PBD Podcast | EP 105 | Special Guest: Bitcoin Historian Kurt Wuckert Jr.
FaceTime or Ask Patrick any questions on https://minnect.com/
Patrick Bet-David Podcast Episode 105. In this episode Patrick Bet-David is joined by Kurt Wuckert Jr, Adam Sosnick, and Gerard Michaels.
Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N
Text: PODCAST to 310.340.1132 to get added to the distribution list
About guests:
Kurt is an entrepreneur from Chicago with experience in bitcoin mining, business management, and cybersecurity. As CoinGeek’s Chief Bitcoin Historian, Kurt is a wealth of knowledge on all things blockchain, and he has the unique ability to make complex ideas easy to understand. Follow him on social media here: https://bit.ly/3DcgZWh
Gerard Michaels is an award-winning Writer, Director, Actor, Podcaster and Comedian with over 40 million views online. Follow him on Instagram here: https://bit.ly/3fMja9z
Adam “Sos” Sosnick has lived a true rags to riches story. He hasn’t always been an authority on money. Follow Adam on Instagram: https://bit.ly/2PqllTj. You can also check out his weekly SOSCAST here: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLw4s_zB_R7I0VW88nOW4PJkyREjT7rJic
The Bet-David Podcast discusses current events, trending topics, and politics as they relate to life and business. Stay tuned for new episodes and guest appearances.
Connect with Patrick on social media:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/patrickbetd...
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/patrickbetdavid
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PatrickBetDa...
About the host:
Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of a financial services firm and the creator of Valuetainment, the #1 YouTube channel for entrepreneurship with more than 3 million subscribers. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal bestseller Your Next Five Moves (Simon & Schuster) and a keynote speaker.
Bet-David is passionate about shaping the next generation of leaders by teaching the fundamentals of entrepreneurship and personal development while inspiring people to break free from limiting beliefs to achieve their dreams.
Follow the guests in this episode:
Gerard Michaels: https://bit.ly/3fMja9z
Adam Sosnick: https://bit.ly/2PqllTj
Kurt Wuckert Jr. https://bit.ly/3DcgZWh
To reach the Valuetainment team you can email: info@valuetainment.com
Want Patrick on your podcast? - http://bit.ly/329MMGB
#PBDPodcast
00:00 - Start
1:38 - Kurt Backstory
5:37 - Bitcoin Can Be Everything For Everybody
11:06 - Are NFT's Keeping Ethereum Alive?
15:09 - Is Craig Wright Satoshi Nakamoto?
26:42 - Has Anybody Besides Craig Wright Stepped Out As Bitcoin Creator?
30:59 - Could Bitcoin Become The World Reserve Currency?
41:38 - How Much Energy Is Needed To Mine Bitcoin
56:28 - Crypto For The Average Person
1:01:30 - Vitalik Buterin On BSV
1:38:38 Woman Breastfeeding Cats
1:40:47-1:50:50 LeBron James Gets Pacers Fans Ejected From Game
1:34:36-1:38:34 Mr. Beast Recreates REAL LIFE SQUID GAME
1:19:58-1:34:34 Jack Dorsey Stepping Down As Twitter CEO
1:13:26-1:19:57 Kurt Speed Round
If you can find the Alan Rynch, we got a special guest here today, Chief Bitcoin historian with Coingee.
That's actually your title.
Yes.
And your entire MO is Bitcoin, crypto.
You worked as a fundamental analyst, hedge fund, private and foreign.
So we got a lot of stuff to talk about.
You got strong opinions.
You had some stuff to say about Dorsey yesterday with Twitter.
Even said you got to get on Twitch, which is maybe we can talk about that.
We got a lot to talk about.
We got a speed run.
I'll give you the names of people in your world.
I'm curious to know what your opinion is going to be on them.
Some tells me you're not the kind of person that's going to be safe.
We have a friend back there, a Mexican Adam Saw Snake.
Manny Soto is in the house.
We have a wager to see who's got better game.
One of these days when you guys go out, I've got to get the report on what happens.
Our analyst, Gerard, will go with you, and he may just school both of you by the time it's over with.
And then we have also my brother-in-law, Oi Sabet Imani, Siamak.
Sabet Imani in the house.
Sia, in the house.
If you're in the Persian community, you know that last name.
That is a legendary last name, Siamak Sabet.
I did see some videos.
His dad's a legend.
So today, for our viewers, if you're interested in crypto, listen up.
Today's the day, right?
I mean, we're going to go deep on crypto.
Get some crypto in your life.
Yeah, so we got a lot of stuff to get into.
So before we get into it, before we get into it, Kurt, why don't you tell everybody your background so people know?
Sure.
Maybe skip the part about you and your wife, MMA, UFC, all that stuff, but specific to crypto.
So 2012, I was a business owner.
I owned a printing company.
I was also big into the sound money and the Fed community and all of that in Chicago.
I had a guy come to me and say, hey, man, I need some posters printed.
Can I pay you in Bitcoin?
I said, I don't know what the hell Bitcoin is.
He tells me, well, it's kind of like video game money.
I said, okay, well, that's whatever.
It was like a $50 job.
So I was like, that's fine.
It doesn't matter.
Pay me in Bitcoin.
Well, that brought me the first step down the rabbit hole.
And by the end of the next year, I was running a small mining operation and doing all kinds of things.
So 2013 to 15, I was big in the infrastructure space.
I wanted to figure out like, how does Bitcoin work?
By the way, when he gave you that $50 Bitcoin, what was Bitcoin in 2012?
$100?
Yeah, not even.
I think it was a little less.
So almost like a full Bitcoin at $50, $75.
If I recall, I got a little more than one Bitcoin, if I recall.
Okay, cool.
For a little stack of posts.
Today's, what, $55K?
The only reason I know what price it was is because I bought Bitcoin in 2012.
I told this story before.
At a Libertarian convention, a guy talked about it.
I was like, yeah, I love this.
And the Fed, screw fiat currency.
I bought 100 Bitcoin for $1,000.
It went down to $900 next week.
I was like, ah, this is a scam.
And I pulled it all out.
I lost $100.
I owned 10 Bitcoin at 100 bucks each in 2012.
Yeah, that's my Bitcoin story.
Anyway.
So, yeah, I mean, long story short, got involved in infrastructure.
I wanted to, I was a big fan of using Bitcoin as cash, using it in the economy.
I believed fully in disrupting business use cases.
So everybody wants to talk about the finance aspect, like hold, get rich, all of that.
For me, it was like, okay, well, what inefficient data silos and all this different stuff is out there that we can disrupt.
So for me, I was getting into development, like wallet development, all these different things.
I wanted to go that direction.
And then what I like to call the Bitcoin Civil War started around 2015, this talk about whether or not Bitcoin should be used as a business tool or whether it is just simply a savings or an investment technology.
You said Bitcoin Civil War.
Absolutely.
Okay, so who is going against who?
So if it's North and South, who's the enemy here?
Who's going to get it?
The most basic way to put it is small blockers versus big blockers.
On the small blocker side, you have Blockstream, Lightning Labs.
They're primarily funded by a group called Digital Currency Group, which is an incubator owned by MasterCard Ventures.
And they believe that Bitcoin is an investment tool only.
Buy it, hold it, that's it.
If you want to use it, maybe use Lightning Network.
Whether or not it works is irrelevant because it's primarily an investment technology.
On the big blocker side, there's actually a couple factions of big blockers that all kind of hate each other too.
But there's the Bitcoin Cash community and Bitcoin SV community.
I'm a Bitcoin SV guy.
That at the time was Roger Ver, guys like Craig Wright, Bitcoin Unlimited.
In 2015, the big group was Bitcoin XT.
So a lot of these people are like, hey, we'll just create a Bitcoin implementation that allows miners to make a change whenever they feel like it.
If there's more traffic, they can raise the block size and just go that direction.
Like, let's keep fees predictable.
Let's use Bitcoin as cash.
And that became an increasingly unpopular opinion.
And the reason is, is because people just kept getting richer by doing nothing.
And if you're getting rich doing nothing, what's your incentive to maybe rock the boat, to maybe pursue some other avenue?
And I get that, but the problem is all the disruptive stuff happens when people actually disrupt business.
And that's really what I want to see Bitcoin do.
And it really hasn't done that yet.
Even all the other blockchains that exist today.
It's because Ethereum is the one that's going to do it.
No, it absolutely is not.
Ethereum is going down.
100% not.
It's a civil war on PVE podcasts.
So why, to me, here's my question.
Maybe help us understand the following for some folks that don't follow it.
So, you know, in religion, you'll have Jews will say Christianity, you know, they're really Jews.
Jesus was a Jew, so you guys kind of took it and came out with this NIV and then changed the whole thing up.
Judaism 2.0.
You know, it's really Judaism 2.0.
Right.
And then Christians will say, well, LDS, you know, you took Joseph Smith from Vermont and you took this and you created LDS and you guys went and out of Chicago eventually ended up in Utah, Brigham Young, et cetera, et cetera.
Judaism Zero.
Seven day, all this stuff that you hear about, right?
Muslim, Baha'i.
So it almost sounds like in the crypto community, there is religions, right?
You got folks like Pomp who will swear by Bitcoin and nothing else.
Like literally nothing else.
The other day I was on, is it Natalie Brunel, who is very eloquent?
I was on her podcast.
And we were speaking.
She is strictly Bitcoin, not Ethereum, nothing else.
And then there's guys that dabble on everything and diversify, and there's guys that just can't stand Bitcoin.
Why don't you explain to us what these different religions within crypto are?
First of all, I love the religious analogy.
It's one that I use all the time.
So it's often, you know, trying to figure out the Israel-Palestine issue, right?
Like we'll never see those two groups likely come to an agreement on, oh, okay, we all agree.
This is all going to work.
Not going to happen.
But the thing with Bitcoin that people don't understand is that Bitcoin is capable of being everything to everyone.
And that's really how it was designed.
It was designed fundamentally to replace the internet.
We don't have 10,000 internets.
We have one internet.
It is a fixed protocol that people can build on, in, above, around.
But you know, the internet's going to be there.
So you can build your business based on knowing that the internet is going to be the same in five years, in 10 years, whatever.
These are at least the assumptions that we make.
The problem with all these different protocols with Ethereum is a great example.
Ethereum hard forks basically once every year, has a very deep and fundamental protocol change, which means everybody needs to retool everything.
Everybody needs to reissue tokens.
They need to reissue the apps that they make.
They need to reissue these smart contracts.
Basically breaks everything.
And then at the end of the day, Ethereum is only really capable of about 15 transactions per second globally, which is nothing.
This is essentially zero throughput.
Transactions per second globally.
Correct.
Okay, got it.
Visa, for example, is good for about 50,000.
Per second.
So let me ask you this: does Ethereum have the ability to improve that?
Or that's the limit?
They claim to, and they're about two and a half years behind on their roadmap saying that they absolutely will.
But I think it's a big meme.
I think they want to continue to pump valuations.
It's like Tesla.
It's like, hey, man, these trucks are coming out in 2019.
No, they're coming in 2020.
Well, okay, it's 2021.
We'll probably get them by 2023.
But you look at Tesla's now a trillion-dollar valuation.
So should they be?
You have to know this.
From my end, one thing you need to know about this group, I don't know about him, but I'm not tied to a group.
I'm just simply asking a question to get smarter, right?
So to me, when you talk to the metaverse community or the NFT community, they'll say, you know, I don't know, Ethereum's got 10 million coins.
I don't know the exact number, what it is, but give or take is what I hear.
It's actually endless.
So Ethereum is emitted constantly forever.
So there is no supply cap on Ethereum.
It exists specifically to launch smart contracts that are.
That's the key, right?
So the smart contract is what I love about Ethereum personally.
Like, so much of this is currency, and we get into the speculative investment because so much money is being made and lost.
But you said it before, it's really technology that people don't understand.
The blockchain specifically is the future of all commerce.
But what people don't understand is that Bitcoin was always capable of smart contracts and smart contracts that are more powerful than Ethereum smart contracts.
Ethereum is limited by, it's a very fundamentally different design.
They use a gas model, and this is why the fees are astronomical when there's so much traffic and all this stuff.
So in Bitcoin, nodes are competitive.
So every node in Ethereum needs to cross every threshold together.
So the network is only as fast as the weakest node in the network, which in my opinion, it's an altruistic system, which in my opinion is garbage.
You should never build a network that is based on altruism.
So everybody's trying to placate everyone, have it so that everyone can run nodes.
This is why they want to switch to proof of stake.
Like, well, we'll get more people to run more nodes.
That'll be good.
And I think the exact opposite.
I would rather have 10 people who are ruthless and really, really want to scale, really want to disrupt everything and are willing to do anything to make that possible.
And that's how Bitcoin's designed.
Bitcoin uses what's called the UTXO model, which allows them to parallelize and compete.
So rather than having one chain that is jumping to each block, you have maybe hundreds, maybe thousands of nodes that are competing to build the best block.
And they want to orphan everybody else.
They want to force everybody to go their direction because they're the best.
Who's this?
This is any one of them.
This is the way the Bitcoin protocol is designed.
So right now it could be anybody.
And it could change on a dime.
In fact, this is why we've seen these fiefdoms grow up in Bitcoin and then crash down.
And it's because it's like, look, man, I'm just better than you.
And if you can't keep up, if you cannot be better than me, you lose and you should lose.
And that's what makes Bitcoin great.
Go back to Ethereum.
So when you talk about the, I brought up the NFTs, half the NFTs that are being bought, they're being bought through Ethereum.
That's what I keep hearing about.
The fact that people are buying NFTs through Ethereum.
Correct.
But Solano, all these other guys are coming that you can buy NFTs through, right?
So is that something where if we know NFTs are not going away, we know there's going to be a fall, you know, the rise and a fall, just similar to the stock market.
