The Revolution will be Digitized – Live with Santiago Velez

Published on
June 11th, 2020
Duration
78 minutes

Rip Van Winkle: Liquidity Edition – Live with Michael Howell


The Revolution will be Digitized – Live with Santiago Velez

Live ·
Featuring Santiago Velez

Published on: June 11th, 2020 • Duration: 78 minutes

During these times of heightened instability, market irrationality, and profound uncertainty, there is but one thing that has become crystal clear — the future will be digitized. Long gone are the days of seeing digital assets as a pipe dream of sorts. The future is here, and this new era of computer science has ushered in what can be viewed as nothing more and nothing less than a turning point for humanity. How does this turning point play out? What will come of all of this? These are the questions that we will be exploring in this week's segment of Real Vision Live. Santiago Velez, founder & CEO ArzuDIOCE Inc, will be sitting down with Raoul Pal to discuss everything from the tokenization of assets and computational data to what is now being referred to as the internet of value.

Comments

Transcript

  • TR
    Thomas R.
    27 October 2020 @ 13:17
    Q. Oddly, did anyone else get hit with a Wells Fargo VISA Ad in the middle of the video? (For the record I am a paid subscriber.)
  • VW
    Vernon W.
    16 August 2020 @ 23:46
    Fascinating!! I can’t believe what I just listened to.
    • VW
      Vernon W.
      16 August 2020 @ 23:58
      How do I lend my compute power?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      24 September 2020 @ 19:25
      Thanks Vernon!
  • JV
    Jerry V.
    14 September 2020 @ 15:47
    OMG, I am blown away. This is clearly the most dynamic subject matter of our times. Thank you Raoul & Santiago for this engaging conversation. Question where do I sign up to join the revolution??
  • JA
    Justin A.
    16 June 2020 @ 13:50
    This long list of thoughts questions is posted with permission from Santiago and I would be happy to hear anyone else's thoughts on the following as well. I apologize for the sporadic nature of the questioning as it is a copy and paste of a twitter conversation: Thanks again Santiago Hi Santiago. It is refreshing to hear from people involved in the space that are able to think cross platform to see that there will potentially be many business models and different blockchains/ledgers that will be able to add value in the future. Having said this, I am curious to know of your thoughts on two specific projects. The first being Hedera Hashgraph (HBAR) I know they completely whiffed on their token economics but as far as a ledger that could potentially compete/displace Ethereum. (Faster, more secure, etc). I am wondering if you have any thoughts? The second is Link. As you know all smart contracts need to get real world data to know when and at what price to execute contracts and that Oracle function seems to me to be vital to that ecosystem. Do you know other projects that are working on or further ahead than LNK in that space. One last question for you that no one I have queried has been able to give me a good answer too and that is the eventual centralization of BTC. After each halving fewer and fewer miners are able to stay profitable and continue to secure the network (even though the price has increased). How does this not lead to a handful of miners with access to low cost or subsidized energy being the ones in control of the network. At that point it seems to me that the security of the network and the reliability of the blocks has the potential to become compromised. HBAR is taking the opposite approach by starting centralized but pledging to move to complete decentralization once adoption reaches a critical mass where controlling the network becomes prohibitive. Thanks Raoul for introducing us to Santiago
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      16 June 2020 @ 16:10
      Justin, I appreciate you taking the time to post these questions on this venue, since it keeps the conversation accessible to everyone that had the opportunity to see the video. Let me *try* and answer each of these questions in turn: 1. Hedera Hashgraph (HBAR) claims to be a DLT technology that uses asynchronous Byzantine Fault Tolerance (aBFT) to achieve consensus / finality of the underlying ledger entries. This is how it avoids the double-spend problem. Here's a good hyperlink to the technical claims: https://help.hedera.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000674097 The inventor of this consensus system has been on Real Vision a few times, it might be beneficial viewers to watch the evolution of this ecosystem over the course of time. Here are the links: March 2019 - https://www.realvision.com/shows/the-creators-of-crypto/videos/hashgraph-the-blockchain-killer Feb. 2020 - https://www.realvision.com/shows/discoveries/videos/the-blockchain-killer-an-introduction-to-hashgraph I personally believe the technology shows great promise, especially as a Layer 1 solution with high transactional throughput capabilities. Unfortunately, performance is only one metric of many that gives an ecosystem value (security premiums, governance, liquidity, etc.). The burden is therefore on the developers to demonstrate they can manage all the aforementioned properties while delivering on the promise of aBFT. If they can do that they will be well positioned to interoperate with other liquidity pools on the Internet of Value. 2. To be specific LINK is the native token of the Chainlink oracle system and I believe it, or some variation thereof, to be an essential project for the space. Although Chainlink has a native token (which was originally ERC20 Ethereum based) it in of itself is not intended to be a P2P value layer. The native token is an incentive system designed to fund and maintain secure and reliable data streams. That means at the end of the day, it's an information layer supporting a value layer with pedigree information. What most people don't realize is that blockchains are self-contained monetary universes and don't communicate with the outside world. If you are to properly leverage the power of smart contracts you need "oracles" to provide information triggers for the intended contractual outcomes to be initiated. For example, you may have a derivatives contract on Ethereum that depends on both the weather & the outcome of a sports contract. Both conditions need to be fed to the smart contract, the outcomes of which are not known before hand. When the outcome is known how do you supply the data in a reliable, secure way to the smart contract so that value can flow fairly. This is the main challenge of Oracles and an essential element of the Internet of Value. Without it these universes are simply an exercise in speculation since their relation to the real world is highly limited to the environment variables of the respective ecosystem. The best description of the technical functions of Chainlink can be found in the documentation: https://docs.chain.link/docs/what-is-chainlink. People can find out more about Chainlink here: https://chain.link/ and an article debriefing here: https://cryptobriefing.com/what-is-chainlink-link-token/ 3. The centralization of the Bitcoin needs to be discussed and addressed before we approach mass adoption, if not we temp fate and the rate of change of the movement. If the main claim to the chain is the SoV narrative, it must do so by precluding a double-spend at all costs. There are several mechanisms at play that change the incentive structures for Proof-of-Work (PoW) miners that have the potential of compromising this narrative. These need to be taken seriously. The best arguments of this "Security Dilemma" are presented in this video: https://youtu.be/zPYkL6L3VGw As with all things, investors and participants need to focus on what they know best, the pros/cons, potential upsides as they related to risk. I think that line of thinking applies to all of the above. I hope this answers your questions!
    • CH
      Crag H.
      29 June 2020 @ 09:28
      @Stantiago: I agree that we definitely need to be wary of Bitcoin's security model and how it behaves when the block subsidy goes away (or becomes irrelevant in terms of total block reward). It's a risk factor for sure. However, I assume that you're suggesting that a PoS system would be the alternative? In my opinion, it's very important to know what the input to the security is. In a PoW system the input is *always* spent electricity. No matter who you are, where you are or what your motives are you always need to spend money on electricity (continuously) to participate in the system. In a PoS system however it's impossible to know *how* you got hold of your staking coins. You could have stolen them, bought them from someone or had them given to you. To me it just feels like a PoS system is much more easily manipulated as the input cost of getting control of the system is unknown and once you *have* your staking coins it's extremely cheap to exercise your voting power (there's no mining).
  • JG
    Jason G.
    25 June 2020 @ 04:09
    Great interview. A lot of great insights and perspectives on digital assets.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      26 June 2020 @ 16:36
      Thanks Jason!
  • NL
    Nathan L.
    20 June 2020 @ 22:11
    Great video, one of the most insightful conversations in the crypto space! Santiago, do you have any thoughts on how the blockchain and decentralization will fundamentally change the ways governments operate? Tim Draper mentions how governments can be reinvented and made much more efficiently on the virtual level with uses of smart contracts and as you alluded to also mentions how governments will be forced to compete and provide the best service for the people with more transparency. Any insights would be much appreciated. Thank you!
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      22 June 2020 @ 16:54
      I'm presently working with a colleague on this very topic. More specifically, we are studying the intersection of Liquid Democracy + Tokenization + DLT and what that means for governance, both at the individual ecosystem level and more broadly for sovereign governments. We hope to examine issues around social networks, influencers, and political capital. What happens when you have an Internet of Value that allows interoperability between these ecosystems / structures and monetization, incentive systems, reputation scores, expertise, etc. It's a very exciting space. I anticipate a radical departure from our current forms of parliamentary & representative democracies without the bureaucratic devolvements common to technocracies. We will release this article on Medium. You can find out more about Liquid Democracy here: Ref. 1: https://medium.com/organizer-sandbox/liquid-democracy-true-democracy-for-the-21st-century-7c66f5e53b6f Ref. 2: https://medium.com/@memetic007/liquid-democracy-9cf7a4cb7f
  • AS
    Alex S.
