um, so you know, not
[07:10] the computer science department, not the economics department, not the finance department.
[07:14] It's multi-disiplinary.
[07:16] That's probably the key and very connected to humans, which I think is so important.
[07:19] Like really creating technology for the benefit of humans.
[07:22] Um and so I I feel like it's a great fit for what we do.
[07:25] Makes us very different than other universities who are working in the space.
[07:28] Um and also I mean I think you know you understand we really started in Bitcoin like you know there there was an interest in filling in the foundations of the underlying field which is like if Bitcoin were to disappear tomorrow I would still be interested in this technology.
[07:44] I would still be interested in the future of money and you know changing the financial system and making um an open censorship resistant payment system that you know billions of people can use.
[07:55] I will always be interested in that.
[07:57] It's not specifically tied to Bitcoin existing but that said we have our roots in Bitcoin and I think most of the people there feel like Bitcoin is a very strong chance of achieving that vision like potentially the more promising of
[08:12] all the options on the table for accomplishing this.
[08:13] Yeah.
[08:15] And and like personally I am just like I I don't know.
[08:18] I have very strong feelings about fairness and about launch and about like decentralization and to me Bitcoin you know is is the best candidate for fulfilling that is the best candidate for for realizing that vision and future.
[08:30] Okay.
[08:31] Yeah.
[08:33] So that's kind of a little bit about who we are what we do our history.
[08:35] Something a lot of people don't know is from the very beginning we have been interested in like money broadly like digital cash broadly right um and I think it was 20 so DCI started in 2015 2016 we hired this guy from the bank of England who had been writing like a lot of crazy stuff for the bank of England about virtual currency and virtual cash and like how could we build a different type of cash and uh you know I think from from like a fiat perspective fiat perspective.
[09:05] Yes, from a fiat perspective, but it was like how can we make fiat work better, right?
[09:11] How can we bring fiat into the 21st
[09:13] century and how can we make digital cash?
[09:18] And um and I think, you know, we've always been interested in that question as well.
[09:21] I see them as like two sides of the same coin.
[09:23] We're interested in both.
[09:26] So, and you guys have done some we've done work not just with the Bank of England,
[09:30] but I know that there was there's been a handful of potentially Federal Reserve that you've worked with.
[09:35] We worked with the Boston Fed, we've worked with the Bank of Canada, and we're currently working with the Bundis Bank.
[09:39] So, the Germans very privacy pilled, very concerned about privacy and digital cash actually.
[09:45] Super more than other states.
[09:47] Oh, yes.
[09:48] Which makes a lot of sense when you think about what has happened in Germany over the many decades, right?
[09:52] you know, they've been through a lot historically.
[09:55] Um, and so the populace is very concerned about privacy and their spending habits.
[09:59] Yes.
[10:00] It's interesting.
[10:02] So like the governments are actually they're they're moving this forward this vision because the they believe the electorate cares about privacy.
[10:07] Yeah.
[10:09] Culturally just Germany is like super into this and like you have to realize like governments are not monoliths.
[10:12] There are very different
[10:14] people with different value systems.
[10:17] you know, for us it's about uh self-sovereignty, controlling your money, privacy, uh, open access, permissionlessness.
[10:24] Um, cash kind of embodies a lot of these values, right?
[10:29] And so we want to bring cash into the digital realm.
[10:31] I mean, that was like a lot of the motivation behind the people who originally created Bitcoin, right?
[10:35] Um, was it came out of e-cash.
[10:37] It came out of kind of that design of can we create digital cash.
[10:39] So, yeah.
[10:42] So, still really interested in that original question, you know?
[10:44] interested in it from a research perspective.
[10:46] We are not a Bitcoin advocacy group, you know, like I know and there are Bitcoin advocacy groups out there.
[10:52] That's great.
[10:54] It's their job to get everybody using Bitcoin to advocate for Bitcoin.
[10:58] That's not who we are.
[10:58] We are researchers and developers.
[11:00] You know, some of us believe one thing, some of us believe another thing.
[11:03] Um, we're very passionate about this and uh, you know, I personally want to dedicate a large amount of my time to working on this, but it's not my job to convince the world to use Bitcoin.
[11:12] like
[11:14] I you know I'm a I'm a scientist like that's what I'm interested in doing.
[11:17] I'm I'm an academic at the moment.
[11:20] Um you know I want to build this stuff.
[11:22] I want to research this stuff and there's different roles for different people.
[11:26] I want to definitely kind of spend I think a good portion of this interview talking about sort of governance and the role of these different organizations that fund developers and governance.
[11:34] But before we do that, while we're on the subject since you brought it up, um I feel like we're kind of like circling a little bit the sort of CBDC's conversation, right?
[11:44] Yes, sure.
[11:45] Which I know has come up and and it's a four-letter word now.
[11:48] I was going to say dirty word.
[11:50] Yes.
[11:50] Controversial topic.
[11:52] Um but you know obviously it sounds like DCI has sort of gotten involved in some research related to GCIs.
[11:56] It sounds like that's very clear from what you're saying from like eight year 10 years ago.
[11:59] Yes.
[12:01] Right.
[12:05] So I mean when you're working with governments like I mean how do you kind of square some of the risks or how do you kind of speak with them about the negative potential externalities of
[12:15] CBDC's which I think Bitcoiners obviously are very well connected to.
[12:18] So I will say um like I said we started this work 10 years ago and we were really approaching it from the perspective of cash which I think is an incredibly important freedom preserving technology if you can think of physical just peerto-peer cash like separate from store value just peer-to-peer cash.
[12:34] Just cash right like think about cash it's very private you know if I pay you 20 bucks right now that is not recorded in a database anywhere that is not like indelibly broadcast on the internet for anyone to see that is a that is a private interaction between you and me and it's private in a way that's not just like you know obviously p but like people get it culturally private like they know that cash is private they can feel it they understand it they know it that they're not being eavesdropped on right.
[13:00] Um you know cash doesn't require a bank account it doesn't require a an ID you don't have to KYC to get paid in cash you don't have to KYC to use cash important technology embodies a lot of freedom preserving principles um yes it
[13:15] is fiat okay uh you know and if you are like ah inflation money printer go burr
[13:20] I get it you don't like fiat currency
[13:22] that's cool uh it is the thing that the majority of people in the world are using right now and you know I'm not going to like ignore that might make sense for some people to use this over bitcoin
[13:31] um so you know I I I'm I'm I totally understand if if to use to use some version of well most people are not using paper cash which is where to use fiat currency to use
[13:43] but it's interesting because when you're saying that cash is this important technology which I actually really agree with.
[13:48] But in its in its physical form, it has privacy preserving.
[13:50] Yes. Uh elements, but in the way that most people use cash today is not privacy preserving at all.
[13:57] You mean the way most people use digital payment systems payments?
[13:59] Exactly.
[14:01] We do not have digital cash today.
[14:04] That does not exist. What we have is we have AC transfers.
[14:07] We have credit card payments.
[14:09] We have uh we have um applications like Venmo or Cash App or whatever.
[14:14] And these are not do not have
[14:18] the properties of digital cash, right?
[14:19] They don't have by default privacy preserving properties.
[14:23] They usually do require you to have an account with someone where you've like given them your driver's license or your social security number or you KYCed.
[14:30] They uh are not censorship resistant.
[14:33] There's an institution that is mediating an electronic message being sent from a client to a server and like saying should this payment go through or should I delay it or should I hold these funds?
[14:44] They're not self-custodial, right?
[14:46] There's an institution that is holding these funds for you.
[14:47] So, we do not have digital cash today.
[14:50] The things that you know I think you're thinking of these payment systems are not digital cash.
[14:56] And what we were interested in is whether we could build something like digital cash.
[15:01] And it it's it's like it gets like a bit complicated and subtle because there's many different ways to design a central bank digital currency.
[15:10] And there are plenty of dystopian ways to design a central bank digital currency where there is no privacy where it's not really self-custodial where you
[15:18] do have to KYC to use it.
[15:20] We were not working on that.
[15:22] We were working on trying to design it to look more like physical cash but in the digital realm.
[15:26] It's interesting that you say that though because I would presume and I think a lot of Bitcoiners do assume that the incentives of these governments is to create CBDC's almost for the purpose of surveillance.
[15:38] And I'm not here to like advocate for CBDC.
[15:40] I'm here to say that look, I think it's inevitable that they will release something digital.
[15:47] Like just the way the world is going, fewer and fewer people are using physical cash.
[15:53] Like I don't carry physical cash with me every day.
[15:55] I don't.
[15:57] Sweden has been like on the cutting edge of this, right?
[15:59] And so the question is, if we don't have something built to look like what I'm calling digital cash, then our only option in the digital realm will be these payment systems that don't have these properties or things like Bitcoin or or maybe even Zcash or Monero, right?
[16:17] But at that, you know, at the time, these these things
[16:18] are not ready to take over global payment systems.
[16:19] They do not scale.
[16:21] They just do not scale to that level.
[16:23] So, like trying to kind of tell this story,
[16:25] it's like, all right, looking forward 50 years, I would be very surprised if we're still carrying around $20 bills, $50 bills in our wallets, right?
[16:35] All right, then how are we paying in that future?
[16:37] How do we move money around?
[16:39] How do we mediate money?
[16:42] And if that the only way to move money is through these payment systems that add a lot of friction, add a lot of control, like take control away from people, that's not a future that I want.
[16:54] And so I was looking towards how do we move towards a future where we can have privacy preserving, self-custodial, free-to-use digital cash.
[17:03] And and that's the equivalent of the physical cash we have today, but in the digital realm.
[17:07] Do do you not see it?
[17:09] And I promise we won't spend too much time on this topic, but now we're into it.
[17:11] Um, do you kind of not see it as like, you know, there's potentially this like conflict of interest whereas like as long as it is
[17:18] fiat government issued money,
[17:21] but this is where we get to governments are not a monolith.
[17:22] They're actually really different.
[17:24] So we are working with central banks.
[17:26] Central banks are so weird.
[17:29] They are like pseudo government.
[17:32] They're kind of like like in and they're all different like in different countries.
[17:34] Like in the United States, the Federal Reserve is is not totally part of the government.
[17:40] It's like pseudo public private.
[17:42] You have the board of the Federal Reserve and that kind of is part of the government.
[17:46] But then you have the 12 Federal Reserve banks like the Bank of Boston and the Bank of New York.
[17:50] And those are kind of independent.
[17:51] Those are private institutions.
[17:52] They're the ones that actually like do a lot of monetary stuff.
[17:54] Like they kind of control cash or like hold the the New York Fed holds the bank account for the government.
[17:59] And so you have this like weird split, this like weird pseudo public private split.
[18:04] And then also they have like incredible independence, right?
[18:09] Like you know, if you think about what's probably in the news today, it's probably like Trump talking about how he's going to fire J. Powell.
[18:13] He can't really fire Jay Powell.
[18:16] Like there there
[18:20] there's like it's it's cra like the Federal Reserve is this really weird legal entity with a lot of strange protections, a lot of autonomy.
[18:29] Um, and the reason that central banks are designed this way is to have independent monetary policy.
[18:34] So monetary policy doesn't come under the control of the government.
[18:37] So when it comes to like the government, there's like law enforcement, there's the FBI, there's the Treasury, and then there's the central bank.
[18:45] And the central bank has very, you know, it depends again on the country.
[18:47] They have very specific mandates.
[18:51] In the United States, the mandate of the Federal Reserve is uh price stability and employment.
[18:57] And so they're not here to eavesdrop on Americans.
[18:59] That is not their mandate.
[19:01] They don't want to know how you're spending money.
[19:03] They have zero interest in getting in the middle of that.
[19:07] That doesn't mean that the Treasury doesn't want them to know that.
[19:09] That doesn't mean that you know Department of Homeland Security wouldn't be super excited to know how Americans or anyone in North
[19:16] there's some relationship between the two in the sense that like the president like u I mean these they're they're
[19:21] instituted by the governments right like the Fed Powell was hired by a government.
