Tyler & Cameron Winklevoss: Bitcoin Is The “Trade of the Decade”

Published on
December 11th, 2020
Duration
67 minutes

James Litinsky: Rare Earths Taking Center Stage in the Electric Vehicle Boom


Tyler & Cameron Winklevoss: Bitcoin Is The “Trade of the Decade”

The Interview ·
Featuring Tyler Winklevoss and Cameron Winklevoss

Published on: December 11th, 2020 • Duration: 67 minutes

Tyler Winklevoss, CEO and co-founder of Gemini, and Cameron Winklevoss, president and co-founder of Gemini, join Real Vision CEO Raoul Pal to discuss how they first discovered Bitcoin, their exploration into other crypto assets, and market psychology. They explain the importance of network effects for Bitcoin, noting that it is a type of social network. The Winklevoss brothers share their grand vision for Gemini and how they plan to shepherd the next wave of adopters away from legacy finance and fully into crypto. Filmed on December 7, 2020. Key Learnings: The crypto asset class is very small and, because of this, institutional investors have been unable to get exposure to it. Bitcoin is a very young asset with enormous upside potential. Many people are just starting to get their feet wet in crypto, and the Winklevoss brothers believe that eventually people will leave the legacy financial systems fully for crypto infrastructure with Gemini helping to facilitate this migration.

Comments

Transcript

  • SS
    Soo S.
    11 January 2021 @ 11:14
    Everyone talks about PTJ, Druckenmiller, Saylor and Mass Mutual. Are there other institutionals adopting Bitcoin?
  • LB
    Lorenzo B.
    16 December 2020 @ 17:45
    This is probably the 1.4x10^7 BTC interview about how BTC is: divisible, pristine, hard asset, nobody's liability, unincumbered, reliable, finite... I think who wanted to understand it, must have got it so far. and I completely understand that we all have a tiny axe to grind here and there (from M. Saylor to the Winklevoss), I perfectly reckon that, and it's great that RV gives space for that too (honestly appreciated) I personaly would truly appreciate to see a bit more of technical dicussion, which means less sales/PMs/entreprenuers and a bit more engineers/programmers/geeks What about BTC energy consumption? in the times of ESG, how much does it cost to run the BTC network, both in $ and energy footprint? How is the energy consumption related to potential increasing adoption?
    • CH
      Christian H.
      16 December 2020 @ 20:51
      It's my understanding that BTC will be a huge driver of clean cheap energy - it's part of the solution and will be embraced by ESG investors worldwide. eg. flared gas emissions now being harnessed by BTC miners in west Texas.
  • RM
    Robert M.
    11 December 2020 @ 23:49
    So as I read through the comments, I see people asking about it being a reserve asset for central banks or that insurance companies will invest since bond yields are low (though bitcoin yields zero). Commonly referred to benefits have been: a) The brilliance of money tied to a payment system (though it appears to have high transaction fees like VISA/Paypal). So to realize this "payment" benefit, it has to be used as payment for things. b) The other often stated benefit is that it is limited to 21 million bitcoins versus holding currency in a fiat printing world. Therefore it is a store of value. So here are my questions: 1. If it is to be used as a payment system, 6% of the US population can own 1 bitcoin. On a worldwide basis, only .3% of the world can own 1 bitcoin. So from a payment perspective, this appears not to be a realizable benefit since only a niche group of owners can use it for transactions. 2. As far as being a reserve asset or a major asset for financial companies to invest, the market cap is $350 billion. Compared to the worldwide bond market, bitcoin is .27% of the market. How is this a large enough market for institutions to truly invest vs just playing around? Bitcoin would have to go to $333,000 to equate to 5% of the bond market, which I guess is the argument by bulls. 3. Some studies have shown that 95% of trading is faked, wash trades. Is there enough float to really support an institutional market, much less a transactional market - which is suppose to be one of the main benefits? 4. How much of bitcoin is tied up by people like Tyler and Cameron. Can't find this number, but my guess this sharply reduces the amount of bitcoin that is tradeable, which again defeats its purpose as a payment system. So for me the only benefit appears to be is it a store of value (outside of living somewhere like Venezuela and needing to get their money out of the country or being used in black markets). So if the bull play is that it goes to the moon, i.e. $333,000 and according to Winklevoss it is those under 25 who get it, is the trade that I buy today hoping someone under 30 can pay me $333,000 for it in five years (instead of buying a physical asset like a house) since the market appears to too small for major institutional investors. And if the market stays too small for institutional investors to truly play, is it just a market of primarily individual investors hoping to flip to another individual investor? What am I missing in these numbers and benefits?