    21 June 2020 @ 05:22
    RV provides exceptional curation. That’s the value. You can go to the flea market and hunt for that hidden gem, and some certainly love sifting through the rubbish. The alternative is to click on just about any video on RV and have your mind blown. RV is an insurance policy on your most precious resource. Yes you could find some of it elsewhere, but Lord have mercy. As for this video, extraordinary. One of the best. The cryptoweenies can suck it. Raoul and Santiago passed the test of explaining insanely complex and volatile ideas at a level accessible to reasonably intelligent humans and that’s priceless.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      22 June 2020 @ 16:48
      Damn Alex, that's a sweet endorsement. Much appreciated.
  • JH
    Joel H.
    21 June 2020 @ 23:50
    This video is nuts. I love it.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      22 June 2020 @ 16:48
      Thanks Joel, that's how I feel about the whole space!
  • RW
    R W.
    22 June 2020 @ 14:54
    Great video! Thanks for the insights, very interesting and exciting stuff!
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      22 June 2020 @ 16:47
      Thank you R W!
  • AT
    Anthony T.
    16 June 2020 @ 12:51
    The idea of swapping any tokens to any tokens that Santiago described reminds me of Uniswap to be honest
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      16 June 2020 @ 16:16
      Uniswap is a liquidity provisioning tool for tokens within the Ethereum ecosystem, therefore it presumes everyone will choose to use Ethereum as the Layer 1 blockchain (which is not realistic from a transactional standpoint nor from a counterparty platform). Interoperability protocols need to support cross-chain and cross-network value facilitation (think Ethereum to PayPal to Bitcoin to CBDCs, etc.). That's a very different proposition, although no more or less important, than Uniswap. All of the above need to happen. For readers here is a good reference to Uniswap: https://uniswap.org/
    • AT
      Anthony T.
      18 June 2020 @ 17:08
      What I meant is uniswap allows for erc20 to erc20 swap by using Ethereum as common denominator. Yes, I have read the uniswap whitepaper and the contract model. We have erc20 token listed there :) For inter-blockchain operability, Polkadot is working hard on that problem. https://polkadot.network/
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      20 June 2020 @ 03:20
      Polkadot is one of my favorite projects!
  • NT
    Nic T.
    14 June 2020 @ 03:04
    An interestng conversation - nothing really new above and beyond what SV has repeatedly and generously shared for free on twitter, but thank you for sharing your thoughts live on camera here Santiago for those who do not follow you . I don't like saying it, but I feel that Raoul is not the right person to be interviewing Santiago - Raoul is totally in his element, and his knowledge extremely deep, right or wrong, when it comes to global macro, but crypto, not so much. The value of a one-sided conversation where the interviewer simply does not have the knowledge, or even attempt to, challenge the interviewee is limited. To me, it sounded like a video re-run of all the ICO pitches in 2017, with Raoul as the naive sucker. I know that sounds harsh, it's kinda meant to for attention, but I'm just speaking from the perspective of someone who saw it all happen and mostly fail, mostly through scamming. I do think we've move past the 'hyper-scamming' stage of then, though one still has to be very careful, but it cant be stressed enough, as Santiago attemtped to, that we are years, if not decades, away from these theories becoming part of everyday reality I'm sorry to say it Raoul, but I really don't think you are qualified for this if your intention is to help your viewers as opposed to you charging us for your education. As a long term member I think you should stay in your lane when it comes to interviews and employ someone credible who can actually challenge the ideas when it comes to crypto, rather than dreaming - it was exactly this lack of understanding and rigour that cost the little guy hundreds of millions of $'s in 2016-2018 Just to be clear, I'm not calling 'bullshit' on this interview. SV has shared his thoughts on twitter and, though not new, he is a great a communicator and extremely intelligent. Not questioning anyone's integrity at all. Would be great to have debates here between Andreas Antanopolous and SV for example, though to be honest, I think they would do them for free on Youtube - its kind of what crypto is all about ... and RV seems to be trying to monetise it. Let's see how that works out ...
    • AS
      Ash S.
      14 June 2020 @ 04:50
      I disagree. I think Raoul brings great questions and perspective. I was thinking that before I read this comment. If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all, seriously. Just watch a different channel.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:07
      For the record I take no offense to this comment, it's all good! I'll be honest, in my mind I live in the future, maybe it's a type of escapism, so it tends to bleed out in conversation. That being said, it's important to provide a vision of what's possible for investors to start thinking about how to position themselves to capitalize on these emerging technologies. "Hopium" is a curse which is why I prefer to focus on "how" the technology could be leveraged and "why" it's so important to do so (cultural & societal impact). This is normal for all technology adoption curves if you look back at the dot.com bubble for example, it's simply impossible to reign in the animal spirits of speculators, and that is regrettable. I would love to talk with Andreas because I follow him religiously online even if I don't agree with him on everything I don't think there is as much daylight as you might think. Is this something you could arrange? To your point about RV monetizing these conversations, I receive no compensation for it but I do receive exposure and value, for both myself personally and the prospects of being seen as legitimate in the future for my businesses. I am deeply appreciative of the opportunities. Thank you for your comment Nic!
    • NT
      Nic T.
      14 June 2020 @ 15:12
      And it’s fine that you disagree. As for only wanting me to write nice things, who does that serve? I’m am expressing my opinion, and what I said is ultimately intended to be for the benefit of potential investors. I have a strong opinion that RV’s crypto coverage is not up to scratch, and I’m expressing that - where’s the problem? And we now have interviews like this where pretty much everything SV was saying, he has generously shared for free and Twitter. I don’t think that warrants it being put behind a paywall. Downvote me again, that’s what the buttons are there for. Seems there are others who don’t agree with my comment either, which is fine. Disagreement is healthy.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:31
      I think you were replying to Ash, not me based on your comment context. I think healthy, respectful disagreement and skepticism is more important than anything else. I'm a believer in the scientific process, and with it rigor and burden. Raoul has asked me if I would be interested in being an interviewer, which I accepted! I can assure you that my goal would be to be unapologetic, without being adversarial, in testing the claims made by guests introducing crypto related concepts / products. I'll do my best when given the opportunity because I always do my homework.
    • NT
      Nic T.
      14 June 2020 @ 16:22
      @ SV, yes I was replying to Ash as you were replying. I just tried to clarify that but it was rejected, probably as you were replying again! I think you being an interviewer here for crypto, and perhaps other content is a fantastic idea, and exactly the kind of one that my initial comment was meant to spur. Perhaps I was a bit fast and loose with my analogies, but that was semi-intentional for effect, and kudos to Raoul for taking on board what others have also said regarding the need for people of your level being required in order to ask the tough questions in crypto related interviews I read your 'thesis' on twitter and thought it was extremely interesting. Thank you for sharing it there. I agree that there might not be that much daylight between your vision and that of Andreas, but it would make for an incredible 'fireside chat' in my opinion. I was going to suggest that perhaps Nathaniel Whittlemore (@nlw), host of The Breakdown podcast may be able to set it up (I dont have the necessary contacts), but if you are going to be interviewing here then that would be great too. I would be surprised if he was not open to it - you are both brilliant crypto thinkers and visionaries. I think your idea re 'fractional content' is correct and is the way we are going. To be honest I think that it would have been a better route for RV to have followed than tiers and paywalls, which is a backwards step in my opinion. It would already be technically pretty easy to implement a 'credits based' system for videos, not even too hard to do it for partial videos if not too granular, and it does not even require crypto. To take it a bit further though, in the future RV could do an ICO with RV coins which could be used to pay per minute viewing, with RV coins traded on an exchanges. The problem is see currently is that this would likely be a very illiquid pair, and as such very easy to manipulate the price of. And I think that this is the weakest link in your vision (for now) - until we have deep markets in all these products, trading eggs for goats in Sudan using an invisible network of blockchains in the background is likely to result in a bad deal for one party ie the market would not be efficient. And we still have to solve that eternal crypto trilemma of decentralisation vs security vs scalability. The scaling required to reach your vision is probably the biggest hurdle, without centralising everything. Anyway, as you said we are in the 'build stage' and solutions may or may not present themselves in the future - exciting times Thanks again, you are one smart cookie!, and yes, I know you were not paid for the interview, and did not mean to imply that ;)
    • NT
      Nic T.
      14 June 2020 @ 17:01
      Actually Santiago, I will go further, and say that I see *absolutely no reason* why you should not have been paid for this interview, as we are being charged to watch it. I think this probably dovetails with your vision of value exchange in the future, no? In this exchange there are 3 parties, RV, you and the viewer. RV has added value by bringing you to the attention of people who are not already aware of you, you bring enormous value with your vision, and we pay to listen. As you said in your comment, you have received value through exposure, but I have no doubt that in the future your name will be widely known and the compensation will come in a more direct form. And thank you for taking so much time to replying to people in the comments here - I can barely keep up, and am learning a lot from your interaction with viewers.
    • RA
      Robert A.