People are getting prepared for it.
But if we know NFTs is going to be around, we know Meta is not going away.
It's here, right?
That's not like a maybe we're going to do it.
The moment Zuck said that, everybody started Googling Meta, checking what that is all about, right?
So isn't that a solid argument for the Ethereum community to say, look, we understand that you said, what, 50% or 15%?
15.
15%.
Eventually, we're going to figure this out just like Tesla eventually figured it out.
We're going to figure it out.
My follow-up to that would be two questions for you to answer: is if Ethereum does figure it out, okay?
I don't know what the numbers were, did they get to 5,000, 10,000, or 50,000 at Visa's level?
I don't know.
But if they do, would they be the cream of the crop coin out there?
If they do figure it out, I mean, I think that if is impossible.
I would put the if nearing 0% chance.
But if they did, if they did.
Well, sure.
I mean, whoever can be the most disruptive and bring on the most people to do the most business with the least amount of friction should absolutely win.
But I don't think Ethereum has any of those things.
What about Solana?
You hear that sort of replacing the Ethereum?
I really don't like Solana either.
I think Solana is a really, really great implementation of a really bad protocol.
It's essentially just a bunch of good stuff about Ethereum and some good stuff about Bitcoin, but they've missed the boat on a lot of things.
What they do have is really great software developers.
So the UX and all of this stuff is excellent, but at a protocol level, it can't scale either.
It hits a scale ceiling.
That means it needs to be fundamentally re-engineered from the ground up.
And that's not something, for example, that we can do with the internet.
We can't just be like, all right, guys, so I know we went down this path and we're hitting a wall here.
We need to shut the internet off for 90 days while we relaunch and retool, right?
That's not going to work for the world.
I believe it was shut the internet down for 15 days to slow the spread.
I believe is what it was.
Yeah, that worked really well, too.
So then this leads me to a question for you.
Are you going to a place where you're saying these are the two, three, four, five coins that could potentially dot dot dot?
Are there those coins out there?
In my opinion, so if you look at Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin SV is the only blockchain right now that has all parameters are open and they are miner settings.
So each node can compete right now.
There is no protocol level.
What is a node?
I'm sorry.
So a node is a computer that validates transactions and writes transactions to the blockchain.
So if you have a soft wallet on your phone and you send, let's say you're using Exodus and you send a Bitcoin transaction, that is being broadcast to nodes, mining computers that will write your transaction to the ledger.
Gotcha.
So those are the nodes.
Right now in BTC Bitcoin, they are not allowed to attempt to build a block bigger than one megabyte.
That's it.
That's the swim lanes that have been decided by software developers whose names you don't know and who you do not know how to petition.
That's what bothers me a little bit about Bitcoin.
The anonymity.
Look, I understand why people who made billions and billions of dollars would not want anybody to know that they had billions and billions of dollars.
But you find out – finding out people like Calvin Ayer and some people that are really, really – let me just get right to it.
I mean, like Satoshi, does he exist?
Does he not exist?
Is it a real person?
Is it an amalgamation?
And if you can't know who's controlling this, why should you invest anything in it?
Well, and that's the thing.
I mean, it's a zeitgeist, right?
It's the exact same thing with this is the word of the day.
That's the word of his life.
My man, pots and tans.
You can tell Gerard prepared that question for David.
I mean, let's go back to the religious analogy.
Like, I mean, you never met Jesus.
Why go to church on Sunday?
You know, there's an aspect of faith to all of these things, including money in general.
Are you comparing Satoshi Nakamoto to Jesus?
I think there's a lot of really applicable analogies there.
Really?
Absolutely.
100%.
Well, I mean, it's somebody people disagree whether or not who he is, whether it's one person or many.
In fact, there's all kinds of people on the internet.
Was it an AI from the future?
Has he come back?
He was Jewish, though, for sure.
Satoshi or Jesus?
So Jesus is from the tribe of Judah.
And yes, to help Adam understand better, you could say Satoshi is more like Biden.
You'd never know where he's at.
To help you, you know, he's making peace around the world.
In my opinion, Satoshi Nakamoto is an Australian man.
I'm a firm believer that Craig Wright is the primary architect of Bitcoin.
I believe he wrote the white paper.
You just pissed a lot of people.
Oh, I know.
This is the single most unpopular thing.
In fact, I guarantee you're lighting up right now with, oh, this guy's a scammer.
Kick him out.
Your reputation's done.
Craig Wright.
So Craig Wright is right now in Miami.
There's a lawsuit going on right now.
The largest private lawsuit of all time.
There's about $160 billion being asked for by the Fitzpatrick.
They're saying that it's the trial of the century.
It was OJ.
Now it's Satoshi.
Do you know who started calling it the trial the century?
Just Lane Maxwell's lawyers.
That's you?
That's you.
So Lane Maxwell's lawyers.
Yes.
Okay.
Do not look here.
Look over there, please.
And when you say Miami, there's Art Basel going on this week.
It's a big deal.
There's a lot of NFT crypto stuff going on at the Art Basel Art, obviously.
Then there's the DeFi conference going on near the airport.
Is that why Craig Wright's in town?
Is that why?
No, no.
Craig Wright is in town at federal court.
He is likely at the Wilkie D. Ferguson federal court building right now.
The jury is actually deliberating.
The case is over, and the jury is currently deliberating.
We're actually expecting a verdict today.
But it's a civil suit, not a criminal suit.
It is a civil suit between the estate of Dave Kleiman, which says that Dave was 50% of the Satoshi Nakamoto team.
And then Craig Wright says absolutely he was not a business partner in any regard.
He was my dear friend.
He did help me edit the white paper, but he always helped me edit white papers.
He was essentially a contractor who was also a friend.
But Bitcoin was my idea.
I'm the architect of it.
He helped me with some of the trimmings, and I'm happy to deal with that.
But he does not get 50% of my invention.
You interviewed Craig Wright.
I did, did you not?
I did.
And by the way, we had a great time together.
It was a phenomenal conversation together.
I just, I enjoy talking to him, but I got to tell you, afterwards, after interviewing Craig Wright, there's only been about, well, I can't say that.
He's probably in the top 10 interviews that I got the most DMs, emails, tweets, people pissed off about having Craig Wright on.
So go back into why you think it is Craig Wright, because there's a lot of different names that you hear about.
Why him?
Sure.
So this really should be prefaced with the Bitcoin Civil War.
This is why.
This is not just a cultural disagreement thing.
This is Israel versus Palestine kind of stuff.
Because SUNY Shia, they're never going to agree on anything.
Exactly.
So the reason that I think it's Craig Wright, first of all, is that every other potential candidate makes absolutely zero sense.
So people bring up like Nick Zabo or they bring up even Hal Finney.
Hal Finney, what's up with that?
Hal Finney is a very cool guy.
He's a very talented software engineer.
He fundamentally disagreed with Satoshi in public.
I mean, you can read their conversations.
Hal Finney didn't understand Bitcoin.
He was a software engineer and very talented, and Satoshi gave him software work to do.
None of this is contentious, but Hal never understood Bitcoin.
He argued with Satoshi about how it should be engineered.
Wait, wait, so Satoshi does exist.
Satoshi absolutely exists.
He exists.
Yes.
Oh, so Dan Pena is full of shit.
First time ever.
First time ever.
Dan Pena?
Dan Pena.
First time.
He's been right about literally everything.
I like Dan Pena, but I think he's going to see the vote here.
Zero pussy.
So the other guys, like they look at Bitcoin and they say, ah, it's got security problems.
Everybody would need to run a node.
It can't scale.
And Satoshi always argued with these guys.
No, It can scale.
No, you do not need to run a node.
Only people that are trying to mine coins need to run a node.
So there's this big disagreement on all these definitions in Bitcoin.
So we can't even get past the basic presuppositions of what is Bitcoin?
How is Bitcoin?
All of that.
This sounds like an Aaron Sorghar.
And it's been from day one.
So the very first response, when Satoshi put the white paper out and said, hi, I'm Satoshi.
I've solved the double spend problem.
Here's the Bitcoin white paper.
The first guy came out to say, Well, here's why it doesn't work.
And they have this rant that is very typical even in social media today.
Well, it can't scale because everyone would need to run a node and then it would have this problem and then you can't propagate blocks and blah, blah, blah.
And Satoshi basically gave the big blocker version.
This is the side of Bitcoin that I fall on of saying, no, absolutely not.
Bitcoin could do Visa-level transactions today with existing hardware.
And he explained the basics on how, but he didn't go really deeply into it.
And he said, but nonetheless, the network hasn't even launched yet.
But don't worry, nodes can consolidate into commercial operations where everyone connects into what is essentially what we know today as a mining pool and describes out all the ways that it can scale and how it should work.
And people started to fight immediately.
So the very first conversation was actually the opening shots of the Bitcoin Civil War.
And we haven't gotten past it.
And then Satoshi very suddenly disappeared in late 2010.
So the white paper came out in 2008, late 2008, and then he was gone by 2010, largely forced out, basically sick of bickering, is the way that I see it, because it was everybody saying, ah, Satoshi, you don't get it.
And he's just saying, don't tell me what I don't get about the thing that I architected.
And then at some point, he just said, you know what?
I have so many other things to do.
I'm going to pass the keys to Gavin Andreessen.
He's the new lead developer.
You guys are okay.
And then he specifically said, stop referring to me as a shadowy figure and stop treating Bitcoin like crime money, that kind of thing.
Like, that's not what he was interested in.
And so then Satoshi was gone.
And then immediately, his repo was moved from SourceForge and put onto GitHub, and a bunch of new people were put in charge.
And then all of his stuff was burned down.
The history of Satoshi was whitewashed.
And then it turned into, hey, here's this big investment opportunity.
And by the way, we're creating this new voting process with soft forks and Bitcoin improvement proposal systems.
And we're going to have this group of maintainers.
And so it turned from governance by proof of work, which is, in my opinion, the most important thing that's been invented in the last probably 50 years.
And then it turned into what is essentially a social democracy, which is everything wrong with money today is the fact that there are gatekeepers and people can vote on it.
And some of the votes happen behind closed doors.
And then people are given this illusion of voting with their quote-unquote nodes, but they're not actually voting.
Like what they've been given to vote on is already the milquetoast that has been approved by various levels of people.
Let's step back a little bit because I want to keep this simple for the audience to understand it.
So simplify story.
Craig Wright says he's the only person that's come out and said he's Satoshi Nakamoto, right?
I don't think he's not.
There are other people that have claimed they are.
Who else has?
That's a credible name.
Who else has?
No, nobody credible.
Everyone else has fallen.
Give me hard understood.
Give me the biggest name that came out that said that.
Phil Wilson is probably the most interesting guy.
Phil Wilson, for the record, also says, well, yeah, it was me and Craig and Dave.
So even Phil, who I think is kind of a sketchy character, he's another Australian fellow.
And he tells the story.
It was me, Craig Wright, and Dave Kleiman.
The interesting thing is that Phil Wilson worked at some of the same companies as contractors and stuff as Craig.
So one of the big reasons why I really think that it's Craig is: A, Craig has a background in statistics, finance, economics, theology.
He's got, I don't even know, half a dozen PhDs.
He's got another 20 master's degrees.
Craig Right.
Okay.
Yeah, I remember that.
So Craig goes on BBC and he's going to put in the keys and show the fact that he owns this.
And then all of a sudden he's like, oh, shit, you know, it's not working.
Right.
And it was a bit of a controversial issue because if you really say you are Satoshi Nakamoto and you go on BBC and you kind of, you know, flip-flop, not able to show it, he lost a lot of credibility there.
Indeed.
And this is why, even to this day, he's among the most contentious people in the space.
They look at it and say, if you couldn't prove it then, you can't prove it ever.
You're definitely not Satoshi Nakamoto.
I think that's unfair.
But the reason that I think it's unfair is specifically because, I mean, there's a million reasons why that could be.
And I think that if he was a scammer, if this was all false, he would have disappeared at that point.
Like, who wouldn't, right?
It's like, okay, the jig is up.
I'm out.
Let me give the question back to you.
Okay.
Everybody in this room, just a question for everybody in this room.
Okay, you ready?
How many guys have forgotten your Chase or Bank of America or Wells Fargo password?
Yeah, absolutely.
Have you?
Yeah.
Okay, have you?
Have you ever, have you ever, yes, you have?
You have?
You have as well?
You have as well.
Okay.
Would we put a guy named Craig Wright with 10 PhDs as one of the smartest guys if he really created Bitcoin?
You'd have to put him as one of the smartest guys out there, right?
Sure.
Okay, if he's one of the smartest guys out there, that produced a revolutionary product.
By the way, I want to believe it's him.
I enjoy talking to him.
I can't wait to have him back on the podcast and have the conversation with him.
If that is the case, the question that people bring up is, how does that guy forget it?
Because the amount of money that he has is, how much is the money that he has in it?
$54 billion or something?
No, no, it's bigger than that.
$252 billion is what was in court.
He would be the second richest man in the world.
Maybe the richest man today because Tesla took a hit.
So if that is like – But that's why some people think that he forgot the key as well so that they can actually go in and see exactly how much he had, how many hundreds of thousands of coins he had in pre-mining.
I mean, if he wasn't.
It wasn't pre-mined.
It was public.
It was said three months before, like, hey, mining starts sometime in the future.
Let's get set up.
Like, that was the point of coming up.
Even with his partners, Pat.
I mean, like, the guy, Calvin Ayer, is the interesting guy to me, man.
Like, I mean, who financed all this?
And if you financed all this, do you own Bitcoin?
Like, do you have an ownership state?
If you financed everything, are you the owner of Bitcoin?
Have you financed everything?
And if you know anything about Calvin Air, people that don't know Calvin Air, go follow his Twitter.
He's a very interesting character.