    • AB
      Aditya B.
      12 December 2020 @ 01:45
      Bitcoin is NOT for payment. It may have started that way, BUT in the current senario, there are various different coins to fill that role, and do it much better. Bitcoin is purely a digital asset. This class of asset has never existed before. You are wrong to assume only individuals are investing. Recent news flow clearly give evidence to the contrary. And when you come to think of it, even largest institutional money (retiremnt and penion) is actully individual money. So if people want that in their retirement account ETF, institutions will provide it.
    • RM
      Robert M.
      12 December 2020 @ 02:24
      Aditya, I agree in that I don't see how it is a payment system. But Dan Tapiero (who has been interviewed on RV) just posted this link on twitter: https://www.aier.org/article/why-does-bitcoin-have-value/ In that article, it states "Bitcoin managed to bundle its unit of account with a payment system that lives on the ledger. That’s its innovation and why it obtained a value and that value continues to rise. " It goes on to state "The currency is held and accepted by many thousands of institutions, both online and offline. Its payment system is very popular in poor countries without vast banking infrastructures but also in developed countries. And major institutions—including the Federal Reserve, the OECD, the World Bank, and major investment houses—are paying respectful attention and weaving blockchain technology into their operations." Quick point: owning bitcoin, I don't believe, gives you any equity or financial return in the commercialization of blockchain technology. So this article is pressing the point that it is a payment system. You say it is not a payment system. That is what I find interesting about bitcoin, people struggle/disagree/have different views on what its actual value is. And if I am correct on market cap, I may be correct on it only be any individual marketplace. I stated market caps above, you did not address my numbers, but the bitcoin market looks like it is a long way from being an institutional market and individuals can't get ownership via an institution if the market is too small for them to invest. I get that some name investors and some funds have bought a small amount of bitcoin. But when it comes to trading volume in equities and bonds, bitcoin does not provide enough float/liquidity to be a meaningful asset class in the institutional market if the number of coins is fixed at 21 million (such limitations are why the US left the gold standard in the 1970s). The value of each coin would have to exceed $1 million and why would an institution pay that amount for one bitcoin in a major developed market? Only reason would be to convert back to dollars/euros/pounds/yen in the hope that those currencies devalued relative to bitcoin at the time of that conversion. Which means they have to find a buyer willing to pay more than they paid for bitcoin on the same hope down the road, that buyer will also find another buyer willing to pay a higher price at time of conversion (since to your point is not used for transactions). Again, get the value in getting money out of third world countries, but in first world countries, you rely on the value every increasing into the future otherwise you lose dollars on the transaction fee and lack of interest paid on your holdings.
    • FL
      Frank L.
      12 December 2020 @ 08:39
      1) It's divisible down to 8 decimal points and the smallest unit of bitcoin is called a satoshi. 100m satoshis = 1 bitcoin 2/3) it has to start somewhere 4) They claim to have a little under 1% of total supply
    • WE
      William E.
      16 December 2020 @ 03:12
      1. Bitcoin is divisible to 8 decimal places. The smallest unit of a Bitcoin is divisible to 100 millionth of a Bitcoin called a Satoshi. Those who hold one whole Bitcoin could be like holding a million dollars. What percentage of the US population holds a million dollars? So your first concern is not an issue.
  • AK
    Ado K.
