Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 3, 2025 - Blood Money

01:54:25

The New Economic System to Liberate Humanity - Blood Money Eps 279 w/ Greg Chew

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	all right guys we got a new section to the america happens website called the whistleblowers forum where you could go on there and anonymously or using your name post anything that you want and contact other whistleblowers to talk about
	what's really going on out there Alright guys, welcome to the latest Blood Money episode.
	I am here in D.C. working the streets, covering the USAID stuff and all the change that's coming down the pipeline due to the Trump administration.
	It's certainly been an exciting few weeks.
	Or a month since Trump came back into power.
	And today I have an incredible guest named Greg Chu.
	How are you doing, sir?
	Good to see you, Ben.
	We met at CPAC, and you were telling me about an incredible concept.
	I want us to go right into it.
	Tell me what you've been working on.
	For the viewers out there, this is essentially a financial system.
	Am I describing that right?
	A financial system that is beneficial to all of we, the people?
	I would describe it as an economic system.
	Financial is a subset of economics.
	Sounds great.
	Dive right into it.
	Tell me, what have you been working on?
	Okay, so in very simple terms, when you think about the world that we live in today, the economic world we live in today, the world where we make our lives, you know, how we pay for goods, how we're paid for the services we provide to other people, whether that's in the form of a job or a service or however we do it.
	That system...
	Is completely fractured.
	And the fractured pieces are even further fragmented.
	And the people who get to make all the money are the ones who connect those fragments and those pieces together.
	And not only do they get to profiteer from that, they get to profiteer in an outsized way relative to the actual value they provide.
	So for example, this is where we talk about having rent seekers.
	And they have the ability to monetize that connectivity.
	In a way that actually is very reductive.
	It's a huge tax on our productivity.
	And it goes further because when their reach exceeds their grasp, which it did in the great financial crisis of 2008, the global financial crisis went around the world because they were all playing the same game.
	Greed overcame reason.
	And rather than these people lose their jobs, the companies go bankrupt.
	They were considered to be too big to fail.
	And by the way, this is not just about banking.
	This has happened with airlines.
	This has happened with transistors, all kinds of industries.
	We've said people are too big to fail, too important to fail.
	No matter how badly they behave, we will bail them out.
	And the way we bail them out is we print a ton of money.
	This is the other great tax upon human productivity.
	So you have this corporatist regime, which is not capitalism.
	Capitalism, remember, is I win, you win, we win.
	It's the tide that raises all boats in the harbour.
	Corporatism is the one that allows some people to have much, much bigger boats than everybody else at the cost of everybody else's wealth and well-being.
	So this is the corporatist agenda here that says we're too big to fail.
	We get to do what we like.
	We get to abuse our position that controls the fragments and the access to and between those fragments.
	And then on the other side of that, you have the state.
	The ever-growing monolithic state, like a cancer, that has to be cut out and cut down over and over again because it keeps regrowing.
	But it can't be funded from income tax and all the other taxes that we have.
	So what we do is, as you've seen in the States, how many trillions of dollars are you guys in debt?
	Sadly, $38 trillion was last time I checked.
	Right.
	So that's all being paid for by...
	Your children, my children, our grandchildren, our great-grandchildren.
	We're stripping out their ability to do this, and this is how it works.
	So they print this money, and people talk about inflation being consumer price index and consumer price index.
	Well, sorry, producer price index and consumer price index.
	It isn't.
	Inflation is literally what it says on the tin.
	It's money supply.
	You are inflating the amount of money that has been printed.
	When I started off as a trader, it was $480 billion in the M0, the narrow band of money calculation for the US Fed.
	I think today it's something like $8 or $9 trillion, or am I wrong?
	It could be a lot more than that.
	I haven't looked in a little while.
	But it's completely out of whack.
	No, I think it was actually around $19 trillion.
	Thanks to all the COVID spending and everything else.
	Sorry, I haven't looked up that number in a little while.
	But what happens is when they talk about economics and mainstream media, they talk about the CPI and PPI. So you have monetary inflation here, PPI and CPI here, and you look at it and think, but hold on, the price of consumer goods hasn't really gone up that much.
	It's gone up 6%, 8%, 10%, 4% in each year.
	On an accumulative basis, that is still massive.
	But the reality is the transmission fluid to slow monetary inflation, translation into CPI and PPI, is us.
	It's anybody who doesn't have any real assets.
	You see, real assets are all in a bubble of everything.
	Right now, every real asset is in a bubble.
	Why?
	Because there's so much money in the system, and that money is chasing the same limited pool of real assets, property, stocks.
	And so what ends up happening is all the people who aren't rich to begin with get poorer and poorer and poorer.
	And effectively, we are being enslaved.
	Now, that's a process that's been going on for decades.
	You could argue centuries and millennia in different ways.
	But ultimately, that's what I'm trying to change.
	That's what the team and I are all trying to change.
	I've spent 24 years of my life fighting this, what I call the enslavement of humanity, because that's exactly what it is.
	Enslavement is not about whips, chains, and the brutality that we think of when we think of the term slave.
	Enslavement is dependency.
	It's forcing someone to be on their knees and stay there.
	Yeah, I mean, we've talked a lot about the Federal Reserve System and this, you know, some people call it usury-based system with high interest rates where people are, you know, most people have just enough to get by but not enough to prosper.
	Another thing we've talked about is historically there's been an American system of economy.
	There was a gentleman by the name of, I believe, LaRouche who was a pioneer to this in the 70s and 80s.
	He's actually one of Reagan's favorite consultants.
	Believe it or not, he came up with the Star Wars concept that he pitched to Reagan.
	And whether that was a psychological operation or whether that was a real thing, definitely, you know, Soviet Union came down during Reagan's time.
	You know, how much of that goes to...
	Credit goes to LaRouche.
	But the long and short of it is that he introduces American style of economy, which is embedded in our history, which is a prosperity-based system, versus the City of London-style economy, which is more of a keeping you in this perpetual state of slavery system.
	And what happened with this LaRouche guy was that...
	Via City of London, they made him out to be this really bad person, anti-Semite, media blasted him, and pretty much removed him from the equation because he seems to have been a threat to the bankers and the powers that be.
	So we know that information.
	But that's the story of the American independence.
	You and I talked about this at CPAC. I said to you that the American war of independence wasn't really a war of independence.
	It was a civil war.
	And what separated the two sides, the side who won were on one side of the Atlantic, the side who lost were on the other.
	So you then had an independence, but in reality it was libertarian capitalist Englishmen against the ones who wanted to preserve the old order and wanted to keep hold of power in London.
	And your example there is exactly the same thing, playing out all over again.
	Because you've got the libertarian capitalists saying, no, no, we should actually open the markets.
	We should deregulate as much as possible.
	We should educate people to make rational choices.
	All of the things that we should be doing in order to have a functioning society, this is what we need to do.
	And a libertarian capitalist doesn't want to limit somebody to their potential relative to where they were born, who they were born to.
	The English system does.
	A lot of people think that I have a posh English accent, but actually English posh people know that I don't.
	I grew up in the Middle East, my father's English, my mother's Irish.
	I'm not part of that clique, and I never will be, even though I've gone to the right schools and everything else.
	Ultimately, it is still like that, and in America you...
	Still have an attitude that's really positive, that's really embracing the opportunities that come your way.
	You know, I say that the biggest difference between an American and a Brit is yes and no.
	Americans invariably say yes to something, Brits prefer to say no.
	You know, it's funny.
	I've got to mention this.
	I spent a lot of time in Europe in the 2000s traveling through England, Germany, France, and that's the thing I kept hearing is that in America, you guys embrace failure because you try, try, try until you succeed, like your classic Abraham Lincoln story.
	Runs for office three times, loses the first two times, and becomes president.
	That's what they admire about us.
	But in Europe, from what I understand, is if you try and you fail, it's not like you get to go at it again.
	It's like they just mock you, you're a failure or whatever.
	And that mentality, from what I was told, is what holds them back.
	It's a big part of it, because in America you have bankruptcy laws that basically say you get to re-roll after a year.
	In Europe...
	Very much so the Germanic countries and England is part Germanic in its mentality.
	The idea that you would Welsh on your debts is abhorrent.
	They don't see fault flowing both ways.
	So who's at fault, the borrower or the lender?
	The lender knew what they were lending money for and to whom they were lending the money.
	So they were aware of the risk they were taking, and no doubt the interest rate reflected their view of the risk.
	Ultimately, the deal that was done between borrower and lender reflected that balancing out of risk.
	But we like to pretend, on this side of the Atlantic, that the lender had no moral or logical bound of risk.
	It's rubbish.
	They did.
	But somehow or other, this goes to the heart of what's different about America.
	Why you had the American War of Independence, as you guys call it.
	It was about that differential of mentality.
	And you can make it as simple as saying one side likes to say yes, the other side likes to say no.
	But within the American system, there is an understanding that borrower and lender came to a deal in the marketplace without a gun to either one's head, and both bear some responsibility for the endgame.
	In Europe, we put all of the blame squarely on the individual.
	And that's a huge impediment to any kind of entrepreneurial activity as well.
	In Switzerland, for example, I had a guy tell me that I explained that doing what we're doing, we lost our family home.
	That to keep going through everything that we've been through, to keep getting up off the canvas has damn near bankrupted my family and I. And the idea that I would be sailing that close to the wind was abhorrent to this Swiss guy who worked in the blockchain world to such an extent that he said, I can't trust you anymore.
	I said, why?
	He said, you know, if you are struggling to pay your bills, then you're not a good man.
	And that mentality, he expressed it in a very open, autistic way, because a lot of people in this industry are like that.
	That is the mentality that actually really holds Europe back.
	I mean, Europe's got 322 million people, more people than the USA does.
	In theory, it has all the advantages.
	The USA had to build from scratch, basically, at the end of the 1700s.
	In theory, Europe should be the superpower, but it isn't.
	Why isn't it?
	And it's all of these things.
	It's a class system that holds people down.
	An adherence to subjugation.
	It's the idea that, ultimately, your birthright matters more than your capacity.
	Almost like a caste system.
	It sounds a little bit like a caste system.
	It is.
	In England, your class is not determined by how much money you have.
	What title do you have?
	If you don't have a title, which, you know, what rank was your father in industry?
	Was he the CEO or director of a major bank or major corporation or a general in the army?
	And then it would go down to, when you stop going through the family aspect, it would come down to you.
	Which school did you go to?
	Which university did you go to?