He's an interesting character.
He's a serious disruptor.
He's the guy that brought internet to half of Canada.
He took the money that he made from that and created a software company that disrupted the gambling industry.
Then he basically took over the online gambling industry with Bodog and became the number one online gambling mogul, period.
He also invented a number of things that ended up competing with PayPal and things like that back in the day, which is why he got into Bitcoin.
Pretty incredible stuff.
Also has a predilection for females that even Dan Bilzerians like, I don't know, bro, that's a little young.
You know, some of this stuff has come up in the past and the people that have brought it up have ended up having to pay restitution and things to Calvin.
So it's there are accusations and nothing's been, nothing's ever been proven.
Charges have never come out or any of that.
And he happily shares the pictures across Twitter and very much understands the legality issues that would arise should these things be illegal.
So I.
So, okay, so let's go back to this.
So the Florida trial.
So so far we talked about Craig Wright.
Fantastic.
He talked about Florida trial, the trial of the century, which you call it.
So Craig Wright is here in Miami.
They're all talking.
What's going on?
Wall Street Journal does an article saying Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto could be unmasked at Florida trial, right?
With this going on.
It's almost a way of saying you better come out and reveal yourself, right?
Has anybody else stepped out outside of Craig to say, I am the guy or no?
Amid this trial, absolutely not.
Like I mentioned, Phil Wilson, there's been a couple of other goofballs that have come out and told stories, but none of them make any sense.
And Craig Wright is the only person.
First of all, Craig didn't out himself.
Craig was doxed by Wired and Gizmodo magazine in 2015.
At the same time, the ATO was raiding his home and a local, ATO is the Australian IRS.
And the local media in Australia was in front of his house filming it.
So somebody coordinated this basically takedown of Craig Wright, not realizing he had left for the UK a few months earlier.
And ultimately, the reason Craig Wright is a public figure at all is 100% not his doing.
So these magazines said, this man is Satoshi Nakamoto.
What can we learn from him?
Blah, So I think that's an important thing to remember is that every other Satoshi candidate came out to say, well, I'm Satoshi and here's why.
And none of it made any sense.
Craig denied it for quite some time until he was able to get some of his ducks in a row.
And then he would say, okay, look, I'm going to start to, I don't want to just tell everyone publicly.
I'm going to bring in some people privately.
So he brought in Gavin Andreessen, who is the guy who Satoshi left the keys with, the lead developer of Bitcoin.
And then he brought in John Matonis, who was the head of the Bitcoin Foundation at the time.
And a couple other people were offered.
And as I understand it, somewhere between six and 10, other people have seen.
And he said, look, I want to do this right.
I want to show you guys in private.
I'm going to do a public key, private key signing, prove that I control Satoshi Nakamoto's assets, and that is one aspect of proving that I'm Satoshi.
The problem is that the second he did that, Gavin Andreessen had his keys burned.
He was removed from Bitcoin court.
Again, amid the Bitcoin Civil War.
So these people were like, oh, wow, Craig Wright is Satoshi.
Boom.
Gavin Andreessen, you're out.
I'm so confused, man.
Didn't you say Satoshi actually exists as a human being?
100%.
So other people know him and have interacted with him?
Correct.
But there's this.
But it's on the internet, not in person.
But it's not in person.
I mean, I know Craig personally.
Yeah.
And so, yes.
My mind's being blown on it.
Is this like a metaverse thing where Craig is Satoshi online?
Craig, so it's an alias.
It's a pseudonym.
Craig.
So there is no Satoshi.
As a human being.
It's a fake name.
It's not a fake name.
Exactly.
No, no, no.
That's kind of like if you write a book and you don't want to use your name.
Yeah, like Gerard Michaels.
I get it.
Yeah.
It's a pen name.
I get it.
But wait, so there actually is no Satoshi Nakamoto.
I mean, there are probably people on earth named Satoshi.
You didn't hear about the story of the guy that Satoshi Nakamoto went and knocked on his door.
And then he's like, I'm telling you, I'm not the founder of Bitcoin.
So this is a, okay.
All right.
Gerard, you're joke.
There's no way.
His real name is a whole stage.
I have a hard time now, Gerard.
How do you not know that?
No, I don't think he is.
I'm not.
I think he got it.
I thought this week.
Dude, I did not.
I thought that there was still debate whether this guy, Satoshi Nakamoto, actually existed or if it was BS.
Are you saying the name or the human?
The human being.
Yeah, Satoshi Nakamoto.
I think people understand that it's a human that created this.
His name wasn't really Satoshi Nakamoto.
I didn't know that that wasn't.
Could have been Craig.
I didn't know that that was a good idea.
It could have been.
I had no idea that that was settled science.
Settled science, bro.
Trust the science, man.
So anyways.
So then what happened is Gavin Andreessen and John Matonis both basically got burned, kicked out of the community.
You're not real Bitcoiners.
Craig isn't real.
Does this guy, Gavin, claim to have met Satoshi?
Oh, yeah.
He was under deposition in Miami court.
What did he say?
He said, you know what?
There were things that were goofy about the whole situation.
But at the end of the day, I believe that I met Satoshi Nakamoto.
And who did he say it was?
It was Craig Wright.
So Craig Wright is Kaiser Society.
It's Kaiser Satoshi.
Yes.
Kaiser Satoshi Nakamoti.
So let me show you this.
Let me show you this.
Let me show you this.
Just in the last 30 days, this is what's happened.
I saw two articles.
So if you want to pull this up, one of them is what Hillary Clinton said.
One of them is what Rand Paul said.
I don't know if you heard this.
I'm sure you did.
So if you can pull this up a little bit higher, a little bit higher, there you go with the picture shown.
Perfect.
Bitcoin could become world reserve currency, says Senator Rand Paul.
This is October 25th, a little over four weeks ago, right?
This is what he is saying.
World Reserve Currency, says Rand Paul.
Hillary Clinton just comes out a week ago or two weeks ago.
This is a week ago.
She says she fears Bitcoin will undermine dollar as world reserve currency.
Which one is more likely to happen or will both happen?
So I think they're both talking about BTC Bitcoin because that's what people assume.
I think it is incapable of being a world reserve currency.
It doesn't have the capacity to settle anything near what would be needed in bandwidth terms.
BTC is heavily crippled.
It does not work.
It really, really only works for what people are using it for today, which is an investment asset.
Front run people, get other people to buy it.
You've become more rich, and that's great.
And that's really everything that's going on there.
It cannot do, even with the layer two stuff, all of that stuff is a lot of vaporware.
And the stuff that works really only works in bubbles.
And so I think, frankly, they're both wrong.
But where they're right is that the Bitcoin protocol, what Satoshi Nakamoto actually invented, is capable of doing that.
It should absolutely be a both and it should be a frictionless digital cash.
It should be a tokenization layer.
It can do smart contracts worldwide right now.
In fact, it is doing it, but it's on BSV.
So what Bitcoin SV is, and this is why Craig Wright and all this stuff is tied together, is that Bitcoin SV is Bitcoin as it was implemented by Satoshi Nakamoto.
So there's no swim lanes in the protocol.
So whatever you want to try to do, if you want to try to push an entire operating system in one transaction and then have tokens interact with that operating system all up in the stack, you can do that.
It's not going to stop you.
So miners might stop you.
If you don't pay enough fee, the miner may not mine it and put it on chain.
I think the token's pretty interesting because I could anyway see a future where every city has its own currency.
For sure.
It's a token that's Bitcoin-based or some sort of blockchain.
Absolutely.
There'd be, instead of paying cash to get an MTA card to ride the subway in New York, you'll have, New York will have its own coin.
It'll have its own token.
Yes.
And digital currency, like Pat was, you know, we were talking about earlier, there was land sold in the metaverse, which is nuts to me, man, because one of my favorite quotes from the Sopranos was when Tony Soprano tries to give fatherly advice to AJ.
It's like, buy land.
God ain't making no more of it.
God's making more land now.
It's digital land.
It's crazy.
No, it's true.
So, I mean, you know, go west, young son.
West for expansion.
And this is.
40 metacres and a mule.
And this is why I'm such an advocate for the Bitcoin protocol, which, again, in my belief, really only exists in Bitcoin SV.
it's the only one that can do those things.
So right now, like, and just for clarification, Bitcoin SV is different than BTC.
Correct.
So they both are.
Break that down.
They're both based on the Bitcoin protocol in a very basic sense.
So it's kind of like the Judaism, Christianity, LDS, Islam, and all these things.
Like there's forks, right?
But they fundamentally.
It's all the Abrahamic religions.
They're fundamentally Abrahamic religions, right?
So all these Bitcoin variants are fundamentally Satoshi-ish implementations of Bitcoin, including things like Litecoin or PureCoin or Dash or all these things are still like 95% the same thing at the very base level.
But the way they're implemented has a bunch of different variables.
And so BTC is Bitcoin, but implemented with a bunch of the stack turned off.
So the opcodes, the stuff that would allow smart contracts, a lot of it just turned off because it's like, ah, that stuff's kind of a security issue.
We don't want to play with that.
Also, we don't want more than six megabytes per hour to go across the whole network or else people in the third world won't be able to operate nodes.
And we want everyone to be able to have an endpoint on the network.
Isn't this what Ripple wanted to do, but they just were dumb enough to incorporate it in the United States?
Yeah.
I mean, Ripple's the same thing.
Ripple is also very similar to Bitcoin in most ways that matter.
So almost every blockchain is basically just a derivation of the same idea.
So what Bitcoin SV is, is, okay, we're going to implement Bitcoin, but we're not going to have any hard limits on things.
So, whatever you want to try to do, whatever economic actors want to push on the economy and see if they can create a market, create an economy with a new idea, you can do it on BSV today.
Like Ethereum, you can't do it.
The NFTs on Ethereum aren't even actually on Ethereum.
You own a string of numbers.
You don't own the artwork.
In fact, people are getting censored off of Ethereum right now for their political cartoons.
Like, if you put a political cartoon that is unsavory in some way, you can just eliminate the art because the art is sitting on OpenSea's server or it's sitting on AWS or it's sitting maybe on IPFS, but that art disappears and you only own the hash.
Bitcoin SV right now, there are like 3D objects as NFTs made in, I mean, you can grab them, you can play with them, but they're on-chain.
They are in the blockchain.
They can't be deleted.
And that's the only blockchain that does it.
Everybody else is selling you a string of digits and they're hosting your file on their servers.
And whenever they feel like, you know what, I'm done with this, they shut the server off and you lost the piece of art what you think you own.
Let me ask you: do you own any Bitcoin or Ethereum?
I own a little bit of a lot of things, but a lot of it is old school.
Like I've been in the space for nine years now.
So some of it is, I probably have stuff that I don't even know exists at this point.
That's smart not to answer with Joe Biden's guy right now.
No, no, no.
What do you mean that you know doesn't exist?
What does that mean?
So, I mean, just in testing, like if we're going back to 2015, so I actually used to be an Ethereum miner.
I was mining Monero in 2016 and 17.
Like I've gotten myself into a lot of things to like.
What is the most recent coin you invested in?
What you bought?
Recent.
BSV.
I'm heavy in the BSV space.
Got it.
So let's talk about the mining, the difference between Ethereum mining and Bitcoin.
You'll see one of the arguments will come up to mine one Bitcoin cost.
You hear somebody the $48,000, $42,000, et cetera, et cetera.
Explain to the average person what it means that it costs $42,000, $48,000 to mine a Bitcoin or mine in Ethereum, which is what you used to do.
Yep.
So what you're doing when you're mining is you're actually, you're trying to brute force a number.
So the network says, find this number, and here's a bunch of math problems to get you there.
And then what you do is what's called a brute force.
So you get a bunch of computers to test, is it this number?
Is it that number?
Is it this number?
Is it that number?
But they're doing it at an incredible speed and just absolutely bonkers speed.
In fact, this is the most progress in computer science and Moore's Law and all this stuff has been toward breaking hashes specifically for hashing on blockchain assets.
So what you're doing is you're hunting for one number.
And in Bitcoin, that is a SHA-256 number.
And on Ethereum, right now, it's ETH hash, which is a, I'm not going to get into the math and science of it because nobody cares.
But in Ethereum, you use GPUs.
So it is like the graphics cards that people want on their gaming computer.
This is why gamers hate crypto people because they can't get the GPUs to make their games cool because they just keep getting bought up by Ethereum miners primarily.
They do.
And so what you're doing there is you can run a GPU farm, which is quieter.
It's a lot less energy efficient, but it's the best way to mine Ethereum today.
And so a lot of people GPU mine and that's what they do.
On SHA-256, it's specifically ASIC mining, which is application-specific integrated circuit, meaning it is a computer that is designed to do absolutely nothing but look for Bitcoin hashes.
And so it's very, very heavily specialized.
Whereas Ethereum miners, when they're, you know, if you decide, you know what, I don't want to be an Ethereum miner anymore, you can put those GPUs on eBay and sell them to the gamers again and the gamers, oh, there's been a drop.
We get to do this.
So, but ultimately, what you're doing as a miner, you're looking for a hash, and that's really all you're doing.
What's a hash?
A hash is a string of numbers that represents some other thing.
So I can make, let's say I write the number my birthday, and then I run it through an algorithm.
It will spit out a hash, and the algorithm can always connect that hash to my birthday if that's what I want it to do.
So it's a proof of the existence of the first thing.
But hashes mean it can be something as simple as a very simple, like my birthday written out, or it can be a whole novel.
Like I can make it Moby Dick, I can make it the entire Library of Congress, and I can hash it, and the hash will be the same size regardless of the input.
Correct.
It is digital DNA.
It's a fingerprint that points to the proof of existence of another thing, but in a way that is standardized and easily attestable.
So that's what they're looking for.
They're looking.
So why does it cost so much money, though?
Because it's competitive.