    14 December 2020 @ 17:25
    Is not your keys not your crypto behind the times? Possibly the dumbest f ing question of 2020, it is astonishing, if you start looking to deep into xrp and eth, even a brilliant man can completely lose his wits. For the wink twins, the reason I can not trust you, is because you can seize my coins if uncle sam tells you to. It is not a technical issue, it is an issue of the asset being unconfiscatble. I do not want the collective to be able to take my assets, regardless of if I am complaint with the law or not. When I hold my keys I am as close to a sovereign individual as possible, and honestly it is a truly amazing feeling. Become a first class Bitcoin citizen, hold your keys, run your own full node, it will literally be as liberating as the first time you got to drive a car.
    • RW
      R W.
      15 December 2020 @ 18:08
      I couldn't agree more, Governments seizing the exchange funds is the biggest risk and they don't even talk about it.
    • WE
      William E.
      16 December 2020 @ 02:57
      I couldn't agree more. Raoul once said Bitcoin is a life raft. Imagine being on a ship in rough seas and there's not enough life jackets for everyone on board. Do you really think the government is going allow you to keep the Bitcoin you are not in possession of, or will they just take it for themselves?
  • JR
    Jeff R.
    15 December 2020 @ 22:54
    I think it’s cool they came back after getting screwed over by Zuck to hit it big with BTC.
  • AD
    Adrian D.
    13 December 2020 @ 18:14
    Over two centuries ago, Aristotle provided the seven attributes of ideal money. Yes, Bitcoin is divisible, fungible, and easy to transfer. But inherently valuable? universally recognized and desired? not really, Store of value? Makes a gold chart look brain dead. Rare? well, Bitcoin may be but not all digital currencies in aggregate. So, to me, Bitcoin etc have utility, but golds wins the competition hands down. (Of course, one can own both.)
    • RW
      R W.
      15 December 2020 @ 18:12
      Look into it again, gold really is a liability and not an asset. It is so inconvinient, not easily divisible, not fungible, hard to verify and even harder to transport (accross borders) and very hard to store/keep safe as well. Then i'm not even talking about the environmental impact of mining, or even mining when price goes up because then they will poison/plough up more and more rainforests/countries.. (p.s. this is a millenial's opinion)
  • AB
    Andrew B.
    14 December 2020 @ 22:58
    Brilliant interview. Thanks for the knowledge drop as always. These guys came up with the idea for FB and then bought millions of dollars (then) of BTC in single digits. Now they are another step ahead with NFTs and Nifty Gateway. If you think these two aren't extremely talented then you haven't got a brain. Mic drop.
  • MS
    Matthew S.
    14 December 2020 @ 16:50
    Great discussion but a programmable CBDC-based economy will not work. It ignores the ground-up process of Human Action. All of the ideas for a data-driven mastermind economy ignore the brilliance of Human Action, Praxeology, and the "I, Pencil" understanding of the free market.
  • NI
    Nate I.
    14 December 2020 @ 05:11
    "a lot of people cannot really get access to gold, if you think about it, whereas really anybody with an internet connection gets access to Bitcoin" Really? So they can open a Gemini account to buy bitcoin but they can't open a Goldmoney account or a brokerage account and buy GLD? How does that work?
    • GT
      Guillaume T.
      14 December 2020 @ 08:53
      You will be amaze the see how many poor countries have phones. Before owning gold.
  • AP
    Alex P.
    11 December 2020 @ 18:19
    Raoul was bombarded with request for these two copy paste tool bags? Wow. These guys are going to single handily reck so many retail portfolios. The level of contradiction with their thesis is unbearable to watch.
    • ST
      Sam T.
      11 December 2020 @ 18:30
      What specific challenges do you have to their thesis?
    • AP
      Alex P.
      11 December 2020 @ 18:34
      Gemini’s philanthropic efforts are so generous, they just bring me to tears. Their next step is to promote BTC in the developed world were it can cost 5 dollars to send 15. Beautiful. Amazing. I can’t wait until these guys are either taking raw in some Thai prison or just simply annoying their private circle of friends.
    • AP
      Alex P.