	You can go to Oxford University and study geography and you'll be given More social credit than somebody who went to, I don't know, the University of Reading, which used to be a good university before it became woke, and did law.
	Why?
	That's the class system at work.
	The kid who got three A's in his A-levels in a comprehensive school against the system, despite the system, that's a public school, what you guys would call a public school.
	Is given far less credit than the guy who went to what the English would call a public school, but what you would call a private school, who had all the best teachers and all the best opportunities and still only scraped three B's.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	Look, you know the whole story about Tommy Robinson.
	Maybe you don't know the whole story.
	None of us know the whole story.
	But why can Douglas Murray say things but not Tommy Robinson?
	Well, the answer is really simple, because Douglas Murray has the right background.
	He's allowed to say these things.
	He's an intellectual one we frown upon.
	God forbid that any of us should turn out like that.
	I mean, it's awful.
	But we certainly can't have these plebs saying things.
	I mean, no, we can't have plebs calling out the court system.
	They're not educated, not of the right class, not the right sort of chap.
	That's the mentality that...
	Has put Tommy Robinson in jail for a civil matter.
	Not just in jail, in a high-security prison full of terrorists.
	He's almost like the J6 story for the UK. High-security prison with terrorists for a civil insurrection.
	And by the way, he's also in solitary confinement.
	Not that Nigel Farage, the person that people in America think is the hero of British politics.
	He regularly turns on Tommy Robinson in order to make himself look more mainstream.
	I've heard by the way and you know I want to get into really the company that you're Working with and stuff and what you guys are doing.
	But before we do that, I mean, I've heard Nigel Farage, you know, like Elon Musk hasn't been too happy about him.
	Is this the reason why?
	Because he represents himself as sort of a, you know, the freedom guy over there, a Trumpian type character.
	But tell us about the reality.
	Well, if he is to Trump as an ant is to Trump, the guy, he did have some principles around standing up against the EUSSR, as I prefer to call it.
	Other people call it the European Union.
	But he did stand up against them.
	He stood up against them in the European Parliament.
	He was elected into the European Parliament repeatedly, and he was a thorn in their side and a very good speaker.
	He shares that with Mr. Trump.
	That's it.
	I think beyond the argument that countries should have self-determination, He has nothing to offer, nothing to say.
	Most of his policies come out of a poll.
	If you want to look at who is actually really smart and really good in the UK, probably the only leader worthy of the epithet in the United Kingdom, it's Rupert Lowe, who is not the leader of the Reform Party.
	In fact, the Reform Party is not just led by Nigel Farage, it's owned by Nigel Farage.
	So, you know, in context, has he done some good things?
	Yes.
	Would I vote for him?
	Never.
	I mean, look, you've got Boris Johnson, who is probably the greatest idiot to ever grace number 10, and that includes all the Labour people.
	Actually, no, Keir Starmer would certainly, two-tier Keir Stalin, as I prefer to call him.
	Would definitely give him a run for his money, but then you have to wonder how Donald Trump welcomed such an imbecile into his office with such grace, particularly when he did such a good job of explaining the realities of the world to Zelensky today.
	Yeah, yeah, I was hoping that would be a little bit more spicy because Keir is definitely, I mean, I've seen what he's done to the United Kingdom.
	I've seen what a pushover he is.
	Just an absolute scumbag, if you ask me.
	I mean, destroying his own country.
	Not a semblance of England left.
	I mean, it seems like it's going to be pretty much another Muslim country, the way it's going.
	It is.
	So the Islamic vote controls Labour.
	And because Labour are the ones in power, the Islamic vote controls the agenda.
	Ultimately...
	What did Tommy Robinson expose?
	He exposed the systemic rape of hundreds of thousands of white girls in towns all over Britain, mostly white girls, not all, mostly white girls, mostly British white girls, by men from Pakistan.
	He exposed the fact that a boy was hounded and his family threatened.
	Over a fight in a schoolyard in which the truth was grossly misrepresented in order to make the immigrant Muslim boy look like the innocent one and the white indigenous boy look like the aggressor.
	In actual fact, the accounts that Tommy Robinson secured as a journalist asking people questions who probably didn't know he was recording evidences a very different story.
	And for publishing that, It was decided by the Attorney General, a political appointee in a political position, that he had so grievously breached the court order to suppress the free speech of that publication that he would go to a maximum security jail and be in solitary confinement in that maximum security jail, allegedly for his own safety.
	But why is he in need of being in solitary confinement in his own safety?
	Because he's been jailed with terrorists from Islamic Islamic terrorists.
	I mean, you couldn't make it up.
	There's so many things you can't make up.
	I mean, as a journalist, you must know this.
	Sometimes you must feel like George Orwell was just...
	He just didn't see how big this would be.
	None of these guys did.
	When you look at fiction, the only fiction that seems to come close to describing our present reality is idiocracy.
	And that is terrifying.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And, you know, I hate to see, man, I've had...
	I married a Brit at one point, which was the biggest mistake of my life.
	I'll be straight with you other than the two kids we have.
	And I was telling you that story about, you know, that situation, how...
	My documentaries were made into child abuse, according to the UK courts, because I was exposing them.
	I was exposing their corruption about what they do.
	And they pretty much told me that they're going to arrest and extrate me if I speak another word of it, because they were very unhappy that about five, six years ago, I was releasing documentaries that showed this level of corruption.
	But doing the research, I realized Tony Blair...
	Basically started this adoption industrial complex where healthy British parents were having false accusations thrown towards them.
	Their children stolen by the CPS of England, given to a lot of the time gay couples, you know?
	And this has started with Tony Blair.
	Now, years later, I mean, this has become its own industrial complex.
	Now we're not only stealing the children, and by the way, you know, one of the things they don't talk about, a white adoptive child versus any other religion, most of the time they want whites, even if they're not white.
	You know what I mean?
	They don't talk about that because, oh, they say that's racist, but that's a fact.
	You know, they want to take...
	Healthy white children from healthy parents and sell them off, literally.
	Child trafficking, child sales, whatever you call that.
	And this was started with Tony Blair.
	And now, 20-something years later, they're allowing the rape of British kids and covering it up, is what you're saying.
	Covering it up, hugely.
	And the police, the local MPs, they're all complicit in this.
	Now, this is all...
	Look.
	In a civilized society, certainly when we talk about civilized society, we're talking about Western civilization, which is anglospheric, the idea of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, the kind of freedoms that we're taught growing up that are human rights, are basic human rights.
	And actually have driven all of the innovation that led to the Western world's acceleration technologically and commercially beyond everybody else for the last five, six centuries, the Enlightenment era on.
	Those things are at the core of our culture, of who we are.
	And they don't actually really exist in most places in all kinds of different ways.
	So you saw this with the Canadian truckers.
	They were protesting.
	Not only did they say you're not allowed to say things we don't like, they shut off their access to money.
	What are we so frightened of that we can't have a debate in the public space?
	That is what the whole idea of freedom of speech should be, that I could disagree with everything you just said and say, then that's appalling.
	How dare you say that?
	How dare you is a terrible expression because it always means that you're trying to bring emotional judgment into something without an actual debate, but forgive me.
	I could turn around and say, well, actually, Vem, I've seen statistics that show that those numbers that you're quoting are wrong, so how did you get to your numbers?
	We could actually talk about the points in such a way that we would arrive at an enlightened state for both of us.
	We shouldn't be frightened of somebody saying things we don't like.
	I tell my children this all the time.
	Be sure to read things you don't agree with, because it's only through reading things you don't agree with that you can test the things that you really think.
	And more than that, you need to know what the enemy thinks.
	I used to have about 13 or 14 subscriptions when I was a kid, boarding school in England.
	And I had The Economist, The Times, The Telegraph, Financial Times, The Spectator magazine, and so on.
	And I got rid of all of them over time, apart from The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal.
	And I'm getting rid of The Daily Telegraph because it's become the newspaper of the neocons.
	It's a bit like The Washington Post, I guess, now.
	Why do I keep subscribing to the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times?
	Simple.
	I need to know what the enemy are saying and thinking.
	And they are.
	They're making it very obvious.
	I mean, their entire anti-Trump, anti-Maga, Maha agenda, the drive they have to shut down any kind of debate, it's all right in front of us.
	The other day, there's a big movement in the UK at the moment amongst farmers to push back against inheritance tax, which is...
	Really a tax that tells you you are a subject, not a citizen.
	You've died, you now owe the state money, even though you pay tax all through your life.
	That tax in the UK they want to impose on farms is going to destroy farms.
	It's going to destroy family farms.
	It's going to enable big corporations to own farms, to own our production centres, but not families, not people who really care for the land, care for the animals, want to do...
	Want to do a really good job because it's their passion.
	It's something that has been handed down over the generations.
	No, they want to give it to all the big corporations.
	And I was saying to one of the guys who was writing about this and protesting that they just don't care.
	They don't need to care because you're too small a number of voters.
	And frankly, if you really want to understand what's happening here, this is not about The Labour government in the UK. This is about the intellectual centre that drives their agenda.
	That's the World Bank, the World Economic Forum.
	I was in Davos earlier this year.
	I had the MAGA, dark MAGA hat on.
	Nothing better in the world for separating wheat from chaff, let me tell you.
	But all of that stuff, they're not hiding anything anymore.
	It used to be that You would have to read deep into things to understand what the agenda was.
	Now you don't.
	The agenda is being published right in front of our eyes, in plain language.
	They are saying, last year they came out saying, we should stop farming in the West in order to meet our net zero obligations.
	This is all...
	Absolute lunacy.
	This is, I mean, when I describe these people, I say they are anti-human.
	I said this to you earlier about Zelensky.
	Zelensky needs to get the message.
	The anti-human people are out.
	The ever-war people are out.
	This is now the pro-human party.
	The uni-party of Republicans and Democrats, they're out.
	Maga Maha is a uniparty of the people, for the people, by the people.
	It's what America began as.
	America finding this out again and coming back to this origin point for American culture as it diverged from British culture is this.
	It is exactly this.
	A government by the people, for the people.
	So, we know that it's these kind of monarchy, the centralization of finances.
	This is part of the issue, because when they centralize it, they decide what to do with our money, and this is part of the issue.
	We've seen what they've done with USAID when they control the funds.
	You know, I could be a Christian.
	I'm an Armenian Orthodox Christian.
	I don't want my money being spent on making worms into transsexuals.
	I don't want my money being spent on trying to make, you know, whatever, give a million dollars to Pakistan for their LGBTQ community.
	When I'm walking down the streets in this country and there's potholes in the ground, homelessness, veterans, you know, not being able to find shelter, I don't think we should be spending money on BS, right?