So specifically, it's if I can do it better than you, then I will, because I'll make that money.
But if Gerard figures out a new way to do it, maybe he's got better, whatever, better computer science background, or he can pay somebody to build a better chip, then all of a sudden he's more competitive.
He's more competitive than us.
Then I need to figure out, oh, shoot, what do I do?
Like, do I go to the third world and try to find an old diesel plant and make it that my power is cheaper or whatever?
So it's this competitive nature.
It is free market economics, 100% at play that makes it that I'm going to compete with you, but then you're going to compete better, but then you're going to compete better.
What is the argument about the reason why Bitcoin will never end up being the currency is because it costs so much money and it requires so much energy and power, right?
Why does that constantly come up?
Because most people are communists and they don't realize it.
So people that talk about cost without talking about ROI are dim, period.
It's ROI.
You say anything bad about communism, this guy's trying to make out with you on camera.
It took off your head.
I feel unbelievable.
You're on such a level, Kirk.
This guy's slightly poking out right now.
But it's true, though.
So the cost conversation is fine, but people that talk about costs without ROI aren't having a real conversation.
These are people that should go get a minimum wage job and stay in their lane.
But if you're creating a business, you're saying experts don't say that.
You're saying, like, for example, can you Google Tyler?
Do me a favor, Google, how much energy does mining a Bitcoin take?
Apparently, it's more energy.
Google, but it's the time.
Tesla, everything comes back to your business.
The only reason I'm at, okay, stay right there.
Let me just read that real quick.
If you want to go back real quick.
Okay, so Business Insider is not a communist yet.
I mean, I know we're going after Business Insider has got a bad reputation with whatever's going on, but Bitcoin mining consumes around 91 terawatt hours of electricity annually.
Okay, Bitcoin mining.
That's more annual electricity used than all of Finland, which is a country of five and a half million people.
That's almost half a percent of all electricity consumption worldwide and a 10 times jump from just five years ago.
So this isn't a, you know, Reddit, crazy, you know, guy that's saying this.
So go back, go into the article.
Let's read a little bit more.
Go all the way to the top.
Let me just read this: Bitcoin mining consumes globally.
And seven times Google's total usage, new reports say, and Google is the number one search engine, go a little lower, go a little lower, half a percent consumption, according to New York Times.
That's roughly seven times on Google.
Bitcoin's negative environmental impact is expected to become a bigger issue as cryptocurrency gains more popularity.
Okay, by the way, I see the fact if New York Times is saying this and they're linking it to environmental impact, you already know where this is going next.
Seymour said, go a little lower, go a little lower, see what else they're saying about this.
It is difficult to measure exactly how much energy Bitcoin Mining consumes.
But a new analyst by the New York Times shared some staggering input.
Okay, and that's the stuff that we just read right now.
So it's not, You know, it's not just one person saying it or two people saying it.
Sure.
I'm really trying to find out for myself.
If we're going in a direction right now where we keep printing money, which has been the strategy for the last 24 months.
Yep.
Okay.
And the printing of money is not left and right.
Bush started it back in the days with quantitative easing that started with who's the first green span.
Was it Greens?
So, hey, quantitative easing is actually a good thing.
You know, we go buy, give money to the banks, and they buy shitty business that's out of business, but you're putting money in there, and hopefully the money is going to go to the middle income.
And then eventually realize the more they're doing that, inflation, next thing you know, we got 6.2%.
We can't wait to see what the numbers are going to be next.
So for me, I would like to see a potential different currency that holds everybody accountable that you cannot manipulate specifically.
The government cannot.
So it would be kind of cool to have a different currency.
Some said, hey, we're going to go to gold standard, Peter Schiff, gold standard.
Nothing's happened with gold the last 18 months.
I own gold.
Nothing's happened with gold in the last 18 months, right?
So if there is a possibility of us going on something that publicly you can count and they can't print, that'd be a beautiful thing.
But the fact that it takes that much energy in today's climate, don't you see that as an issue?
I don't.
In fact, if you look at Bitcoin mining versus what is going on in the rest of the world, like you're ignoring, like, yes, Google.
And Google is a big player, but they're not the only player.
If you look at the entire global economy and what they are doing in order to bootstrap whatever we call the global financial system, so all of these things, all these players, they're using exponentially more energy than Bitcoin.
Now, here's my problem again with Bitcoin BTC: is that what are we doing with all that energy on BTC?
What we're essentially doing is securing a bunch of coins that are sitting on people's paper wallets or ledger nanos or whatever.
They're sitting there and they're not doing it.
They're not creating anything with that money.
And this is a problem for me, too.
This is why I actually argue that the BTC community has become bourgeoisie, whatever.
They're very, they've got a communist penchant to their behavior.
They're not building things with Bitcoin.
They're not using Bitcoin as a tool to disrupt the actual economy.
And so it does become a problem.
Then it does become wasteful.
If this is just securing what's in my wallet, that is a problem.
And it's not a problem for me to go out and physically change for someone else.
It's incumbent upon me to build business use cases that supersede that.
So imagine if what I was doing with Bitcoin was replacing Twitter, for example.
Twitter's a giant nightmare of a company.
They're a terrible company, but everybody uses them because everybody's there.
But they're also very wasteful.
Think about how much server space is actually exists just to keep Twitter online.
Now, if we were to move over to Bitcoin, BSV, for example, has the Twitch network, which you have an account, as I recall.
I do.
Yeah, I do.
I spoke to the founder of it.
Him and I went back and forth.
I had different interests with them, but yeah, I do have an account with them.
And so what they've done is they are putting everything on chain in the stack.
It's up in Bitcoin.
It runs in Bitcoin.
It's not using other infrastructure.
So we can ignore, we can eliminate Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure and all these other things that are also consuming a lot of energy.
But it also has the added benefit of extreme censorship resistance.
People can have political opinions that are maybe unsavory, but can't be deleted just because Jack Dorsey or this new goon CEO can, you know, wow, I don't like the sound of that.
And it's all on-chain.
It's secured by proof of work.
And again, this proof of work, this brute forcing of ideas.
So imagine the hash.
We talked about brute forcing hashes.
Imagine brute forcing every idea and making every node around the world use that power, use that energy to take conflicting ideas.
Speak to the audience as if they're a fifth grader right now.
Because you went to a lalal.
So come back and simplify for us.
Let me go back to the question.
Here's a question.
If it requires this much energy that people say it requires, you want to use the example of Twitter.
It's seven times Google, which means Twitter's probably freaking nothing.
It's nothing compared to Google, right?
I mean, you can't even compare the two.
It's probably 700 times Twitter, if not more, right?
So that comparison argument, somebody might find a leak and poke it and say, I don't know about what you're saying here.
All I'm going back to is: remember, I would love to see an alternative to fiat currency.
I think most people would love that where the government cannot just say, let's go mine 50 million more Bitcoins.
You can't bullshit like that, right?
So we don't have to worry about all the other stuff.
Why is this constant conversation about how much energy it requires to mine a Bitcoin?
Because people aren't focused on what you can create with that cost.
People are just looking at the cost and saying that is awful consumption.
And if you just look at the consumption, I agree.
Yeah.
And I agree to the point that people aren't creating disruptive things with their blockchain.
Let me restate the question.
I'll ask the question in a different way.
I'll ask the question in a different way.
So, for example, okay, you know, we'll talk about Mafia States of America.
We'll give an update before the whole thing ends because people need to know what's going on with that.
But hypothetically, okay, how many total hours have we put into Mafia States of America?
Total everybody team, you know, think about where we were at shooting 40 people, their editors.
Can we say, I don't know, total everybody, 10,000 hours.
Is that a fair number?
Maybe more.
Okay, let's just say 10,000 hours, though.
Let's just say 10,000 hours.
Now, I, the funder, is going to sit there and say, why is this costing so much money?
It's taking so many hours.
It's freaking ridiculous.
I don't have manpower to get these guys to edit other projects.
I have nine editors working on this one project.
Gerard, this is freaking ridiculous, right?
However, however, if when we're done QCing all of it this week, which is going to release December 3rd, we are done putting any time into it because now it's up there, then I'm good.
Meaning, if that energy is required to mine a Bitcoin, it's just the energy required until you mine it.
Then it's good to go.
It doesn't require any more energy.
We're fine.
No.
But is it a constant energy required to sustain it?
Because that's the concern.
So the other thing that occurs is that you are a transaction processor as well.
So the same people that are mining the Bitcoins are also processing the transactions.
So as transactions occur, that's also part of the consumption.
On BTC, it's almost none comparatively.
But BSV, for example, has more transaction, more of what's going on on that network is transactions than it is mining.
So, and this is why I say, like, look, if we're building a world that is disruptive, it is more efficient, it's more fair in a way that is verifiable, not arbitrarily fair, but like, look at the math.
Look, Kurt, to me, that's a complete red herring, man.
I mean, you know, if you're using 5% of the world's energy, that's governmental.
That's not people in their backyard on their computers.
That means that world governments are using a lot of their energy grid to be able to do that, all right?
El Salvador is specifically one of these countries that's moving to it as their primary currency.
The other thing about that is that our energy production is only just beginning.
Remember, 100 years ago, you know, World War I started and Calvary was still involved.
Like, World War I began, and they were still, I believe it was Poland, was going up against tanks in actual with horses.
So, I mean, we basically just came out of the Middle Ages, guys.
100 years from now, our energy capacity is going to be something that we can't even really begin to understand.
So, I think the other thing to know about power right now is that there is more power generated than is used.
So until we actually get to the point where we're putting real strain on the grid, I think it's an irrelevant conversation.
You haven't even captured the power of the sun, man.
But even right now, as inefficient as our power generation is, we're generating too much power.
Even with Bitcoin and even with all the other inefficiencies that are perceived, we're creating more energy than is used.
My big issue with Bitcoin.
To me, that's an obvious, you know, to me, and again, everybody's a communist, right?
But I mean, to me, that's just an obvious hit piece.
So what does concern me is a little bit of the decentralization.
Like, who can take over Bitcoin?
Pat talked about a fiat currency.
For people that don't know, basically it means that the United States dollar isn't backed by anything.
There's nothing back.
There's no gold standard.
You can't tie it to anything.
There's nothing.
Your paper dollar in your pocket is based on nothing more than faith.
It's as real as Satoshi.
All right.
It really is.
It's as real.
So, you know, but Bitcoin doesn't have aircraft carriers.
So there's that aspect of it.
You know, so, you know, our Fed Reserve, for as bad as it is, and I think the Fed Reserve and the WBO are two of the most evil organizations on earth.
I really honestly believe that with every fiber of my being.
And they sell, for people that don't know, the Federal Reserve isn't even a government agency.
It's a private bank that sells money to the United States.
We buy our money, folks.
The money in your pocket is worth less the second you get it than the second it was printed.
We buy our money from a private bank.
So moving away from this, like Pat said, I think is absolutely crucial to every American citizen.
It's also why they'll never let us do it, number one.
Number two, what is to stop Bitcoin from becoming a world-backed currency, let's say, and then somebody like Calvin Air being like, oh, yeah, by the way, I own this and now you guys have to pay this price or this and that.
Like, what's to stop that from happening?
Well, I think, first of all, the way that it's distributed, first of all, like, there's a reason why it wasn't distributed by, you know, Craig Wright, patent this and that, copyright this and that.
It's actually copywritten to Satoshi Nakamoto, and it's got an open source MIT license.
So it's basically, look, modify it if you want, do what you want to it, but if you make a modification, you need to change the name.
So if it's Bitcoin, it's Bitcoin, run Bitcoin.
And then the way that it's distributed, the way that it's processed and everything is 100% competitive.
Again, it is a pure free market function.
And this is why it really matters.
This is why I don't like with BTC that the BIP process and this, what has really become democratic socialism in the way that changes are made and changes are implemented in BTC, I think is a major problem.
Bitcoin is supposed to be governed 100% by proof of work.
And if everybody agrees that, look, you need to compete to create the most value.
But even there, before you move on from that, Kurt, who governs it?
Like, how is it governable?
Who's holding each other accountable?
Like, what is the process of that accountability?
We can say it's proof of work, but, you know, also if there's no fines or penalties, like, but there is.
That's the point of proof of work.
If you do something that is unsavory to the other nodes in the network, if your proof of work appears to be malicious, they can just simply say, you know what?
We're done with you.
We're not going that direction.
The proof of work will orphan your ideas off of the network.
That's the beauty of it, is that if you aren't creating value, the second you have decided, maybe I'm going to be a malicious king, you will cease to be the king, period.
We've seen it hundreds of times in Bitcoin.
Every time there used to be the Bitmain, oh, Bitmain's going to take over and they're this big conglomerate.
And ultimately, people are like, you know what?
We don't like Bitmain.
We're just basically going to do things that make them go away.
And they've had to completely change.
They've reorganized their entire business.
You can obviously see the next logical step in that is, okay, now China just comes in, overwhelms the system, and says everything that's not pro-us, we can orphan the same way.
But they really can't because, again, it's based on its principle and proof of work.
So if they come in with something that, again, is malicious to the network, the network itself is anti-fragile in that it can say, we're basically going to go a different direction.
I don't understand what that means.
The network's, is it AI?
The network doesn't have to be a problem.
No, it's people.
It's competitive.
People are corruptible.
A person is corruptible.
In a perfect free market system, I believe that in a perfect free market system, we will still have malicious actors.
We'll still have serial killers.
We'll have these things.
But if we are all able to compete 100% to be anything we can be, if we can cooperate better, whoever cooperates best will win and they should win.
But the way that they win is by creating the most value for the rest of everyone else.
So I would actually hope that communist China says, okay, we need to mine.
We need to participate in this economic disruption by being a node on the network because it will create incentives that make them better people too.
That's my desire.
I want governments to stop having cold wars and hot wars with each other.