      15 June 2020 @ 17:50
      Nic, I respect your viewpoint on perhaps Raoul not having the Crypto gravitas to conduct this interview to your (and others such as yourself who are at a much deeper level of Crypto understanding) satisfaction. That said, I think there is great value in having Raoul conduct the interview because he is most familiar with the RV audience ethos and what we have been exposed to over the hundreds of interviews presented during the last four years. I think he subconsciously tried to ask the questions which we neophytes might wish to have asked...perhaps these questions were “dumbed down” from those that you and your more accomplished Crypto thinkers might have wished....but, one of the purposes of RV is for us to learn and be exposed, in perhaps a more rudimentary way, to a plethora of different Macro and Finance subjects. Many of us have only recently scratched the surface of the Crypto world and candidly this interview, although fantastic, was probably an intellectual “reach” for quite a few of us. Please consider the following; what if the subject matter was not in your wheelhouse of interest, experience and understanding?.....for instance, let’s say Commercial Real Estate or Private Aviation....and let’s say a guest with sophistication in either subject had a new angle of delivering and thinking about the product...let’s say an idea that goes beyond Private jet fractionalization, Jet card and Charter metrics with the current regulatory constraints, taxation and business model formulas where on one level Aviation Lawyers, Insurance Brokers, Aviation Accountants and Aviation lobbyists would want the questions posed in a certain granular manner and the rest of us would rather have the questions posed in a simpler way so that we could get our heads around the Guest’s out of the box thinking about Private Aviation in such a way as to deliver the Private Aviation product such that millions could have access to it at a reasonable cost and competitive with existing Commercial aviation. Nic, there is no perfect answer to the level of questions asked as some viewers want to really drill down and others just want to skim the topic a bit to get more familiar with something they may not know that much about. IMO, Raoul with his understanding and familiarity of everything that has been presented to the RV audience is the perfect interviewer to make the call on the level of discussion..
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:42
      For me the interaction in this forum has exceeded my expectations and I'm grateful. This is what it's all about for me, engagement, conversation, the sharing of ideas! We are so early to the space. It's like being at the California gold rush but talking about the Interstate Highway system. The bridges, on-ramps, off-ramps, and vehicles are being built. The best part will be the choice that comes with it, the lowering of friction, the freedom to express value!
    • NT
      Nic T.
      16 June 2020 @ 17:19
      @ Robert A Likewise, I respect your feedback on my comment and agree with some of it. I would have to have my head i the sand not to see how enormously grateful most of the commenters here are for this video, which has to mean Raoul and team are doing something that is popular, regardless of my own personal biases, which were aimed more towards the overall nature of crypto content and the new Tier structure. As it seems from Santiago's and Raoul's replies that both of these are being addressed, I will wait with interest to see how things evolve ;)
    • JO
      Johnny O.
      17 June 2020 @ 11:04
      Nic may have seen all this before on Twitter, but most if us on RV are no more clued up than Raoul and want to hear it discussed. By "most of us", I mean to include people who hold BTC and ETH and a bunch of over-hyped altcoins and shitcoins, not the anti-crypto bunch on RV. I agree with Raoul's barrier to consumer first entry observations: it's not easy for new users to join the party. I keep getting offered the next shitcoin by various exchanges, and instead wish they'd just get their fiat bank accounts set up right.
  • AT
    Anthony T.
    16 June 2020 @ 12:42
    One of the folks working underneath the water here 👋 - We are building the best mobile app for Indonesians to buy/sell/store crypto (https://pintu.co.id/). We believe crypto will become the next parallel financial universe.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      16 June 2020 @ 15:45
      On behalf of the rest of us, thank you for your service! Take your app to the next level and make it interoperable using ILP (Interledger.org).
  • Sp
    Scott p.
    16 June 2020 @ 00:59
    Don't liquid and lightening networks do everything Ethereum does but with more liquidity (Bitcoin) and more decentralization (is ETH really decentralised when Vitalik can make any change he wants?)? What's the advantage of Ethereum at this point other than easier coding (less security, DAO hacks)?
    • Sp
      Scott p.
      16 June 2020 @ 01:13
      Also why wouldn't you want everything to converge to Bitcoin if you could, it's basically like going back to a global gold standard. We could still be likely to have multiple coins with different technological trade-offs, but wouldn't you want all on Bitcoin in an ideal world?
    • JM
      Jonathan M.
      16 June 2020 @ 09:04
      Liquid and lightening brings capacity but not smart contracts.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      16 June 2020 @ 15:44
      Lightning Network is a Layer 2 payment channel mechanism that has the ability to use Hash Time Locked Contracts (HTLCs) to facilitate value transfer off chain with some conditional statements. This is not a substitute for a Layer 1 smart contract platform (e.g. Ethereum) because it is disconnected from the incentive layer (compute/security hashing in PoW is applied at Layer 1 not 2, as is the security premium). As a result the LN is a scalability solution with some necessary compromises and presents other types of attack vectors. Here is a beginners guide to the network: https://coincentral.com/lightning-network-beginners-guide/ Vitalik Buterin, the inventor of Ethereum, cannot make any change he wants, for code changes and blockchain consensus he still needs to appeal to the community consensus, and he's done so in the early history of the change when he commanded a disproportionate influence over the network. I believe what you are referring to is the "rollback" events early in the history of Ethereum (for example the Parity attack discussed here: https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/a-hacker-stole-31m-of-ether-how-it-happened-and-what-it-means-for-ethereum-9e5dc29e33ce/) and reference to the DAO hack (discussed here: https://medium.com/swlh/the-story-of-the-dao-its-history-and-consequences-71e6a8a551ee). Proof of my statement can be seen in the fork between Ethereum and Ethereum Classic, if Vitalik enjoyed unilateral authority over the Ethereum blockchain, and related software, this fork would not have been possible. With regards to the global gold standard. Why would we want to resort to a base layer of value that is supply limited when the endgame should be to increase the velocity of value (something the Fed has obviously failed to do, stymying GDP growth)? It should be self-evident that the ossification of value is only a hedge against uncertainty, and not a remediation to poor economic performance. This is a useful hedging tool for instruments like gold and Bitcoin, but it's not a foundation for building a global economy, unless you want growth constrained. There is a reason the petro-dollar system was invented, because credit needs from the economy exceeded the issuance ability of the government (as gold was required for each dollar issued). Arguably, the petro-dollar and electro-dollar are more representative of intrinsic value (namely energy) required to facilitate global transactions. Bitcoin is a direct expression of energy consumption, however it has a fiat leakage path in that mining OpEx is paid for in fiat. We therefore need a value layer that is currency agnostic and resistant to value ossification to facilitate global growth in a non-hegemonic, equitable way. That layer is the Internet of Value with protocols like Interledger Protocol, Hyperledger Fabric, etc. None of those interoperability layers preclude using Bitcoin, instead they provide a framework for senders / receivers to transact in the value abstractions of their choosing. Real monetary freedom.
  • CD
    Christopher D.
    15 June 2020 @ 22:38
    v high level, distributed computing sounded a little like what rigetti is doing for quantum computing.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      16 June 2020 @ 00:31
      Chris, this is an great share, I'm doing my research on them now. When we talk about distributed computing there are a couple of nuances. Decentralized Computing are Platforms (networks) that connect clients & servers without a centralized counterparty in order to perform a computation. The allocation of resources, both hardware and software, to each individual workstation. In contrast, centralized computing exists when the majority of functions are carried out or obtained from a remote centralized location. Either can theoretically utilize quantum computing.
  • HR
    Humberto R.
    15 June 2020 @ 16:15
    How about each of us as citizens of some country pay our taxes in proportion to the services we consume?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:07
      Super interesting idea!
    • DS
      David S.
      15 June 2020 @ 20:23
      You will be a country of one. DLS
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 21:12
      @David I literally snorted out loud when I read this comment, LOL! The idea Humberto threw out is important because it can frame the conversation and we can start shaping effective policy.
  • DS
    David S.
    15 June 2020 @ 20:32
    Great interview. Please make sure everything is user friendly - close to idiot proof - for the general public. In a fast AWD car, you approach the corner differently, but it is easy to learn. That much learning and fun I can handle. DLS
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 21:10
      I wish I had a magic wand, someone to reign in these developers that don't follow the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) principle. If my wife won't accept it as a tool then in my mind it's un-necessarily complicated or the UI off-putting. To be clear, this is not an intellectual measure, this is "I have important things to do with my life than worry about how to create digital wallets on distributed ledgers" and that's how it should be. The challenge with abstraction layers are always security and compromises in functionality. It's an important balance.
  • TP
    Timothy P.