	Right.
	And that's what it seems like is happening.
	Yeah.
	But fundamentally, this is what the whole tax system does.
	So I touched upon the two biggest taxes.
	Tax number one is corporatism.
	Tax number two is socialism.
	Okay, so corporatism is what says that certain players in the economy get to control all of the fragments and access to the fragments.
	And because of that, they have an outsized ability to make profit relative to what they actually do.
	And when they screw up and get greedy because their reach exceeds their grasp, which it does every 15 to 20 years.
	Everybody else has to pay the cost through the socialization of that risk, and the socialization of that risk is done by money printing.
	On the other side, we have the socialist totalitarian state, to which, you know, Ronald Reagan said, the nine scariest words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
	The whole mechanism, everything you see in Europe, why has Europe gone dark?
	Why has Britain given up on being the home of liberty that it once was?
	Because the answer to every problem has become, the government should do that.
	The government can do this.
	And it just keeps creating this ever bigger, monolithic state.
	And ultimately, the government is not the one that you elect.
	It's the one that runs the administration.
	And this is what you've seen.
	You're seeing this play out right now.
	Trump's first term, he got absolutely nailed to the wall by the real government of the United States, the unelected.
	Officials that run everything around it.
	What he's doing right now is culling that.
	Now, you might argue, and you could argue well, that there are going to be repercussions from this.
	There are going to be failures within the system.
	But what you'll end up with is a state that actually works for the people.
	And that's the way around it needs to be.
	So the third type of taxation is income tax.
	And all of the things that go around are personal taxation.
	So all of the money you make, you have no accountability within the system for that, because the people who work for these government departments think they have the right to this money.
	They think they have the right to distribute it as they see fit.
	Now, I'm not going to go full Ayn Rand on this and say that everything, including roads, should be built by the people who want to have a road go somewhere.
	But there is actually a pretty good argument for a lot of those things, to do things by community subscription.
	Why don't we?
	Because we have Taken all the power we can from the individual and transferred it to this ever-growing monolithic cancerous superstate, the totalitarian socialist system.
	Corporatism and socialism are the best of friends because each of them has the same object.
	It is to make a very small number of people have all the power and all the money at the cost of everybody else.
	I was trying to explain the difference between these things to my 10-year-old son a few years ago.
	I said, imagine a harbour and in a capitalist harbour, as more boats come into the harbour and the boats get bigger, they increase the size of the harbour so that everybody can have a boat and everybody can have a bigger boat if they earn one.
	But ultimately, the water just keeps being let in and you end up with this bigger and bigger and bigger harbour.
	In a corporative system, They don't really want competition.
	They want to have rent-seeking.
	So what they do is they close the gates.
	And over time, a small number of the people in the harbour will end up with huge boats.
	And most of the people in the harbour will end up with small boats.
	Little small boats just eating by.
	And everybody will be sitting in the mud because all the water will be in the pools on the big yachts.
	That's corporatism at work.
	In the socialist system, it's exactly the same thing.
	Everybody ends up in the mud at the bottom.
	The harbour door is closed because that's the way this works.
	And you end up with a small number of people having all the power.
	So the hegemony that the cabal is, corporatist, socialist, totalitarian state together.
	And the model for this, by the way, was Nazi Germany.
	They did it first.
	They did it best.
	Wow, wow.
	So, all right, let's dive into, I mean, you have a solution for the head of the state.
	Let's talk about that a little bit.
	So, all the rights you have, I mean, in America, you still have guns.
	Europe has been disarmed.
	That's another reason why it doesn't have the ability to stand up and do anything about the state they're in.
	So, you have guns, you have the right to free speech as an absolute right, or at least it's been restored to you as an absolute right.
	But ultimately, as we've seen all over the world, all over the Western world, if you say and do things the government of the day doesn't agree with, they can turn off your access to money.
	They can turn off your ability to prosper as an individual.
	They can cut off anything they want.
	They can cut off your data, your access to data.
	They can cut off your certifications.
	For example, they can just cancel your driver's license.
	They can cancel your passport.
	Same with assets.
	Most assets that you own are subject to some sort of state approval.
	Whether that's a car or a house, whatever it is, it has some sort of state approval.
	Now, to some extent, that is necessary in order to underpin those rights.
	But it's a slightly different thing to say that the state underpins your right and acts as a witness to your right versus the state has the ability to enforce and take away those rights if it wishes to.
	And the third thing...
	Your data, your assets, your money.
	Now, there's two aspects to the your money piece.
	Number one is the money that you have in your wallet.
	The dollars, the Canadian dollars, etc.
	It's all fiat.
	And the best person to read about this isn't any of the intellectuals.
	It's none of the economists.
	I mean, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, they're brilliant.
	Hayek, etc.
	Fantastic.
	Thomas Mises, all of them.
	They're all great to read.
	But if you want the really simple version...
	That's done really well.
	Read J.P. Morgan's testimony to Congress in 1912 about banking and money.
	And he describes the greenback, which is what today's fiat money is.
	It was a credit note, not real money.
	He describes it as being a credit note.
	That is not real money.
	So the money you have in your wallet, the dollar, that is just being printed at the convenience of the Fed to serve the ends of the socialist, corporatist machine.
	The more dollars there are in the economy, the less somewhere is a value.
	So what happens is you print more dollars and you get a bubble of everything in real assets, right?
	So they keep up.
	But the bit that doesn't is the people who don't have the assets, who don't have all the money.
	They're getting crushed in their value.
	They're being turned into slaves.
	So if not already.
	So that's one aspect of it is that this money printing is a huge issue.
	The second part to it is they can literally turn off your access to it.
	So when people talk about CBDCs, which is central bank digital currencies, the big opposition is if I have dollars in my hand, at least I have dollars.
	They can't be taken away from me.
	Cash is cash.
	But if it's in a digital form, it can literally be switched off.
	And this is true.
	So this is really what the whole story of Bitcoin and Satoshi was all about.
	It wasn't...
	What you see in the press today, what you see people talking about, Michael Saylor, etc., that's just the number go up.
	That's the Bitcoin version, as I call it.
	What it did was it took an incredible proof of concept, not for blockchain, which I'll come to in a second, but for what real money is and how it can be created.
	And it is just a proof of concept.
	And it turned it into, essentially, a manipulated number go up machine that...
	Just like the corporatist socialist system that Satoshi Nakamoto was writing to remove power from, they want to do the same thing.
	It's this Shanghai billionaire argument.
	And the Shanghai billionaire argument, of course, is that the U.S. Fed should print billions or trillions of dollars in order to buy what is allegedly a hedge against monetary inflation, Bitcoin.
	So that's like saying you're going to chase something through a train station that you'll never catch.
	It's ridiculous.
	But their object, all the people making those arguments, is to turn themselves into the Shanghai billionaires at the cost of everybody else.
	It's a zero-sum game.
	Satoshi's innovation was historically, as per J.P. Morgan's testimony to Congress, cash was actually like a representation that could more easily be traded and moved between people of gold.
	The gold that underpinned that dollar, that pound, back in 1912 was the stronger economy of the two.
	That was literally backed by, the cash was backed by the gold at the central bank.
	So you couldn't print more money.
	You couldn't just magic money out of thin air.
	The pound notes used to say that the Bank of England promises to pay the bearer the value of.
	Whatever the denomination was, along with the code that proved it was that £5 note or that £10 note.
	And the gold was literally in the Bank of England to back it up.
	So that's what JP Morgan said real money was.
	It was money backed by gold.
	Satoshi Nakamoto's great innovation with Bitcoin was to say, but hold on, there was no industrial value to gold at this point in time.
	It was purely an instrument of money.
	Why?
	What does it do?
	Well, you can prove what it is really easily.
	It's malleable.
	It's fungible.
	It's actually pretty tough to extract.
	The risks are high.
	The workload is high.
	So what you're really doing is you're proving that you have done some work to extract value from a finite resource.
	And you can only create more of that, as one of my team members says, Craig Ebert, by blowing up a star.
	So, big effort, right?
	So Satoshi's idea was, well, hold on, if you create a competition to solve a cryptographic puzzle, then whoever does that can be rewarded with our Bitcoin.
	And in the process, what you're doing is...
	You're creating real money.
	And he was right.
	If you think it through, the logic is absolutely unassailably correct.
	The problem was, the efficacy of doing that was so poor that it was never going to be anything other than a proof of concept.
	And in reality, once it had gone into the public domain, you can't change a blockchain once it's gone completely public.
	A blockchain done correctly is sustained by all of the people that mine it.
	All the people that support it.
	All the distributed computers that are involved in it.
	So let's say you want to push an update to the chain.
	Every single miner has got to implement that change or the system forks.
	And then you have a break and you end up with this continual process that you don't actually have a cohesive system.
	What he was trying to do was to create real money in a way that all of us could participate in, all of us could benefit from, act within, and the proof of concept it created challenged these things.
	So what have we done?
	We have made Bitcoin tens of thousands of times more efficient and added in native smart contracts and virtual machines.
	Those are the means by which you can say that a thing is true.
	And because a thing is true or because it is false, A subsequent action can occur.
	Think of it a bit like a vending machine.
	So a vending machine, it has a 0-1 binary state all the time.
	Has anybody put money into the receiver?
	No.
	So then its state is 0. If somebody puts a dollar into the machine, the machine says, right, I now have 1. Now I'm going to turn on the keypad and I'm going to ask the person to make a selection.
	Have they made a selection?
	Yes or no?
	Once that becomes yes, It then drops the bottle of Coke down to the bottom and allows the lock to open so that you can get out your Coke.
	That's essentially what smart contracts are doing.
	They're looking at a state to say, is something true or false?
	If it's true, take this next action.
	At the next action, you have a logic gate process that takes you through a series of events that can be 0 and 1 all the way along.
	Being able to do that on a blockchain means that you can actually trust the message, not the messenger, so clearly at scale.
	That is massively significant relative to what we were talking about earlier, because remember I said our entire economy is fragmented and fractured.
	It's fragmented into national blocks.
	It's then fragmented into industries and different access pathways and all the rest, all of which reduces our productivity because it excludes most of us from being a fully enabled actor within that context and means that all of our work has to go through one of those gateways and pay a tax to whoever it is that controls that particular gateway.
	With this, you can actually change that.
	For the first time, your work can be yours.
	The profit of your work can be yours.
	Your money, your assets, your data, they should all be yours.
	And it's made possible in creating an open resource layer that nobody owns, nobody controls, but anybody can use.