I want them to have to mine about it.
They need to brute force their ideas.
That's what mining is.
It is brute forcing to find the best path forward.
And I would rather have these things brute forced rather than we're invading each other's countries or whatever else.
Okay, Adam's got a question.
I got to follow Patrick.
I feel like we're learning a lot, but I also think that there's some people that are, because I'm one of them that's like, way over my head right now here, bro.
Straight up, up.
So let's bring this down to just regular people out there.
Most people are most people.
I say this all the time.
I gravitate towards personal finance.
That's what I care about.
Make your money, save that money, invest that money, yada, yada, yada.
Talk to the regular people out there.
The nine to fivers, they're making 50 grand a year, 100 grand a year, whatever is going on.
They're getting their paycheck.
They're putting their money in their 401k.
They're renting.
They have a mortgage.
They got kids.
Yada, yada, yada, freaking yada.
And then you're like, bitty bop and bitty cock and bitty bada, bitty boop and dada bada ba.
Blockchain, it's like pump the brakes for a second, bro.
Sure.
How does this affect the regular person?
The regular person can't afford Bitcoin.
Maybe they're buying some Dogecoin and praying.
Maybe they're buying some fractionalized shares of Bitcoin.
Maybe they're like, look, bro, I see what's going on.
NFT, like, you know, you're familiar with like jump the shark.
I had a buddy out there that all he does is smoke blunts every single day.
He hit me up.
He's like, bro, what's up with these NFTs?
I was like, that's it.
I'm out.
Okay.
My question to you is bring this back to the normal person.
Why should they even give a shit about what you're saying?
I don't mean that disrespectfully, but they're just like, look, bro, I just want to make my money.
I want to save some money.
I want to live my life.
You're talking about nodes and nerds and this and that.
Just break this down for the regular person out there.
What should they be aware of?
What should they be most, most concerned about?
And just break that down.
The first thing is that dollars are a tool for oppression.
It's bait.
It's sell your time for this.
You can't get the time back, but you will get these dollars.
And people do that.
People work the nine to five and they're commuting an hour each way and having their kids and doing that.
99% of people.
This is regular business.
Everybody does that.
This is essentially everybody.
But those dollars are losing value as they're sitting in your bank account.
Inflation's killing our ability to purchase things.
You know, now a year ago, it was, oh, inflation's not a thing.
Now it's inflation might be good, and here's why.
So this is something that we are.
Which is totally gaslighting, by the way, what they're doing.
They're saying inflation is good.
I mean, they're just trying to get middle America to say, okay, it's not a big deal.
Right.
Yeah.
I mean, you've been talking about inflation for six months, man.
I mean, you called it when Janet Lellen was like, it's only 1%.
You're like rolling your eyes.
It's a mess.
Four years.
It's a major.
6.2%.
It's a majority.
It's usually 2% to 3%.
So it's double what it usually is.
It's to make us rely on them.
What Bitcoin does fundamentally is it gives us tools that allows me to do business with someone in South Carolina as easily as I can do business with someone in South Korea.
And it makes it that I can bootstrap a business.
Can be a fintech startup with a trivial amount of capital as opposed to, all right, I need to write a thing.
I need to go to some Silicon Valley venture capital.
Like, there's this whole process.
But that's not the regular person out there.
Remember, we're talking to regular people here.
Silicon Valley Capitalist.
But that's what I'm saying.
That's the silo.
That's the silo that a regular person can't ever broach.
They can't get there.
But with Bitcoin, excuse me, with Bitcoin, you have the ability to create things of value in an hour's time on your own computer and sell these things for real value.
You can do business on the Bitcoin network, much the same way that the internet allowed people to maybe create an eBay business on the side 15 years ago, right?
Like, oh, wow, I've got extra income because I figured out that I can go buy designer shoes at the resale shop and then sell them for 10X what I bought them for, right?
That was a revolutionary little thing that the internet created for people.
But Bitcoin is that much better because you can do it with digital assets.
You can tokenize your own home, your own life, futures on your own ability to earn, things like that.
It gives financial instruments that have been kept away from people forever.
And it allows them to be in the hands of people to do micro lending.
Let's say maybe you've got 50 grand that you've saved up because you've kept a bank account for 30 years working at your job.
Well, that 50 grand, how can you make that 50 grand work for you?
You can leave it at IRA or whatever the thing is.
I probably got allergies here.
But with Bitcoin, it allows you to do micro, this DeFi thing.
Like it allows people to give.
I'm going to give a micro loan.
I'm going to choose the interest rate.
I'm going to allow people to.
Have some tissue, please.
Appreciate it.
So I'm going to be a lender in my neighborhood now.
And the on-chain attestation of my identity and my reputation makes it that people can trust me.
We can have a smart contract, secure it, and do the escrow and take away all of the nonsense, the stuff that people don't want to know and hear, and say, look, you can earn 6% on your dollar now by lending to people.
I literally think that Gerard, what I was telling us about this, right?
Yeah.
You want to tell us what you do?
No.
Okay.
Because it's illegal.
Have some tissue.
Thank you.
No.
And you get very emotional.
Let me allergy.
He was firing for the comie.
Let me read an article here about BSV.
So, Kurt, you know, the comments right now are on fire about BSV, right?
Yeah.
So they love BSV, apparently.
I'm being sarcastic.
So can you pull up this article about what Vitali had to say?
So Yahoo article, this is two years old, though.
This is not a new article.
It's two years old.
Ethereum's Vitalik Buterin slams Bitcoin SV, obviously a complete scam.
If he can go up a little bit, Ethereum Vitalik maintained his hardline stance on Bitcoin SV.
In a recent interview, Colin Craig writes cryptocurrency a complete scam speaking with YouTube articles, a little room for interpretation regarding his thoughts on BSV.
The Ethereum co-founder also gave his thoughts on decentralized exchanges and the worringly centralized accumulation of power by Binance Coal, a little lower.
Obviously, BSV is a complete scam, but the delisting from Binance, that was interesting, there's arguments in favor of it, but then there's also an argument that this is a centralized exchange that's wielding a lot of power.
What do you have to say about his thoughts against BSV?
I mean, BSV makes Ethereum completely obsolete.
So I mentioned Ethereum is good for 15.
BSV makes Ethereum completely obsolete.
Completely.
Ethereum is good for 15 transactions per second globally, and it does smart contracts that cost sometimes $800 a transaction just to make a wallet or just to do all these different things.
Which would obviously concern our friend Vitalik.
There is no scaling ceiling on BSV.
It was zero.
In fairness, Ethereum was never intended to be a transactable currency or an investment.
You know what?
If you go look at Vitalik Buterin quotes from 2017, he was the one talking about that it's a travesty that BTC fees are over $5 or whatever.
He's, oh, no, that could never be disruptive.
And now, you know, literally $800 to make an Ethereum wallet if you're trying to open a DeFi contract.
And it's madness.
But on BSV, you can do about 100,000 transactions per second today.
Full smart contracts, everything that Ethereum can do can be done for an infinitesimal fraction of the cost and at exponentially higher speed than Ethereum.
And that's why BSV is a scam, in his opinion.
People don't want to hear it.
The reason it's being delisted from Binance and from all these other places is because the entire crypto economy, all 10,000 of these blockchains, some days, BSV has more transactions on just BSV than the entire rest of the blockchain economy combined.
Nobody talks about it, and it's because it's their Ponzi scheme.
They're making money by trading tokens and by accruing this liquidity.
What BSV does is not about crypto trading.
That's not the thing here.
What it is is it is disrupting the entire global economy.
We don't want to replace the blockchain economy.
We want to replace the internet, period.
Do you think those blockchains are going to consolidate at some point?
They have to.
They don't work.
Like, they literally need to bring whatever value is on those blockchains needs to come to BSV because the other blockchains don't work.
They can't scale.
People don't get it.
L2, all this layer two nonsense.
Four years ago, Ethereum said, oh, Plasma is going to fix everything.
Plasma never came out.
It can't work.
Elon Moyce just came in.
So he's in the chat.
He's watching the, no, no, I'm being serious.
This is the COVID of BSV.
He's the Twitch guy.
The frog.
Yeah, the frog.
So he came in and he says, Bitcoin does the work of 100,000 bankers per second.
What does he mean by that?
That it's everything.
Bitcoin is a global notary.
It is a global group of bankers.
It is a global data attestation service.
It is the internet.
That's the thing.
Everything you can do, if you want to.
It's the deed.
You buy a car with Bitcoin and it is your deed.
The coin is.
Everything.
Every single piece of ownership, identity, and transaction, period, can happen on BSV.
If we were to move the entire global economy to a blockchain today, it would have to be BSV.
It could not be done on another blockchain, period.
So Chamoth says 200,000 by the end of next year.
What do you think?
I think he's a madman.
Here's the thing.
It could be.
If it does, it'll be because it's the inflation meme.
It's the problem of inflation.
Sure.
But he's been wrong before.
Yeah.
So back, I don't think so.
That will primarily.
If that's the case, if it's the case, it'll be primarily an indicator for how bad the economy has gotten.
And it will not be because of value that was created by the blockchain.
So Bitcoin is a hedge against hyperinflation.
It is the only thing that people are using it for.
That's it.
Are you familiar with this Bitcoin rainbow?
No, I don't think so.
You're not?
What is it?
Okay.
I mean, maybe it's called the Bitcoin Rainbow.
Only you would know something.
Let's hear this.
This isn't a gay pride thing.
No, no, I'm not saying that.
It's just like Bitcoin Rainbow Price.
You got a hundred questions to ask for asking about Bitcoin Rainbow Price.
Because this is essentially the predictor of what's going to happen.
Yes.
Okay.
So what's it telling us?
Yeah.
Yeah.
You've never seen this?
I have seen this.
Okay.
Okay.
All of a sudden, I'm teaching you.
It's a Bitcoin guy.
Bitcoin.
Rainbow says what.
Basically, this is exactly like, it's sort of like the teacher's manual.
This is insane.
Tell me why we shouldn't laugh at whoever made this.
Seriously.
Like, look at this.
What is this?
I don't know.
But apparently it works.
No, what it is is you overlay it on something that exists.
Like this didn't exist 10 years ago.
Somebody put this together a couple years ago at the very least.
It was at a smaller one.
Yeah, it was blood.
Smoke it blessed was like this.
This is like a rainbow.
So this is not a predictor.
Any rational person should look at this and laugh.
Like, what is it even telling us?
Well, I think we can all agree.
The word rational is a very loose terminology these days with the metaverse and the NFTs and the Bitcoins and the bitty bobs.
None of this is rational, bro.
That indicates that we are in a bubble that will crash.
Okay, let's talk about that.
What's this bubble?
You hear the Bitcoin bubble, the crypto bubble, the Dogecoin bubble.
What's the bubble?
It's the same reason people don't work at the burger stand anymore either.
It's the same reason there's supply shortages everywhere.
It's the same reason we can't get port workers to unload half a million ships or whatever that are off the coast of California.
It's because the entire economy is broken.
The entire economy is slowing down.
It is fundamentally changing in ways that are not good.
And it's because people are being paid to be lazy.
And it's the exact same thing they're doing with cryptocurrency.
They look at it and they're like, oh, well, I mean, you just buy this thing.
You may never have to work again.
Like, buy Shiba Inu coin.
And here it is, man.
And it's like, okay, what does Shiba do?
What economic utility is being unlocked by Shiba Inu coin?
What do any of these coins do, for that matter?
Nothing.
The answer is nothing.
And that's the problem.
Are you basically predicting a crypto crash?
Yes, it's all nonsense.
Okay.
Well, I mean, you're the Bitcoin guy.
So like the fact that you're saying that, the fact that you're saying that crypto is all nonsense, alarm bells should be going off right now.
So you have to know that if Pomp was sitting here right now, we would have to separate them because they have complete opposite.
Because Pomp is a Bitcoin loyalist, right?
And he may be one of the best explainers of Bitcoin out there.
When I listen to Pom, I say, I walk away saying, okay, cool.
So his position is a different position than a Pomp, than a Shaman.
There's a lot of this.
Again, go back to the religion.
Can you put up this question somebody just asked?
I'm curious to know what your thoughts are on this.
And we're going to change the subject and go into Jack Dorsey and a few other guys.
And maybe we'll talk about some more about this Bitcoin rainbow.
But go to what I just sent you.
I don't know if you see it or not.
Trying to get over.
Just give me a second.
Trying to overlook it.
Okay.
All right.
So, anyways, I'll read it to you while he's trying to figure this out, Tyler.
So, John Pitts at Equity Diamonds.
I don't know if you know who he is or not.
I do.
Okay, you know who he is.
He asks, number one question: How would BDO, an audit firm which relies on its integrity, minutes, which are independently produced, CSV has no control, not be a smoking gun that's CSV equals SN?
Can you unpack that question for us and then answer that?
Then I got a follow-up second question for you.
This is strictly for the Bitcoin community.
Yep.
How would you respond to that?
So I've been in court.
Can you unpack his question, by the way, to the audience?
This is from the Klein Wright trial.
I have been in every single day, every single minute of this trial, taking notes and doing a live stream every evening for it.
So there might not be, there's one other guy who is probably equally expertise on this, and it's my buddy Pat.
But there was a piece of evidence admitted, my buddy Pat Thompson, but that's my buddy Pat.
Craig Wright gave a piece of evidence that was minutes on BDO Letterhead from 2007.
This is about a year before the Bitcoin white paper came out.
And it was explaining time chain P2P cash system and giving a timeline of when he wants to do these things and whether or not BDO wants to invest in this idea and make it a BDO product, Bitcoin as a commercial, essentially triple entry accounting system, which would be great for BDO in theory.
But they didn't understand the opportunity.