      11 December 2020 @ 18:43
      Sam, try to truly understand bitcoin and it’s capabilities to affect absolutely everything and you will see that falls apart. They support and perpetuate ecosystems that are Ponzi schemes. Bitcoin will grow from its widespread usage. BTC cannot support this. Neither can Ethereum on a global scale. I couldn't care less about any tribalism, I just hate how there are so many story telling apes in this space making so much money from the very little liquidity they have to steal from.
    • SP
      Simon P.
      11 December 2020 @ 21:21
      Very hard to watch
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:35
      @Alejandro - you're full of it. I recently sent about 7k USD for about a dollar, and the only reason it cost that much is I made it priority transaction, so I was willing to pay a higher fee. "5 USD to send 15" is a load of garbage -- really, anyone can check tx fees right now and its nowhere near the lies you are spouting. You just sound like most no-coiners I know, willfully ignorant and fundamentally flawed in your reasoning.
    • AP
      Alex P.
      13 December 2020 @ 10:54
      Timothy, I'm actually quite bullish on blockchain and bitcoin my friend. With regards to being able to send 7k for a dollar that's not innovative at all. What's going to be innovative is when bitcoin allows anyone to send cents for fractions of cents in seconds. Peer to peer electronic cash, I encourage you to read the bitcoin whitepaper. Don't let the SOV or "digital gold" narrative that's being jammed down our throats fool you brother.
    • CB
      Carl B.
      13 December 2020 @ 21:50
      Their broad bitcoin thesis is spot on, but I was similar, couldn't finish watching it. They're embarrassing ambassadors. Especially the argument against "not your keys, not your coins" - bitcoins utility is that it's a completely independent of the rest of finance; sovereignty is baked right in.
  • AF
    Alan F.
    12 December 2020 @ 15:44
    Since they brought up the subject of banking the unbanked I'd love for anyone to help me understand how this is possible without a layer 2 solution which doesn't sacrifice ANY security. How is the Lightning network or any other layer 2 solution coming along? During the bullrun in 2017 we saw transaction fees of $30-40 and settlement was taking 6+ hours, in other words 2-3 weeks of income for the unbanked person they seek to help. And this was still 99% retail speculative utility and a small fraction of the world had a BTC wallet. From what I can tell it seems at this point a foregone conclusion that BTC is incapable of fulfilling its original intended use case as a currency but that's OK. I do think it holds utility in the near and medium term as a store of value which is why I'm holding it.
    • SB
      Sharif B.
      13 December 2020 @ 17:56
      There is large amounts of Bitcoin now moving on Ethereum and EOS and a couple of others in a peer to peer way. And PayPal just entered the L2 space , Revolut have been there a while. Slowly then Suddenly.
  • GH
    Guy H.
    13 December 2020 @ 14:17
    Interesting interview thanks Raoul. The generic “bitcoin kills banks” thesis usually lacks depth. Regulated banking activity is partly credit extension within a fractional reserve system, and partly payments and other services. The latter I can see bitcoin disintermediating; the former less obviously. Unless the need for 10x+ leveraged regulated lending expertise disappears, banks should retain some utility. Unregulated bitcoin lenders might run up to 3x leverage for a while – perhaps to the bottom of the next business cycle when they’re all wiped out. But a 3x leveraged financial system is neither efficient or interesting. What institution stabilises a 10x levered bitcoin loan market is quite a fascinating topic.
  • PN
    PJ N.
    12 December 2020 @ 03:57
    Would have taken these guys much more seriously if they did not argue that Gold would soon be supplanted by Bitcoin, due to Elon Musk mining gold from asteroids.,.. yes they said that... yes there is a video of them saying it.
    • FN
      Frederick N.