	You allow all of the infrastructure, all of the disconnected pieces that we currently have, to suddenly connect.
	And you create this open space in the middle that nobody owns or controls so anybody can do whatever they want within.
	Your money is yours.
	Because this is not fiat money that's created by the central bank printing money and then representing it on a ledger in a bank who we trust because they're regulated, etc.
	I'm not saying we shouldn't trust banks either.
	Don't get me wrong.
	I'm not one of those anti-bank people.
	I think they have a huge role to play in the future too.
	Not in the way they do now, but in a different context.
	So, you end up with a system in which you're able to trade with everybody else freely, openly, transparently.
	Your money is yours, your data is yours, your assets are yours.
	Ideally, all of these things come together in what I call the Internet of Economics.
	We have an Internet of Data, which is where we exist at the moment.
	We're using it right now.
	We need to move away from that.
	For the good of humanity, toward one in which we have an open architecture for us to operate as independent economic actors.
	And once we have that capacity, the state has to ask us for permission, not vice versa.
	We are who we are.
	Our identity is ours, regardless of who wants to take it away from us or not.
	Our money is ours.
	Our assets are ours.
	This is the true emancipation.
	That democracy is a sleeve for.
	Democracy, to some extent, is illusory unless you own your own data, unless you own your own asset, unless you own your own money.
	And maybe a lot of people don't realize the extent to which they don't.
	But I think the penny has been dropping for the last 10, 15 years.
	I think people are really beginning to understand this.
	And when we were trying to raise money, and it's very hard to raise money for a project when you tell...
	No, we will control nothing.
	Literally, we will control nothing.
	We will build this thing.
	We've spent $25 million getting here.
	We've accessed a ton of really good open source things that cost tens of millions of dollars more and brought it all together, and we're going to give it to the whole world for free.
	That doesn't sell well with venture capitalists who love the corporatist story.
	We're going to corner the market like this, and we're going to be the pass-go ticket on the monopoly board, and we will control the board.
	So I was being asked, you know, what kind of people do you think would like this?
	And I joked and said, well, everybody who thinks that when you go racing, you turn left, which Californians don't get, but anyone from the southeast states of the USA will definitely get.
	They may not like it, though, because they think NASCAR is about more than turning left.
	But they asked me to refine that further, and I said, well, if you'll excuse the frank language.
	It's everybody who started to work out how fucked they have been and would like to unfuck themselves and maybe do some fucking of their own.
	I love that.
	That is awesome.
	Give us more details.
	I mean, how does it work?
	How does it differ from, you know, the things that we've heard?
	Bitcoin.
	Tell us more.
	Well, Bitcoin, like I say, Satoshi Nakamoto, who wrote the Bitcoin white paper, That white paper is probably one of the most profound documents in documented human history.
	The idea that we can create real money through means other than something that can be extracted from the ground as gold, that's truly a break that actually moves us into a digital era away from what we've had in the past and allows...
	A reset, if you like, economically.
	The problem is it's so incredibly inefficient and so incredibly slow.
	It's a proof of concept.
	And it could never evolve beyond being that proof of concept.
	Because the moment it went public, everybody who mined it, like I said earlier, they all have to update the program.
	And anybody who doesn't update the program ends up forking the chain.
	And then the whole thing begins to fracture.
	So it has changed.
	Tiny amounts, almost nothing in all of the time.
	When Larry Fink from BlackRock, by the way, says he thinks that the coding of Bitcoin can be changed, he's right.
	If they get to 51% control of the mining, he's right, they can fork it.
	And that's actually a lot of what's going on.
	90% of all the Bitcoin that's minted right now is going to five accounts.
	And there's actually a fight within those five between China and America.
	Massive, massive amounts of money have gone into dominating mining in this way.
	But if I wanted to buy something from you using Bitcoin, and remember, the Bitcoin white paper, everything is in the heading.
	It's marvelous.
	It's our peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
	Peer-to-peer means me to you.
	If I wanted to buy something from you using Bitcoin, let's say you're a coffee shop vendor and I want to buy a pack of cigarettes, a Snicker bar, and a coffee.
	By the time the transaction has actually confirmed, I would have smoked all the cigarettes, drunk the fourth coffee, and be on my second Snicker bar.
	It takes 10 minutes for the transaction to even get into the hopper to be confirmed.
	It takes hours to actually settle the transaction.
	This is not something that can be used in any commercial context.
	In addition to that, the cost of the coffee, the pack of cigarettes, well, maybe not in DC, but in most places, the coffee, the cigarettes, and the snicker bar, the cost of those would be exceeded by the cost of making the transaction happen.
	That isn't money.
	That's real money, but it doesn't really work.
	Now, a lot of people made an awful lot of money.
	From Bitcoin's price going up.
	And if you look at it, it moved from cents to dollars.
	Pretty big jump.
	But it went from there up into the thousands, up over 100,000.
	Not even the tulips of fame from Holland.
	Nothing has done this before.
	Nothing has gone from fractions of a penny to hundreds of thousands or to $100,000 ever.
	That jump has never occurred.
	What's driving it?
	Manipulation.
	So if you own a ton of Bitcoin, which a really small number of people do, it is massively profitable for you to drive up that number, know when the market has topped, and begin to create bad news stories that drive the price back down again.
	And then it gets to a certain point, and you start to accumulate it.
	And then you start telling really good stories about where it's gone, and then you get a new high.
	And then you break that down.
	Until you get down to just below this one, and then the previous high, and then the people who bought in above here begin to panic, and it really pushes the price.
	It's all manipulation.
	All of it.
	And it has made some people extraordinarily rich.
	Now, those very same people, as part of this game, are the ones who've put $95 billion into so-called Layer 2s.
	Layer 2s are basically people saying, okay, so...
	Bitcoin is a square wheel.
	Let's pretend it's not.
	Let's pretend that we can shave some of the angles off by re-centralizing.
	So instead of having a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, we have a peer-to-crypto bro-to-peer electronic cash system.
	We've reinstituted trust.
	The whole point of blockchain is it removes the need for us to trust a third party.
	We can transact one another and we can trust the message, not the messenger, securely at scale.
	That's blockchain technology in a nutshell.
	By putting the crypto bro into the middle, the layer 2 as they like to call themselves, we've destroyed that.
	And so it goes on.
	You've got all these other...
	We did a video about this on Rumble.
	It's called the Garden of Eden problem.
	Look it up.
	It's Internet of Economics on Rumble, Garden of Eden problem.
	And we talk about it at length.
	Every single one of the so-called blockchains out there, they're not.
	They're controlled.
	They have Masters, Solana.
	Hedera.
	Hedera are very blunt about it.
	You know, they have a foundation and they have members who are the actual nodes.
	That's still centralized.
	You can make all kinds of arguments to justify it, but that's what it is.
	And that doesn't mean that it's not legitimate.
	It means that it's infrastructure, which we already have.
	And so blockchain has emerged.
	Not blockchain.
	Distributed ledger technologies have emerged in much the same way as the existing economy has.
	Turned into lots and lots of fragmented infrastructure.
	And then you have these people who literally call themselves Layer Zero, who want to become the cave-dwelling trolls that sit underneath the bridges, connecting everybody up and taxing everybody.
	These guys, by the way, they raised, I think, $125 million at a $1.2 billion valuation in 2021. And so far as I could make out, there was no tech.
	There was just some really slick marketing documentation.
	There's a friend of mine, Chris.
	I'm terrible with names.
	He's actually a CFA. CFA is kind of like being a doctor in any other field, you know, a PhD.
	A CFA is a charter financial analyst.
	They're the top people in the finance world in terms of their knowledge and ability.
	I'm just going to give you his name.
	Give me a second to look it up, because he wrote about this, and he's actually made a film about this that's coming out in the near future, and it is brilliant if you want to understand what's really happening.
	Chris Galazio, G-A-L-I-Z-I-O, or I-Z if you're an American.
	And all of this has been going on.
	So these people, all of their money has been pushed into creating the illusion that the square wheel is not actually square, that it is perhaps a polygon.
	And I say that as a tongue-in-cheek industry joke because one of the layer twos is actually called polygon.
	They're not round.
	So rather than say, oh, hold on a second, this doesn't really work, let's build something that actually does work.
	Let's look at the proof of concept, the idea, and let's turn the idea into a reality.
	Nobody wants to fund that because that would suddenly put a pin in this bubble, in this bubble of bullshit, frankly.
	Is Bitcoin worth nothing?
	No.
	It has a value.
	I don't know what it is.
	We will do a video about it in my team one of these days when we're not under so much pressure in every other direction.
	We do a lot of these kind of discussions.
	Again, in Rumble, Internet of Economics channel.
	We did a discussion about Bitcoin and all of the dirty hacks, which is what we're talking about now, to pretend that it works.
	All of which have been funded by Crypto Whales to continue and perpetuate the illusion, the myth.
	The reality is, yes, you can pretend to pay for a hotel room in Bitcoin, but not really, because actually it's a whole series of intermediaries, many of whom are no longer regulated or audited, pretending to be effectively banks.
	And there are some banks and there are some major financial players in there like Visa and MasterCard.
	So yeah, you can pretend to pay for something with Bitcoin in a hotel, but you're not.
	You're working off the same system that we've always had.
	So when you see the things happening with Bitcoin, it's actually really sad to somebody like me who's dedicated my life to this cause because it was.
	It was a massive breakthrough.
	I was effectively using blockchains long before.
	Blockchains are not new.
	They've been around since at least the 1950s.
	They're not new at all.
	If you want to understand a blockchain very simply, it's like if you were standing in a room and there's 100 people in the room and everybody has the same sight of something that's happening, that everybody in the room has a pen and paper and can write down.
	Vem gave Greg an apple.
	And you could go around the room and check that everybody had the same note.
	Vem gave Greg an apple.
	If you weren't in the room and you knew 100 people that were in the room said, all 100 people that were in the room said, Vem gave Greg an apple, would you believe that you gave me an apple?
	Absolutely.
	That's what blockchain is about.
	The existing system is to say, well...
	A bank or a trustee or somebody we put into a fiduciary position witnessed what happened and they put it in their ledger and because they have oversight, supposedly, we will trust that that ledger is true.
	So rather than having 100 people say it, we have one person say it, but everybody says, oh, but we have to trust that one guy because that one guy is the regulated entity, the fiduciary, etc.
	You see how being able to trust the message, Not the messenger, has such a phenomenal impact.
	I mean, when you really begin to unpick that, it's phenomenal.