[19:24] they were appointed uh by Congress.
[19:28] So, Congress does a relationship, but Congress has to pass a law to like change the way the Fed works like.
[19:35] but but the heads of the Fed, the people who actually work at the Fed and are making centralized decisions ultimately, which is the perfect segue back into our governance conversation in a moment, but those people are ultimately like you say, so Congress appoints there's some relationship between government.
[19:50] There is a like Yeah, it's centralized. It's a centralized thing. It's an entity and it's called a central bank. Like this is like the point.
[19:56] Fiat currency is fiat currency. It is governed by a central bank.
[19:59] I'm and I'm not making a comment on to like is that good? Is that bad? Do we want, you know, fiat currency or whatever.
[20:09] Um it's it's like the dominant thing in the world right now. So, you know, I mean, somebody wants it and it's happening.
[20:15] And maybe there's a future where fiat currency no longer exists. I don't know. We're super far from that world. But I'm saying given the way it
[20:22] works right now, you know, it's I think
[20:25] I think you'd end up you would be doing
[20:27] a disservice to yourself if you bundled
[20:29] all this stuff together. Central bankers
[20:30] think very differently than the law
[20:32] enforcement part of government or even
[20:34] like the Treasury sort of financial
[20:36] ministry parts of government. They have
[20:38] different goals. They they want to do a
[20:40] different thing and it helps to
[20:42] understand the motivations of all these
[20:44] different parts and stakeholders. Let's
[20:45] I think the centralization piece is
[20:47] actually perfect mostly because it is a
[20:49] good segue into I think the rest of this
[20:51] interview but the centralization piece I
[20:53] think the key part there is that
[20:55] ultimately and again this is just the
[20:57] issue with fiat currency including
[20:58] regular cash but well it's a little
[21:00] different actually you know with if you
[21:02] have a centralized authority controlling
[21:04] whatever this e this cash is this e-cash
[21:06] is then they can make changes to the
[21:09] rules right I mean
[21:10] >> 100% and the fed can change the interest
[21:13] rates right can change monetary policy
[21:16] >> could change potentially even like the
[21:18] privacy properties or like any technical
[21:20] properties associated with this thing
[21:22] >> they can fork essentially
[21:24] >> yeah I mean that is the risk right and
[21:27] so that's why we were encouraging them
[21:28] to build it in a way where there were
[21:31] cryptographic privacy asurances so at
[21:33] least if it changed in the future you
[21:35] couldn't see what had happened in the
[21:36] past
[21:36] >> so you would say like one of the things
[21:38] that you're doing that's kind of
[21:39] interesting is like you're you're I mean
[21:41] it sounds maybe not advocating is the
[21:43] right word But talking to governments
[21:45] about kind of the importance yes how to
[21:48] like we wanted them to know that it was
[21:52] possible to build priv like
[21:54] cryptographically privacy preserving
[21:55] cash like they didn't even know it was
[21:58] possible. I don't know if they're going
[21:59] to do it, right? Like that's a much
[22:01] bigger political question that like we
[22:04] are not well suited to, you know, we're
[22:06] like a small group of nerds at MIT,
[22:08] right? We're not your alley.
[22:09] >> We're not going to like go influence
[22:11] like the ECB to to build it this way
[22:14] versus but we can at least show them
[22:16] that it's technically possible.
[22:18] We do it as like it's a political
[22:20] they're political. That's how I saw our
[22:22] role as like let's make sure they at
[22:24] least are not just getting their
[22:26] information from like large consulting
[22:28] companies that they're paying millions
[22:29] of dollars to like build prototypes and
[22:32] like hear stuff, you know, they they
[22:34] were just getting like wrong technical
[22:35] information. So it's like can we at
[22:36] least
[22:38] >> show them what's actually possible? And
[22:40] also some things we don't even know if
[22:42] it's possible. And so that's our role re
[22:44] do the research to figure out if it's
[22:45] possible. out of curiosity and then I
[22:47] promise we'll move on is what is the
[22:49] technical cryptographic like choice like
[22:52] choice cryptography that you were
[22:54] recommending that is this perfect
[22:55] privacy protecting
[22:56] >> it's not perfect so yeah it it depends
[22:59] on what trade-offs you want to make
[23:00] right and so there's a lot of different
[23:02] cryptographic primitives you can use to
[23:04] achieve you know do you do you want to
[23:06] hide the values so you can't see how
[23:08] much people are transacting do you want
[23:10] to hide the transaction graph um that's
[23:13] much more challenging to hide completely
[23:15] the transaction graph is it sufficient
[23:17] to like
[23:19] >> maybe you're not completely hiding the
[23:20] trans. So this is like this is like um
[23:23] >> you know the difference between like
[23:25] bulletproofs on Bitcoin versus Monero
[23:27] versus like Zcash and uh you know and as
[23:32] you like kind of go down the using
[23:34] stronger and stronger cryptographic
[23:35] primitives you make a trade-off with
[23:37] things like throughput and latency and
[23:39] complexity and so you know there's no
[23:42] easy answer. It's not like, "Oh, just do
[23:44] this and you get perfect privacy and uh
[23:47] you know, there's no problems whatsoever
[23:49] and you can, you know, it'll work in a
[23:52] country with like a billion people."
[23:53] Like, no. Um, you have, you know, they
[23:56] have to make policy decisions about
[23:57] those trade-offs. And for us, it was
[23:59] about surfacing this complexity, getting
[24:01] them to understand that there might be a
[24:03] way through. Yeah. And and just so they
[24:05] didn't think it was impossible. Yeah.
[24:07] So, so I mean it sounds like it's fair
[24:09] to say that DCI, the digital currency
[24:12] initiative in general is much more
[24:13] focused on sort of the technical
[24:14] research behind these things. This this
[24:16] question of what is possible, right? And
[24:18] basically, you know, whoever
[24:20] >> needs to understand that information,
[24:23] you want to make sure that they
[24:24] essentially have
[24:25] >> security, scalability, privacy, and
[24:27] usability. So, those are like the four
[24:29] areas that we focus on. And it's all
[24:32] about, you know, our mission is to um uh
[24:36] to empower users to move money the way
[24:39] they move information and to help them
[24:41] financially flourish. So, how does the
[24:44] digital currency initiative make
[24:45] decisions about where to put research
[24:49] efforts, dollars, resources, like how do
[24:51] you make decisions about exactly what to
[24:52] work on?
[24:53] >> We raise all of our own funding. Um and
[24:55] we do that through grants and um
[24:58] research collaborations
[25:00] and just like donations, gifts. So
[25:03] >> So meaning like people when you say we
[25:05] raise our own funding is the distinction
[25:06] there like we are not getting paid to do
[25:08] specific research. Is that what you
[25:10] mean?
[25:10] >> Uh no because sponsored research is kind
[25:12] of that
[25:13] >> there is sponsored research but but it's
[25:15] not like a consulting kind of a thing.
[25:17] Like it's not like it's you know
[25:19] universities are like we're independent.
[25:21] We do research. The idea is that you
[25:23] don't know what the output's going to
[25:24] be. You can't promise like a specific
[25:25] output. It's it's
[25:26] >> they're giving you a question. They pay
[25:28] you to look at the question
[25:30] without any attachment to the answer.
[25:32] They actually want to just know the
[25:33] answer.
[25:33] >> Exact. Yeah. Like like you can't sort of
[25:36] Yeah. You can't sort of know how this is
[25:37] going to come out. You can't just say we
[25:39] need you to show that X is true. It's
[25:41] got to be like
[25:42] >> It's not like big pharma coming out and
[25:44] saying like hey can you prove that like
[25:46] can you make the data look like our
[25:47] medicine works? It's not like that.
[25:49] >> Exactly. Exactly. And there's a risk
[25:50] that like it might not work. Like
[25:52] whatever it is that we're trying to
[25:53] figure out, we might find the negative.
[25:55] Like we might we might be like, "Yeah,
[25:56] we we couldn't do it." Like there's
[25:58] always that risk. And they and these
[25:59] payments are made or these sponsorships
[26:01] are made on a project by project basis.
[26:03] So it's not like you're incentivized to
[26:04] like keep them happy so that they renew
[26:06] or something like that.
[26:07] >> Yeah. No, that's like half of our work
[26:09] um is is kind of sponsored research and
[26:11] the other half is just like uh donations
[26:14] basically.
[26:15] >> Just straight up donations from
[26:16] whomever.
[26:17] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[26:18] >> Um Okay. And so how much of the budget
[26:22] goes to like specific research projects
[26:25] versus like just funding independent
[26:27] developers to do whatever they want?
[26:28] Yeah. So um we raised some money just to
[26:32] fund our Bitcoin side of the house a
[26:35] while ago. So people who were donating
[26:37] to that knew that it was just going to
[26:39] that right. So we have like a Bitcoin
[26:41] >> meaning just going to independent
[26:42] developers basically working on Bitcoin
[26:43] or specific Bitcoin projects. Uh it was
[26:46] going to independent developers working
[26:48] on Bitcoin and students like funding
[26:51] students to do research projects around
[26:53] Bitcoin.
[26:53] >> Specific research projects that were um
[26:56] dictated by the person sponsoring. No,
[26:59] >> just just you guys got to decide. They
[27:01] had no they were just like no strings
[27:03] attached donations by people interested
[27:05] >> the idea that it was like going to
[27:06] further Bitcoin in some way and they
[27:08] trusted us to make decisions on what
[27:10] that is based on our track record and
[27:12] based on you know who we were and what
[27:14] we were doing.
[27:14] >> So some of his independent developers
[27:16] who just basically are sponsored to work
[27:18] on what they want and then students
[27:20] working on specific research projects.
[27:22] How are those research projects decided?
[27:24] Like how do you decide what those
[27:25] research or do the students decide which
[27:27] research projects they want? We talk
[27:28] about it like we discuss and we're like,
[27:30] "Okay, I have like these three ideas.
[27:32] What do you think? What are you most
[27:33] interested in?" Well, this is exciting
[27:34] because of this. This is exciting
[27:35] because of that. So, like one of the
[27:37] projects, um, you know, I've been really
[27:40] worried about Bitcoin's long-term
[27:41] economic security when the mining
[27:43] subsidy goes away, the block subsidy,
[27:45] right? Um, and I've been wanting to work
[27:47] on this. Yeah. And so, I've been wanting
[27:48] to work on this. And so, we had a
[27:49] student and we're like, "Hey, do you
[27:51] want to like There was this Princon
[27:52] paper. It was really interesting, but it
[27:54] made all these assumptions. Therefore,
[27:56] we don't think it was quite realistic.
[27:57] do you want to reexamine um kind of this
[27:59] question by removing some of the
[28:01] assumptions maybe we can get some
[28:02] clarity and she was like yeah this
[28:04] sounds really exciting and so we did it
[28:06] >> what is there uh results yet
[28:08] >> yes yes
[28:10] very important the Bitcoin expo and
[28:13] there's her thesis um it's online it's
[28:15] on our website
[28:16] >> key takeaways on the security budget
[28:18] declining
[28:19] >> um we really need to make sure there is
[28:21] a not only a backlog of transaction fees
[28:24] but like a like even continuous backlog
[28:27] of
[28:27] >> liabilities, right? Like ordinals aren't
[28:29] going to cut it. Like speculative assets
[28:31] as a way of creating fees don't cut it.
[28:33] >> These spikes are like not good for
[28:35] mining for mining security. We really
[28:38] need to make sure there's too much of an
[28:39] incentive to fee snipe. You really need
[28:41] like solid continuous like reliable
[28:45] transaction fees
[28:46] >> which basically means you need a
[28:47] payments. You need payments to actually
[28:48] be
[28:49] >> you need use cases that result in that.