      12 December 2020 @ 06:59
      Where do you think they buy their weed? It must be strong
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:24
      Mining the Kuiper Belt isn't a pipe dream. If anyone can do it, its an assortment of Silicon Valley Billionaires concentrated on doing so. Gold supply doubles every generation, roughly. There has been a clear rotation out of gold into crypto in general. It isn't surprising, as crypto has enjoyed massive yields versus Gold. If Gold can't lift its head when debt-to-GDP is north of 130%, then what use is it? Massive devaluation is happening and this wonderful asset doesn't even provide a decent hedge. My guess is that its ring-fenced and regulated into passivity. Why else would govt's sell issued coins? If they were really afraid of "hard money" they wouldn't traffic in it, much less let the hoi polloi plunk down their garbage fiat for it. But there I go again, thinking differently, which enabled me to build massive wealth -- even though I get criticized for doing so. I'm fine with it - my revenge is living well and watching charts in shorts and a t-shirt, instead of having to go to an office making someone else rich.
    • AM
      Alonso M.
      13 December 2020 @ 13:26
      Hey Fred, I have your answer. I think they buy it from Timothy P.
  • WD
    William D.
    11 December 2020 @ 11:53
    Excellent as always but is it possible to find someone who can logically argue why BTC is very overvalued and not worth investing in? All the guests are uber bulls and financially at stake. There are academic papers that show BTC does not follow Metcalfe’s Law, so is BTC just another basic commodity with supply/demand on any given day setting price?
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      11 December 2020 @ 12:24
      Exactly William. It has become an endless stream of bulls/shills with big stakes in BTC. can we please get both sides of the coin/arguement.
    • GF
      George F.
      11 December 2020 @ 15:07
      If you're looking for the other side, I would take a look at what Nouriel Roubini and Peter Schiff have said around bitcoin. You can find a lot of material on youtube or just check out their twitter feed to get deep in the weeds. Once you hear their arguments, you can make your own decision around how you view BTC. Personally, I did the same exercise and it became abundantly obvious that Bitcoin wins out but it's up to every individual to come to their own conclusion.
    • JL
      J L.
      11 December 2020 @ 15:24
      Why would BTC not follow Metcalfe's Law or at least some comparable version of it? That is like saying BTC sees no benefit from network effects. Given that a store of value becomes more stable and attractive the greater the number of investors who are using it (via added market depth and long-term holding base etc), and given that the number of storage solutions and intermediary payment rails (e.g. Fidelity and PayPal) will increase along with the user base in a two-way reflexive manner, to state that BTC does not benefit from Metcalfe's Law seems empirically false.
    • JL
      J L.
      11 December 2020 @ 15:35
      Re behaving as a basic commodity, imagine a commodity that is known to be in short supply relative to overwhelming demand at a given point in time. It will be hard to find a credible bear case for that commodity, because the supply vs demand picture is compelling. If all the chocolate makers need cocoa, and the cocoa crop just got devastated by flash floods, it wouldn't make sense to go around saying "someone give me the bear case on cocoa please." Either the bull case holds up well under stress testing or it does not. If it does, there you go. And even if BTC is in fact "just a commodity," that might not matter. Gold is "just a commodity" too, in a very real sense, but with a specific set of properties that increase the level of demand relative to supply against a certain macro backdrop.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      11 December 2020 @ 16:18
      Great post George. I agree with you, and fade Roubini all the time (I like Schiff but the one trick pony thing gets old after a while) ... but what do you think is their strongest argument for being anti-BTC? Thanks.
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      11 December 2020 @ 16:58
      @ George F. If we are to troll youtube and twitter for meaningful and unbiassed news feeds then why pray tell should anyone subscribe here? Correct me if I am wrong but part of the appeal of RV is to gain access to all sides from a holistic macro view. May as well subscribe to Kitco to get advice on buying gold all day long.
    • DP
      Duane P.
      11 December 2020 @ 19:47
      @George The problem with Roubini and Schiff is I don't think they have a good grasp on the crypto world. I would like someone who understands this technology but is a bear on BTC or any other particular crypto assets. Maybe they don't exist. Maybe everyone who does a deep dive into it becomes a believer. Who knows. It is strange that there is no one on RV to take the other side of the argument though.
    • DP
      D P.
      11 December 2020 @ 19:59
      I hold BTC and don't mind all of this free (to me) marketing material.