	But even when you do that, you're stuck with this problem of, well, how do we have money exist within the system?
	Because money is actually how we transfer value between people, between things.
	It's how we pay for services, goods, etc.
	The barter system simply doesn't work.
	You know, the whole guns for butter argument doesn't really work.
	It's not something that you can create an index of.
	It's not something you can create a transparent market with.
	So on, so on, so on.
	There are very good reasons to have money.
	When you look at the other DLTs that have emerged, they work on a thing called proof of stake.
	So Bitcoin is proof of work.
	Its idea is that you...
	Prove that you've done the work.
	And let's give an example of what that work might be when you talk about solving a cryptographic puzzle.
	So Bitcoin works in 10-minute cycles.
	10,000-piece jigsaws are thrown in the air.
	Everybody gets to try and turn that into the finished jigsaw.
	Whoever does it first wins.
	So you understand the degree of computational capacity that needs to be employed in order to solve that puzzle.
	It's huge.
	And the risk that everybody bears is that they may not win.
	So a huge amount of work can be done to get to the cryptographic puzzle solution, which is exactly like a whole pile of people can go mining in the Klondike.
	Only some of them are going to find gold.
	And only some of them are going to get that gold to a point where they can exchange it for goods and services.
	That's proof of work.
	You can prove that you did the work to get the value.
	To extract the value from the finite resource.
	And proof of work actually is the real basis of blockchain.
	If it's not proof of work, it isn't a blockchain.
	Let's put it that way.
	So with that, with a proof of work system, you can absolutely trust the message, not the messenger, securely at scale.
	The at scale part is the real issue when it comes to proof of work, which I'll come to in a minute.
	What you also see is what's called proof of stake chains emerge.
	Now, I refer to these as the Dorothy chains.
	So, you know, the way Dorothy clicked her heels together three times and all of a sudden she was back in Kansas.
	Same thing.
	You can just magically create money out of thin air.
	Now, Ethereum, which probably most of your viewers have heard of, Ethereum was a proof of concept for how to create state channels, sorry, forgive me, smart contracts and virtual machines on chain.
	Remember, I gave the example of the vending machine.
	That innovation was Ethereum's.
	Again, another proof of concept.
	Again, cannot, did not, will not evolve.
	But they made a shift from being proof of stake, a real blockchain, to being proof of stake, a fake blockchain.
	But worse, they became anonymous proof of stake.
	So proof of stake is a bit like saying you have a group of people who are providing consensus in a room, just like the 100 we gave earlier.
	But certain ones will have more votes than others because they have more stake.
	And in a room where you can see what everybody has and you know who's voting for what and how and why, that's actually okay.
	It's not the worst thing at all.
	In fact, it can be a very good idea that within a group of people who know one another, that everybody knows what the cards in play are, you can act with a fair degree of trust in that context.
	Anonymous proof of stake, and I love doing this with people, I say, would you ever work for a company where you don't know who the managers are, you don't know who the directors are, you don't know who the owners are?
	In fact, you literally get your orders handed to you by a little anonymous piece of paper each day.
	Would you work for such a company?
	And nobody I've ever met said yes.
	That's anonymous proof of stake.
	Because you don't know who is deciding what, why.
	In what form?
	None.
	None of these things will you know.
	And this is where, again, you see massive collusion.
	You see this happening in all these proof-of-stake systems.
	And sometimes it's very obvious and overt, like with Solana or DFINITY. Sometimes it's hidden, as with Ethereum.
	But it's the same thing in the end of the day.
	That doesn't really remove the need to trust the messenger.
	You still have to trust the messenger somewhat because they're all infrastructure.
	There are control functions in there everywhere you look.
	Every single one of them has got some kind of a control function.
	Again, I refer people, if you want to do a long-form discussion on this, go to that Rumble channel.
	There's three hours of video, Craig and I talking about this, another two and a half of Craig Ulf and I talking about this.
	These are huge, huge issues with whether or not we're actually using a blockchain.
	So, you know, when I came to DC the first time for the DC inaugural ball and the second time for CPAC, I kept saying to people, the ones that are surrounding the Trump administration right now are fake blockchains, fake exchanges, pushing jokingly fake money.
	And this is not going to go well.
	Because right now, with the Trump administration, you have the opportunity to go down the road of an economic reset to really embrace blockchain properly.
	But the people driving the agenda are the ones who like the meme coin.
	The very same meme coin that brought millions of people in and then stripped their money out.
	Transferred that to the people who promoted the coin in the first place, just like it's been doing in Web3 crypto for the last 15, 16 years.
	This is not how you get mass adoption of blockchain.
	And blockchain and cryptocurrency are two very different things from crypto.
	Crypto is like the cancerous love child of the two, and its object is always about number go up.
	It's about being a cryptographic betting flip, which the insiders will always win, the house always wins.
	And a few punters make enough money that the story gets out that this is a way of making quick, cheap cash.
	And so people keep going to the casino.
	So, look, rather depressingly, that's where all of the money that's gone into this industry has gone.
	It's really tough, but it's got to change.
	And what we built, like I say, is Bitcoin made tens of thousands of times more efficient.
	With native smart contract language, grown-up native smart contract language, not the child version that is Solidity that you see in Ethereum.
	Great proof of concept, but Solidity is a terrible programmatic language full of opportunities for hacks.
	We actually adopted Sophia and Fate from the Eternity blockchain, the guy who founded that.
	Very smart guy.
	He was known as the godfather of Ethereum.
	He was Vitalik's advisor.
	And he told them, Solidity is rubbish.
	So in 2018, he raised $200 million in order to build a proper and proper virtual machines.
	And he made them open source.
	So we adopted them.
	And they're brilliant.
	I mean, they genuinely are brilliant.
	They have self-testing mechanisms to prove that they work.
	That's what we implemented into this.
	So tens of thousands of times more efficient than Bitcoin as both a blockchain and as real money.
	Native smart contracts and virtual machines.
	Now, what we say is that it's an actual blockchain.
	Remember, our definition is that it has to be a proof-of-work system to be an actual blockchain that actually works, because we can do 300 transactions per second.
	Now, that might sound small to you when you listen to some of the numbers that are talked about in the market, which are almost all done in a purely academic context and not in reality.
	But our number is a real-world number, and it's faster than Visa's real-world number.
	So that gives you some idea of what we're talking about here.
	It takes three seconds to confirm a transaction.
	Think about how long it takes.
	If I wanted to buy a cup of coffee off you, I have to pull the $5 note out of my pocket, out of my wallet, hand it to you, then put it into the till.
	That's what?
	Five, six, seven seconds.
	If I do a transaction using a Visa card against a terminal, seven to ten seconds.
	In our system, a $5 transaction is done and dusted in three seconds.
	That's real speed.
	That's real money that's really working.
	If you wanted to do a billion-dollar transaction, you might have to wait all of four minutes to be absolutely mathematically certain that that amount of money had moved from point A to point B. Because it's essentially a probability curve.
	Everything is probabilistic.
	Don't let anyone tell you differently.
	Everything in the world is probabilistic.
	Everything you think is an absolute fact is also probabilistic.
	You, where you are as a human being, is probabilistic because actually you're made up of atoms.
	This is what I mean.
	The probability that this transaction is true after three seconds, let's say it's 95%.
	The probability that it's true after 30 seconds is 99%.
	It takes four minutes to get to 99.99999% certainty.
	That's what we're talking about.
	That is phenomenally high speed.
	Nothing on planet Earth transacts that fast.
	Tell me about the practicalities of it.
	I apologize if I'm interrupting you if you want to finish the thought or whatever.
	If I'm like, hey, this sounds great.
	I want to be involved.
	Tell me a little bit more.
	Okay, so we did a lot of things that people don't like in the blockchain or the crypto world.
	We did all the engineering first and the marketing last.
	Most of them do it the other way around, and they never actually get to the engineering.
	So the whole thing is actually built, it's running.
	Okay, so people talk about a wallet in a blockchain context, and you probably heard that expression.
	It's a complete misnomer.
	It's not even like someone saying Hoover instead of vacuum cleaner.
	It's much worse than that.
	Really, a wallet is like a complete operating system for your engagement with a blockchain.
	It contains a vast number of different functions, much, much more complex than simply having money or assets or tokens in there and moving them around.
	But for the sake of convenience, we'll use the expression wallet.
	Let's call it the programmatic interface for the more technical people, but wallet is the general term.
	All of the wallets out there, every single one of them, and I'd love to tell you different because it would have cost us a lot less time and a lot less money if somebody else had actually built something properly, but they haven't.
	How have they not?
	What they've done is they program a very slim part of the wallet function.
	Most of it is being pulled from libraries.
	Libraries are where you have Pre-done pieces of code that fulfill certain functions, and you import those libraries into your codebase.
	So your codebase might be this.
	You import the library, and it's this.
	You add a bit more, and then you import another library.
	A bit more, another library.
	Eventually, you end up with something that's a complete program, but probably only somewhere between 1% and 20% of it is done by you.
	The rest of it has been brought in from open-source libraries or licensed from libraries.
	The problem is they're not actually auditing anything that comes into that.
	And if you think I'm not telling the truth about this, go and do your own research.
	Go and look it up on Google.
	There are some hilarious examples of some of the biggest MetaMask, for example, some of the biggest wallets where their own devs are laughing at how insecure the system is because they've imported these libraries and they haven't audited them.
	So we say that basically we have the only wallet that hasn't been pre-hacked because we built it from scratch.
	What do I mean by pre-hacked?
	Well, if you're the NSA, GCHQ, People's Liberation Army, the guys who did the Bybit heist, the North Korean intelligence services, how do you hack everybody's wallets?
	Simple.
	You put code into these libraries that people aren't actually auditing, which they then implement into their wallets, and hey presto, you have a backdoor.
	So we built a wallet from scratch.
	That's one.
	The means by which you engage with and interact with the Gajimaru, what we call the blockchain, is entirely through this wallet.
	The second thing that we did was we got rid of passwords and logins.
	So everything works off the secure enclave in your device.
	The secure enclave, when I swipe up my phone and it does my facial ID, that's coming from your secure enclave.
	We made the wallet work from the secure enclave on a phone or on a laptop.
	We're actually in the process of renaming all of the pieces of the things that we've done, but one of the first things we built was a proper marketplace, a completely on-chain marketplace, which in the demo on the QPQ Internet Economics YouTube channel, and we have the thing in there called the Quid Pro Quo Walkthrough, which is a marketplace.
	It's the only...