So basically what it is, is this is proof of about a year before Bitcoin released of Craig Wright showing BDO what is essentially Bitcoin and explaining, all right, we'll release the white paper in Q3 of 2008.
We'll get the software done and tested during this timeline.
We'll try to release by early 2009.
And there's a guy named Alan Granger, who's some kind of executive at BDO in Australia, basically signing off on it.
And it was going to be green lighted, except the economy collapsed, and ultimately research and development projects and stuff ended up getting booted.
In fact, Craig also got let go from the BDO just a few months later, not for malfeasance, but simply because, hey, we're letting a bunch of people go because of the economy.
So this is why Bitcoin became Satoshi Nakamoto project instead of Bitcoin trademark, a BDO product.
So I think it's a very compelling piece of evidence.
I think it's a piece of evidence that people were not expecting.
And people want to write it off, and they're like, oh, it's a handwritten note.
It could have come from anytime, anywhere, but it's, well, but it's on BDO letterhead and timestamped and all these things.
So I think it's a major smoking gun, a major bombshell.
And another piece of evidence of Craig Wright, for which I saw about a thousand pieces of evidence that basically couldn't point to anything else.
So to answer your question from probably an hour ago, why Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto?
If Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, he's been pretending to be since about two years before Bitcoin existed, doing almost nothing else with his time.
It just wouldn't make any, he wouldn't have time to do anything else.
And so.
How'd you answer the second question?
If BitCash Bitcoin email from 2008 is indeed a fraud as CSV, CSV equals Craig Wright, right?
As CSV, CSW, how does Klyman have a case at all?
I personally don't think Klyman has a case at all.
It doesn't make sense to me.
The whole thing is predicated on Craig Wright being a bad man and trying to get money for the estate the way that I see it.
I think it's a giant money.
Anyone going to jail?
No, absolutely.
No, it's a civil civil case.
No, it's a civil case.
And also in a civil case, though, you don't need all 12 jurors to agree.
You only need a majority.
FY, for the audience, let's listen to this.
A lot of people are asking me about having John E. Deaton on, just so you know, he's the founder of cryptolaw.us, and he's a lawyer known in the crypto community.
We are having conversations about having him on the podcast, and we'll talk about what's going on with the case.
I know people are asking about it.
Him and I have started communicating in the last week or so.
So we'll let you know when that does take place.
Okay, having said that, let's get right into a couple topics that we got here.
I'll give you a few names in your world, and you just give me one word or any thoughts you have on these names.
Curious to know what your thoughts are going to be.
So, number one, Pompliano, Anthony.
Never saw an opportunity that he didn't want to ride.
Okay.
Brian Armstrong.
Similar.
Yeah.
Brian Armstrong, I think, is a guy who was Bitcoin only until the moment it became inconvenient, and then he just did what the money told him.
By the way, for people that don't know it's Coinbase, right?
CEO and founder of Coinbase.
Coinbase.
Yeah.
Vitalik Buturin.
Interesting character.
I think he's also very much in it for the money.
He knows his stuff doesn't scale.
He's even admitted his stuff doesn't scale on stage.
And he's here for the money.
He's here to make money.
Okay.
I'm going to have a hard time.
I'm going to butcher this name.
Juchika Chow.
Achika?
I don't even know.
Okay.
We'll go to the next one.
Jack Dorsey.
Jack Dorsey is a communist who thinks he's a libertarian.
Okay.
I mean, try to hold back a little bit if you.
Terry Duffy.
Terry Duffy?
I don't know, Terry Duffy.
Jamie Diamond.
From JPMorgan?
I don't know.
He's a bank CEO.
What is there to say about Charlie Lee?
Total scammer.
If you look into Charlie Lee, Charlie Lee is an insider manipulator to the core.
Wow.
Period.
You just pissed off another group of people that are not going to be happy with you.
Naval Ravikant.
I like his tweets.
I think he used to be a lot better a few years ago.
I think he's running out of axioms.
I'll ask you, Craig Wright.
You've already said stuff about Craig Wright, but Craig Wright.
A gigantic pain in the ass, and also Satoshi Nakamoto.
Okay.
Elizabeth Rosiello.
Don't know her.
Don't know.
Barry Silbert.
Barry Silbert is one of the heads of the beast that is there to completely strangle out what Bitcoin was designed to do, and he's doing it all for money.
And if you look at his board of directors, it's all people from the World Bank and the Clinton Foundation and a bunch of stuff pretending to be disruptive, cool, you know, Bitcoin people, and they're not.
They're a bunch of nasty, nasty insider pranker types.
Damn.
Okay, Elizabeth Stark, Lightning Labs.
She's a fall person.
Okay.
Brad Garlingkaus.
Brad's a brilliant CEO, and I think he's also a piece of trash.
But I think he does a great.
He's a brilliant piece of trash.
I like that.
Can we make sure we escort this guy out when he leaves?
You cannot, Kevin.
XRP.
So here's the thing.
XRP is 100% the only thing that Ripple Labs does.
They would not have revenue if it wasn't for pumping XRP.
So he's a brilliant CEO in that he's figured out ways to make people in that company some of the richest $1.3 billion in the world.
So that's what I mean.
He's a brilliant CEO.
But his company actually does nothing but put out press releases about, hey, we're doing this thing with Western Union.
None of it actually exists.
He also.
You got to give him credit.
He tried to, he was the very first guy that went head-to-head with the U.S. dollar.
He was like, yeah, let's do it.
He's a mixed bag.
You remember, Brad?
But he is not a disruptor.
He is there to make money for Ripple, period.
So when people, and people know this.
At the Miami Party, we went to.
I'll tell you about after that.
The XRP.
Mark Cuban.
I don't like Mark Cuban at all.
I used to until he's just another opportunist.
Like, would I accept money from him with a lot of strings attached, maybe?
Villy Ledon Virta.
Don't know.
Okay.
Paul Leroux.
Paul Leroux in prison for human trafficking and gun smuggling.
It's a gigantic piece of human trash.
I hope he gets the chair at some point.
Gavin Anderson.
Gavin Andreessen?
Yeah.
Gavin is way too nice to have been involved in Bitcoin and let himself be manipulated by way too many people, but I think he's a good man.
Half met him.
Hal Finney.
I haven't met him, unfortunately.
Hal Finney.
Brilliant programmer.
Very cool guy.
An actual libertarian, by the way.
I like Hal Finney.
Wrong about Bitcoin and ultimately not Satoshi.
A lot of people think Hal Finney is Satoshi.
I don't think so.
Well, because he died, what, five years ago?
13, I think.
Maybe so.
That's sort of like the Kaiser-Soze approach.
And he had ALS, I want to say, and Shamat.
Shamat?
Yeah.
I don't know.
Oh, you know who he is.
It's okay.
Nick Zabo.
Zabo's another guy.
Zabo's also actually a libertarian, but I think he's 100% wrong about Bitcoin.
I think he's been wrong about cryptocurrency for a very long time, actually.
He created a precursor to Bitcoin that failed because it didn't make any sense.
And he keeps trying to turn Bitcoin into that thing because that will vindicate him.
I think he's trying to get back the thing that he lost 20 years ago.
Dave Kleiman, last one.
20 years ago.
Dave Klein.
So Dave Kleiman died in 2013 also.
Nobody in the space ever really met him.
From being in this case and hearing all of his stories, Dave Kleiman seems like he was probably one of the nicest people to have had in your life.
And he died tragically and in a way that makes me really emote for Dave Kleiman.
So he seemed like a hell of a guy, but he's no longer with us.
Would you say if we were reading this list and your name popped up, what would you want to be known for?
What should others say about our buddy Kurt here?
I think people that know me in real life know that I'm the guy you can call at 2 a.m. in an emergency, and people who know me know they can sleep on my couch or that I'm good for all kinds of nonsense when people need someone to help them through their personal stuff.
My enemies, people who don't know me, will say that I'm for sale and I'll say anything that I, you know, will earn me a buck.
But as you guys can see, I say what's on my mind.
I say what I think about powerful people, and I think it's crucial to know what you believe and why, over and above what you do not believe and why you don't believe it, and be happy to talk about it.
By the way, if he said you got that couch, hopefully it's a big couch because if anybody here called you, it wouldn't work.
I'm a big guy, so I have a big couch.
Okay, so let's get to some of these stories.
So Jack Dorsey, first one, Twitter CEO, stepping down, officially steps down with his role, effective immediately.
Dorsey co-founded Twitter with Evan Williams, Biz Stone, and Noah Glass back in 2006 and served as a CEO until 2008.
He later returned to the CEO role in 2015, and former CEO Dick Costello stepped down.
He has a net worth of approximately $11.8 billion.
There's a lot of talk about the importance of a company being founder-led.
Dorsey said an email to employees.
Ultimately, I believe that's severely limiting in a single point of failure.
I've worked hard to ensure this company can break away from its founding and founders.
Dorsey will be replaced by Twitter CTO Parak Agarwal.
Your thoughts on this move taking place yesterday.
So I think Dorsey's hated that company for about 10 years now.
Why do you say that?
Why do you say that?
I mean, he's at odds with the company.
Like, here's the thing.
I said before, he's a communist who thinks he's a libertarian.
And so he's got this major conflict.
And, you know, he quotes Mises and talks about Bitcoin, but ultimately the behavior of things, like, it's one thing to be, you know, hey, let's talk about sound money.
And then, but actually, I've got this platform that's known for its political censorship and for doing what the Communist Party in China asks for when necessary and these different things.
And it's like, if you don't behave the same on Friday night as you do on Sunday morning, then I don't like you as a person, fundamentally.
In fairness, not that I want to be the guy defending Jack Dorsey here, but if you believe what Joe Rogan has to say, he's been advocating for free speech on Twitter and he's been overruled by his own board for years.
So much so that he tried to do a spin-off called like Twitter Dark or something like that, where it was basically going to be a, you know, Twitter and 4chan, where anything goes free speech, upvoting system.
And he was, again, he was denied by his board.
So, I mean, if you believe that story, this is a guy who's been eaten by his own success.
He doesn't even have the say in his own company.
I don't know, man.
When you're the captain of a ship, if the ship gets out of control, I think that's your fault.
Like, at what point were the decisions made that allowed a bunch of nasty social justice warriors to be in charge of the whole company?
Like, these are a lot of little decisions that led to that at some point.
And so I think he's got to own that.
And I really, I think that's a lot of lip service because I think in theory, he doesn't want to lose his street cred as like the cool guy with a nose ring.
Silicon Valley?
Right.
It's just the whole thing.
It's like, well, I'm going to be this disruptive libertarian guy, but I'm also very San Francisco and everything else.
And it's just that it just, they can't be both.
And he didn't choose.
So he's been riding the fence for a decade trying to make Twitter.
Outside of Twitter, he has a chance to make it right, though.
Which I'm excited for Jack Dorsey's second act.
If he can come out and do what he wanted to do, if there's a chance to do a secondary social media channel that promotes free speech, he can save his legacy.
And we'll see.
I don't know.
The thing that he pretty much put out there, and my question is, how big of a concern is making money to him or increasing his net worth?
Because I think his net worth is, what, $12 billion, somewhere on that?
And he said that he wanted his sole focus now to be on Square and obviously everything that Square is doing in the crypto space, and it's going to be backed by Bitcoin.
And he Twitter, I think, is down double-digits percentage this year.
He looks at someone like Zuck, who's worth over $100 billion.
They're up 20% this year.
And he looks at Square and says, that's a better opportunity to make more money.
How much of a motivation is this to basically increase his net worth?
It's hard to know.
I think Square, you know, Square's a big proponent of Lightning Network and the whole BTC narrative.
They're part of what's called the Crypto Open Patent Alliance, which I think is another nasty cabal of people that just want to control things similar, like connected to the Barry Silbert people and all of this.
Like there's a group of people that want to, again, pretend that they're disruptors, pretend that they're libertarians, pretend that they're going to do all these big things.
And ultimately, it's like, yeah, but everybody behind me, like, yeah, I'm going to lunch with world bankers and doing all this other stuff.
And really, I think it's a LARP.
I think the whole thing is like, look, man, I'm cool.
You can use Square and pretend it's Bitcoin and all this stuff, but keep using Square here.
I think you have money.
All of our employees are going to have critical theory training.
Right.
I have a question for you.
So let me tell you what I just did right now.
While you guys were going out, I was doing a little bit of research.
Can you pull up this article?
Type in, Jack Dorsey says Trump's Twitter ban was right decision.
This is an NPR article.
I want to read this to you.
And then I want to answer a question about what you said and what you said that you guys made me think Trump's Trumos.
Donald Trumos from Paris.
Nice.
Good day.
Yeah, right there.
All right.
So check this out.
So you just said you brought up him.
He's the captain of the ship.
He's got this option, all this other stuff.
And you said, Rogan, et cetera, et cetera.
He says, look, I'd love to have some kind of a second option.
Twitter, and I remember when that conversation took place.
What percentage of Twitter do you think he owns?
I don't even know.
I want you to guess it.
I want you to guess what percentage do you think he owns?
If I had to spitball, I'd probably say 20 or 30%.
Okay, cool.
20 or 30%.
What do you think he owns?
I'd say a little less than that.
Okay, so here's what I want you to type.
I want you to type Jack Dorsey total shares of Twitter.
And look what comes up.
You guys are all going to be show shocked.
Jack Dorsey, total shares of Twitter.
Okay.
Twitter.
There you go.
Ready?
22 million shares, which is only 3% of Twitter.
3%.
He's a nobody.
So here's what this means when you're 3%.
Okay, Steve Jobs got fired, even though he owned most shares.
When he got a board, the board is a board.
You ain't got nothing.
Listen, you can be whoever you are.
So for us to go that position, I don't think he has as much influence as you think he does to do what he did with Trump or all this other stuff.
He may have an opinion.