[28:51] And um
[28:52] >> okay that was you know
[28:53] >> are there any ideas other than digital
[28:55] cash those use cases that could
[28:57] >> I don't know people are creative they
[28:59] might come up with something else that
[29:00] was kind of outside outside the scope of
[29:02] this specific project was what you know
[29:04] how do we actually make the shape of the
[29:06] transaction backlog look that way but
[29:07] >> but she presumed something that I think
[29:09] many of us probably intuit she basically
[29:11] approved that's something we intuitively
[29:12] know which is that we need a consistent
[29:14] reliable fee market
[29:16] >> yes yes and there were some really
[29:17] interesting results out of that like If
[29:20] there are very spiky high fee
[29:22] transactions or very like sparse high
[29:25] fee transactions,
[29:27] um the incentive based on the setup of
[29:29] this research is for miners to do really
[29:32] weird things like only mine one
[29:34] transaction per block because you want
[29:36] to leave as much for people to be
[29:38] incentivized to build on your block as
[29:41] possible. like you just get all these
[29:42] weird
[29:43] >> because reorgs basically like it's all
[29:46] about reorg in order for you to get the
[29:49] money of the transaction fees. You need
[29:51] people to build on your block and not
[29:52] ignore your block. And so it's about
[29:54] incentivizing that.
[29:55] >> You know what's so funny and we're going
[29:56] to circle back and do more on the
[29:58] quantum conversation probably in this
[29:59] episode but I was talking to Avi who is
[30:02] the CPO of Starkware who created this um
[30:06] >> binoash yeah quantum safe bitcoin
[30:08] without a soft fork etc etc. And I said,
[30:11] "Well, we already can do that. You know,
[30:13] it could excuse me. Quantum save
[30:15] Bitcoin, this this scheme that he came
[30:17] up with is dependent right now on
[30:19] private mess because they're
[30:20] non-standard transactions." And I was
[30:21] like, "Well, what's the point of this?"
[30:23] Because, you know, if you just use
[30:25] slipstream, if you use a private
[30:26] mempool, it's already quantum safe
[30:28] because they're completely private.
[30:29] Like, as long as you trust the minor,
[30:30] then those keys aren't right
[30:32] >> um you know, exposed in the me poolool
[30:34] anyway. And he said, "No, no, no, no.
[30:35] That's not true because of the reorg
[30:37] risk." M
[30:38] >> he said you need something you
[30:40] slipstream alone will not cut it. Using
[30:42] a private minor alone will not cut it.
[30:44] Like people love to game theory about
[30:46] like oh if there was a if there was a if
[30:50] this guy had a quantum computer they
[30:51] would do this they would do that. And I
[30:53] think a lot of things people are not
[30:54] thinking about is reorgs like the mining
[30:59] security like like when you want to talk
[31:01] about Satoshi's coins and like oh you
[31:03] know
[31:04] >> like the there's a massive incentive to
[31:06] just like start reorginging and to try
[31:09] but I think probably what would happen
[31:10] maybe I'll get another student to work
[31:12] on this is something similar to what we
[31:13] saw when we were looking at this
[31:15] question from the perspective of of like
[31:17] when the block subsidy goes away is
[31:19] maybe the incentive is just take like a
[31:22] little bit of satoshi these coins and
[31:23] leave the rest, you know. Anyway, I'm
[31:25] speculating at this point.
[31:26] >> This is a good research project for
[31:27] somebody at DCI is to actually like game
[31:30] theory out some of this quantum stuff
[31:32] because that's the biggest question that
[31:33] I get about quantum game theory.
[31:35] >> Not armchair game theory, but like
[31:37] there's actually a science behind this.
[31:39] It's hard. It's complicated
[31:41] >> and it's imperfect. Like you have to you
[31:45] have to create a model and prove things
[31:46] in that model and models are like by
[31:49] design not reality and leave a lot of
[31:51] detail out. But sometimes you can you
[31:53] can learn interesting things. So I think
[31:55] I think yeah I think this would be
[31:56] really interesting.
[31:57] >> No, this is a super important I mean I
[31:58] would not be surprised if you guys got
[32:00] like some sort of offer just to
[32:02] literally do that kind of research like
[32:03] literally just game theory quantum for
[32:05] us.
[32:06] >> My DMs are open but my DMs are not open
[32:08] but send me an email. I would we'd love
[32:10] to work on this.
[32:10] >> Trust me I have some connections to make
[32:13] for you guys. Um well, okay. So, okay.
[32:16] So, that kind of gives a little bit of a
[32:18] sense of DCI, which is quite different
[32:20] than some of these other organizations
[32:22] that are funding Bitcoin development.
[32:24] >> Completely different, right? I mean,
[32:25] we're not like Yeah. So, I mean, you
[32:27] want to talk about the landscape. So,
[32:28] there's like
[32:28] >> Yeah. Like there's Well, there's only
[32:30] there's not that many organizations
[32:31] funding Bitcoin developers. So, they're
[32:33] all different and how they operate.
[32:34] >> Brink, which is also a nonprofit, you
[32:37] know, and takes donations. So, they also
[32:38] have to raise all of their own money
[32:40] >> and they're independent. They're not
[32:41] connected to academic institution which
[32:43] is I think
[32:43] >> disabled
[32:44] >> totally independent nonprofit um really
[32:46] focused on Bitcoin core so that is like
[32:49] only Bitcoin core um and uh you know
[32:52] also has to raise all their own money
[32:54] right and has a bunch of core developers
[32:56] um then there are chain code and spiral
[32:59] right those two are unique in that they
[33:02] do not raise any money they do not have
[33:04] to raise any money they are sort of
[33:05] funded um uh you know in the case
[33:08] >> ancient whales Yeah, but in the case of
[33:11] Chain Code, they are funded by two
[33:13] individuals who co-ounded a hedge fund
[33:15] and want to do this and want to give
[33:17] back to Bitcoin, but they don't raise
[33:18] any money. You don't go donate to Chain
[33:20] code. They like, no, they don't
[33:22] >> privately fund like 50% of Bitcoin
[33:24] developers. No big deal.
[33:25] >> Whatever they want to do, right, for
[33:26] now. Um, so
[33:27] >> I think that's right. Right. I mean,
[33:28] just so that I'm getting the numbers
[33:29] right.
[33:30] >> I don't know that I don't know that it's
[33:31] 50%. I wouldn't say that, but I don't
[33:32] really know for sure how many there are.
[33:35] It's like in the multiple tens of
[33:36] percentages though of full-time Bitcoin
[33:38] developers. Okay,
[33:39] >> that might be true that I would not be
[33:40] surprised if that were true. So, uh and
[33:42] then there's Spiral which is in Block
[33:45] the company uh that that does Cash App
[33:48] and Square and is led by
[33:49] >> Jack Dorsey basically funds that or is
[33:51] it like Block money?
[33:52] >> It's Block money that funds it, but it's
[33:54] Jack Dorsey as the CEO of Block saying,
[33:56] "I want to put some of our balance sheet
[33:58] behind this." And um and they run it,
[34:02] >> you know, very independently from Block.
[34:04] It's like there are Bitcoin developers
[34:06] so I'm on the board of blocks. It's not
[34:07] like for blocks profit motive.
[34:09] >> Exactly. There you think that's
[34:11] defensible. Super defensible.
[34:12] >> Like there's people who work like Cash
[34:14] App uh has Bitcoin features and there
[34:17] are people who work on Bitcoin for Cash
[34:18] App. That's not Spiral. Spiral is like
[34:20] open- source independent development.
[34:22] Yeah.
[34:23] >> Okay. So those are so that's four I mean
[34:26] are there any like meaningful other
[34:28] contribut like funding organizations for
[34:30] developers?
[34:31] >> So there's 2140 in Amsterdam. There's
[34:33] local host in San Francisco.
[34:35] >> That's brand new, right? Pretty much.
[34:36] >> These are these are both pretty new. Um,
[34:38] and those are both like a little bit
[34:40] more like Brink, so nonprofits need to
[34:42] raise all their own funding. And then
[34:44] there's like there's something called
[34:45] Maelstrom, which I don't know very well.
[34:47] I think that's Arthur Hayes is behind
[34:49] that.
[34:50] >> Oh, interesting. I didn't know he was
[34:51] doing that. That's cool. Go.
[34:52] >> Yeah. I mean, don't you know. Yeah. And
[34:54] there's there are probably more that I
[34:56] don't know about. Um then there are a
[34:58] couple of cryptographers at Blockstream
[35:01] who like really work on LibCP and you
[35:04] know who are working on some really
[35:06] important stuff for Bitcoin as well.
[35:07] >> Yeah, Blockstream is kind of like a
[35:08] unique um example in this, right?
[35:11] Because they're obviously a for-profit
[35:12] company, but they clearly so much of
[35:15] what they do is just like working on the
[35:17] guts and bones of what Bitcoin is.
[35:19] >> Yeah.
[35:19] >> Um so Okay. So, and to your knowledge
[35:23] like how do you what's your
[35:25] understanding of how all the ecosystem
[35:28] the term that you used makes decisions
[35:30] about what to work on? I mean do they
[35:31] just hire I mean just chain code just
[35:33] hire developers and say have a blast
[35:36] work on whatever you want.
[35:37] >> So far there has been an incredible
[35:40] amount of autonomy and choice in people
[35:42] deciding what they want to work on.
[35:44] Right now, that said, is Chenko going to
[35:47] give you a full-time job if you know you
[35:49] haven't proved yourself already as being
[35:51] a person who can make good decisions
[35:53] about that and get stuff done?
[35:55] Like, I'm not going to, you know, we at
[35:57] DCI in particular, our focus has been
[36:00] more on senior long-term developers. So,
[36:02] we aren't like training the next
[36:04] generation necessarily. We're really
[36:06] focusing on like, you know, a long-term
[36:09] home for senior developers. They don't
[36:10] have to worry about going out for
[36:11] grants. they don't have to worry about
[36:13] like am I am I going to have health
[36:14] insurance next year or whatever you know
[36:16] they have a home u as long as as we have
[36:18] the funding to do that and so you know
[36:20] again we're taking people who already
[36:22] have a very strong proven contribution
[36:25] record right um but that said you know
[36:28] we don't tell them what to do we have
[36:29] discussions we talk about well what have
[36:32] you done and like why is that important
[36:34] there there has to be some level of
[36:35] accountability right when you're
[36:37] directing funding in in such a world but
[36:40] um it's definitely not like a top down
[36:42] you have to work on X.
[36:43] >> But the accountability piece is a little
[36:45] bit it's a little ambiguous. It's not
[36:47] like a super definable thing. It's not
[36:49] like there's a board where people like
[36:50] have to show their work and it's like
[36:52] okay does this like pass the snuff test
[36:53] of meaningful contribution.
[36:54] >> Brink has a board where they decide how
[36:57] to give out certain. So Brink also does
[36:58] grants and so I think they have like a
[37:00] grant committee or something like that.
[37:02] Um and Spiral does grants. I don't know
[37:04] what their process is for grants.
[37:06] >> Well and then there's the grant
[37:07] organizations. It's actually a totally
[37:08] different conversation. open sats, you
[37:10] know, all these types of Right. That's a
[37:13] whole other way that fund development
[37:14] funding happens.
[37:15] >> Yes. Yes. Yes. I'm Yeah. And I mean,
[37:18] >> it's very
[37:20] um it's not very well organized. There
[37:23] is a lot of overlap. There's a lot of
[37:25] frustration that I hear from people who
[37:27] have to go through these processes. It's
[37:29] not necessarily super transparent.
[37:31] >> It's illdefined.