    13 June 2020 @ 16:43
    "You need to be aware of the ecosystem you choose." Why yes, you do. That's why its interesting to me that Mr Velez doesn't realize that ETH is dead-coin walking, it just doesn't know it yet. The pivot to Proof-of-Stake opens up ETH to larger network security risks. There are examples where PoS systems have been manipulated and abused due to this "staking" model. (I'd elaborate, but then you'd have to pay me.) Raoul - "Bitcoin doesn't change" -- oh my, someone is behind the information curve. That isn't remotely true. In fact, peruse the output of "Bitcoin Improvement Proposal" (BIPs) and you'd find that isn't true, and changes have been merged into the Bitcoin codebase. (Funnily enough, ETH copied the format and call theirs EIPs). "Tribalism" is a word people use when they don't understand there are massive technical reasons to choose one chain over another. They don't get it, so they think in simple-simon terms and say "Well, its just a tribal affiliation...". That is total bollocks. While there are people who cling to something regardless of any real reason, I can fully articulate to anyone why a given token is crap, and why another is worth investing time in. Currency Swaps, Protocols, etc.. its evident to me that no one on the Real Vision team really truly understand crypto outside of the basics of trading it. That could change, but it would take investment in subject experts who do. Make worth my while, and I might help.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:08
      ETH is a dead coin walking? Please substantiate your claim with some data, which I and readers would all value, because that's what this is all about, a conversation to discern fact from fiction so that we can make informed decision on what ecosystems to invest in. For the record, I am presently only a minor holder in Ethereum the token, but tangentially I'm involved in a great many projects that are leveraging the ecosystem in anticipation of future expansion. To be 100% honest I'm more partial to XRP as a settlement / payment digital asset because of the performance metrics (I'm sure the next retort will be to call me a banking Ripple shill). I'm glad I received this kind of response from at least one viewer because it means I'm going in the right direction, no one likes group think. Now, with regards to your innate abilities to discern value for others, I think that's the main point of the Internet of Value. We can all list to people like you, people like me, and then pick the value we choose at our own risk. Do you consider that a threat, and if so, why?
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      13 June 2020 @ 18:16
      @Santiago V. - It is, and I could, but I don't work for free. I've given out information on this platform before, but its become evident to me that the gap in knowledge is so large that they need a subject expert. If you don't realize what kind of problem PoS is, then it suggests to me that you need to to do more research. As for XRP, that centralized token has its own problems, but again I'm not the business of doing mind-dumps for free anymore.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 20:54
      Timothy, I respect that position very much, no one likes to contribute for free. I would argue that it can still be self-serving to your position if you illustrate why other's shouldn't make the mistake of supporting one project or another. Let your arguments stand on their merits. I know Proof of Stake has some serious governance problems, as well as security attack vectors, and I'm by no means taking a position on it one way or another. I would instead defer to saying that it should be tried and those that want to experiment with it should understand the risks properly. You could lend a lot to that conversation. XRP is a centralized token only in that the majority of the original issuance resides with the company Ripple. From a transactional perspective, the code base and validator nodes upon which consensus is obtained to avoid a double-spend is without argument decentralized. Ripple cannot roll back or freeze transactions, but yes, they can act against their own best interest on dump on the holders, indisputable. This brings up a great point. What do we mean when we say decentralized? Do we mean node operators that store the ledger account history? Code base? Developers? Hashing power / validators? etc. There is incredible nuance that needs to be brought to light in all these aspects and there are more productive ways than simply generalizing terminology. I apologize if I keep engaging, I assure you it's not in an antagonizing way.
    • EF
      Eric F.
      14 June 2020 @ 13:03
      Timothy, it is a shame if you do have some deep subject expertise here, as the way you have communicated here makes me completely disinterested in hearing anything else you have to say. You come across as arrogant and selfish. Do yourself a favour and re-read your comments in the cold light of day, and get a grip about how valuable you think your comments are.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      15 June 2020 @ 13:42
      @Eric F - When people use those terms to describe me, I read further into why. I've been right, about a lot of things. I no longer apologize for it, nor do I smother my speech under layers of pandering emotionalism. So when you say "arrogant" all I can see is "stop being so damn correct it makes me feel inadequate": That's on you, not me. I won't apologize for having taken the time to understand a subject deeply, scoffing at people who don't do their homework, and generally telling a know-nothing muppets to get stuffed if they're spewing nonsense. While everyone was larking about and ignoring the subjects that matter, I was putting in my time. I know it very well. Better than most, and almost well enough to contribute code -- though I don't devote time at that tier of output -- I'm mostly a trader, not a full-time programmer. That level of knowledge was hard-won, and I don't give it out for free. Why else are you here? RV isn't free for that exact same reason. So save the insults, and if you want actual knowledge, RV can bring me on as a consultant. If they don't, that's their lost opportunity, not mine.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      15 June 2020 @ 13:49
      @Santiago, I have no issue with you -- I just threw out my contribution into the wind. I still disagree that XRP is decentralized, I recall an analysis I read a while back, but don't have the link on hand. For instance, token distribution and their centralized server structure (they say you can run your own, but alas they promote their servers as the de-facto default) points to the Centralization side of the column. Also, the XRP token is divorced from their banking-tier system that they're continually pushing. This makes me think they're using the token to wring value from uneducated crypto newbies, who don't get the distinction. That kind of behavior rings all kinds of alarm bells for me. Not to mention their year-over-year performance is utterly horrific. Down -56.8% s of this writing.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 21:03
      @Tim, it's all good! Let's address some the latter points with regards to XRP: 1. Validators for arriving at consensus are determined via a UNL (list of trusted parties called Unique Load List). Each validator has the ability to choose their own UNL or those of Ripple (which is the default because of the inception). The current validator balance under the direct purview of Ripple is less than the amount of consensus majority need to rollback / freeze transactions. From a processing standpoint this is by all technical merits a decentralized system. Furthermore, there are many projects running their own UNL with lists that are completely divorced from the Ripple default that can process and settle transactions without double spend. This is because there are domain overlaps that allow this to be possible (thing Venn diagrams). 2. The XRP token is a digital asset of an open permissionless ecosystem. Anyone is free to do with XRP as they wish, the problem is how do you acquire them? Since the entire issuance occurred at genesis there is no way to compete for them with compute (like with PoW mining) so you are forced to either generate a digital asset with compute and then swap on a exchange OR use your hard earned fiat to buy some from an exchange. This means there is a direct monetary transmission layer from buyer of the asset to the largest asset holder (Ripple). This means there is risk that Ripple uses the XRP token as a perpetual crowd funding, similar to how other ICO's issued their tokens on Ethereum during the bull run. This is a completely legitimate concern from a counter party perspective and should be weighed into the balance over whether or not you should invest. Let's be 100% transparent though. People who engage in PoW mining using compute also have to fund an ecosystem, electrical generation companies and ASICs manufacturers. The only difference is that one transmission mechanism is obvious the other is hidden behind technical abstraction. All bow down to some fiat supply chain operation. When these assets mature from proto-money or SoVs to be sufficiently liquid to fiat these issues will no longer be as relevant. 3. Price action for a specific digital asset in isolation is a poor metric for me personally. The utilization of the asset, trade volumes, wallet openings, institutional adoption, etc. are more important metrics, particularly if you are not a trader but an investor trying to capture high value at a low price. Thank you for your insights!
  • RA
    Robert A.
    13 June 2020 @ 21:23
    OK Milton, maybe we got a useful tip on another way to partially monetize some “Plus” content while exposing some otherwise price constrained “Essential” users to a portion of “Plus” content. If RV could charge for the “Plus” content time consumed incrementally then an “Essential” member could watch certain “Plus” interviews they were interested in and pay for THAT content (at perhaps a higher per episode price than “Plus” members who pay for the entire annual package of interviews). For instance, I often want to have a relative who is an “Essential” member watch one of the “Plus” interviews I really like (my relative can afford an Essential membership, but not a “Plus” level one). Either my relative or I would gladly pay the price for the viewing of an occasional “Plus” interview. Just a thought dovetailing on Santiago’s “pay for what you WATCH on Netflix, Amazon Prime or Disney“. This was a REALLY good interview, especially for a guy who made his first foray into BTC four years ago and who has only the most elementary understanding of the Digital coin space.
    • RP
      Raoul P. | Founder
      13 June 2020 @ 23:49
      We are looking into stuff like this but its probably 6 months away.
    • sm
      sylvain m.
      14 June 2020 @ 15:35
      I suggest not forgetting about the people paying the bills, ie: the advertisers. Micro transaction can be good for users and content creators but not at the expense of creating significant friction for advertisers. Like it or not, they are the ones funding the system and therefore their voice matter a great deal.
    • NT
      Nic T.
      14 June 2020 @ 16:45
      @sylvain m. Re advertisers, did you catch the part where Santiago said that he would sign up for the cable comany when *they pay him* to do so, in return for watching the adverts. This vision of the future turns the current model completely on its head, with viewers being payed for their eyeballs by advertisers, and paying creators for their content directly, with pinpoint accuracy. What we currently have is content creators being paid by advertisers who then spray us with adverts and we pay for the overall experience, which is not ideal. Many of us do not like being advertised to, and if there was a way to cut out the advertiser, and pay the creator directly for their content, we would choose it. Being advertised to would then be a seperate contract that we entered into directly with the advertiser and were paid for.
    • sm
      sylvain m.