I don't think it's a good idea, but the board is going to, I'm in these board meetings all the time.
And believe me, I kind of know how these things work.
So now go to the other article, what he said about Trump.
So Jack Dorsey says Trump's Twitter ban was right decision, but worries about president.
So go down and see what he tweets out.
He says, I do not celebrate or feel pride in having to ban Donald Trump for Twitter or how we got here.
After a clear warning, we take this action.
We, we, the board, made a decision with the best information we had based on threats to physical safety, both on and off Twitter.
Was this correct?
And he opens it up and people are going back and forth.
Yes, no, maybe whatever.
Now, deep down inside, did he want to take him off or on?
I don't know.
Did it make sense to do it or not?
I don't know.
Was most of this board probably an anti-Trump board?
I would be willing to bet 99% of the board can't stand Trump.
I don't think they're going to have a, you know, for example, Kellyanne Conway sits on Twitter's board.
That's probably not going to be happening anytime soon, or Ted Cruz, or any of those guys, right?
So is there a part of it where, you know, the guy's got a difficult job.
They started a company that, to be honest with you, is probably one of the most powerful companies that determine elections.
You go immediately to find out what debates are taking place, issues taking place, immediate reaction.
It's a very, very pulse of America, right?
I don't know.
I mean, it's a pretty powerful company.
You know, Trump wouldn't become a president without Twitter.
Take Twitter out.
Trump's not the president, just so you know that.
If Twitter's not there, Trump's not the president.
Hillary Clinton's the president.
So for the people that hate him as much as they do, you may want to thank Twitter because without Twitter, there is no Trump.
Hillary Clinton would have been your president.
That's one part.
Now, what he does next, I don't know.
You know, whether he is a communist, whether he's a libertarian, I have no idea what next moves he's going to make.
The real question now becomes who's the next guy taking over and who sits on Twitter's board.
Can you pull up who sits on Twitter's board?
Well, it's interesting that you say, you know, that he was a nobody, too, because his first time on Rogan, it was really off-putting.
I forget her name.
There was a woman, very, very intelligent woman, but it was very clear that she knew the day-to-day operations of what was going on behind the scenes and the decisions being made.
And he didn't.
He kept deferring to her to answer Rogan's questions.
Okay, so he wasn't the CEO for like five years.
All right, so check this out.
So here's the board of Twitter.
Brett Taylor, independent board chair, president and chief operating officer, Salesforce.
Okay, cool.
So that's from Salesforce.
Salesforce is Mark Benihoff.
Mark Benihoff bought Time magazine.
That's an anti-Trump guy.
That's a liberal left side.
Parag Agarwal, we know what position he's at now and where he was at politically.
He is not necessarily the biggest supporter of freedom of speech.
I don't know if you guys have seen what he tweeted out about freedom of speech.
Have you seen what he said about freedom of speech?
He's conflicted with freedom of speech.
He doesn't think it needs to be as open as possible.
You may want to pull up his name.
Type in Parag Agarwal tweet freedom of speech.
It's kind of not a gray area conversation.
You're either for freedom of speech or you're not freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech tweet.
Speech tweet.
Pull that up.
So this is the board.
Okay, go.
Jones Arms once at the company.
Okay, there you go.
Click on that one right there, Fox Business, the bottom.
If they are not going to make a distinction between Muslims and extremists, then why should I distinguish between white people and racists?
That's a little bit concerning, by the way, right?
So click on that.
Click on that.
Click on that.
That's a little bit concerning.
If they're not going to make a distinction between Muslims and extremists, then why should I distinguish between white people and racists?
So the verdict is still out.
We don't know who this guy is.
Anyways, the board chose him.
Jack Dorsey did not choose him.
The board chose him.
Now, Jack says in his email, this was my first option as well.
This is who I wanted.
He's my first round draft pick.
Go back to the board of Twitter.
I'm actually just curious right now at this point on who sits on the board.
So then you got Mimi, senior vice president, private partnership at MasterCard.
Okay, cool.
Jack Dorsey got it.
Which, by the way, in May, he's stepping down from the board as well.
Co-CEO at Silver Lake, 100%.
Lucky voice group, former co-founder, manager, and director last minute.
So got it.
He's the former executive chairman of Twitter, cool.
Professor at Stanford.
Makes sense.
Good university.
General Pardon Venus at Seneor Vision, Geneva.
Born in Beijing in China, by the way, Faify Lee.
Who's at Faify Lee?
Makes sense.
CEO of Ferzomalt Inc., former chairman, board of directors at Alliance, Bernstein, Holden County.
Okay, so that's who.
How many people in total?
11?
I think it's either 9 or 11.
Go up, let's see.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
It's 9.
Okay.
Is it important to distinguish between 9 versus 11 versus 7?
Does it make a difference?
3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15.
It's whatever the odd number is.
It's always an odd number.
somebody give up 97 of their company that's like that's that's if you keep raising a lot of money Well, you have to know.
Here's a question for you.
What is the business model for Twitter to make money?
Actually think, how many times have you spent money on Twitter?
It's only advertisers.
Okay, so you have to know the business model isn't really a business model.
Just assume they're selling information.
You need a lot of money.
Data.
A lot of money.
Data, the new currency.
To sustain, like, what do you think YouTube was sold for?
Do you know what YouTube was sold for?
No.
Billion dollars.
I thought it was more.
$1 billion.
It's a billion dollars.
$1 billion.
So because YouTube eventually got so big where the guys didn't have advertising figured out, you don't have capacity for servers.
It keeps crashing.
So you're like, dude, I'm going to go raise some money.
You can't afford to do this anymore.
So I'm not surprised he's worth 3%.
So Jack Dorsey is not as influential as people think within Twitter community.
That's the point I'm trying to make with you.
Or the bigger lesson is the founder is not as influential as you would assume.
It depends at what phase.
At what phase.
It really depends.
It depends on the company structure and why it grew into what it did.
This is why I would, again, put the pressure back on Jack Dorsey, though, and say, hey, man, the company looks the way it looks because of your executive leadership over the last 15-ish years.
Again, Russell Holbrook has never sold a drug in his life, but he created a platform where people sold drugs and arms, and now he's spending the rest of his life in jail.
Yeah, nobody's saying the onus isn't on him.
You know, like yesterday I'm talking to Jack Carr.
I don't know if you know who Jack Carr is, the Navy SEAL who wrote all those books, New York Times bestsellers.
And I asked him a question.
I said, okay, so we talked about Afghanistan.
I said, here's a question for you.
I said, take the general, the army, the general air force, the general Marines.
Take all the main generals of whatever the four branches are that we have, right?
And the president, commander-in-chief, says, let's get out of Afghanistan, okay?
You're on the ground and you're saying, this ain't the right strategy, right?
There's no way this is the right move we're making.
We're going to leave all this shit to the Taliban.
They're going to come and ruin people's lives here in Afghanistan.
20 years we've been working here.
But you got to follow orders.
I said, but here's a question.
No, no, that's not the question.
The question is, nobody becomes the general of the Army, Marines, Air Force, or Navy, and you don't have a strong personality.
Nobody.
And by the way, the general of any of these organizations, it's not like you're a yes man person, right?
Let me sit there and say, hey, I'm sorry, guys, this is a shitty strategy.
I'm going to have to push back.
Hey, president, this is not a good move.
I'm telling you, my suggestion is we do this, right?
There's got to be pushback.
You're there.
You know more than the president does.
You're trying to tell him, here's not the right move, right?
Okay.
So, but the president says, what?
Here's what we're doing.
To me, this becomes like who is really running a company in Twitter?
Is it the generals running it?
In this instance, if you see Twitter's interview with Jack and the other lady that was there, it seemed like the operators are running it.
Jack's not really as involved.
He was more the figurehead.
So sometimes you're more distant.
You no longer have the kind of influence that you had.
You just kind of are there on the board because you have certain special information that maybe others don't have.
But you kind of like, listen, it's cool, Jack.
And Jack's more sincere.
What do you guys think?
What are you guessing?
What are you guys thinking rather than know what to do?
So I don't know.
I don't know how much of it is him running it.
I think this was kind of coming.
It'll be interesting to see what this guy does next.
He's definitely not going to be going away, I don't think.
But we'll see.
Anyways, let's go to the next story here.
You guys saw what Mr. Beast did.
I don't know if you saw that or not.
YouTube star Mr. Beast created a real life squid game, set and had people compete for $456,000, which is ridiculous.
If you haven't seen this video, within four days, the video got 100 million views in four days.
Now, here's a budget that they had.
Can we play any of it?
No, we cannot.
No, we cannot.
YouTube star Mr. Beast shared his recreation of Squid Game, which included full-scale sets.
You can put up the images so people can see it.
Costumes that look just like the ones in the show and a total cost, you ready?
$3.5 million to create the exact set.
This is Squid Game Netflix' most watched show of all time.
It's a Korean drama series about a group of morally great characters who took part in children's games and deadly twists in order to win enough money to pay their debts.
Everyone in this video game wore costumes inspired by the show, including Mr. Beast, who was wearing the game Masters Black Clothing.
Mr. Beast said $3.5 million was spent on a real-life Squid Game, which was partly sponsored by video game Brawl Stars.
He said on that, he spent around $2 million to build and produce a $1.5 million in prizes for the recreation.
FYI.
You saw the tweet Kai sent us to us yesterday.
He said Squid Game got some 85 million viewers that watch it on Netflix or whatever it is.
He said, Mr. Beast got 20 million more viewers than the show did.
It's trending towards working intense craziness when you think about that.
What are your thoughts on that?
I think Mr. Beast is, he knows his audience probably better than almost anybody in the space.
He's incredible at understanding his audience, and he has a great team around him that's able to, you know, capitalize on the moment.
You would think like, you know, Squid Game, when you do these kind of meme things, you got to be like right off the way.
We were like, because Squid Game was a story weeks ago, but for him to do it, and it was also the way that they pulled it off, if you watched it, was incredible, man.
I mean, like, they're going to be.
Did you watch his video?
Yeah, it was incredible.
I haven't seen it.
Also, I'm going to state it for the record.
Squid Game, remarkably overrated.
Communist propaganda.
Anybody old enough to have ever seen Running Man understands the concept.
I mean, this was, but that's neither here nor there.
Mr. Beast, you are indeed a beast.
Incredible.
Well, now, my big question becomes from a philosophical standpoint.
I don't, I can say, I can save it for off the air.
Save for off the air.
But why?
How much money do you think he made off of that 150 million viewers?
And is it better to have a subscription model with paying viewers as opposed to an ad revenue?
That's a great question, and we can kind of transition that into Mafia States of America.
This is what most people don't understand when it comes down to YouTube and AdSense, right?
So what he produces is 100% qualified for AdSense, which means what?
Per million views, he'll make $8,000 to $12,000.
Probably a lot less, to be honest with you.
Because the heavy demographics of his worldwide audience, the CPMs are going to be way less.
Well, but in the U.S., let's just see.
So let's just say it's $7,000.
Put it at $7,000.
Per million views.
Yeah, $7,000 per million views.
Here's the thing.
Way less than people think.
By the way, say we do Mafia States of America.
What do you think the AdSense is on that?
What do you think the AdSense is on that?
Nothing.
Do you know why?
Who the hell wants to advertise a coffee company on a mafia, you know, killing each other?
I killed 19 people.
You know what?
Pfizer is going to endorse their vaccine on our video.
Oh, Ford's going to come and advertise.
That is the part where people don't realize how AdSense works.
He's got an AdSense machine going on right now.
He's crushing it, doing a great job at it.
More power to him.
Love seeing what is taking place.
I spoke at a school two weeks ago, whatever was Veterans Day.
I don't know what Veterans Day was, a couple weeks ago.
I can't tell you how many kids today who are 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 years old say, what do you want to be when you grow up?
I want to be a YouTuber.
I can't even tell you.
Can you imagine us growing up?
What do you want to be when you grow up?
I want to be a cat guy.
You know, what do you want to be when you grow up?
I want to be whatever.
Today, I want to be a YouTuber.
So that leads me to Adam's favorite story, which is very important for us to cover.
Woman allegedly breastfeeds cat on Delta Airlines.
By the way, this is not a satire story.
This is not.
I thought we agreed not to pass.
I thought we agreed not to cover the Madonna story.
FYI.
This is a Newsweek story.
Yeah.
This is not Onion.
This is not like Babylon Beat.
This is Newsweek, credible newspaper.
Woman on recent Delta Airlines flight allegedly began breastfeeding her cat, a pet, mid-flight and refused to stop after getting caught.
The image circulating online describes, by the way, can you pull up this image?
The supposed event in what appears to be a screen capture of a message sent U.S. aircraft communications addressing the reporting system, which pilot used to transmit short text-based messages to the ground.
The message reports that a passenger in C-13A is breastfeeding cat and will not put cat back in carrier.
In response to a request from a flight attendant, the message asks that the situation be addressed by the airline's red coat team upon landing.
Delta describes members of the team as elite airport customer service experts who are specially trained to handle on-the-stop customer issues.
Now, how do you train this?
How do you say, well, guys, if you ever...
Well, let me explain how that works, Pat.
Let me explain.
How do you train this?
Let me take it over from here, buddy.
How do you train this?
Since you breastfeed your cats.
I don't know if you know that, but men also have nipples as well.
You got nipples green.
All I'm saying is this is my kind of lady.
This is the type of lady that I meet at the CAT conference that I go to when I wasn't here before.
Somebody find the scroll bottom.
Somebody find the scroll bottom.
All I want to say is she was in 13A.
I wish I was in 13B.
We would have thrown some covers.
Emotional moments.
It would have been a wonderful moment.
This lady is a hero and she's being scorned and shamed in public when she's just trying to feed her damn cat.
Well, whoever she is, can't you?
Not long enough, Kurt.
So there's your story.
You wanted it?