	Marketplace in the world that is completely on-chain.
	And if you want to test everything I've said about nobody else has built an actual blockchain that actually works, nobody's made real money really work before, here's the test.
	If you had an actual blockchain that actually worked, minting real money that really works, and it was in the world, what's the very first thing you'd build?
	It's a marketplace.
	Why has nobody built an on-chain marketplace for goods and services before now?
	Simple.
	Because nobody built an actual blockchain that actually worked, minting real money that really works before now.
	We're the first to do it, so we built the first marketplace.
	In that marketplace, you can sell any goods or services.
	It's not intermediated.
	We do have a moderation function as a business because we have to.
	If somebody puts children up for sale there, obviously we can't allow that to happen.
	But any other good services people want to engage in, they can do.
	You know, whether that's selling your knitted jumper or selling your second-hand piano.
	All of that can happen in this context.
	So, in that demo, we show this thing called grids.
	That's what we call it.
	Now, grids is the capacity to transact me to you over the Internet of Economics, as we call it, in such a way that I'm transacting from my secure enclave to you.
	And in fact, as we evolve this, this will become air-gapped.
	Air-gapped means that the device that I engage with has no connection to the internet.
	Everything works off optical signals.
	So all you need is a camera and a screen.
	If you have a screen and a camera, which even your laptop has, you have the ability to exchange optical signals that allow us to confirm that things That I am me and you are you and be able to access our wallets, our money, our data, our assets, and be able to operate upon them and engage with them and engage with third parties.
	That's all in this walkthrough demo that's on YouTube.
	Very neatly set out.
	It's not sexy.
	It's me doing a talk.
	I'm literally talking over a series of screenshots.
	It's 20 minutes of your day if you want to really see what the future looks like.
	It's right there.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	So, okay.
	You talked about people using their computers to basically mine.
	And as opposed to having, you know, some kind of farm system set up, this is something that anybody could do.
	Could you elaborate on that?
	Yeah.
	So I've talked about a couple of things along the way in this conversation.
	One of them was that this is a chance for a complete rebuild of our entire economic system, a reset.
	That's one aspect.
	Another is I talked about how Bitcoin, if you want to think of it like throwing a 10,000-piece puzzle into the air and solving it in 10 minutes, that's another.
	So why do you need multi-million dollar server farms in order to mine Bitcoin?
	There's your answer.
	Technically, that's not what's happening, but the analogy I've given is pretty good.
	It's like a 10,000-piece puzzle being chucked in the air, and you've got to fix it in 10 minutes.
	A cryptographic puzzle is really hard to solve, but really easy to prove you've solved.
	So you can say, hey, I've won.
	Give me the Bitcoin.
	In our system, we implemented it slightly differently.
	We use something called the cuckoo cycle.
	Now, the cuckoo cycle is more like a maze.
	So, you know those maze that kids do, and it says, Johnny's got to get to Jane, and there are a hundred different ways that he can get there, and you have to plot which route it takes?
	Well, that's all memory function, because just like the kid drawing, going, nope, that didn't work, start again.
	Nope, that didn't work.
	It's testing each avenue.
	Now, you could get lucky and immediately spot it's there to there.
	But the way that a machine will do it is it will test every possibility.
	This is essentially what machine learning is.
	This is how it works, right?
	So we create these mazes.
	This is the cuckoo cycle in a simplistic form.
	Again, not entirely accurate description from the technical people, but for everybody else in the world, it works.
	We have these mazes.
	Mazes don't work on the computational capacity.
	When you're trying to solve a 10,000-piece...
	Jigsaw puzzle.
	You're using massive amounts of computational capacity because you're having to move all of these parts and see the relativity between them all, all of the time.
	Massive computational capacity.
	Solving a maze is different.
	Solving a maze is a memory function.
	Memory is the most over-provisioned, least used part of every computer out there right now.
	It's also the bit that doesn't run hot.
	It doesn't use vast amounts of energy to operate.
	It's extremely cost-efficient.
	By having most of the function be to push the failed solution to the memory and then only hone in on what the actual answer is, you're still doing a proof of work, but you're doing something at a fraction of the time, cost, and expense of doing it in Bitcoin.
	So that was one part of what we implemented.
	That in turn means that anybody can mine this.
	We started the chain on five $250 laptops.
	We had one in Japan, one in Bulgaria, one in Sweden, two in Switzerland.
	That's how we started this.
	We then added to it with some MiniMac M4s.
	I think there are now 14 or 15 Mac Mini M4s running.
	And we're just going to keep adding bits and pieces to test different ideas out.
	But ultimately, you could mine it on your phone.
	That would be a really bad idea because your mobile phone is extraordinarily expensive.
	Vast amounts of computational capacity crammed into a tiny little thing this size.
	This laptop is an extraordinarily effective solution because this is a five-year-old laptop.
	You could buy this in a shop for $200 and it would mine the Gajimaru extraordinarily well.
	So, what we did is, come back to the point about an economic reset.
	The whole thing with decentralization, I touched upon it.
	Now, Bitcoin, it's not a governance issue.
	Well, not yet.
	Not until somebody gets to 51%.
	But five accounts do over 90% of all the Bitcoin mining in the world today.
	That is massive centralization of economic value.
	And it happens because they've stuck so much money into this.
	And they've built these massive server farms to do it.
	Funded in no small part by the likes of Larry Fink and BlackRock, who think if they get to the control point of 51%, they can actually change how Bitcoin works.
	Anyway, that's a whole other day's discussion.
	Our system, we've built software that people can install on a Mac, a Linux.
	They install the software.
	They go to the Gaju markets to get the mining license to apply into it.
	All of these things, all of these processes we're working through right now to make us as automated and slick as possible so millions of people can come in and do this.
	And our idea is really simple.
	Until we finish building the chain, We have to keep pushing updates to the chain on a weekly basis.
	We can't do that if it goes public, because like Bitcoin, we will suddenly have to have everybody, which we have no control over, adopt the same updates.
	So the solution, while we're still building some of the further pieces into this, which people will love, by the way, because the things that are coming next are about being able to create any kind of infrastructure you want within the system, but also things like The restoration of personal data, but understanding that we live in a data-intense world and we need to do data analytics against scaled data sets.
	Data-rich digital assets, which means that we can have real assets come on-chain for real, not the fake thing that people are talking about when they talk about tokenization of real-world assets.
	That's nonsense.
	I can explain that in a minute.
	All of the adaptations we want to do before we can stop building the core, Groot, We talk about resource, infrastructure, platform, application.
	Resource is missing in the world.
	It's missing in the traditional economic world.
	It's missing in the blockchain world.
	That's the really key bit that we've built now.
	What we're working on right now, in addition to that, is to make all the tooling exist so you can build any infrastructure you want, whether that's a national payment rail in America, for example.
	It's decentralized identity in Poland.
	Medical data in the United Kingdom.
	Whatever you want, that's all infrastructure.
	The platforms and applications, which is the user pieces, that all flows above that.
	So, when you look at the innovations and pieces we want to push into this, they're core to really making the whole thing work.
	That point about your money, your assets, your data.
	It's going to take us another 16 to 18 months to implement all of that.
	When we get to the end of that, it all goes public.
	We're hands off.
	We have no control, no governance, no nothing.
	Zip.
	Nada.
	When that happens, the big commercial miners, the guys who are currently mining Bitcoin, can step in and they can mop this whole thing up and they can do what they like.
	Because just like with Bitcoin, over 90% of the mining will be done by these same five accounts.
	But between now and then, as I put it, we can call Marco to the world and have the world shout back Polo.
	Our Marco is, do you want to continue to be enslaved or do you want to break free?
	Do you want to become an emancipated sovereign individual?
	The sovereign individual requires your economic emancipation because without money, without your data, without your assets, without your money, All the free speech and all the guns in the world aren't for much.
	You can maybe fight for as long as your ammunition lasts and then you're crushed.
	Your ability to survive, to live, the Canadian truckers proved this.
	They not only shut down the truckers in Canada, they shut down all the people who sent them money.
	They shut down the means by which they could receive money.
	They closed down any payment service provider who continued to operate.
	They were closed down.
	Our Marco is to say to the world, here is your economic emancipation.
	Take it.
	Because we built the software.
	Everybody can download it and install it on any machine.
	And eventually we'll get this to work on gaming machines as well.
	Because the people who've been most screwed by the money printer aren't you and I. It's our kids.
	It's our grandkids.
	And they're the ones who are playing Xboxes and PlayStations, right?
	So we want to get this to them, too.
	But once they install the software, we will then operate pools in the background, which allows us to make sure that all the updates we want to push to the chain are being pushed to the pools from us.
	Because we're running the pools.
	And to this extent, for a little while, you could say that we have more control than we ought in a governance-less system.
	But the choice we have is do nothing and continue to build this out and then go public and let the big guys come in and take over the whole thing, or do this.
	And we think this is the better answer.
	So the aim is to get 10 million people mining.
	If we can get this message out...
	And we can get the whole world to understand the opportunity that we're trying to literally give you.
	Maybe we can get a billion people.
	The key is, all of the computers, I mean, you and I were talking about this in CPAC, and I said, look around the room.
	How many computers are in this room?
	How many laptops?
	How many iPads?
	Tablets?
	Phones?
	There's a huge amount of computational capacity in the room we were standing in, most of which is doing absolutely nothing.
	What, maybe 2-3% of the room were using their phone at the time that we were talking?
	Everybody else is sitting in their pocket.
	And that's true of a vast amount of computers around the world.
	When you go to work for the day, does your computer do anything?
	No.
	And actually, we're not the first to think of this.
	SETI was a program done in the 1990s where you could install a piece of software on your computer, and when you weren't using your computer, you just left it on.
	So are you saying, just so I could...
	Clarify this because to be honest with you, some of this stuff is definitely complex sounding, but are you saying that your computer is running basically creating money more or less?
	Yeah, your computer is in a computational pool and the ability of your computer is being paired up and matched with thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of computers around the world in order to compete for the price.
	Now, what that means is that, and we will make sure that the pools are as competitive as possible, so that everybody is getting something out of the system.
	And what we're aiming for is that when we get to the point that the whole system goes public, access to mining goes open to anybody and everybody, is that those pools will become self-actualized and actually...
	Continue to improve.
	Continue to get better.
	Continue to get stronger.
	And they will be more powerful than the server farms.
	If we can get enough people to do this, this is real capitalism.
	This is I win, you win, we win.
	Because, yeah, we're going to make $20, $25 out of every $100 that comes in.