      14 June 2020 @ 18:29
      Hi Nick, I have heard that part yes. And while I can imagine part of the population maybe doing exactly this, it will be a long time coming before this is done at the scale needed to justify the friction this add with advertisers and consumers. Concerning cable, it is a pure cash cow right now with days counted which is why Disney, Comcast, ATT are going to SVOD/AVOD as fast as possible. I am not suggesting advertising will not be challenged, nor that it should not be challenged, however I do think understanding the full dynamic of an industry is key to disrupt it.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:50
      I think Nik T put it well, the contract between viewer, content creator, and advertiser has been co-mingled for so long that it's a difficult proposition to untangle. That being said, we are talking about unpaid content. Netflix, Disney+, etc. don't have ads but have a paywall and people have already accepted this a simple contract. To be clear, the endgame is where content is king. So how to decouple this system properly and at scale? It has to start with decentralizing the Content Delivery Network stack. There are projects like VideoCoin started by Halsey Minor (of CNet founding) which are using blockchain to incentivize transcoding, storage, and delivery of video (which comprises 80% of internet data traffic by volume). Combine a dCDN w/ edge computing and payment rails and you can create a production flow environment that challenges the AWS/Akamais of the world. I am working a company that will support these types of projects via compute portfolio, it's called Block Digital Corporation and our pilot should be coming online in Q3. We will be doing a capital raise via a decentralized and fully compliant debt issuance via a Security Token Offering (STO). The next step is to monetize the content. I am also working on that and I have a company called ArzuDIOCE, Inc. (AD, Inc.) that will allow micro-payments to content creators (like TikTok, YouTube, etc.). The telemetry from our structure and payment flows will create a sniper like precision to Ad spend, instead of the shotgun approach referred to in this thread. I'm bullish.
  • RH
    Rob H.
    14 June 2020 @ 16:33
    Great interview, it would be great if RV could bring in more experts on other cutting technology that promises to change the would. Like the 5G space, and the TaaS - Transport as a Service space. Crypto seems like the big focus on RV but there is so much more to explore. I don’t know how many Times RV had oil and mining experts on that explored individual publicly traded names. It would be great if real vision could find other experts in other tech fields that would do the same. I like these conceptual type interviews as well but they don’t really bring any actionable information.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:36
      I agree! I think as a taxonomic exercise videos should start differentiating different aspects of the blockchain space (SoV, P2P, ILP, tokens, CBDCs, etc.) and do deep dives. With regards to other technologies I would categorize them into the following aspects of the 4th Industrial Revolution: 1. Internet of Things 2. XR (Augmented Reality / Virtual Reality) 3. Distributed Ledger Technology 4. Machine Learning / AI 5. Automation of Machinery (self driving cars/planes, power plants, supply chains, etc.)
  • CM
    Chris M.
    14 June 2020 @ 16:59
    @Santiago Velez insight into the tech stack is spot on. If Santiago told us he worked as as software developer instead of a nuclear engineer I would believe him. Amazing guess!
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:33
      Thanks Chris! I can only code Java, and my wife won't let me code because I already go down enough rabbit holes. That being said, I build all my own computers and I'm a first adopter on technology in general so I like to be on the cutting edge.
  • NT
    Nic T.
    14 June 2020 @ 17:17
    Santiago, how do tokens such as Filecoin and similar decentralised storage projects, with users being rewarded for renting out free hard drive space fit in with your vision?(Filecoin was the one that sprang to mind - not even sure it still exists, so not shilling!). Do these fall within a similar bracket as being paid to have your Tesla do maths in the parking lot?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:32
      Nic, you are tempting me! I am 100% for using decentralized incentive systems to monetize compute resources. In fact, I'm building a business doing exactly this and it's called Block Digital Corporation (BDC). We construct compute portfolios that look for ecosystems like Filecoin wherein we can put compute components to work in parallel. The trick is the balance of component and overall system design. We hope to launch our pilot demonstration Q3, followed by a debt issuance via a Security Token Offering (STO). We will use blockchain to raise capital as it's central to our philosophy as a company.
  • SF
    Stephen F.
    14 June 2020 @ 18:09
    Does Santiago have a book recommendation.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:29
      No. I fear that printed media simply can't keep up with the pace of change, either technological nor conceptual. The way I learned was to follow specific projects, technologies and then learn from the thought leaders in that space from forums like Medium, Telegram, Discord, Quorum, Twitter, etc. It's not a very organized or systematic way of learning but it's the only one with the dynamism for keeping up. It's breathtaking.
  • LJ
    Liam J.
    14 June 2020 @ 20:34
    With the whole barter discussion i'm suprised uniswap, curve and balancer weren't brought up in the conversation. Yes they're still very small but talking about liquidity for everything to everything those protocols on Ethereum are probably what the future looks like. Curve probably has better liquidity and less slippage for most stablecoins than all the centralized exchanges.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:27
      If only there were more time! These projects are awesome. It's important to recognize though that in the case of something like Uniswap it's aggregating liquidity "within" the Ethereum ecosystem for specific smart contract operations (like ERC20 token swaps). The Internet of Value can source liquidity outside of any single value network (Ethereum) or liquidity pool. It's an ocean, not a lake.
  • wo
    william o.
    14 June 2020 @ 21:14
    Thank Raoul and Santiago! It was a very thought provoking and exciting interview! How quickly do you think that can large incentivized corporations like Walmart are able to begin using newly developed payment systems to disenfranchise Visa and MasterCard etc.?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:25
      Ah! The true battle. Visa & MC & Amex see the writing on the wall and the rent-extraction being severely curtailed. They will try and position themselves into the value flows as things become further digitized. They still serve two functions: (1) issuing credit to consumers and earning interest (but that will be challenged by Decentralized Finance), (2) facilitating business on-ramps / off-ramps to digital asset ecosystems and cross-border. In the latter case I can see them becoming connectors. Walmart will inevitably want to tap into the value flows of the IoV on behalf of both their supply chain (cross border FX management / treasury simplification) and their customers (allowing micro payments for video / audio products on Vudu) and the ability to accept any kind of currency of digital asset with value in exchange for products.
  • tc
    thomas c.
    15 June 2020 @ 01:42
    Loved this Thank you Santiago and Raoul for having the wisdom to bring him here. I've been seeing this theme of decentralization for years. The internet could have been tokenized in the 90s but micro payments weren't profitable for visa etc.. So advertising became the support mechanism and big data silos the most efficient data aggregators. The tech is here now to change all that. Middle men in everything are becoming extinct. Deflationary but vastly more productive potential. The promise of the internet could be realized - Instead of all knowledge in 1 brain (Google, FB) , all knowledge in all brains.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:21
      Amen to that! Couldn't have said it better.
  • EP
    Emma P.
    15 June 2020 @ 10:34
    Really enjoyed the interview. Much food for thought. It changed my layman's evolving framework for thinking about digital assets/ projects into: 1) What problem is the project trying to solve? 2) Where is the value being created? The "ecosystem" or the token or something else? 3) how scalable/ sustainable/ properitory is it? A few points: - Regarding the Tesla "on-hiring". From an accounting perspective, the Tesla (car) is an asset (depreciating), not a liability. Any finance used to purchase/ lease with the Tesla is the associated liability. By on-hiring the Tesla you are not turning a liability into an asset but turning a non-income producing asset into an income producing asset. The income helps to reduce the liability. Tax implications!?! [I note the main point was about the micropayment mechanism] - Is Chainlink an example of intra-operability? - How do I get my teenage children interested in this? It seems to promise opportunities. Is computer science the only path?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:21
      Thanks Emma for the precision in language. I completely agree, taking a depreciating asset and monetizing it only changes the cash flow balance. If the monetization potential exceeds rate of depreciation (from a market value standpoint) it can either maintain it's value as an asset or grow in value, but at a minimum it is now tied to two markets: the used car resale market & the ride-share markets. With sufficient coupling between those two markets they start to influence one another right? The entire value proposition becomes even more exciting (similar to rental properties). The tax implications are significant and we need algorithmic solutions. This is because the IRS views digital assets as property but does not recognize like-kind exchanges. Every transaction requires resolving the tax bases. This problem can either be solved by improved tax policy (like an exception on digital asset transfer / swaps below a certain amount) or by an algorithmic tax as a function of revenues above cost. One could imagine a real time depreciation curve applied to the income stream to offset revenues. It's only calculations. Chainlink is a decentralized oracle service. What this means is that the information layer of the internet needs to communicate with the value layer of blockchains (which are separate universes to do not "speak" to the outside world). The vision is bringing telemetry from the outside world that is accurate and secure so that the programmable aspects of the technology (like smart contracts) can be leveraged without compromising the security of the network or the transaction. Oracles are an essential element to any digital asset based settlement layer for things like derivatives markets (weather on commodities, conditionals, sports outcomes, etc.) If your teens engage in any type of online gaming they are already digitally native. The conceptual leap is to explain to them that someday their "points", "tokens", "social credibility scores / reputations", etc. will be interoperable with ecosystems outside of the immediate game or social network and they will be able to transact with those assets. Most games / social networks are centralized but with ILP (Interledger Protocol) they don't have to be. Another good concept to expose them to is digital scarcity, the idea that only one copy of a digital product can be represented and other copies are illegitimate (this does not apply go consumables like music yet) but more like collectibles (think baseball digital cards or crypto kitties). It's seems quaint until you extrapolate this concept of digital scarcity to claims on Intellectual Property, domains, virtual property, etc.