We covered it.
Thank you.
Are you happy?
Now let's cover your LeBron story.
Now let's cover your LeBron story.
Lakers, LeBron James, gets Pacers fan ejected and returned from suspension, which, you know, what a sweetheart of a guy LeBron is.
This is a New York Post story.
LeBron James just can't stop getting ejected from games.
This time, two fans in his first game back from his one-game suspension for Bloody and Pistons forward.
Isaiah Stewart LeBron had a couple of Pacers fan ejected from Los Angeles win Wednesday night in Indianapolis.
LeBron brought the referees over to two fans sitting courtside at Gain Bridge Fieldhouse and angrily pointed at them, yelling, this one right F in here.
The fan, a young man and a woman, were then asked to leave with two minutes and 29 seconds left.
And overtime, when upseen gestures and language come in, come into it.
It cannot be tolerated.
There's a difference from cheering for your team and not wanting the other team to win and things I would never say to a fan and they shouldn't say to me.
So this is LeBron saying that.
Adam, I'm going to go to you first since you're a Die Hard LeBron fan.
I'm not a Die Hard LeBron fan.
I do respect greatness.
Heavy is the head that wears the crown.
No disputing there.
Okay.
So people that don't best play of all time.
Top two.
Okay.
I got Jordan and LeBron.
I got him.
And then maybe you got Kareem in there.
That's me.
But in my opinion, I don't even know.
I'm a big story with Sabonis.
I mean, you would have him in your top.
I'd be a Sabonis, greatest passing big man of all time.
Thank you for that jersey.
But here's the deal.
LeBron gets hated on like how much shit do you think is talked to LeBron from the stands every single game?
Yeah.
The fact that he ran up on these two people courtside, pointed them out, and full on these two, these two.
How bad of what, how bad was it what they actually said?
Can I ask you a question?
Yeah.
Okay, here's a question for you.
All right.
So how much of it is self-dep?
How much of it is self-inflicted?
How much of it is just fans being fans?
I mean, I've been to games where you're hearing people calling out fans nonstop in the ugliest ways, right?
One, how often do you hear a story like this about Steph Curry?
You don't.
How often do you hear stories like this about Mike Trout?
You don't.
He's the best player in MLB.
How many times do you hear stories like this about, I don't know, pick the name of whatever.
How many times have you heard the story like this about Ronaldo?
How many times have you heard a story like this about pick any of these stories?
Okay.
So then here's what the next thing I say to you is: in the last 40 years, how old are you?
40, 40 years old.
Okay, about to be 41 on February 4th, which like 41-ish, but 40 right now.
So how many times in the last 30 years of watching basketball?
You've been watching basketball for how long?
30 years?
My whole life.
Last 30 years.
Who have been the face of the league last 30 years?
Is it Jordan Kobe and Shaq and maybe LeBron?
You had since the 80s, you had Bird and Magic, for sure.
Then Jordan took over.
Then you had Kobe Shaq.
Okay.
Allen Iverson was the face of the league for real quick.
They didn't want him to be the face of the league.
But he was, yeah.
He didn't want to practice.
That was a problem.
We're talking about practice?
Yeah.
So, but go to the bottom.
And then you had some Dirk for a hot minute.
You had some, you know, the Hebrews.
He was never the face of the league.
Dirk just wanted to.
For a hot minute.
Not one year.
I agree.
He was an underdog, won the championship.
In 2011.
I love what he did when they were making fun of him choking.
Carnett.
Carnett.
Not really.
Guys, we're not going to debate this freaking dirt in the face of the league.
Holy shit.
Mick Van Axel.
They don't treat us the face of the league.
Come back here.
So here's the question.
I wouldn't vote for Trump.
Best meme, by the way, by the people.
Here's a question for you.
Which face of the league have you ever seen go up to a reference to take these two guys out?
Okay, well, let's just get right into that.
Let me know.
In the comments, what's been said?
Let's just say what the comment was.
Which, who said that that was said?
Well, listen, okay, at some point, you're just going to have to believe what.
Even if.
Let me just get this off my chest.
Allegedly, the couple, and then it was the girl that gave the little pouty face.
Man, she said, I hope your son, Bronnie James, dies in a car accident.
Good luck shooting your free throws, buddy.
So what?
Okay, but at some point, you as a father, you as a father of two kids, at some point, you suck, fuck you.
Doesn't just rolls off your back.
Now you want my kid to die in a car accident?
At some point.
I've heard it so many times, Adam.
And hear me out.
At some point, though, at some point, people have to learn.
The comments that people make online and they just go to their little keyboard warriors and they just go off to regular, you know, normal work and they just blaspheme whoever they want.
At some point, you have to pay a price for talking to them.
Some of these stones may break my bones, but he's worth a billion dollars.
So the freaking anymore.
He's a robot.
Oh, he's a robot.
Poor poor LeBron.
I hope he recovers.
The thing about him is now everybody in the world knows he's listening to what's being said.
He just made it a thousand percent worse on himself that every chirp that he's always heard, now people know he's hearing him.
He's listening to him.
It's the worst thing you can do.
I got news for you, buddy.
People got ears.
And if I say, hey, Kurt, you're an absolute piece of shit.
You're going to be like, bro, right here in front of you, bro.
On an infinitesimally, we all have ears.
We're all human.
On an infinitesimally smaller scale.
I played Minor League Baseball 10,000 people.
Hold on, no, this is infinitesimally smaller.
You, LeBron, you and the minor league.
So you hear everything they're saying.
You hear everything they're saying.
Toshi Nakamoto is Jesus and you and LeBron played in front of fans.
The same exact thing.
I get it.
You heard when you were sitting on the bench in community college football, you heard what these people were saying about you.
But you have to.
And I said these two right here.
You have to let it go.
I got something in two minutes.
So make your point.
My point is this.
One, you either let it go completely, or two, you're LeBron James, and you have something funny to say where it's like, he won't get in an accident because I can afford drivers.
Like, or something like that.
You think that people didn't say this crap to Kobe?
Think they didn't say Spike Lee and Reggie Miller.
For people that are younger and don't know what it's like to talk shit, look at what Reggie Miller did with Spike Lee with the NEW YORK Knicks in the playoffs all these years.
Spike Lee was saying everything he possibly could.
Reggie would hit the three and go right up to him and say that one's for you bitch, and that's how you play and that's fine.
I played bad.
You know I played football.
You know all the shit you want these people have.
Okay, the most horrifying thing.
So here's my question for you, Is there anything that anybody could say that is grounds for dismissal to be kicked out, or anything they could say is fairly good?
From the players?
Is there anything that somebody could say to say fixing stones, bro?
Your ability, your ability to do it.
If they called him the N-word, then why?
If they did that, you would hope that somebody else would take care of it.
But if they don't, who cares?
It's a word.
As soon as they don't touch you, as soon as they touch you, it's on.
But words?
LeBron James needs to be protected from words now?
Words.
It just makes him look soft.
I'm not a big basketball fan, but I saw that and was like, ooh, it's just lame.
It was not a good look for him.
I'm not saying that he should have done it, but I'm saying at certain point, it's crossing the line.
It shows your father.
And it's going to invite more of them.
You get a lot of shit talking to you.
Probably more than you deserve.
Could they make something bad happening?
Let's hear it from a father.
You get a lot of shit comments, stupid shit online.
Everyone's tough behind Twitter.
Everyone's tough on YouTube.
They're the toughest people in the world, YouTube commenters.
But at some point, someone says something about Senna.
At some point, you're going to be like, hold up.
What?
As a father, how do you respond to this?
Okay, so who's basic rules?
Anyone, anyone's fan.
That's not how life works.
That's not how life works.
How would you interpret it?
If you say it, this is done.
We have a problem because you are in the circle.
Of course.
I have a problem with you.
You're not going to like it if you say anything like that to me.
If you say it.
If a guy off the street says it, what do you want me to do?
If a guy off the street says it, I had a couple choices.
I can whoop his ass.
I can get him to make a few calls and make that guy's life a living for.
Sammy.
I can do all of that.
Yeah, of course.
And if I do that and I go to jail, then my kid's not going to see me for two months.
So he caused me to lose two months with my daughter's life.
I don't know if it's worth it.
But if somebody on the inside says it, it is what it is.
We're going to have a problem.
Now, let me continue.
We have something called Twitter.
I don't know if you've been to that website.
There's a guy that was running Jack Dorsey.
3%.
He owns it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So this Twitter website, you know what things they've said to Obama about Trump?
It's insane.
About anybody.
Have you ever gone and read the comments?
It is brutal, right?
Toughest people in the world.
He can't take it if he can't take it.
I mean, buddy, I think, listen, is that the worst comment ever made in the history of vast money?
I'm not going close.
How many times do you think people probably called somebody certain awards in the 80s, 90s, and Michael still went out there and won the game?
In Boston, too.
Yeah.
I don't know.
All I'm saying to you is, all I'm saying to you is, this sets the precedence that censorship is now going into games and sports, period.
You got to sit there and be like.
You know what I would like?
I don't like that.
I would like the people that made the comment, because I think they did make this comment, to have a conversation.
Why don't we invite him?
Can we see that?
No, we'll get a hold of them.
No, no.
Let's invite him to the next podcast.
Sure.
Can you do that?
And just say, how would you justify saying a comment like this?
We'll do that to make you feel good about it, and then we'll go from there.
Anyway, they should be held accountable if they did say that.
Exactly.
Totally.
I don't think it's LeBron James who should be the guy.
I feel you on that.
But at some point, the shit talkers.
They got to be this.
They got to be researched.
This is where I come from.
This is where I come from.
Say I'm in a place, okay?
Guy and a girl are fighting.
Guy slaps her in the face.
Guy hits a girl.
Guy hits a girl in the face.
What I'm saying to you is I'm going to do something about it.
So if somebody around them is sitting there, a guy says something like that, I'm going to be like, what is the freaking matter with you?
Like in the stand.
I'd be sitting next to him and saying, what is the matter with you?
I agree.
Are you freaking stupid?
I would call your ass out.
100%.
We would have a problem.
So this is what.
Fan on fan.
Yeah, let the people handle it.
So if people around them didn't say anything, you know, those are the people that are.
Anyways, hey, we don't have podcast Thursday.
I'm in Dallas, but I'm in podcast.
We don't have next podcast going to be Tuesday.
Let's thank Kurt for coming out here.
Where are you?
Thank you for the appreciation, brother.
This was a lot of fun.
Thank you.
My man.
Yes.
Can I just say thanks to the Valutainers that drove over an hour to see me on Saturday?
That was 60 people that came inside.
From four different states.
The Value Tainers, man.
Two from Delaware, two from Long Island.
That was in Pennsylvania.
That was nuts, man.
Love you guys.
That was really, really humbly.
That was dope.
Thank you so much.
You said you had an announcement on Mafia States?
No, I mean, it's just Mafia States comes out Friday.
Yep.
That's a pretty big announcement, Pat.
$3.99 an episode.
We don't get AdSense.
You want to order it?
Do so.
There's going to be many short clips.
And later on, our strategy, knowing the direction that YouTube is going, this is one thing that most people don't know about.
Last year, we used to get, we were doing a lot of interviews on what do you call it, vaccines and all this stuff.
We had about 40 to 60 videos that have been taken down.
Let me comment on that because I see you.
Let me say this, man, and I want to hear you say a couple words on that.
We had about 40 to 60 videos taken down.
We have a completely different strategy on the direction we're going.
An investment we're making right now in OTT.
Long term, Mafia States America is going to be one of the projects that is going to be on the OTT.
That's the route we're going.
So we have to take this route, and AdSense is not going to pay for it.
So for some people, they're like, you should just put it on YouTube.
It's going to make the money back.
It's not going to make the money back.
We would have easily done that.
So having said that, go ahead, Chair.
Yeah, so I saw the podcast, the emergency podcast that you did while I was sitting on the plane, man.
That was in the total.
Yeah, it got along very well.
But then I read the comments, and I got to tell, I love the Value Tainers.
And I don't think a lot of those people that were making those comments are Value Tainers because here's the thing.
As somebody that's watched every single second and was there for every single second of this thing being shot, there are things that are going to be so newsworthy in this.
This is history being made, and there is no way YouTube would let it sit.
All I can tell you is that there's no way, especially episodes 4, 5, and 6.
You can't even tell them what it is.
Especially episodes 4, 5, and 6.
Last two, though, would you like to do it?
The last one, last one, there's no way YouTube would let this be.
You think YouTube would have taken it down?
I'm telling you, I'm telling you, as somebody, if people have been following me for years, know I've been shadow banned.
You saw it.
You didn't believe me, and I showed you it.
Oh, yeah.
What did it look like?
I don't know what you're talking about.
Yeah, exactly.
So I'm telling you, as somebody that's been, if you guys want this to be real, if you want the PBD podcast, you want people like Patrick, Adam, myself to be able to hold a mirror up to the powerful until they cannot help but see what they've become, you guys got to support us in this way.
And the way that you support us is by giving us the power to have a voice outside of them where they could shut us down.
So it's bigger than the product, Pat, to be honest with you.
It's a great product and it stands alone, but it's bigger than that.
We need your support so that we can continue speaking truth in this time of heightened sensitivities and heightened censorship.
You know, you made a great point, and I will tell you, the true believers of Valutainment, they're all in.
The messaging and the notes we've gotten and the amount of people that have already ordered it, they're all in.
Friday release, 8 a.m., first thing in the morning.
I can't wait to see those who binge watch all 10 episodes and we follow it.
Hashtag Twitter, Mafia States America.
On Friday, we will release three of the chapters on Valutain so you guys will get a chance to see it.
And there's going to be a bunch of short clips that will be out there, but everything's going to drive back to Mafia States America.
You can order all 10 episodes for $3.99 a pop, which is $39.99.