	Because we're selling the software.
	We're selling the services.
	We have to deliver those services.
	We have to manage them and put them all together in the background.
	We have to do all of the marketing, all of the promotions.
	And so we're saying to people, look, we're going to spend about 60% of everything that comes in.
	It's going to go back out on customer acquisition, marketing, education, promotion.
	It's a huge expense.
	But if we can get the message out to everybody out there that this is the one chance.
	My wife said to me recently, we had a very...
	Difficult conversation.
	And I had a couple of threats made against me.
	And for a number of years, people have said that if I do what I'm doing, that someone's going to kill me.
	And she said, you know, why are you not frightened of that?
	And I said, well, you know, you've got five children.
	They come after you.
	Why would you put all of that at risk?
	And I said, look, in World War I and World War II, Hundreds of thousands of men answered the call to arms, left their families behind, and they were fighting for nothing more than the ability to deny the Kaiser an expansion of his borders, to deny Adolf Hitler the ability to force the rest of Europe to speak German.
	That's a bit tongue-in-cheek, forgive me.
	But ultimately, when people talk in a sort of...
	Rewriting history and talk about how it was to save the Jews.
	No, it wasn't.
	What was happening to the Jews in Nazi Germany did not motivate the Allies one bit until they came across the first prison camps and actually uncovered what was going on there.
	That was Belzen, I think.
	In reality, the war against the Nazis was not about the liberation of the people in the camps, not until the last days of 1945 and into April, May, June, July.
	I said, so hundreds of thousands of these men left their families and went to war over such a trivial thing next to literally a multi-millennial opportunity to deliver the economic emancipation of humanity.
	From the point where we began to move from a hunter-gatherer existence to a farming agrarian existence, we ceased to be able to move away from a threat.
	We now needed people to protect us from a threat, and people found that if they were able to exert force, they could take things.
	They could exert control.
	This is how we ended up with the feudal system.
	This is how we ended up with kings.
	They were the ones who took control.
	Everything from that period on has actually turned us into subjects.
	We are not citizens.
	We are not sovereign.
	And we are not going to be that until we can restore ourselves to that state of grace of being economically sovereign.
	Economic sovereignty means electoral sovereignty.
	It means all of the other things that we think and we take for granted as being citizens, as being sovereigns, they're all illusory until we have that economic control back.
	And that's what we're delivering.
	And I said, if I'm going to die for something...
	That has to be the most noble cause in the last 5,000 years, bar the story of Christ.
	Sorry, I should have thought about that.
	There are obviously religious stories you can tell that are of great significance, but from a story about our economic subjugation and our economic liberation, what Satoshi wrote in his white paper in 2008 opened the door to a whole other potential economic universe for all of us.
	What the team and I at QPQ, which is the company behind the build, what we've been doing is trying to put all of these tools into the world and give them to everybody for free.
	I mean, all of our patents, all the work we've done, the patents haven't been done so we can exclude other people from this.
	They've been done so that we can protect the system from bad actors.
	All of that is just going to be licensed into the chain for free.
	We're not going to have a foundation.
	Foundations are simply gateways for control.
	We've deliberately avoided everything that would allow us to control any aspect of the chain's operation once it goes public.
	Nothing's centralized, basically.
	It's all decentralized, for lack of a better term.
	Yeah, and our object, as I say, if we can get 10 million people mining by the time we go public in Q3 next year, That's a win.
	It's a big win.
	And obviously people can still come on board and mine and, you know, we'll make the software available to everybody to do that.
	We'll still sell the software.
	We just won't sell the services.
	The services will be, we're hoping, a lot of other people will compete to do.
	Because if you're a capitalist, you believe in competition, right?
	You don't believe in cornering markets.
	That's a corporatist game.
	Everything we've done has been about Eating our own message.
	We're not telling you to eat our dog food.
	We're eating it to show you.
	Come with us.
	Every single thing we've done is that.
	We have adhered to that message to the most painful degree imaginable because it would have been so easy for me to have written a bullshit white paper 10 years ago, gotten a ton of money in, and not be facing any of the financial or personal struggles that I have.
	And the same with my team.
	The team who've been with me over the last almost two years, the previous CTO stole everything because they didn't like the idea of something that the whole world would own.
	They wanted something that they and one of the investors at the time would own and control instead.
	So they stole everything and tried to destroy the company.
	Thankfully, a new team came in who shared the vision, shared the belief, and they haven't had it easy either.
	They're living...
	On a fraction of what they normally would, because we've had some wonderful people support us through this, but none of the Silicon Valley guys would ever touch this.
	So we could have sold out a hundred different ways before now.
	We're not.
	We haven't.
	We've taken the hardest possible road to get here.
	Why haven't you ever heard my name, the company's name, the CTO's name?
	Ulfiger, one of the smartest human beings on the face of the earth.
	I have an IQ of 160 and I'm the dumbest guy in the room in every morning stand-up.
	Craig Everett, phenomenal guy.
	Ex-US Special Forces.
	Incredibly smart guy who knows distributed systems better than almost anybody on the planet, bar Ulf.
	Dimitar Ivanov.
	We joke on our website, we have alternative bios if you go into the Easter egg piece of the website.
	And his is escapee from Soviet Russia, etc., etc.
	He's not Russian, he's Bulgarian.
	But the Bulgarians, when he was growing up, he's of our age, a bit younger actually, were under the jackboot of the USSR. So he knows very well what socialism is and isn't.
	Peter Santos, who came on board to do all the marketing work.
	These are people who've bled to get to where we are.
	Phenomenal people.
	And you've never heard of us because we haven't taken a single shortcut.
	We have spent every penny we have on getting the engineering right.
	That's the opposite of everyone else in the industry.
	Everyone else in the industry put out a white paper, did a pretty deck, and again, I talked to that guy, Chris Galazio.
	He nails this in a film he's releasing later this month, sorry, March or April.
	Pretty decks, all this kind of stuff, and they got tons of money in.
	They didn't spend the money on building better engineered systems.
	All they had to do was create a clickable interface on Figma, for example.
	That got them the money.
	Then they spent their money building their community.
	And again, rumble.
	You want to have a look at this whole thing.
	We talk about the industrialization of bag holding, which is the process of turning crypto assets into ETFs.
	and we talk about the same thing on that long-form video, all the egregious horrors that are going on there.
	Ultimately, we've not taken a single shortcut We've done everything that puts the engineering first.
	And now we're trying to get the whole world on board.
	We're not just going to open it up and let anybody come in and mine, because if we do that, we're going to see the big commercial miners come in and wipe everybody else out.
	But if we do this well enough, if people like you work with us, people who have an audience that is our audience, the very first event that we sponsored was the Trump inauguration party in D.C. The Maga Maha Crypto Inaugural Ball.
	We sponsored that, our very first event, and we have a budget that would make a church mouse look profligate.
	Because the whole Maga Maha movement is, we said this earlier, Maga Maha is about returning control, returning the democratic state to the people.
	Government by the people for the people.
	So we sponsored that because actually that audience is one-to-one matched with our audience.
	It's all the people, like I said earlier, who've worked out that they've been screwed or are beginning to work out that they've been screwed and would really like to change things and would really like to restore some agency to themselves, would really like the state to work for them, not vice versa.
	That's our audience.
	If we can get 10 million of those people on board, we win.
	All of us win.
	We get 100 million.
	This is phenomenal.
	A billion?
	That's it.
	Game over.
	We've changed everything because the truth of it is they can't kill me and stop this.
	They can't kill Craig or Ulf or Dimitar and stop this.
	It's beyond them because it's a movement.
	This is not about creating yet another business.
	This is about creating a movement for the economic emancipation of humanity.
	We have the keys, we want everybody to have them, and then we want to burn them.
	Sorry, I had to write that down.
	The economic...
	What do you say?
	The economic...
	Emancipation of humanity.
	Okay.
	So, like, let's talk opportunity.
	What is...
	Well...
	First, actually, a question.
	Legalities.
	Because this came up when I was mentioning this to some friends who've obviously known about all these crypto scams.
	You know, we've all heard, you know, there was that Democrat, let's call him a gentleman, big, you know, whatever, crypto fraud, a lot of crypto fraud.
	Let's talk about the legalities.
	What could you tell to the viewers out there?
	That are concerned that this sort of thing is legit.
	What do you know about the laws?
	Okay.
	The laws on this are very straightforward in some ways and not in others.
	So when people talk about crypto, they're talking about what I would refer to as a cryptographic betting slip.
	Now, I've been advising the FCA in the UK. I was involved when FINMA were looking at...
	FINMA is the Swiss regulator.
	We're looking at how they did token principles and rules.
	I've been in this space.
	Over 20 years.
	In different ways.
	Obviously, pre-Satoshi, it wasn't in a blockchain context.
	Sorry, a real money type approach.
	It was more thinking about how do we make the existing system slightly better.
	So I've been looking at the regulatory aspects for a long time.
	If you want to know how you regulate crypto, it's very simple.
	What laws do you have around casinos and gambling?
	Because that's what it is.
	It's not investment.
	All these meme coins, same thing.
	It's just a cryptographic betting slip.
	The people who run the casino make all the money.
	You can call that what I call it.
	You can call that caveat emptor.
	So I call it fraud because that's what it is.
	It's a bunch of people who know an awful lot more than everyone else does about what's really going on.
	Then using that imbalance of knowledge to monetize.
	They monetize that imbalance of knowledge.
	And what they're actually doing is they're using very expensively refined and researched marketing.
	That's where they spend their real money to create FOMO, fear of missing out.
	And they're getting people in and there's a wave of cash comes in.
	There's no responsibility on their part.
	They just get to walk away, go down to the Lambo dealership and buy the Murcielago of their dreams.
	And if you look at it, most of that is pretty obvious.
	It just takes a second to come back and ask.
	So let's say, for example, if you were offering me an opportunity to invest in your company, I would be giving you cash in return for which there's an exchange of risk between you and I. I've given you some cash which reduces your risk.
	I'm now at risk losing that cash.
	So I want to support and help you build and grow your business.
	Etc.
	And if your business does really well because of the work that you've done, that I've done as an investor and an interested party in it, then actually the price of the company should go up.
	The amount of dividends, which is the profit after you've paid taxes and everything else, should start to flow to all of the shareholders.
	So not only are you sharing risk, you're sharing opportunity and profit.
	With the crypto, the meme coins, there's no Fair exchange here.
	All you're doing is you're buying a cryptographic betting slip and praying that the number goes up.