    • mh
      mark h.
      11 December 2020 @ 20:42
      I'm own gold and it's miners, but I stay away from Schiff. He's myopic and only sees things one way regardless of the circumstances. I'm not as familiar with Roubini, but he strikes me as the same way.
    • ST
      Sam T.
      11 December 2020 @ 21:58
      Roy Sebag has the best counter-arguments as to why Bitcoin won't work. He understands the space extremely well, used to run one of the largest mining operations. Here's a RV interview of him discussing some of the issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kim-6HGEc0w He basically points out that the durability of Bitcoin relies on the incentive structure of the network working to perpetuity. We would need mining to continue to be economical for decades, hundreds, or thousands of years in order for Bitcoin to survive in the long run. Compare this with Gold, which requires no human action in order for it to maintain it's durability. Humans could be wiped away and gold would still exist. I am a Bitcoin bull bull bull but I think these are some of the best counter arguments I have heard.
    • PB
      Patrick B.
      11 December 2020 @ 22:46
      Agreed, need a fair, robust bull vs. bear debate to really test the thesis. Thanks
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:39
      And yet, its persisted for these 10+ years, in spite of your thesis that it can't. I'd say it means your premise is fundamentally flawed. A lot of people who don't understand crypto think this way, and I suggest that you educate yourself outside of the MSM talking points of "this can't work". Honestly, I've never seen such a flood of ignorance in the comments on this topic -- what happened, did the Fed lay off a bunch of people and they're posting in between job searches?
    • NT
      Nicholas T.
      13 December 2020 @ 12:06
      Banks and institutions coming into the space may have a near term positive impact on the price of BTC, and after that it's just another investment and will be regulated. The fantastic BTC valuation will collapse around the point in time when central banks really get into the space themselves with their own digital currencies. They're not going to let you pay your taxes in BTC without conversion to their CBDC, so ultimately, even if they can't stamp out every rogue BTC trading network, its utility in the vast majority of day-to-day transactions is going to be regulated. This is not going to support the current or future fantastic valuations people are predicting for BTC. And right now, it seems BTC advocates have people continuing to buy on yesterday's news: the concept of the technology being a store of value, a hard and diminishing, trackable asset existing outside the fiat currency world. They see financial institutions moving into the BTC space as some sort of support for this point of view. What it might mean is that we are in the final phase of this "trade of the decade" bull market. Gold on the other hand is held by central banks around the world, with Russia and China especially buying it in the last decade. CBs and governments around the world will be more interested in protecting the value of gold than of BTC as we move into a digital currency world. BTC's value and place in that world has yet to be defined.
  • MH
    Murray H.
    13 December 2020 @ 02:08
    I wish they would have been asked if they are on developing an ETF as I know they have previously tried. Are they still working on one.
  • DL
    Dam L.
    12 December 2020 @ 20:37
    meh they don't seem to be too smart
  • JC
    John C.
    12 December 2020 @ 17:41
    I had a hunch this interview would be incredible. So I saved it for Saturday morning, so I could have some coffee, relax and really pay attention. It did not disappoint!
  • LF
    Lisa F.
    12 December 2020 @ 17:01
    I can't find my car keys TBH. When someone says, 'not your keys, not your crypto' I want to poke them in the nose!
    • LF
      Lisa F.
      12 December 2020 @ 17:16
      Also, thank you all very much for the great content!!!
  • JR
    J R.
    11 December 2020 @ 15:26
    You would think they are digital twins for quite a while now, why haven't they figured out a system of who answers what question without stepping on each others toes ;-)) You might have to help them out next time @Raoul
    • DP
      D P.
      11 December 2020 @ 19:57
      If you sat there, listening for 67mins, and that's all you took away from this interview you really wasted your time.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:47
      You obviously don't understand what synchronous communication provides, and how people interact within it. What is this garbage, honestly. Its like some toss-off posting on a tabloid message board.
  • JJ
    Jay J.