  • AA
    Andrew A.
    15 June 2020 @ 15:43
    Santiago says that it's difficult to value crypto because they're all about non financial measures, like the size of the network for example, and asks how we can value them (51m 30s). RV should invite Charlie Morris from Bytetree.com who may help answer this fundamental question. His model places a current fair value on Bitcoin for example based on Network metrics.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      15 June 2020 @ 20:09
      Charlie has some incredible insights. I would love to see those metrics applied across many ecosystems to see whether or not they yield consistent results. It's easy to apply his model to a highly liquid, large network model like Bitcoin, a lot more difficult to apply to small projects with high potential. This is the same contrast we see in the VC vs. equities world.
  • jW
    john W.
    15 June 2020 @ 01:14
    Mind stretching. Let me watch that again...
  • CB
    Chris B.
    14 June 2020 @ 05:31
    Bravo Raoul and team, this guy was great. Excellent insight, with keen ‘new world’ instincts. Things are changing, and we need to be talking and thinking more about this than we do about the old world. Keep going on this line of guests.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:26
      Thanks Chris!
  • SS
    S S.
    13 June 2020 @ 13:04
    This was mind-blowing. Santiago is an unbelievable find.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:19
      Thanks Steve!
  • MD
    Matt D.
    14 June 2020 @ 02:44
    Great interview! Very humble and obliging guest (Santiago) - including replies to comments. Thanks Santiago. Interesting the "thumbs up down" count is low which to me is definitely not a representation of the quality of content (almost the inverse for this interview). Perhaps a reflection of the awareness of this space? I think I am like Raoul - fascinating, the possibilities massive. Probably needs a re-watch as it is sort of revolutionary. It could lead to hyper-monetisation (of everything) - a negative in my opinion. Philosophically we are (or are we?) way way behind the technology?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:12
      You honor me Matt. The Internet of Value is the solution to the deflationary nature of technology and the failed monetary transmission mechanisms of central banks. We don't need more liquidity (which obviously isn't working), we need to increase the velocity of value so that humans can transact at a greater pace. On a side note, we didn't get a chance to talk about how externalities can be more effectively priced with the micropayment / pathfinding nature of the IoV. Specifically, emissions tracking / taxation with IoT measurements, cradle-to-grave outcome health expenditures, waste streams, etc. We are way way behind philosophically as the technology is getting ahead of us, but isn't that always the pattern?
  • TN
    Tim N.
    14 June 2020 @ 03:58
    Santiago, thank you for sharing your insights so generously.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:01
      Thanks Tim, I'm glad you enjoyed it!
  • AB
    Alastair B.
    14 June 2020 @ 05:04
    The conversation about barter is the major takeaway from this. I’d never thought about cryptocurrency in this light before - I will use this analogy to explain it to people in future.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:00
      Friction-less barter to be precise! This is my main learning, abstractions can be facilitated by code in the service of humans.
  • AB
    Alastair B.
    14 June 2020 @ 05:06
    What is your opinion on crypto.com?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 15:00
      I've never heard of it, but I checked it out today. Appears to be a standard exchange. There are many and I use many, depending on the transaction types, digital asset types, and fiat rails. Some exchanges support ACH, others FedWire, credit card, etc. Some exchanges don't require KYC/AML but have withdrawal limits. All of these metrics should be weighed in terms of choosing the best exchange for your need. On the issue, it's true that exchanges have the potential of being large Internet of Value participants (connectors in Interledger Protocol parlance), but don't discount DEX's. Decentralized exchanges organically create order books without centralized operators and match buyers and sellers without concentrating value in a vulnerable hot wallet. DEX's will take over the ecosystem in due course and eventually we may all become connectors in addition to being senders/receives. Raoul cleverly alluded to the ability for people to become facilitators of liquidity, and I think that's precisely what's going to happen.
  • TN
    Tim N.
    14 June 2020 @ 05:31
    The internet of value could profoundly change society. If we have to exchange our value on a regular basis there will be very efficient price discovery. Perhaps with all the people in the world able to participate, this will be deflationary on human capital but inflationary on needs (food, shelter, etc). Also if this results in ever increasing velocity of value, is it possible to store value. Maybe we will all have our own individual tokens whose value rises and falls with our productivity. Not sure if this will be a utopia or dystopia. The current system does allow those of us who "have made it" to build a moat around our successful positions, and save for periods when we are not productive - ie retirement.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 14:54
      There are no guarantees that technology yields a better outcome because it's a tool for amplification. It will amplify the good, and bad, in society. We also know that from studying history that using technology to empower individuals via decentralization is a counter to aggregation (think democracy vs. kings) and is net good. I do anticipate that individuals will tokenize themselves, sports athletes are already doing this for brand contracts. I can see students issuing a token offering to investors for college loans (for example), the interest rate being a function of prior performance (test scores, etc.) This is largely true today, what's different is that it's not longer being gate-kept by a few but opens up to the many. If I'm feeling humanitarian as a philanthropist I should be able to directly help a person on the other side of the world obtain opportunity if I so choose, this is largely impossible today without much of the value being captured by intermediaries. The future is bright, but this will come with the discomfort of leaving the cave.
  • MJ
    Matthew J.
    14 June 2020 @ 09:13
    @Milton - Is RV able to register with the Brave browser so we can use it as discussed to earn for viewing and you can also earn tips from viewers, maybe you can start this here and pioneer it on your platform? Potentially this can be done on YouTube also. Great to hear your thoughts @Santiago V. Love to hear your views building on eveything I have been learning, so exciting and eye opening.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 14:49
      Very exciting! The future is coming fast.
  • MS
    Michiel S.
    14 June 2020 @ 12:06
    @Raoul, thank you and the RV team for finding people like Santiago and introducing them to our community, I guess the velocity of knowledge, at least mine, is growing fast and I now just need to translate that so it becomes visible in my bank account:-) @Santiago, I have started following you mate so keep me up to date. Thanks
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 14:48
      Will do! Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed the talk.
  • SE
    Sylvain E.
    13 June 2020 @ 22:29
    Knew nothing about the space, absolutely brilliant. Thanks Santiago & thanks RV
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      14 June 2020 @ 00:59
      Thank you for watching Sylvain.
  • GF
    Gordon F.
    13 June 2020 @ 20:49
    A note to RV. I watched this interview live, and just now finished watching it again. When you post live interviews, you do not allow comments for several hours. I understand that it takes time to prep the interview so it can be seen after the fact, but is there any necessity of preventing comments until the recording is available? I often watch the live interviews, and would like to be able to comment when they are done, rather than having to return hours or days later, when you finally lift the "Closed to comments" barrier. What an interview! I am a retiree who is trying to keep up with developments, and this blew me away. I can't wait for the day when seamless payments and transfers are the norm, especially internationally. (I live now in Ecuador.)
  • HS
    Henry S.
    13 June 2020 @ 19:51
    What a superb debut from Santiago. Please bring him back on RV.
  • MS
    Moritz S.
    13 June 2020 @ 19:50
    Excellent. Absolutely excellent. Quite a new perspective on the spectrum of blockchain possibilities.
  • AH
    Alexander H.
    13 June 2020 @ 19:39
    JUST SAY THE FORBIDDEN WORD LOL. The interledger protocol facilitates the internet of value and the xrp ledger is the settlement layer. XRP BABY... SAY THE WORD.
  • TE
    Tito E.
    13 June 2020 @ 17:14
    How do people feel about the likelihoods or abilities of gvmts to ban use of (say, ) Bitcoin for transactions and forcing people to transact/pay bills/transact legally in "Govcoin X"? Guess Bitcoin becomes purely a store of value. But if made illegal how much can it flourish? This is the main existential question wrt free DLTs isn't it? (i'm long btw and v excited about the space - think its the only true invention in the last 50 years at least - but this government suppression question is something i've found cheerleaders avoid)
    • TE
      Tito E.
      13 June 2020 @ 17:16
      btw Santiago i'm not calling you a cheerleader - was a great discussion and i learned lots
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 18:06
      All words matter. I don't think governments can "ban" Bitcoin because of it's decentralized nature. So long as there are two nodes anywhere in the world and a computer to process the hash Bitcoin will survive. Now, on the spectrum of difficult can they make it to transact in it, how much friction can they impose, I would say quite a lot. For one, they can attack repositories of liquidity (like exchanges), they can pressure financial institutions to avoid supporting fiat onramps / off ramps, they can use force to compel large holders to give up their private keys to either seize the asset for destruction or to depress the market with large bulk sell-offs. There are many ways in which governments can "set back" digital assets in general, but they can't stop it, can't ban it, etc. They will capitulate when a large enough percentage of their constituency demands it and it becomes expedient. With regards to flourishing, Bitcoin as a SoV for a Chinese citizen under capital controls while their purchasing power dwindles as the Renminbi weakens is a pretty good narrative. The problem I have with SoV as language is that it suggests different things to different people, and that's because value is information, it has a tendency to flow not ossify. We WANT to ossify it, so that we can sleep better thinking that our future is more secure, but the reality is that true security comes from increasing the velocity of value, not hoarding it. Permissionless DLT is like open source software, in the beginning it was met with revulsion because it impacted many entrenched interest, but everyone capitulates at a critical mass. We are approaching that point.