[37:32] >> Yeah. But, you know, we're dealing with
[37:33] it. Everybody's moving forward. We're,
[37:36] you know, people are trying to figure it
[37:37] out. We're doing the best we can. And
[37:38] it's a and and to your point, I mean,
[37:40] this is a tradeoff. We're going to use
[37:42] this word a lot in this interview. I
[37:43] have a feeling
[37:44] >> this is a trade-off of decentralized
[37:46] government governance, excuse me, is um,
[37:50] you know, it's a little uh messy. It can
[37:52] be a little disorganized. I think there
[37:53] was a hope that companies that really
[37:57] like their you know their business
[37:59] really depended on Bitcoin there would
[38:01] be a natural sort of incentive to hire
[38:04] Bitcoin core developers like kind of
[38:05] like the way Google and IBM hired like
[38:08] Linux developers right that hasn't
[38:11] played out so much like there used to be
[38:14] a Bitcoin developer to a Coinbase that
[38:16] might change as more big corporations
[38:19] have greater stake in Bitcoin though
[38:21] which I think we'll probably touch on at
[38:22] Coinbase has a pretty big stake in
[38:24] Bitcoin, I'd say. But, you know, but but
[38:27] they haven't well, we'll just get into
[38:30] it now. You know, for the most part,
[38:32] they don't care about a lot of these
[38:34] like kind of minor changes that are have
[38:36] been being made. There's no like major
[38:39] exist if there was an existential threat
[38:41] to their Bitcoin that mattered at a
[38:43] technical or developmental level.
[38:44] >> But in order to be ready to contribute,
[38:47] you have to have done the you have to
[38:49] have had the person, you know, you can't
[38:51] just be like, "Oh, no. quantum today I'm
[38:53] going to wake up ah maybe I should have
[38:54] had a Bitcoin developer on staff and
[38:56] been a part of this process like too
[38:58] late. Well, I think what what we're
[39:00] really getting into is like is this
[39:01] system going to change, right? Like
[39:03] >> it's it's about maturity. It's about
[39:04] long-term thinking. And I think that um
[39:07] people have just been very short-term
[39:09] focused. And as as everybody matures,
[39:12] they will become more long-term focused.
[39:14] They will hopefully they'll start to
[39:15] realize, ah, the next time there's one
[39:18] of these things, I want to have had that
[39:21] experience. I want to have had that
[39:23] bench to draw on so that I'm ready and
[39:25] this existential threat doesn't just
[39:26] like jump, you know, in my face. Yeah.
[39:29] It It's funny because I think this is
[39:30] this is we've kind of been circling
[39:32] this. This is coming up in the quantum
[39:34] conversation. This is the first time
[39:36] where we have major corporations with
[39:38] serious financial stake in Bitcoin very
[39:42] concerned about the nuts and bolts of
[39:44] what's happening with Bitcoin at the
[39:45] core technical developmental level and
[39:48] completely unprepared to engage and like
[39:52] have a conversation about it in a
[39:53] productive way,
[39:54] >> right? Although I have a feeling they're
[39:56] in the process of catching up quick
[39:58] because they are seem pretty motivated.
[40:00] Like I think over the next year we're
[40:02] going to see more major corporate
[40:05] players getting more deeply involved in
[40:08] one way or another
[40:09] >> and it is going to be so interesting
[40:11] because like
[40:12] >> you know I think a lot of these people
[40:14] maybe weren't around 10 years ago when
[40:16] we went through the block size wars and
[40:18] I just hope we don't repeat some of the
[40:20] mistakes that that we had back then. You
[40:22] know
[40:22] >> I prepared FYI for that.
[40:25] >> I'm strapped in. It's going to be
[40:28] interesting to see how how this turns
[40:30] out for sure.
[40:31] >> All right, guys. Taking a quick moment
[40:33] to thank my new sponsors of the show.
[40:35] First off, the one and only layer 2 Labs
[40:37] pushing forward research and development
[40:39] of drivechains. Drive chains were first
[40:42] introduced as a software proposal to
[40:43] Bitcoin aka BIP 300 BIP 3001. These BIPS
[40:48] essentially propose a bridging mechanism
[40:49] between Bitcoin and layer 2s that are
[40:52] incentive aligned with miners and
[40:53] they've gotten a ton of attention over
[40:56] the last couple of years. If you're
[40:58] curious about how drivechains could work
[40:59] in practice, though, check out layer
[41:01] 2labs.com and download their alternative
[41:04] front end to Bitcoin Core. It lets you
[41:06] play with drive chains and see how they
[41:08] actually work in real life. I'd also
[41:11] like to introduce Hashi, an alternative
[41:13] primitive to traditional L2s that allows
[41:15] users to execute a wide range of Bitcoin
[41:18] DeFi activities without having to trust
[41:20] a federated bridge. With Hashi, Bitcoin
[41:23] is controlled by an MPC wallet that
[41:26] requires a quorum of proofofstake
[41:28] validators on the Sooie network to
[41:30] execute Bitcoin transactions based on
[41:33] the validity of smart contracts. At
[41:35] least a third of the staking power of
[41:37] the Sue validators network is required
[41:39] to execute these MPC mint and redeem
[41:42] transactions, which is a substantive
[41:44] improvement in trust assumptions
[41:46] relative to other L2s or side chain
[41:48] bridges.
[41:49] Hashi's commercial team is also stacked,
[41:52] including a crew of former builders from
[41:54] the crypto division of Meta. I think
[41:56] we're going to see a suite of super
[41:58] competitive Bitcoin DeFi products built
[42:00] with this protocol. So, definitely check
[42:02] out the Hashu page on sui.io if you're
[42:04] curious.
[42:06] Last but not least, shout out to Bitbox.
[42:09] Bitbox is one of the easiest and most
[42:11] simple to use Bitcoin hardware wallets
[42:13] on the market right now. If you have
[42:15] friends or family members that you want
[42:17] to make sure stay safe and use cold
[42:19] storage, but maybe they're not the most
[42:21] Bitcoin native people in the world, I
[42:23] highly recommend checking out Bitbox.
[42:26] They're completely open- source, no
[42:28] compromises on security, but they're
[42:31] also super easy to use, really intuitive
[42:33] UX, plus you can use them with concierge
[42:36] multisig services like Unchained, which
[42:38] I'm personally a big fan of. If you want
[42:41] to check out their hardware wallets, go
[42:42] to bitbox.swiss Swiss and use code
[42:45] Bitcoin rails to get a discount. All
[42:47] right, back to the show. It's funny
[42:49] because even pre-quantum like exploding
[42:52] as a narrative. I have had this thought
[42:54] and I think others have had this thought
[42:56] too. You know, in the future when
[42:59] hopefully we have live in a hyper
[43:00] bitcoinized world and you know bitcoin
[43:02] is the global reserve currency like is
[43:04] it still going to be run by you know
[43:06] less than 100 independent developers
[43:08] just working on whatever they want
[43:10] autonomous? It can't be right. It can't
[43:11] be. It won't be. Yeah, there's no way.
[43:13] >> It just occurred to me that this current
[43:15] system as it exists, the way that sort
[43:17] of governance currently works isn't
[43:21] really sustainable in a truly hyper
[43:24] Bitcoinized world. Yeah. So, okay, we're
[43:26] talking about this hypothetical future,
[43:28] right? So, I 100% agree with you. I I
[43:31] think that in in a world where Bitcoin
[43:34] has achieved that level of integration
[43:36] into the global economy is that
[43:38] critical, is that important,
[43:41] it's not going to be left, you know,
[43:45] Junior and his friends.
[43:46] >> Yeah. It's it's not going to be, you
[43:48] know, political memes on on X with like
[43:52] quantum cats and that's like, you know,
[43:54] like screaming for software cuz that's
[43:56] not how it's going to work anymore. I
[43:58] don't know what that world looks like
[44:00] exactly. I mean, you know, I think our
[44:03] world today is like the base case. It's
[44:05] just different institutions and
[44:06] different power players, right? But, you
[44:09] know, who are probably funding
[44:11] developers to do exactly specific things
[44:13] that they want them to do.
[44:15] >> Exactly. Yeah. and and you know
[44:16] >> and the economic incentives start to get
[44:18] really different because the because it
[44:21] becomes economic actors hiring
[44:23] developers to do things probably is what
[44:26] it's going to look like rather than like
[44:28] warm-hearted fuzzy developers just
[44:30] working on what they love
[44:31] >> volunteering. Yes.
[44:32] >> Yeah. And and and the question is like
[44:34] okay, but the thing that makes Bitcoin
[44:38] unique and interesting and valuable is
[44:41] this decentralization is this fact that
[44:44] you can get developers to build whatever
[44:47] you want them to build. That doesn't
[44:49] mean that the Bitcoin network is going
[44:51] to adopt it. Right. Correct. I run a
[44:53] node. This is the magic node.
[44:55] >> You know, nobody's telling me what I
[44:57] what to run on my node. That said, you
[44:59] know what I think what what people might
[45:01] forget about that is that everyone's
[45:02] node is not created equal.
[45:04] >> Yes,
[45:05] >> there are certain nodes that are more
[45:07] val economically valuable, economically
[45:09] meaningful. We are all bought into this
[45:12] monetary system and there are incentives
[45:14] at play and so you know that's the
[45:17] question is really what will the econom
[45:20] you know is it like
[45:23] is the system different enough because
[45:26] like it's still you know whoever has the
[45:28] most economic weight gets to say things
[45:31] gets to choose things
[45:32] >> wins the fork war basically
[45:34] >> but you know like the block size wars
[45:37] were really meaningful to me because we
[45:39] saw saw almost every major company in
[45:42] Bitcoin get on one side and get behind
[45:45] one proposal and that is not the
[45:47] proposal that won. The community
[45:49] overrode that proposal and if you
[45:51] remember SegWit 2X and all of that,
[45:54] right? And like Bitcoin's really
[45:57] different and and it is a little bit
[45:58] different and so I think that there is
[46:00] this sort of like mimemetic power
[46:03] decentralized narrative like there there
[46:06] is this you know is that is that
[46:08] arguable at all? Like, you know, you
[46:09] also often hear about like, you know,
[46:11] Coinbase, even just like the choice of
[46:13] the ticker made a difference, right?
[46:14] Like the BTC, you know, the BTC ticker,
[46:18] maybe that was the tipping point in the
[46:19] reason why that one was because what we
[46:22] now think of as Bitcoin got to keep the
[46:24] Bitcoin ticker and so more people held
[46:26] the Bitcoin ticker who maybe aren't
[46:28] dayto-day connected to this
[46:29] >> narative. I mean, that's the Bitcoin
[46:31] versus Bitcoin Cash kind of that that
[46:33] part. But before that was SegWit versus
[46:38] 2X.
[46:38] >> Okay.
[46:39] >> And they were all on the side of 2X.
[46:41] They were all on the side of hard fork
[46:42] blocking block size increase. The
[46:44] community was on the side.
[46:46] >> Which companies and why were they on
[46:48] that side? I'm not familiar with this
[46:49] piece of history.
[46:50] >> Um like all of them. I mean it was
[46:52] >> like the exchanges and stuff.
[46:53] >> Yeah. It was Grayscale and Barry Silbert
[46:56] and Coinbase and Brian Armstrong and
[46:58] like BO and Mike Belshi and um
[47:01] >> and and just just I think this is super
[47:03] interesting. just break down like so
[47:04] what were the two sides and why did they
[47:06] want one or the other? So, so the the
[47:08] debate was how to scale Bitcoin and uh
[47:11] it was really interesting because almost
[47:12] at every company you saw a CEO CTO
[47:15] divide like the CEO was like we need to
[47:18] hard fork. We need to increase the block
[47:19] size and
[47:20] >> because they wanted fees to go down.
[47:22] They just wanted cheaper cheaper
[47:23] transaction.
[47:23] >> They wanted more block space and they
[47:25] wanted cheaper transactions. They wanted
[47:26] to like build expand you know grow
[47:29] >> lower fees. Yes. And the CTO's
[47:33] were I mean not this isn't like
[47:34] universally true but this is partially
[47:36] true were like no that destroys what we
[47:39] can't hard fork like that you know
[47:41] SegWit is like a great compromise that
[47:44] like threads the needle and is
[47:46] effectively a block size increase but
[47:47] with a soft fork we should do this
[47:49] instead and so it was it was really
[47:50] interesting to see that battle. Why do
[47:52] you think in that instance the CTO's for
[47:56] lack of a better uh term here won over
[47:59] the economic nodes, the CEOs? Because I
[48:04] think
[48:05] >> the economic nodes are exchanges and
[48:09] custodians
[48:10] and they are serving at the behest of
[48:13] their customers. And it was like,
[48:16] >> you know, I mean, most customers maybe
[48:18] don't care that much, but like the
[48:19] customers that really do care, they they
[48:22] had opinions and they were very vocal
[48:23] and very strong about it and um you
[48:26] know, they made their case.