	If the number goes up, you want to make sure you get out fast enough so that before the thing goes back to zero, you've profiteered.
	And this is the story of the casino aspect of it.
	It really is a zero-sum game.
	I got very annoyed when a guy on a channel I used to be in...
	He described Trump's meme coin as a new breakthrough for capital raising and was talking about how he was going to do a project to do with some absolute drivel and nonsense.
	And he was going to get it funded by a meme coin.
	And what did that actually mean?
	It was basically, well, I'm a crypto bro and I'm really cool.
	If you want to be cool too, come and buy my meme coin and we can pretend that we're in the same business together and I can pretend to high-five you.
	Whilst taking your $100 and maybe another 100,000 people's $100 and run off into the sunset having built nothing because there's nothing to stop me from doing whatever I want with that money.
	It's mine.
	I spoke earlier about the people that are advising the Trump administration right now, or seem to be.
	Fake blockchains.
	They're all proof of work.
	Binance.
	Completely fake blockchain.
	Completely one-sided monetary.
	Absolute joke.
	Fake exchanges.
	Binance again.
	Coinbase.
	You know, Coinbase calls itself an exchange, but it's not regulated as one.
	An exchange is a multilateral trading facility.
	It has no such oversight.
	All of the funds that sit in Coinbase, all of the digital assets, all of the real money, Bitcoin, all of the fiat money, the dollars, the euros, the yens, etc., all of it is co-mingled with their own money.
	So if that thing goes bankrupt, poof, it's gone.
	FTX all over again.
	None of these things should be news to anybody who has an inkling about how any of this stuff works.
	It is to most people because most of this stuff is sort of hidden in the background.
	But these are the realities.
	Fake money?
	So-called stablecoins.
	They're even worse than fiat money.
	Because you have to take a pinky promise from somebody that they have the US dollar reserves to underpin the so-called stablecoin.
	So that's fiat money, which, as we've covered earlier, is printed on convenience.
	So it's not really retaining its real value.
	Inflation is very much in play here.
	Fiat money, but you have to take the pinky promise of a crypto bro they actually have in some sort of liquid instrument like a treasury bill.
	And the representation they create online using Ethereum, which as I've covered is an extremely insecure system, should all be trusted with your money, your work, your endeavor.
	Absolute joke.
	So the most regulated of all the stablecoin providers is one called Circle.
	Circle are actually the good guys in this industry, believe it or not.
	But they can't get a big audit company to audit the fact that they have what they say they have.
	We have to take their promise.
	We have to take their pinky swear.
	No oversight.
	No regulation.
	No auditing.
	Those should be three colossal alarm bells ringing in everybody's ear.
	But they're not.
	Why?
	Because we're told through all the wonderful marketing, no, but we're good guys.
	We mean to be the best people you'll ever see.
	Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	I'm on record time and time again.
	Anytime I'm ever allowed on stage, And by the way, I'm no-platformed a lot because the crypto industry hate my guts for saying these things.
	The last time people had the bravery to put me on stage and talk about decentralization was in Liechtenstein.
	Go to the CCA Liechtenstein and you'll see me talking on stage.
	On stage, I say very plainly, decentralization is a choice.
	People make all sorts of excuses for why we can't decentralize.
	We're working very hard to make sure that we're massively decentralized as quickly as possible.
	One.
	Two.
	Doesn't matter whether you think I'm the rebirth of Jesus Christ and that Craig is the rebirth of the Buddha.
	It doesn't matter.
	You cannot let anybody have the keys to that kingdom.
	Ever.
	That is the whole problem.
	So, the crypto industry, Circle, as I say, they have an attestation as to what reserves they have.
	And that's the best there is in the whole industry.
	Tether, who are far bigger than Circle, they can't even get an audit company to do an attestation.
	These are the realities of what that industry is about.
	So, when someone says they hear what we're talking about and they think illegal, You're right.
	This industry, the crypto industry, has done everything in its power to profiteer on the back of the promise of what blockchain could deliver and be.
	And it has abused that egregiously in order to hoover money out of your pocket and put it in theirs.
	Now, when it comes to Bitcoin, there is no issue with this.
	All of the regulations, MICA in Europe, The regulations in Switzerland, the regulations in the US, they're all very clear on this.
	Where something is mined and there is no control function, it's not an issue.
	We're not selling you gajus, which is the currency of the gajumaru.
	When I say, you know, Bitcoin made tens of thousands of times more efficient, that's what we call it, gajus.
	You're mining gajus.
	There's nothing, we're not selling you something.
	We're asking you to partake in this.
	What we're selling is software and services to allow you to take an ordinary computer like the one you and I are using to communicate and turn that into a mining machine.
	What's the risk?
	The risk is that you spend some money to buy the software and services and your machine is working to provide solutions to the system.
	It's pretty small.
	Do we personally profit from it?
	Yeah, we do.
	Our company gets 20% to 25% of all the revenue that comes in will be our profit margin.
	I think that's pretty reasonable for the amount of risk we've taken.
	So question, question.
	So now, you're saying that the computers that are mining, this kind of farm of computers, of we the people's computers that are doing the mining, so that's creating value, and you guys are taking a 20% to 25% commission of the value?
	No, no, no, we're not taking commission.
	We're selling the software.
	The software has cost us probably six, seven months of development work.
	There's a whole pile of services that we need to put in place in the background that allow us to make sure that we're balancing all the pools.
	So we're trying to create as many pools as we can and make those pools as strong and competitive as possible.
	We have to manage all of that to balance them and make sure that everybody is getting a pretty fair crack of the whip, right?
	That's what we're going to do.
	Within range of going public, we're then going to turn around and try and get people to operate their own pools without us.
	We want to step out of the system as much as possible and let the whole thing just go open.
	What is the cost of that software, though, the initial software to get people going?
	The software is anywhere between 100 francs.
	We're a Swiss company, so we're doing everything in francs.
	There's 100 is the very basic.
	What is 100 francs in U.S. dollars, just so people understand?
	It's about 100, depending on exchange rate.
	I haven't looked at it in a while.
	It's anywhere between, let's say, 105 and 115, depending upon where the fluctuation, the exchange rate goes.
	So they spend, you know, whatever, 115 to get going, and now they're basically mining currency.
	That's one part of it.
	The other thing is that we're giving everybody who buys one of those memberships.
	We call it a mining membership.
	So everybody will get a different membership package over the time.
	So the first people coming in right now, we're calling the pioneers because guess what?
	They're pioneering this.
	They're going to be the ones that we test everything out on and make sure we've got everything right with before we go to the next group.
	And so we'll keep...
	Keep iterating month by month, create new pools, create new delivery methods, etc.
	And that will then allow us, hopefully, to get to the millions.
	My hope is...
	Okay, I'll explain this another way around.
	In order to mine all of the Gajus in the Gajumaru, it will take 87.5 years.
	You've heard of Fibonacci?
	I have, but refresh my memory.
	Okay, so Fibonacci is the, he was a mathematician, and he detected that everything in nature corresponds to a series of numbers, every single thing.
	1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55. What are they?
	They're the previous two numbers added together.
	So 1 plus 1, 2. 1 plus 2, 3. 2 plus 3, 5. 3 plus 5, 8. Everything in nature corresponds to this.
	The ratio, the golden ratio, is a Fibonacci ratio.
	And so if you look at a snail, the size of the snail's casing is a Fibonacci ratio.
	That's exactly what we've done with the bonding curve, the curve across the mining curve.
	So as it starts over here, The amount of work required to solve the puzzle is pretty small, and the rewards are pretty high.
	But the further you get around the curve, the more it goes like this.
	So right at the end, at the 87.5 year...
	Sorry, question.
	So you're saying that the pioneers have most of profit because they're on the lower end of the curve?
	The earlier you mine, the more of this you'll get.
	But in order to make this work in such a way that the maximum number of people can get involved, what we've done is we've constrained the amount that somebody can get.
	So we've removed the economic incentive to cheat.
	So let's just say, for example's sake, if you bought the top package, and we'll only sell very few of those.
	Most of them are going to be the $100, 100-franc packages.
	I think about 56% are that.
	Another 20% of the 250 and so on.
	It becomes, I think it's 0.2% of the memberships will sell in any month will be the 10,000 franc packages.
	So let's say you buy a 100 franc license, 100 franc, $100 license.
	And it says you can mine 10 gajus per day.
	But you put that license, that membership, onto a server farm.
	Okay, so now you're sticking that onto a Bitcoin server farm.
	You're going to mine everything.
	And we're just going to go, okay, now you're capped.
	You're limited at this amount.
	So the economic incentive to put that membership on a server farm has been removed because your cost to run the server farm is going to be colossal.
	And your reward is going to be tiny relative to your cost.
	So the aim is to do it this way.
	What happens if we fall below our targets?
	We only get 5 million people in.
	Well, then we're going to have a problem because the distribution won't be good enough.
	So we'll take the excess that's buying during that period and we'll make it available to market makers and try and make sure that we stabilize that price as much as possible so it stays within a range.
	Because if you walk into a shop and the price of the currency you're working in, Gajus, It's going up and down relative to other currencies madly, like you've seen happen in the past with Bitcoin.
	You can't actually transact.
	So that's going to be solution A if we don't do as well as we hope.
	Solution B is so many people come in and mine this that actually the distribution is huge.
	If we got to a billion people mining this, distribution is so big that the thing stabilizes all by itself.
	You don't need to nurse-made it.
	It will look after itself.
	Anybody can build anything they want.
	We've built a marketplace.
	We've built the means to make payment in a shop.
	Anybody who has a mobile phone can transact to somebody else.
	We've built all the reporting systems into this as platforms that we will run.
	But everyone else can come and do the same thing.
	A guy asked me the other day, so how can I turn gadgets into dollars?
	And I said, well, who says you need to?
	Everything that you want to do should be possible within the context of the Gaju Maro as well.
	But let's say you do.
	Why are you asking me when we're going to build an on-off ramp from Fiat to Gaju's?
	Why don't you build it?
	It's open.
	Nobody runs this.
	Nobody controls this.
	This is the whole point.
	Anybody can do whatever they want.
	If Citigroup were to turn around tomorrow and say, well, we're going to build the best on-off ramps to the Gaju system, And we're going to build a completely digital bank.
	Great.
	Interesting.
	Everything we're doing is about trying to make sure that this is as decentralized as possible and it stays that way.
	We're getting to the cusp of two hours and I think we're about to get into part two.
	So for the viewers out there, this is part one of the interview with Greg and we're going to actually now go into part two.
	Stay tuned.

▲