    11 December 2020 @ 13:40
    😂 “can anyone you you secure your btc better than us, the answer is probably yes, very much yes” “I don’t think anyone can secure your btc better than us” 😂 your dumb we’re smart give us your value, I think I’ve heard his somewhere before from the people at the top a failing sector.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:46
      Oh my, the horror of someone who has devised a custody service and believes in it. What did you expect -- "here's our custody offering, but its a bit shit...." While I don't like storing coins with anyone, having some rube posting an emoticon-laden garbage opinion about how a massively successful CEO conducts his business is beyond the pale. If you're so insightful, what is your solution? Besides tossing off half-assed posts, that is.
  • DG
    Dave G.
    11 December 2020 @ 15:16
    Instead of shutting down the internet couldn't governments just make it illegal and impose fines or jail time?
    • JJ
      Jay J.
      11 December 2020 @ 15:24
      And they will chance away huge amounts of wealth, as the market cap grows the BTC holders will reward the jurisdictions that welcome them and punish those that don’t
    • JL
      J L.
      11 December 2020 @ 15:29
      No because government jurisdictions compete with one another, and democratically elected governments are constrained by the voters. It is sort of like asking why governments don't just raise taxes sky high. They would see capital flight if they did, and jurisdictions that adopted lower tax rates would benefit.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:36
      China has banned Bitcoin about three different times now. The OTC markets for BTC are still thriving. If a totalitarian dictatorship with a country-wide firewall can't stop it, how can any other govt do it? It just isn't possible.
  • TE
    Tito E.
    11 December 2020 @ 19:21
    This conversation was pretty weak
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:32
      A poor craftsman blames his tools.
  • BC
    Bill C.
    12 December 2020 @ 02:58
    The money to be made is based simply on money flow into the limited asset and the broad assumption of long tern acceptance of bitcoin as an asset. As long as there's increasingly acceptance it's a winner. I'm reminded of Green Stamps and Top Value Stamps in the 1960s and 70s. My question remains, can bitcoin accounts be hacked. A few weeks ago there was a story about a 'silk road' account of bitcoin was was hacked by a government and $ millions taken from it. How could this happen if bitcoin accounts are safe? Another story was about how cell phone providers, the providers themselves, or maybe it was the likes of Google, were blocking emails - direct emails - that had pro-Trump links in them. I don't know much about either of these stories and the last mention is not about Trump, per se, it's about hackability and the ability to block something...like a transaction...that a cell phone provider or an email service deems unsuitable. Say the carriers computers recognized a cell phone bitcoin transaction...could it be simply blocked or rerouted. And if the answer is no...why is this the case. I would welcome informed comments on this.
    • RM
      Robert M.
      12 December 2020 @ 04:24
      As I posted below, that is the only value I see. Some argue it is not the transaction system, so it is only the money flow and the ability to sell to someone else that pays a higher price.
    • ER
      Emma R.
      12 December 2020 @ 08:39
      Important question and there are long and detailed ways to answer that you can explore more deeply. But in short as long as *you* hold the private cryptographic keys to your Bitcoin they cannot be hacked. On an exchange like Gemini they hold the keys and you have an IOU. Hence the importance of the terms custodial vs non-custodial when talking about Bitcoin wallets. I remember Peter McCormack tackling this question in a very straightforward way on hit What Bitcoin Did podcast. Hope this helps.
    • TP
      Timothy P.
      12 December 2020 @ 16:30
      The protocol hasn't been "hacked". In fact, the only reason funds were seized was because the idiot that had the coins stored them on a shady backwater exchange, which was coerced to turn over the funds. I could give you a BTC address right now, and you can't take my coins. The protocol is fine. If I'm stupid enough to store coins on a third-party service, then I'm at the whim of their custody. Blocking Bitcoin transactions would be difficult. Its similar to the efforts put into stopping digital file piracy, for instance. Millions of dollars have been put into these efforts, but they can't stop it. Frankly, short of shutting down the entire internet (and even then, the blockchain is transmitted from a satellite now - so good luck there) it isn't possible. Other methods for "off grid" solutions have been progressing, including 'mesh' networks and short-to-medium range RF methods. The cat is out of the bag, and no one is capable of stopping it.