[48:28] >> Yeah. Interesting. Okay. So ultimately
[48:30] it was like the companies wanted to grow
[48:32] grow but they they had to be accountable
[48:33] to their users who had a point of view.
[48:36] So in that way the people did win. Yeah.
[48:38] >> Right. And and and and you could make
[48:40] the argument the end user Yeah. I would
[48:43] say the the end user won, right?
[48:44] Ultimately.
[48:45] >> Yeah. Yeah. If you agree that was the
[48:47] right thing to do. Um which you know
[48:49] it's Yeah. And Yeah. So I don't know
[48:52] what would happen today. I don't know
[48:53] what would happen today. But um you know
[48:55] I think eventually we'll find out.
[48:57] Eventually there will be this battle and
[48:59] uh that's why I care so much about
[49:02] getting making Bitcoin usable for as
[49:05] many people as possible. I think this is
[49:07] like incredibly important. the more
[49:09] people who can hold it and use it
[49:11] themselves, the better. Um because that
[49:15] is the counterwe to the heavy head of
[49:20] large financial institutions and
[49:22] custodians.
[49:22] >> Do do you think that the fact that the
[49:24] end users threw their weight around
[49:26] ultimately though is also kind of an
[49:27] economic argument because Right. Yeah.
[49:30] It is ultimately still like the money
[49:32] kind of wins because the incentives I
[49:35] agree with that. Yes. So this is
[49:38] interesting. Okay, so let's back up
[49:39] forest through the trees for a second.
[49:41] This is I could go in so many different
[49:43] directions right now, but so um we still
[49:46] don't really have like a clear picture
[49:48] of like what this governance structure
[49:49] could potentially look like in like a
[49:51] hyper bitcoinized world or whatever, but
[49:53] it seems like quantum might be a
[49:56] catalyst to maybe pushing us in a
[49:59] direction of assessing, right? I mean
[50:02] this is again the first time that we're
[50:04] in a situation where major corporations
[50:06] are probably it's looking like are going
[50:08] to take a really strong hand in uh
[50:12] technical issues certainly since the
[50:14] block size wars etc. And I I my gut on
[50:17] this is it will be even more intense
[50:18] because there's just so much more
[50:19] institutional capital now than there was
[50:22] back then.
[50:23] um you've written about quantum uh quite
[50:26] a bit and you actually framed it which I
[50:29] really appreciated in the context of
[50:31] tradeoffs.
[50:32] >> Yeah.
[50:32] >> How do you see the quantum question in
[50:36] the realm of trade-offs? Like can you
[50:37] explain a little bit of like how you see
[50:38] the quantum conversation as being
[50:41] ultimately a discussion about
[50:43] trade-offs? Yes, absolutely. So, I think
[50:45] um I think the quantum question is going
[50:48] to be really is really something new for
[50:50] the Bitcoin community to address. like
[50:51] anyone who's like, "Oh, we've done stuff
[50:53] like this before. It'll be fine." I I
[50:54] don't think that's entirely true. And
[50:57] and it does come down to trade-offs.
[50:59] There is no technical solution that
[51:04] doesn't have a trade-off like so. Okay.
[51:08] So, so what's going on? So, at at the
[51:11] very top level, it's do we do anything
[51:14] at all? Right? We don't know that a
[51:15] quantum computer is going to appear.
[51:17] There might never be a quantum computer.
[51:19] There might never be one. So why take on
[51:21] this burden, this risk of like changing
[51:23] the cryptography in Bitcoin, of doing
[51:25] all this work when there's a chance that
[51:27] there might not be a
[51:28] >> and it's not just work. I mean to your
[51:29] point about trade-offs, it's not even
[51:30] just work. It's also like Bitcoin will
[51:32] function differently if we execute some
[51:35] of these changes.
[51:36] >> Yes, exactly. it will function
[51:37] differently. And and and so even at that
[51:40] high of a level, there's this trade-off
[51:42] between the future is unknown. There is
[51:45] a risk. How do we measure that risk? How
[51:47] do we decide when it's worth it to bite
[51:51] the bullet and make the changes and and
[51:53] do this? And people are going to
[51:54] disagree about that. And we don't have a
[51:57] clear-cut answer. We just don't. And so
[52:00] somebody we just have to make a call. We
[52:01] just have to go for it, right? Um, and I
[52:04] think now finally, you know, the most
[52:07] people are on the page of like, all
[52:09] right, if we really want to be, you
[52:11] know, secure money for the next hundreds
[52:13] of years, yeah, you're right. We're
[52:15] like, cryptography will break. We have
[52:17] to fix this. We have to have some way of
[52:18] fixing this. I think, you know, from
[52:21] what I've seen over the last week,
[52:23] people have gotten onto this page, which
[52:24] I'm like, yes, good progress. Excellent.
[52:26] Um, elliptic curve cryptography, this is
[52:28] sort of like my take on that, is
[52:30] elliptic curve cryptography currently is
[52:31] arguably like the greatest single point
[52:33] of failure for Bitcoin right now, right?
[52:36] Like if that breaks, the whole project
[52:38] basically dies. So like let's maybe not
[52:41] rely just on that.
[52:42] >> Yeah, let's build in redundancy, right?
[52:44] Let's build in cryptographic agility.
[52:46] Let's like fix this problem, right? Um
[52:49] especially when you're saying you're
[52:50] going to be like secure uncensorable
[52:52] money for the next hundreds of years.
[52:54] Yeah, exactly. that's kind you got to
[52:55] you kind of got to fix this. So even at
[52:57] that top level though there's this
[52:58] trade-off of like do we do it? When do
[53:00] we do it? How do we do it? Right? Um
[53:02] then you kind of start to get into the
[53:04] weeds of all right fine. So what do we
[53:07] need to do? Uh well we need a signature
[53:10] scheme that um you know is postquantum.
[53:13] We need a postquantum we need
[53:14] postquantum cryptography. Uh we got to
[53:16] provide a way for people to move to this
[53:18] postquantum signature scheme. Um and and
[53:22] this is like a multi-step process. And
[53:24] then at some point we might actually
[53:26] want to stop supporting a vulnerable
[53:29] scheme. Maybe we want a break glass in
[53:32] in case of like if a quantum computer
[53:34] were to appear literally tomorrow. Do we
[53:37] have a plan for what we could do? Do we
[53:39] have a plan for people who don't move
[53:40] but might wake up in 5 years and be like
[53:43] oh no I missed it to to move then? You
[53:45] know so there's all three of coins.
[53:47] >> Exactly. So there's like all these
[53:49] different parts and phases and like use
[53:52] cases that you want to be able to handle
[53:55] and they all require trade-offs. They're
[53:58] all like do you privilege the people who
[54:01] are active now and are ready to go or do
[54:03] you try to design something that is more
[54:05] targeted towards the people who who are
[54:07] going to wait and be lazy? Do you um you
[54:11] know do do you just say like hey if you
[54:15] if you're using this stupid wallet that
[54:17] reveals your public key that's on you
[54:18] don't use that wallet or do you say
[54:20] people are using wallets that reveal
[54:21] their public key so we need to do
[54:22] something about this like even if it's
[54:24] imperfect you know is it okay that it's
[54:27] a little bit more inefficient the you
[54:29] know to move to even something that like
[54:31] creates postquantum optionality or do
[54:33] you say no no no it's got to be cheaper
[54:35] than what we have now or nobody will
[54:36] move do you like how do you choose is
[54:38] the postquantum signature scheme. How do
[54:40] you trade off between like this one's
[54:42] really big, this one has additional like
[54:44] cryptographic security assumptions, this
[54:46] one's really slow, this one, you know,
[54:49] doesn't let us do any of the cool
[54:50] cryptographic tricks that we like really
[54:52] like doing in Bitcoin. So, there's all
[54:53] these things. Nothing checks all the
[54:56] boxes. So, it's like which box are you
[54:58] going to leave unchecked? Do you have a
[55:00] point of view a about you know what kind
[55:04] of proposals that we've seen around this
[55:06] so far that you you know like or do you
[55:08] intentionally not take a position on
[55:10] such things?
[55:11] >> No, no, I'm I'm happy to take a position
[55:12] but um I'm just kind of getting into
[55:14] this like I'm not a cryptographer by
[55:17] training. I'm a computer scientist but
[55:18] not a cryptographer. And so, you know, I
[55:20] haven't been I haven't
[55:22] >> You're reviewing
[55:22] >> I'm I'm I'm reviewing I'm looking,
[55:24] right? And and these things are like
[55:27] subtle and nuanced. And sometimes you're
[55:29] like, "Yeah, this seems like a great
[55:30] idea." And then you're like, "Oh, wait.
[55:32] Actually, for this wallet and use case
[55:35] that's super important, it makes this
[55:37] trade-off that is not great and it's not
[55:38] going to work out well for people." And
[55:40] so, it takes like a lot of time to get
[55:42] your head around all of these things. I
[55:44] mean, and it's very emotional for
[55:45] people. I mean like I think I'm not
[55:47] something that I notic is when you bring
[55:48] this topic up people gut reaction what
[55:51] we they think we should do when they
[55:53] really haven't done the research of like
[55:55] understanding any of the implications of
[55:58] the problem itself or the solutions.
[56:00] Yeah. Yeah. Totally 100%. I mean what's
[56:02] out there right now
[56:04] >> um there's BIP 360 which I know you are
[56:06] an author on and I'm not just saying
[56:08] this because you're an author but it
[56:09] seems seems like a good idea. I mean I'm
[56:11] like I'm like
[56:12] >> it's a very conservative baby step. It's
[56:14] a good foundational easy to be peasy
[56:16] non-controver relatively non-controvers
[56:18] not the end of the road. Um but I think
[56:21] seems like a pretty good idea to me. Uh
[56:23] >> it's step one of like a hundred.
[56:25] >> Yeah. But hey Merkel route I think I
[56:27] think solid. A lot of thoughts gone into
[56:29] it so far. Seems like a good idea. Need
[56:31] some more time to think about it but
[56:33] overall I'm like yeah. Um just came from
[56:35] OP next where I saw Jonas Nick gave a
[56:38] talk about the work he's been doing on
[56:40] signature schemes. He came on the show
[56:43] yesterday. We talked about uh shrinks
[56:45] and shrimps on the show yesterday.
[56:46] >> I have a feeling that I mean it sounds
[56:48] like that BIP is is coming.
[56:49] >> Yeah. And it's super cool. I was very
[56:52] apprehensive about the statefulness.
[56:54] >> Yeah.
[56:54] >> Beforehand and um I understand it a
[56:57] little bit better now. Slightly less
[56:59] apprehensive about it given the fallback
[57:01] mechanism. Want to understand the
[57:03] fallback mechanism better. Want to get
[57:05] some wallet developers involved to
[57:07] understand how they feel about the
[57:08] statefulness. Also, still giant
[57:11] signature, still big ones, you know,
[57:13] like still it's not it's not
[57:14] >> the more stateful the smaller they are,
[57:16] but paying for anyone who doesn't know
[57:18] what we're talking about to go watch the
[57:19] Jonas Nick episode.
[57:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. So, but very cool work. Uh a
[57:23] great presentation. Needs some people to
[57:25] beat their heads against it for a while
[57:27] and like pick over all the corners and
[57:29] things like that.
[57:30] >> Um but, you know, pretty cool. Uh and
[57:33] then you know in the far out future uh
[57:37] would be great ifogyny based crypto
[57:40] turns out to be something that that
[57:42] works for Bitcoin because it has a lot
[57:45] more structure and so we can still do a
[57:47] lot of really cool things um
[57:49] cryptographically.
[57:50] >> Interesting. I didn't know that.
[57:51] >> Yeah. But it's not ready yet. It's like
[57:53] >> it's pretty theoretical, right?