    • TE
      Tito E.
      13 June 2020 @ 18:25
      Increasing the velocity of value rather than hoarding. Beautiful concept!
  • DM
    Dominic M.
    13 June 2020 @ 03:54
    Really outstanding conversation - thank you, gentlemen. I'd love to see Mr. Velez on RV again.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:49
      Thanks Dominic.
  • DJ
    David J.
    13 June 2020 @ 04:24
    Guys, thanks so much for sharing. That was a gift. Santiago keep up the good work. This brings a lot of hope to an uncertain time and provided a lot of clarity personally so thanks again!
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:49
      We won't find solutions in our leaders, we need to do it with each other. We now have to tools to do so! Let our leadership compete for our affections.
  • TR
    Theodore R.
    13 June 2020 @ 06:18
    Thank you to Santiago for helping me jump to a much higher level of understanding of the digital asset world in an hour and a half. From zero to a level much higher... As a father, I would love to see my sons one day having the intellect and clarity to so humbly and comfortably help people understand a topic better. Raoul, you are a gold miner and you just made a significant discovery. Now, secure it and bring Santiago back.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:48
      Damn, I think I'm going to frame this comment. My wife will be displeased when I can no longer safely traverse my doorways with the size of my head after this comment. Thanks!
  • SS
    Shanthi S.
    13 June 2020 @ 06:19
    One of the best discussions I’ve heard on RV, ever. Incredible Twitter find Roaul. Santiago is a real life Free Market God!!! Very much looking forward to hearing more from him. I’m long humanity too. <3
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:47
      This! Let's all have a level playing field on which we can compete and serve one another. Incentives drive behavior, so let's create a system in which we are rewarded for sharing value rather than hoarding it!
  • JB
    Julien B.
    13 June 2020 @ 06:49
    Great content, will need to rewatch it to truly absorb everything... anyone have santiago's twitter handle?
    • CM
      Csaba M.
      13 June 2020 @ 07:15
      @Santiag78758327
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:46
      Thank you for the kind words Julien.
  • Cd
    Christiano d.
    13 June 2020 @ 06:50
    I think it is just the best interview about crypto I have seen in RV. Santiago just took me back to the 90s when he described what we had in Brazil for some time. It was called "CPMF", a tax for every bank transaction. Everyone really hated to have a small % of the transaction deducted from their bank accounts.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:46
      Thanks for the good word, my first interview so it means alot. I'm projecting programmatic taxation as an amelioration tool for gross income inequality (Empire Strikes Back). When policy makers realize the gravity of the situation these types of concepts will come. It can be either symbiotic or parasitic. It's our duty as citizenry to ensure it's the former.
  • DN
    D N.
    13 June 2020 @ 07:59
    Lending compute power, taken as a concept to wider scale is one of the potentially revolutionary ideas. It allows for us to take a jurisdictionally based energy, and digitise it thru the Internet into fungible value. No pipelines, no tankers, no rail, no physical friction. Literally converting energy direct to compute which is monetised and priced in a global market. For the ESG crowd, this also provides a market based pricing mechanism for excess electricity... Something the renewable space has struggled with for a while without seeking government PPAs. Proof of work is merely the first application. Will be many more to come and already some interesting startups in the space.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:43
      I couldn't agree more, in fact I'm building a business around this premise. One of the selling points for power generation is that we are taking their product global in the most literal sense. We are focusing on the following electrical to compute to digital asset pipelines: 1. Proof of Work 2. Video Transcoding, storage, delivery (dCDNs) 3. Machine Learning / AI 4. Content workflows (renderings, graphic processing in movies / video games) 5. XR (Augemented and virtual reality rendering & low latency delivery) etc. etc. etc. Sky's the limit. We will be launching this initiative via a Security Token Offering so that qualified investors can participate in our debt offering and be direct recipients of revenues, all transparent and on chain.
  • VG
    Viktor G.
    13 June 2020 @ 08:05
    Very interesting insights and understandable explanations. Many thanks for that! I would also some questions that haven't been discussed in all interviews yet. What is the political weapon that China or a different government may use if they mine more than 50% of all bitcoins or also through exchanges they physically hold over 50% of all positions. How they can influence the forking process and the rules that everyone worldwide needs to adhere to? On the current value of the Bitcoin I had a thought regarding its production costs. Right now the electricity price per MWh has lots in value significantly but the Bitcoin price is at levels where it was before. If I consider that the production costs have halved or more over the past half year and that the low mining costs attract more mining capacity to come online then it should create pressure on crypto prices as long as the electricity stays low. Of course, there may be a surge in the the fiat inflows, but I guess that the production shouldn't be ignored.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:37
      Great questions Viktor. There is a difference between having a majority of the hashing power needed for a 51% attack on the chain (for example a double spend through longest chain swaps) and jurisdictional control of mining rigs. Why? Because you can have mining pools that are non-geographic but still under the control of malicious operators. This is the miracle / curse of the technology. That being said, we've seen this drama play out with Bitcoin cash / SV in real-time and the result was a code and community consensus fork. This is what I meant by the cell division analogy. This thing will happen and investors need to understand the attack vectors, splits, forks, sovereign influences, non-sovereign influences, etc. For the record Bitcoin nodes (the data blocks), exchanges, and mining operators all are part of the consensus process for new Bitcoin upgrades to they all play a role on the forking process. I should know, Coinbase tried in keep Bitcoin Cash from me when it split from Bitcoin and I was very unhappy. They capitulated after community pressure when it became clear they weren't get to keep all the Bitcoin cash. With regards to electricity price and Bitcoin, they are uncorrelated. The way this expressed is as follows. The network difficulty dynamically adjusts in response to available hashing power. This is a competitive environment. Whatever happens on the compute does not change either the block time, nor the supply schedule. The economic gyrations of miner capitulation and additions have no impact on Bitcoin supply. At this point in the game the supply of Bitcoin, being a scheduled process, is becoming a smaller fraction of overall market volume as a source of liquidation on exchanges (slippage is going down as liquidity rises). Apart from all of this, many hardened mining operators have large arsenals of bitcoin for rainy days to finance operations through the depressed periods to acquire market share from less efficient operators. It's a ruthless business. Fiat inflows into the ecosystem will come if the narrative persists as a value proposition. That is to say that if it intends to be a reliable SoV, and can prove it's claims consistently at scale, then money will flow in until a natural equilibrium with fiat is achieved. We are getting close to that brakeout point. The best brand promoter for Bitcoin are the central banks.
  • IN
    Ian N.
    13 June 2020 @ 08:21
    One company owns ALL the stock in America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cede_and_Company (Enjoy that rabbit hole) When hurricane Sandy came the vault flooded, Losing 36.5 TRILLION USD (this is literally just paper money). But please understand a certificate is a document of ownership. https://www.businessinsider.com/hurricane-sandy-damage-dtcc-stocks-2012-11?r=US&IR=T Here's a lovely video of trillions being destroyed, it only has 2k views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZN03yAVyj-0 Oh but don't worry they have a plan to replace them. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/5-522-5469?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1 Just put them on the blockchain, where they belong. It was great to hear about some of these micro economies from Santiago. PoS hasn't created value in the past, I fear ETH 2.0 tbh. I also don't understand how US companies can trade unregistered securities as PoS is within the remit of the SEC & not the CFTC as PoW is. I passed on the ETH ico for regulatory reasons, ETH 2.0 will just ignite them again for me. So until I see a reversal on the BTC/ETH chart, I'm not jumping in. Besides BTC has the best derivatives & controls the market right now. Smart contacts will not die though no matter what happens to ETH. Thank you for your time Santiago & Best of luck on you project. P.S. Loved Raouls face when Santiago explained he got sucked into RV through Youtube.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:24
      Yes, Proof of Stake is what I consider an unproven proposition. Maybe one of the mistakes we will learn from in the future is that the incentive / tokenomic structure upon which you build your initial community consensus has far reaching consequences. It's like trying to decide monetary policy for all history in the first rule set, incredibly naive. The regulatory issues are very interesting, not from the perspective of enforcement by unregistered securities, but from the nature of what it means to be a company, a legal entity, property, equity, etc. When I own ETH I technically own both an incentive system and fuel for transactions, it is not a claim on property, it IS the property. Regulators haven't grasped that they dynamism of property ownership is going to change radically. Prepare!
  • GB
    Graeme B.