  • MR
    Marco R.
    12 December 2020 @ 12:43
    Why are those two not challenged about Tether or at least asked about it. Is Tether a scam or not. Would be good to get a public statement of them
  • BC
    Brandon C.
    11 December 2020 @ 14:45
    Request for Mark Hart interview on BTC + macro
    • MO
      Master O.
      12 December 2020 @ 06:15
      Yes please bring back Mark Hart to RV. I have commented few times to bring him back.
  • MB
    Matt B.
    12 December 2020 @ 00:23
    Great interview, well done on getting the Winklevoss twins onto Real Vision. Just shared it with two mates who are yet to sign up to the Vision. I found this interview was a good Macro Discussion, while referring to the real useability of crypto. I feel there should be a deeper dive into their business model as a follow-up interview. Keen to understand more about Gemini, their strategy and security protocols. They already have such a good reputation as the custodian of choice.
  • MD
    Matt D.
    11 December 2020 @ 23:34
    Thanks Raoul, enjoyed this. The idea that the bigger institutions will only buy in once it is worth more (or deeper liquidity) is interesting...
  • df
    diamantino f.
    11 December 2020 @ 16:49
    If Bitcoin goes wrong they will be going to the moon to dig Gold, my money is on them for sure
    • JM
      John M.
      11 December 2020 @ 18:08
      Mining on the moon is not relevant for most peoples' investment time horizon, guessing 1-5 years. However, if you are really interested, so far: https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/28/20936315/nasa-mars-insight-lander-heat-probe-mole-digging-failure
  • JD
    John D.
    11 December 2020 @ 17:47
    Great piece. Wish they would've had a more in depth discussion of Bitcoin as a potential reserve asset for CBs. Hopefully this is a discussion that takes place in more detail on the RV at some point.
  • AS
    Atul S.
    11 December 2020 @ 16:30
    So how would credit and lending and that part of the money supply work with a CBDC? Who prices credit risk?
  • DZ
    Dan Z.
    11 December 2020 @ 14:59
    There's more "likes" in this interview then todays price of BTC.
  • NR
    Nathan R.
    11 December 2020 @ 13:34
    “If you purchased a cryptocurrency in 2020 or 2021 you may be entitled to compensation.”
  • MR
    Michael R.
    11 December 2020 @ 13:16
    We just saw Mass Mutual dip a toe on the water with $100M BTC purchase, a tiny fraction of their ~$235B holdings. Soon all of the insurance companies will green light BTC purchases simply because they cannot obtain bond yield to meet their future obligations and the existing fiat system cannot be saved.
  • sc
    steve c.
    11 December 2020 @ 11:16
    Great interview!
  • WW
    Woody W.
    11 December 2020 @ 09:58
    One of the best interviews on RV !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I hope to see them again next year!
  • EC
    Edward C.
    11 December 2020 @ 09:42
    Fantastic
  • RC
    Radu C.
    11 December 2020 @ 08:50
    Love it. Thank you.
  • JR
    John R.
    11 December 2020 @ 08:37
    Really, really interesting.
  • SP
    Sat P.
    11 December 2020 @ 07:59
    Great discussion. Institutions not getting involved “until Bitcoin is more expensive”just goes to show why people shouldn’t trust Wall Street with their money. It was great to learn about niftygateway.com too. There is so much potential for digital commerce on that kind of platform, the opportunities there are endless.
  • BP
    Blair P.
    11 December 2020 @ 06:58
    I tweeted at them a while ago. From @stubbornnut1 to change the ui on their exchange to create a more realistic unit of btc. I'm so glad they listened. Great interview. Very exciting.
    • BP
      Blair P.
      11 December 2020 @ 07:03
      Nvm. That was Dan held I tweeted at and he doesn't listen to anyone.
  • MK
    Martin K.
    11 December 2020 @ 06:22
    Legends!!