[57:54] >> It's like it's still like needs a lot of
[57:56] shaking out. Um, one thing I worry about
[58:00] is like we rely on NIST to kind of like
[58:03] standardize cryptographic primitives,
[58:06] right? And if Bitcoin goes in a
[58:08] different direction than what everybody
[58:10] else is looking at, that means that the
[58:12] stuff that we have is going to have less
[58:13] eyes on it, is going to be less well
[58:15] tested, um, is going to be less robust.
[58:19] And so, you know, I'm wondering, do we
[58:21] want to get involved in the NIS process?
[58:23] Do we want to start poking them and
[58:25] making sure that like the people do we
[58:26] want to start getting the people who are
[58:28] hardcore working on postcon cryptography
[58:30] to understand the Bitcoin use cases and
[58:33] needs better so they can incorporate
[58:34] them? Do they have an incentive to do
[58:36] that? Will they even bother? I don't
[58:37] know.
[58:38] >> A lot of Bitcoiners just don't like Nest
[58:39] because of its government ties, right?
[58:41] Also, so there's like some like
[58:42] >> It's just funny. It's just interesting.
[58:44] >> They're doing free work for you. They're
[58:46] standardizing like look, okay, just like
[58:48] take advantage of it where you can get
[58:49] it. I understand there might be a back
[58:51] door of blah blah fine but it's like you
[58:54] you have you know you
[58:55] >> it's the highest level research we have
[58:56] on these
[58:57] >> I mean it's like yeah yeah and and I I
[59:00] wouldn't ignore it let me put it that
[59:01] way so so that's something that I'm
[59:04] thinking about right now um and you know
[59:06] we'll see we'll see where this goes.
[59:07] >> Yeah. Do you have a point of view about
[59:10] it's funny because you know many people
[59:12] are saying well yeah we can you know
[59:14] have a million technical arguments about
[59:16] the PQ signatures and and those will you
[59:18] know continue to go on but fundamentally
[59:20] that's a much easier problem to solve
[59:21] then something like Satoshi's coins or
[59:23] what do we do about quantum vulnerable
[59:25] coins I think that's where most people
[59:26] are presuming the consensus government
[59:30] challenge will really arise. Yeah. And
[59:32] and I mean I get it. It but like we
[59:35] don't have to answer that question right
[59:37] now and we don't have to let that gate
[59:40] this other really important work like
[59:42] >> Oh, that's interesting.
[59:43] >> Yeah. Like like that question becomes
[59:47] relevant when there is a quantum
[59:48] computer. I'm not saying we don't have
[59:50] to have a plan in place.
[59:51] >> Right. Well, I was going to say you need
[59:52] to have a plan for that as well, right?
[59:53] >> You need to have a plan. But how about
[59:55] we give everybody the option of moving
[59:57] to quantum safe cryptography first
[59:59] >> and then see how many quantum vulnerable
[01:00:01] coins basically are left to deal with.
[01:00:03] >> Like right now there there like other
[01:00:06] than you know a VH
[01:00:08] >> good point
[01:00:08] >> QSB thing which I'm sorry is not
[01:00:11] practical. This is not the way that
[01:00:12] we're going to actually make quant
[01:00:14] bitcoin tradeoffs even he says. So yeah,
[01:00:17] you know, like aside from that,
[01:00:19] literally there's no way to make your
[01:00:22] coins quantum safe right now, like
[01:00:25] really quantum safe.
[01:00:26] >> You can hide them behind a PE uh like a
[01:00:29] hash, but
[01:00:31] >> that's that's short exposure attack.
[01:00:33] Yeah, exactly. It's not it's not a good
[01:00:35] solution. And so
[01:00:36] >> how about we give people that option
[01:00:38] now? We create a robust like real way
[01:00:41] for people to do that. Let's not hold
[01:00:44] that up on a philosophical conversation
[01:00:47] about like what to do about Satoshi's
[01:00:49] coins. We don't have to answer that to
[01:00:50] do this. Let's do this. This is the most
[01:00:53] important thing to do right now. It's
[01:00:54] interesting because, you know, one of
[01:00:56] the conversations that I've had at
[01:00:57] length with people like Hunter and
[01:00:58] Michael Casey and some of these folks
[01:01:00] that I've been working on these
[01:01:01] proposals with, um, is, you know, well,
[01:01:04] the cleanest way to handle this would be
[01:01:06] to have like one nice little Qbit
[01:01:09] activation that includes everything to
[01:01:11] quantum harden Bitcoin in one go. No.
[01:01:13] >> Um, very interesting that you Right.
[01:01:16] But, but basically what you're saying is
[01:01:18] like that will actually stall progress
[01:01:20] on a lot of important things. I think if
[01:01:22] you have to answer everything all at
[01:01:24] once, it's not going to happen.
[01:01:25] >> Yeah. I say let's make Bitcoin quantum
[01:01:29] safe as soon as possible. Let's figure
[01:01:30] out
[01:01:30] >> just at the transaction level, not
[01:01:32] quantum vulnerable coins.
[01:01:34] >> Give people an option that this is my
[01:01:35] take and I'm I'm open to being convinced
[01:01:37] otherwise. But I think that would do a
[01:01:39] lot to alleviate uncertainty. And I
[01:01:42] totally respect there's some people who
[01:01:44] are like what's the point of that Nha if
[01:01:46] we haven't resolved this bigger problem
[01:01:48] because even if
[01:01:51] 50% of the coins move 60% of the coins
[01:01:53] move 70% of the coins move if 30% of the
[01:01:55] coins are still quantum vulnerable
[01:01:57] Bitcoin's broken. I'm not convinced
[01:02:00] beyond a shadow of the doubt that the
[01:02:01] answer to that that that's true. I I
[01:02:05] think that we could like but there's but
[01:02:06] there's clearly a strong probability
[01:02:08] that it's true or a possibility that
[01:02:10] it's true. We need to do more work to
[01:02:11] understand that and
[01:02:13] >> I I think and I think some allocators
[01:02:15] and this is where the technical people
[01:02:17] often are wrong and the actual like
[01:02:19] smart money often has more information
[01:02:21] is that the allocators have actually run
[01:02:23] the numbers on that the technical people
[01:02:25] have not the developers
[01:02:27] >> they run the numbers from the
[01:02:28] perspective of like could the market
[01:02:29] handle if you dump those coins on the
[01:02:31] market
[01:02:32] >> I don't care if the bit price of Bitcoin
[01:02:33] crashes temporarily like that's not what
[01:02:35] I'm optimizing for I know some people
[01:02:36] care about that and I understand they're
[01:02:38] optimizing
[01:02:38] >> I don't think it'll be that I mean
[01:02:39] temporary Niha it's like temporary for
[01:02:42] like a decade like temporary for I mean
[01:02:44] like do you know as a quick wick down
[01:02:47] >> yeah true is there but is there a
[01:02:49] version of Bitcoin that can continue
[01:02:50] operating in that environment I don't
[01:02:52] know the answer to that question
[01:02:54] >> I understand yeah I just I don't know
[01:02:56] the answer to that question I would like
[01:02:58] to figure I would like to get more
[01:03:00] confidence either way from an economic
[01:03:02] perspective from a price perspective
[01:03:04] also from a technical security
[01:03:06] perspective like we've just talked about
[01:03:08] I think that mining could totally break
[01:03:10] down if that happens. Exactly. And that
[01:03:12] means it doesn't work anymore. So
[01:03:13] >> exactly. I don't know that that's true.
[01:03:16] And this is like
[01:03:16] >> well and also there is I mean again the
[01:03:18] So you're still in research phase here
[01:03:20] but like to your point there's a lot to
[01:03:22] look at with that
[01:03:23] >> and I think that conversation that that
[01:03:26] I think is really important is if I knew
[01:03:28] one way or the other I could convince
[01:03:30] other people and I think it would be a
[01:03:31] lot easier to have this conversation. I
[01:03:34] think part of the reason that it's just
[01:03:36] like people talking past each other and
[01:03:37] like debate is because we don't actually
[01:03:40] have the facts, everybody's kind of
[01:03:41] operating based on vibes or like kind of
[01:03:44] like assumptions. Well, yeah. Exactly.
[01:03:45] And so the more clarity we can get, the
[01:03:48] more the more factual we can get,
[01:03:51] >> then the easier it's going to be to get
[01:03:52] everybody on the same page. Well, and
[01:03:54] one thing that I mean, you know, again,
[01:03:55] the sort of economic node conversation,
[01:03:57] I hear this a lot like people saying
[01:03:59] basically, well, like it doesn't really
[01:04:01] matter what happens with the fiat price
[01:04:02] because like Bitcoin is still going to
[01:04:04] be Bitcoin no matter what. But it is
[01:04:05] interesting because ultimately the
[01:04:07] economic nodes, they care about the
[01:04:09] price and so they will have some they're
[01:04:12] going to do their thing, which is
[01:04:14] probably advocate with their money as to
[01:04:18] what we should do with Satoshi's coins
[01:04:20] no matter what. So it starts to get you
[01:04:22] start to get into the circular
[01:04:23] conversation.
[01:04:24] >> Theory is complicated and it is
[01:04:26] recursive and uh it depends on what
[01:04:28] everyone thinks everyone else is going
[01:04:29] to do and yeah it's super interesting.
[01:04:32] Yeah, but I do think your point is very
[01:04:34] well taken that uh we don't need to
[01:04:37] figure out Satoshi's coins right now.
[01:04:38] And I do think that will be the most
[01:04:41] controversial piece of this for sure.
[01:04:43] And to stall on some of these other
[01:04:46] really important kind of technical
[01:04:48] elements until we figure out get
[01:04:50] consensus on Satoshi's coins is like a
[01:04:52] disaster kind of.
[01:04:53] >> I think we need to get consensus on that
[01:04:55] before we can do good things. But, you
[01:04:57] know, I'm open to being convinced
[01:04:58] otherwise.
[01:04:59] >> No, no, no. I mean, I I I mean, I I've
[01:05:01] thought about this a lot. Um, and I
[01:05:03] think you're right. I actually think
[01:05:04] that that's really good. I'm I wonder
[01:05:06] how
[01:05:08] >> calming it will be to the market if um,
[01:05:12] you know, just having the postquantum
[01:05:14] transactions piece kind of handled, how
[01:05:16] much that will mean to the economic
[01:05:19] actors who I think are mostly focused on
[01:05:21] the Satoshi's coins issues right now.
[01:05:23] But I do think that it it at the very
[01:05:26] least there's some like meaningful
[01:05:28] >> Yeah, that's an interesting question. I
[01:05:30] don't know the answer to that. Yeah.
[01:05:31] >> Yeah. Um I mean we'll see. We'll see.
[01:05:33] But I do think to your point like no
[01:05:35] matter what it's definitely moving in
[01:05:37] the right direction to just get the
[01:05:38] postquantum transactions piece underway.
[01:05:40] >> I don't know that we're going to decide
[01:05:42] what happens with Satoshi's coins. I
[01:05:44] suspect
[01:05:45] >> there will be a fork.
[01:05:46] >> I agree.
[01:05:46] >> And and so you know that
[01:05:48] >> there will be fork wars.
[01:05:49] >> Yeah. Exactly. And so, you know, it's
[01:05:52] it's just kind of like it's going to go
[01:05:53] both ways and we'll see what happens.
[01:05:54] >> We're not I I mean, I agree. I think
[01:05:56] it's I think it's not probable. It's
[01:05:58] unlikely that we're all going to like
[01:06:00] come to consensus about what to do. It's
[01:06:02] more likely going to get battled out
[01:06:04] >> unless it's so clear that Bitcoin cannot
[01:06:08] work and everyone becomes convinced of
[01:06:10] that. Yeah. I I mean, I think there's a
[01:06:12] slight chance
[01:06:13] >> because of like mining incentives or
[01:06:14] like something at a fundamental
[01:06:15] technical level. It's not just all the
[01:06:17] institutions fail. It's got to be deeper
[01:06:19] than that. But at a very fundamental
[01:06:21] technical level, if we can prove it
[01:06:24] doesn't work
[01:06:24] >> from a mining mostly, it's got to be
[01:06:26] mining related at that point. That's
[01:06:27] where fiat and bitcoin meet, right? Is m
[01:06:29] is the area of mining.