    13 June 2020 @ 09:39
    Excellent summary of the direction of travel. This is exactly the conversation I have often with friends and family. Streaming is a great use case. E.g. this video – people could pay per second to watch. And the payment could be split and routed to RealVision and Santiago in what ratio they pre-agreed, in real-time. Same for music – a Spotify listen could be paid for in real-time, the money split and streamed to the songwriters, performers, producer, labels etc in the ratios of their various agreements. Those agreements just need to be in code with the wallet addresses for each party. The thing I missed in this interview was how people get started. Wallets are essential as they are where I store and access this new world. And wallets remain the main point of friction. This is changing though – e.g. Argent is designed for the masses whilst maintaining the principle of decentralisation, ownership and bullet-proof security. The other key thing that wasn't explicit in this interview is that Ethereum is an open system. Anyone can build on it without permission. This is the reason why the pace of innovation is so astounding, and why the implications are so great. Thanks Santiago and Raoul – excellent.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:20
      Great points! Thank you. I regret talking so much about Ethereum, I simply used it as an example for my learning curve because many viewers are familiar with it. I agree that a large part of it's growth is that it's permissionless, but don't underestimate permissioned blockchains that are storming the trade finance world. The projects being built under the radar on frameworks like Marco Polo (by R3) are mind-blowing. They are solving real world problems at scale, with a compliance and identity layer. Hyperledger Fabric is another. All of these systems will be tied together with technologies like Interledger Protocol (ILP), Hyperledger, Overledger, etc. hence Internet of Value.
  • pS
    paul S.
    13 June 2020 @ 10:34
    Great conversation- I was hoping RV would start to look at how to value crypto / blockchain outside of Btc, this with other recent conversations have started do this. Btc is very secure, decentralized and scarce and can be valued as a digital store of value (digital gold / hard money), i think it’s unlikely Btc will have any meaningful competition as the digital gold. Eth is a lesser store of value but has the potential be the base layer for finance. Nearly all defi is currently being built on Eth, it is a more secure chain than other smart contract platforms and Eth 2.0 should make it scalable. Also Eth 2.0 will enable anyone with 32 eth to become a validator and earn yield - with no counterparts risk. The upside for Eth as the base layer for finance is huge. High through put chains such as EOS may get a strangle hold on the gaming market (check out mythical games) or social media (check out Voice), but I don’t think will compete with Eth to be the finance layer, because they aren’t as decentralized and Eth has a big head start. It’s very early days, but I would encourage more debate around trying to value these ecosystems.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:17
      Agreed. An entire industry of analysts are going to spring up to keep track of developments, perform valuations, and extrapolations. This is a healthy part of the ecosystem growth. The end game is bridging them all together in an interoperable framework so we can get the best of all worlds and get some emerging properties to take on the big boys and put them in their lane.
  • Rs
    Rameshchandra s.
    13 June 2020 @ 12:15
    pls help me to receive this on my Mobile phone
    • SS
      Shanthi S.
      13 June 2020 @ 15:05
      The RV app is annoying and only works when it feels like it. I use my phone for all RV content, but I access it via the website in a browser. Duck Duck Go browser works well for me. A little clumsy, but much more reliable than the app.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:15
      Agreed. My android mobile app version has some problems that I'll bring up with the team. Here are some of my complaints: 1. I can't initialize Chromecast to stream from the native app to a compatible device (like a smart TV) w/out having to go to a desktop chrome browser (you can't even do it from the mobile chrome browser). 2. I can't stream back a video with the screen off (I can do this with YouTube so it's built into the mobile framework). The only way to hear audio only is to download an MP3 file (which can allow illegal sharing BTW!). 3. The auto-resume functionality for playback is not consistent. Sometimes episodes start at the beginning, other times in progress, very hard to pinpoint the bug.
  • BT
    Ben T.
    13 June 2020 @ 15:16
    Fantastic chat Raoul/Santiago, many thanks. Santiago, on the subject of computer resource sharing I wondered what your thoughts were on Bittorrent Coin (BTT) ? Do they have a natural advantage in this space given ownership of the Bittorrent protocol and an existing user base?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 17:11
      The torrent protocol is brilliant, but we are a long way from protocol to what is Bittorrent the company, and what has occurred with respect to Tron in the acquisition. I have no concerns with the technology, especially at is it relates to file sharing (for my business I don't even use a cloud or network, we use a file sharing application called Resilio Sync that keeps us all synchronized in our offices without using a 3rd party and at the base layer is bittorrent). I do have concerns with Tron, the founder, and the direction. We can dive into that whenever you want.
  • gr
    guy r.
    13 June 2020 @ 07:21
    fascinating interview. watched twice. thank you.
  • DT
    David T.
    12 June 2020 @ 22:50
    Positive sides of crypto sounds great but, there must be some negative sides we just don't know yet. How for example PPP program would work if a central bank doesn't have crypto that public is using or there will not be CBs and crises in the crypto world?
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 02:46
      There are a great many negatives to digital assets, a subset of which is crypto currency, if you want to talk about taxonomy. For one, large early adopters often times hold a disproportionate influence on the course and development of these nascent ecosystems. That can lead to excessive market manipulation, code forks, etc. The other problem is the complexity of the technology, which is a barrier for mass adoption. This is why interoperability is so important, we need a layer that abstracts away all of the complexity and simply works, the same way TCP/IP works for your internet access. A PPP program has already been demonstrated in the digital asset space, it's called an "airdrop". Often times though this comes from centralized issuance to incentivize use by "gifting" early participants with free shares. It's a jump start mechanism. For mature fiat currencies like the $, a CBDC can fulfill this role by granting citizenry direct access to monetary stimulus from fiscal policy or liquidity from monetary policy. In both instances the technology allows for tracking and compliance. That being said, all of the above does not preclude systemic crisis in any of these arenas, be them micro or macro, because humans be humans.
  • TB
    Tad B.
    12 June 2020 @ 22:55
    Very, very interesting. I'm going to have to watch this again. He's definitely a good guest to have on more. Counterparty risk is one of the main attractions of crypto so the first half of this interview rang alarm bells for me on that...and I don't see why PayPal won't take over the payment exchange market, frankly. But the rest of it looks like the Wild West: Everything's up for grabs.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 02:41
      The reason PayPal won't take over the exchange market is simple, they represent a single pool of liquidity and by all measures, is a demographic preference. Venmo and others are favored by millenials, so how do you make the two systems interoperate without everyone having to have accounts on both? Answer, Interledger Protocol. By using streaming micropayments, path-finding, and competitive connectors you can create a Internet of Value that services everyone. I agree there will be dominant players with economies of scale, but the moment they attempt to leverage their market share in unfavorable terms there will be a competitor that will steal all the flow. This is key.
  • TS
    Thomas S.
    12 June 2020 @ 23:39
    Good talk. I've been working in the Ethereum space for the past 5 years on various projects, so there wasn't much new for me. But, if you're just looking for some exposure to this area, this is a great primer. Ignore most of the jargon like "trustless" and "store of value" if that's off-putting. If you do find this talk interesting, then dive in. There are thousands of Ethereum projects underway, many in the DeFi space (decentralized finance). It's not coming. It's already here. It may not have significant exposure yet, but that will come.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 02:39
      The DeFi space is incredibly exciting because at the end of the day, for me, it represents an opportunity to allocate capital in an efficient, yet distributed manner. It has the potential to grow without creating systemic risk since there is no central counterparty. It will swallow up Wall Street IMPO.
  • PD
    Peter D.
    13 June 2020 @ 00:50
    Ethereum is like "fiat crypto." It has a single point of failure (founder control) and an uncertain inflation rate. This guy is smart, informative and credible. He (and the boys at A16H) may be the "smartest guys in the room." His apps. (and Eth. apps in general) may turn out to be great. But the Ethereum as a currency is not in the same class as BTC. BCH and BSV.
    • PD
      Peter D.
      13 June 2020 @ 01:25
      Fantastic interview BTW. There were not many comments, but this guy is top notch. Love the concept of interoperability. Hats' off to Raoul for the crypto coverage.
    • SV
      Santiago V. | Contributor
      13 June 2020 @ 02:37
      Ethereum's history is checkered, without a doubt. The rollback done in the early days was a smart move from a governance perspective because the Parity flaw would have been a black eye to the community value proposition. That being said, it was mature because had they not done it it may have resulted in a failure to start. These are the kinds of debates that need to happen withing communities. If they are small and requisite consensus required to do these kinds of rollbacks exist, it's 100% legit. For the record, I don't work on Ethereum at all. The thing with digital assets is they are not all intended to be "currencies" in the traditional sense that they are fiat, often times they simply represent an incentive system to achieve an end objective, in this case payment for computation (gas). The Bitcoin derivatives are trying to decide whether they want to evolve into SoV or P2P payment systems, all of which are valid and admirable use cases. I hope the main takeaway of the conversation is that we don't need to be tribal about digital assets, nor form adversarial positions, because with interoperability we have the technology to choice and exchange value without compromise. That's the revolution.