[01:06:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's not even fiat
[01:06:32] and bitcoin. It's incentives and it's
[01:06:34] like can you progress the blockchain?
[01:06:35] Can you It's a tech. It is a technical
[01:06:37] question and I think that's the one
[01:06:40] that's at the top of my mind right now.
[01:06:41] There might be other technical
[01:06:42] questions, but I think if you can prove
[01:06:44] it breaks, but the harm of Satoshi's
[01:06:47] coins ripping, liquidating basically is
[01:06:50] fundamentally tied to fiat price
[01:06:52] destruction, right? Like that is the
[01:06:54] harm in it. Like those coins just
[01:06:56] launching onto the market if there's no
[01:06:57] trading value doesn't really matter,
[01:06:59] right? So, okay. No, it's about the
[01:07:01] reward to the minor and is the minor
[01:07:02] incentivized to continue building on
[01:07:04] that chain and miners are incentivized
[01:07:06] by the fiat price of Bitcoin. This is
[01:07:08] what I'm saying. But it's not about like
[01:07:09] the price tanking because Satoshi's
[01:07:12] coins are on the market. It's about like
[01:07:14] the
[01:07:15] >> but but if the price tanks then that
[01:07:17] fundamentally changes the economics of
[01:07:19] mining.
[01:07:19] >> That is also another reason that is also
[01:07:21] another reason why mining might break.
[01:07:23] But it's a little bit different than the
[01:07:24] reason that I'm saying. Yeah.
[01:07:26] >> But but right right but there's there's
[01:07:28] a I the way it's funny like working at
[01:07:30] MER I've been thinking about this so
[01:07:31] much lately. It's like I really realized
[01:07:33] that like you know the the mining is the
[01:07:38] part is the technical part of Bitcoin
[01:07:40] where you can't ignore fiat anymore,
[01:07:42] right? Because electricity is currently
[01:07:45] paid for in dollars. So until we're on a
[01:07:47] Bitcoin standard and you're buying
[01:07:49] energy in Bitcoin and the entire world
[01:07:51] agrees that energy is priced in Bitcoin,
[01:07:54] Bitcoin is fundamentally at a security
[01:07:56] level tied to fiat and the trading value
[01:07:59] between Bitcoin and fiat because of
[01:08:00] mining
[01:08:01] >> and they're short markets. Short markets
[01:08:02] are another place where they are in yeah
[01:08:04] in intricately tied together.
[01:08:06] >> Exactly. So it's interesting but um okay
[01:08:08] so question for you circling back to the
[01:08:11] governance do you think on this like
[01:08:14] quantum conversation like how do you see
[01:08:16] this playing out so corporations are
[01:08:18] obviously taking interest in how the
[01:08:20] tech evolves um in the short term like
[01:08:23] in the next like year two years three
[01:08:25] years like are we going to see you know
[01:08:28] companies who have big stakes in Bitcoin
[01:08:30] and really want to make sure that you
[01:08:31] know this problem is handled hire
[01:08:33] developers or fund developers like how
[01:08:36] are Are we going to start to see
[01:08:37] corporations potentially? Right now
[01:08:40] they're just talking to people, right?
[01:08:41] But but that could change as this
[01:08:44] >> Yeah, I think it's inevitable. I think
[01:08:45] it'll start with the corporations
[01:08:47] funding developers or funding developer
[01:08:49] organizations more closely and and being
[01:08:52] like a little bit more like we want you
[01:08:54] to work on focus on this, right? like it
[01:08:56] won't be like you guys have to build X,
[01:08:58] but it'll be like we want to fund this
[01:09:00] organization that's really going to
[01:09:02] focus on, you know, mining like what
[01:09:05] happens when when the block subsidy goes
[01:09:07] away or like really going to focus on
[01:09:08] the quantum question or something like
[01:09:10] that. And then I think yeah, I think
[01:09:12] eventually there'll be more, you know,
[01:09:14] if Bitcoin succeeds then there there
[01:09:18] will be more more of a tie-in like
[01:09:19] they'll realize they need to have a
[01:09:21] role. However, I think there'll be less
[01:09:24] of an incentive to have a role the less
[01:09:26] work that needs to be done on Bitcoin.
[01:09:28] So maybe once we navigate quantum, once
[01:09:31] we navigate the mining subsidy block,
[01:09:34] >> the existential threats existential
[01:09:37] threats are handled then they won't care
[01:09:38] anymore.
[01:09:39] >> Yeah, they well because it'll just kind
[01:09:41] of work, right? And so you know that
[01:09:44] there's less of an incentive. So I think
[01:09:45] you'll have those two things kind of
[01:09:46] like working against each other. Are
[01:09:48] those the two existential threats that
[01:09:51] you think about is like quantum and the
[01:09:53] fee market and the subsidy declining.
[01:09:54] Are those like the two things that like
[01:09:56] Yeah, there's three actually. So one is
[01:09:59] yeah one is quantum one is what happens
[01:10:02] when the uh the block subsidy uh goes
[01:10:05] away and then the third is
[01:10:09] I really think that if bitcoin is just
[01:10:11] custodied by even if it's hundreds of
[01:10:15] large financial institutions I think it
[01:10:17] loses its narrative as digital gold like
[01:10:20] I think it becomes no longer interesting
[01:10:22] I think you know it'll just it'll
[01:10:25] >> well what's the point I mean and this is
[01:10:27] a huge I completely agree. I think this
[01:10:29] is like uh the custody conversation,
[01:10:31] right? Which is
[01:10:33] >> intimately linked with the scaling
[01:10:35] conversation, right? Because right now
[01:10:37] it's not even possible for 8 billion
[01:10:39] people to self-custody their assets.
[01:10:41] Like there's just not enough throughput
[01:10:42] for that, right?
[01:10:43] >> Um interesting. I wasn't sure we were
[01:10:46] going to get to L2. We really went
[01:10:47] through my whole list just now.
[01:10:49] >> It's all connected.
[01:10:50] >> It's all connected. It's all connected.
[01:10:52] It's so funny. I wasn't sure we were
[01:10:53] going to get into Bitcoin. Yeah. Yeah,
[01:10:56] but I I think that that's something that
[01:10:57] people don't really realize. You know,
[01:10:59] people think about scaling and they
[01:11:00] think about like new use cases, but they
[01:11:02] don't necessarily realize that like
[01:11:04] scaling is actually about self-custody,
[01:11:07] like the ability to self-custody. Like I
[01:11:10] need to and Robin Linus talks about this
[01:11:12] a lot. I've spoken about this with him
[01:11:13] at at length. If I need a third party to
[01:11:17] execute my purchasing power like to make
[01:11:19] payments to turn my store of value
[01:11:21] bitcoin into actual goods and services
[01:11:23] and use it as payments. If I can't do
[01:11:25] that self-custodially
[01:11:27] >> if I need you know to exchange for
[01:11:29] dollars or you know whatever you know
[01:11:31] some other custodied solution to do that
[01:11:33] it's not permissionless like what is the
[01:11:35] point?
[01:11:35] >> Yeah.
[01:11:37] >> Yeah. Yeah. No. Yeah. I agree. or if you
[01:11:39] if you need an institution to allow you
[01:11:42] to move your Bitcoin, that's that's not
[01:11:45] self-custody. Um, and and I really think
[01:11:49] you have to be comfortable thinking on
[01:11:50] the edges here. Like I look, I
[01:11:52] understand most people in the world
[01:11:54] aren't going to self- custody. That's
[01:11:56] okay. That's fine. I I am a firm
[01:11:58] believer.
[01:11:58] >> You don't think there's ever a universe
[01:11:59] where the UX problems get solved and
[01:12:02] people can just self-custody?
[01:12:04] >> That would be super cool. That would be
[01:12:06] awesome. That would be I am not holding
[01:12:08] my breath for that world but that would
[01:12:09] be great. I don't know that it's
[01:12:10] impossible.
[01:12:10] >> Let's dream. Yeah, let's dream. Sure.
[01:12:12] But even but you know whatever. I mean I
[01:12:15] think there's always a risk to self
[01:12:16] custoing like it might you might lose it
[01:12:18] and so there's always going to be people
[01:12:19] who want like a little bit you know want
[01:12:21] someone else to handle that for them
[01:12:23] maybe and maybe we invent some super
[01:12:24] cool way for them to have back
[01:12:26] >> maybe is like this type of middle ground
[01:12:28] solution or whatever. That's not self
[01:12:30] custody.
[01:12:30] >> No no no but but middle ground solution
[01:12:32] in terms of like
[01:12:34] >> Yeah. No, no. Yes. Yes. Custody on a
[01:12:37] spectrum.
[01:12:37] >> Yeah, totally.
[01:12:38] >> At least I get to choose my custodian
[01:12:40] kind of thing.
[01:12:40] >> Yes. Um, so I I'm not I don't believe
[01:12:44] that like everyone in the world is going
[01:12:46] to self custody. They're going to make
[01:12:47] the choice that's right for them. And
[01:12:48] I'm a firm believer that that's okay.
[01:12:50] You you meet people where they are and
[01:12:52] you don't assume you know what's best
[01:12:54] for them. You you let them choose what's
[01:12:56] best for themselves. That that's self-
[01:12:57] sovereignty. That's how it works.
[01:12:59] >> Yeah. Totally. and and and so but but I
[01:13:03] think this is super important. I think
[01:13:05] that anyone who wants to self-custody
[01:13:08] should be able to. Okay? And that is a
[01:13:11] very different thing. And and that means
[01:13:14] I think everyone who wants to self-
[01:13:16] custody should be able to. You have to
[01:13:18] be able to support that. And if you
[01:13:20] can't support that, that's a big
[01:13:22] problem. It means people are going to be
[01:13:24] trapped. And it it you know, I think you
[01:13:26] start to very quickly lose the plot.
[01:13:28] >> 100%. I think Robin Lionus is going to
[01:13:30] like this. We should clip this and send
[01:13:32] this to Robin Lannis because this is
[01:13:34] what he's banging the drum on is
[01:13:35] basically it's like okay yes we can't
[01:13:37] control adoption basically of
[01:13:39] >> self I don't want to tell people what to
[01:13:42] do that's not like me personally I'm
[01:13:43] like you do you okay not my goal to tell
[01:13:46] you how you should be living your life
[01:13:47] >> but we should at least be able to
[01:13:50] technically have the capability of
[01:13:52] offering 8 billion people self-custodial
[01:13:54] tools for payments
[01:13:56] >> the people who want to Yes. And if
[01:13:58] there's anyone who can't, that means
[01:14:00] that yeah, I mean, I don't know if it's
[01:14:03] possible, though. I don't know if it's
[01:14:04] technically possible to do that with the
[01:14:06] trade-offs of decentralization, but I
[01:14:08] don't know that it's impossible. That's
[01:14:10] what's kind of exciting. That's why I'm
[01:14:12] >> working towards it.
[01:14:13] >> Yeah. 8 billion people is a lot of
[01:14:15] people.
[01:14:15] >> It's true. So, what are your I mean, do
[01:14:17] you have favorites on the L2 scaling
[01:14:20] solutions uh spectrum? I mean what okay
[01:14:24] what I really wish is that we had the
[01:14:27] primitives in Bitcoin script to open up
[01:14:30] the design space here right like credit
[01:14:33] to Robin Lionus for torturing Bitcoin
[01:14:35] script every he like every other month
[01:14:38] he comes out with something new and I'm
[01:14:40] just like oh my god like this is crazy
[01:14:42] >> you know credit to him for being able to
[01:14:44] figure out that stuff he should not have
[01:14:46] to be doing this like we should have the
[01:14:49] ability to explore the design base of
[01:14:53] expanding the number of people who can
[01:14:54] self-custody with the minimal number of
[01:14:56] trade-offs.
[01:14:57] >> And in layman's terms, what you're
[01:14:58] actually saying is we should have more
[01:15:00] expressive op codes that enable
[01:15:02] trustless payments.
[01:15:03] >> Yes. Okay. Yeah. I don't like the word
[01:15:05] trustless, but yes. Like uh you know,
[01:15:07] it's always about what are your security
[01:15:09] assumptions? This is my this is like my
[01:15:11] pet peeve. Bitcoin's not trustless. you
[01:15:13] are assuming that there isn't a quantum
[01:15:15] computer out there that has broken ECDSA
[01:15:17] and Shreore like you you know there are
[01:15:20] security assumptions
[01:15:22] whenever you're using these systems and
[01:15:24] cryptography and this technology you're
[01:15:26] assuming 51% of the miners aren't
[01:15:27] including and don't have like a a fork
[01:15:30] double spending you the last time you
[01:15:31] received Bitcoin um there's no such
[01:15:34] thing as trustlessness I know a lot of
[01:15:35] people disagree with me on that they
[01:15:36] really like that as a shorthand I think
[01:15:38] of it as like the fewest additional
[01:15:40] security assumptions above and beyond
[01:15:41] vanilla Bitcoin fundamentally, not to
[01:15:43] get too off track here, we're talking
[01:15:45] about soft works for op code, right?
[01:15:46] Like you would like more expressive op
[01:15:48] codes. You would like to see more
[01:15:49] expressive
[01:15:50] >> op. I think that would be cool. I think
[01:15:51] that that would enable us building
[01:15:53] really exciting things and not you know
[01:15:55] fussing with the base layer like yeah
[01:15:57] that'd be great.
[01:15:58] >> Do you have any concerns and again I'm
[01:16:00] I'm broadly on your team there uh but do
[01:16:03] you have any concerns about you know
[01:16:05] potential negative externalities
[01:16:06] associated with increased expressivity?
[01:16:09] Okay, the biggest negative externalities
[01:16:11] are the following. Um, number one is me,
[01:16:15] right? So, again going back to how is
[01:16:19] this going to incentivize miners and is
[01:16:22] this going to be a centralizing force on
[01:16:23] minor on on miners on mining. Um, that
[01:16:27] is the biggest concern. Uh, we need to
[01:16:30] work that out. I don't think it's like I
[01:16:33] don't think you can just bring it up and
[01:16:34] say therefore we can't do this. I don't
[01:16:36] think that's true. Yeah, there might be
[01:16:37] solutions working
[01:16:39] >> and I suspect that the ME problems will
[01:16:42] be on the L2s, not on the L1. So, I
[01:16:44] don't think we should worry about it
[01:16:46] that much, but you know, but yeah, I
[01:16:48] think I think we need to work it out. We
[01:16:50] need to figure it out. There's just too
[01:16:51] many things to work on. That's probably
[01:16:53] the biggest one. The second one is
[01:16:55] people are worried that everyone will
[01:16:58] move their Bitcoin into L2s. They'll
[01:17:00] lock it up and put it in L2s. And to
[01:17:03] that I say, well, yeah, if pe like
[01:17:05] again, I'm it's not I'm not here to tell
[01:17:07] people what to do. If people offer
[01:17:09] interesting services that they want on
[01:17:11] L2s, they're going to go use the L2s and
[01:17:15] >> that's okay.
[01:17:15] >> The pro the problem there though becomes
[01:17:17] the fee market issues, right? And that's
[01:17:18] why people are concerned about Bitcoin
[01:17:20] getting locked on L2s is then like L1
[01:17:22] fees aren't getting paid.
[01:17:23] >> I'm not as concerned about that. If
[01:17:24] there's a tremendous like economic
[01:17:26] activity happen, valuable activity
[01:17:28] happening on L2s, that will come down
[01:17:30] into the L1 fees. Do you feel confident
[01:17:32] about that? Has there been any It's
[01:17:33] actually interesting cuz we talk about
[01:17:34] this all the time also with Mike Casey
[01:17:36] and them. Um like has there been real
[01:17:39] research on that? Because that's a
[01:17:41] question that I'm like I want to see the
[01:17:42] math. I actually don't know like what
[01:17:44] how that is going to play out.
[01:17:46] >> I mean I think it's use of Bitcoin and
[01:17:49] so it leads to transaction fees, right?
[01:17:51] Um
[01:17:52] >> but but it's but it's by definition like
[01:17:55] you're limit you're reducing use and
[01:17:57] fees that would be paid on L1 to move to
[01:17:59] L2.
[01:18:00] I'm like a big believer in Yemen's
[01:18:02] paradox, right? You know you know Jeans
[01:18:04] Jevans paradox like Jeans paradox is
[01:18:06] like this idea that if you make a
[01:18:08] technology cheaper actually like
[01:18:12] >> okay if you make a technology cheaper it
[01:18:14] increases use but actually you can make
[01:18:15] way more money like the demand will go
[01:18:18] up massively because you've made it
[01:18:20] cheaper and so you know that's what you
[01:18:22] know the idea was like I think I forgot
[01:18:25] like it was originally with like the
[01:18:27] coal coal and steam engines or something
[01:18:29] like that like it turned out even though
[01:18:31] they made engines more efficient to use
[01:18:32] less coal overall. We used way more coal
[01:18:35] because there's more demand for the
[01:18:36] products because they were cheaper.
[01:18:37] >> Exactly.
[01:18:38] >> Right. And Robin Linus makes this point
[01:18:40] too on a regular
[01:18:41] >> and I think we've just seen that happen.
[01:18:42] >> That's theoretical, right? Like is there
[01:18:44] real It's I guess it's impossible to do
[01:18:46] the research because it depends on an
[01:18:48] assumption that adoption will happen.
[01:18:50] This is the core.
[01:18:51] >> I think we want to build for a world
[01:18:52] where this is successful. I mean
[01:18:54] otherwise what are we doing, right? Like
[01:18:55] are we building for a world where like
[01:18:57] 20 people use Bitcoin?
[01:18:58] >> Is it is it chicken or the egg though?
[01:19:00] Is it I mean what do we see happening
[01:19:02] you know adoption of what comes first
[01:19:05] adoption of payments that push you know
[01:19:07] actual technical solutions for payments
[01:19:09] forward or do we need the tech to exist
[01:19:11] in order to see the adoption
[01:19:12] >> this is the big question yeah and the
[01:19:14] answer is both and and but the tech to
[01:19:18] me is the physics like it's gravity if
[01:19:21] gravity doesn't work you can't do things
[01:19:22] with gravity so you have to make it work
[01:19:24] so that you can you can bring the use
[01:19:26] cases you're right the use cases might
[01:19:27] not come but then what were we doing
[01:19:29] anyway it was never going to
[01:19:30] Interesting. Well, this husband I am
[01:19:32] amazed that we got through like
[01:19:34] literally all of the topics that I was
[01:19:36] like thinking I was like push I was like
[01:19:38] you know kind of framing my conversation
[01:19:41] with Niha and these were all things I
[01:19:43] was like well if we have time we'll get
[01:19:44] to this but you're right they're all
[01:19:46] connected right
[01:19:47] >> that's the theme like yeah
[01:19:48] >> well originally I was like let's talk
[01:19:50] about governance and that will like kind
[01:19:51] of naturally kind of move into a
[01:19:53] conversation about how quantum is
[01:19:54] affecting governance right and that was
[01:19:56] sort of the original theme that I wanted
[01:19:58] to talk about here but um
[01:20:00] >> in my sort of backup list of questions.
[01:20:02] I was going to ask you about the fee
[01:20:03] market, other existential threats to
[01:20:05] Bitcoin, L2s. I mean, these are all
[01:20:07] your, you know, areas of expertise. So,
[01:20:09] um, and we kind of touched on
[01:20:11] everything, so it kind of worked out
[01:20:12] perfectly. Great.
[01:20:14] >> Yeah. Well, thank you so much.
[01:20:15] >> Thank you for doing this. This is really
[01:20:17] fun, this wide ranging conversation.
[01:20:19] >> Super fun. Any final like last like
[01:20:22] shout outs you want to make related to
[01:20:23] DCI or MIT or like what are you guys
[01:20:26] working on right now? like what are you
[01:20:27] like really excited about with DCI right
[01:20:30] now?
[01:20:30] >> Um, okay. This is like a little in the
[01:20:32] weeds, but I'm really excited about a
[01:20:34] project one of the engineers at DCI is
[01:20:36] working on called Bitcoin kernel. Okay.
[01:20:38] It is a project to modularize and put
[01:20:42] like all of Bitcoin's core cons Bitcoin
[01:20:44] Core's consensus code like in one place.
[01:20:47] And what I think the reason I'm so
[01:20:49] excited about this, people might not
[01:20:50] realize Bitcoin Core is like a wallet, a
[01:20:52] guey, like a peer-to-p peer network.
[01:20:53] like there's all these different parts
[01:20:55] to it. Not just the validating the
[01:20:57] blockchain like important part staying
[01:20:59] in consensus with the network. Once you
[01:21:01] encapsulate that,
[01:21:02] >> I think it'll be possible to have kind
[01:21:05] of like break the core monopoly so to
[01:21:07] speak. I think like people can build
[01:21:09] different things around that. I think
[01:21:11] >> it actually affects governance
[01:21:12] ultimately, right? It'll be easier for I
[01:21:15] mean basically are you saying if you're
[01:21:16] able to kind of like
[01:21:17] >> people could grab that part and just
[01:21:20] plug that in and then do other built
[01:21:22] cool things. Now, this doesn't solve the
[01:21:24] problem of like, well, what if you want
[01:21:26] to build something different consensus
[01:21:27] wise, right? Like, if you want to add
[01:21:29] new op codes, if you want to like add
[01:21:30] new signature schemes, that's still
[01:21:33] Yeah, that's a different ballgame. But I
[01:21:34] think this is a step along the way to
[01:21:36] multiple imple implementations, to more
[01:21:38] diversity, to hopefully it being easier
[01:21:40] for more people to work on.
[01:21:42] >> Are you pro? Well, I think I think
[01:21:44] broadly I think this is generally people
[01:21:46] are interested in having more
[01:21:47] implementations and competitiveness
[01:21:49] around implementations. But yeah,
[01:21:51] >> the risk was always what if these
[01:21:53] implementations diverge on the network,
[01:21:55] right? That's always the risk. And so
[01:21:57] this alleviates that risk. So
[01:21:58] >> Oh, it does because you think people
[01:22:00] basically will take this kernel and
[01:22:01] they'll sort of you essentially fork it,
[01:22:03] right? They'll build on the kernel and
[01:22:05] the kernel will encapsulate all of the
[01:22:07] core consensus part and and thus you can
[01:22:10] build your like cool mobile whatever
[01:22:12] node or your this or your that and like
[01:22:15] you know you'll stay in consensus with
[01:22:16] the rest of the
[01:22:16] >> Oh, interesting. So the kernel is the
[01:22:18] consensus piece that like basically
[01:22:20] cannot break in order to not hard fork
[01:22:22] essentially but you can do like your own
[01:22:24] relay policy and your own everything
[01:22:25] else like around it. Wow, that is really
[01:22:29] cool. Oh my god. Well, I'm very bullish
[01:22:31] on Bitcoin Kernel now because we're
[01:22:34] going to see a lot of these interesting
[01:22:35] new relay things. Yeah,
[01:22:37] >> I hope so. Yeah.
[01:22:38] >> Awesome. Cool. Well, thank you so much,
[01:22:40] Na. That's awesome. I will look out for
[01:22:42] that. And uh yeah, anywhere that people
[01:22:44] can find you? Anything else that
[01:22:46] >> uh onx nha? Yeah.
[01:22:48] >> Okay. Awesome. Cool. Well, thank you so
[01:22:50] much for coming. This is awesome.
[01:22:51] >> Thank you. Yeah. Thanks.