Bitcoin Legend Dan Morehead: On the Cutting-Edge of Macro and Crypto

Published on
November 14th, 2019
Duration
57 minutes


Bitcoin Legend Dan Morehead: On the Cutting-Edge of Macro and Crypto

The Interview ·
Featuring Dan Morehead

Published on: November 14th, 2019 • Duration: 57 minutes

Dan Morehead sits down with Dan Tapiero for a comprehensive conversation between money managers about the most critical aspects of the crypto trade. Morehead makes the case for the 'Trade of a Generation', detailing specific currencies and protocols, future regulation, international money transfers, global custody solutions, and emerging 'Layer 2' protocols — which many in the space believe will power the next generation of blockchain solutions. Filmed on November 8th in New York.

Comments

Transcript

  • MO
    Miguel O.
    7 December 2019 @ 13:59
    Masterful interview...impeccable segways, spot-on questions, unbiased inquiry. DTap is top 3 interviewer on RV. Please do more macro x crypto work :)
  • JH
    Joel H.
    3 December 2019 @ 03:03
    People have to stop using the word currency & money in the same context. They are different.
    • DA
      David A.
      6 December 2019 @ 15:15
      How different? Different in what way?
  • GE
    George E.
    27 November 2019 @ 16:46
    "Did you put a tie on for that?"
  • JL
    Jordan L.
    23 November 2019 @ 21:17
    Dan Morehead never ceases to entertain, impress, and inform. He is the best evangelist out there due to his ability to articulate in a direct way, all of the many nuances of crypto. I can never get enough. I still have my doubts about Bitcoin vs. the field. Good thoughts on Libra.
  • HH
    HODL H.
    20 November 2019 @ 22:29
    Can we get the professors on who said price surge was driven by market manipulation? University of Texas Professor John Griffin and Ohio State University’s Amin Shams. Griffin and Shams, who have updated a paper they first published in 2018, say the transactions rely on Tether, a widely used digital token that is meant to hold its value at $1.
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      20 November 2019 @ 22:40
      Check out the video with Kyle Bass. shows correlation of btc ATH, precious stone purchase volume and capital flight from China.
    • JA
      J A.
      29 November 2019 @ 20:21
      If RV did that many hodl'rs here would have to finally start to admit or again deny how corrupt and delusional BTC is and has been to date. CBs only go to this kind of trouble https://www.g4si.com/newsroom/2019/11/28/how-billions-in-gold-was-secretly-moved-from-london-to-poland - if they either have a MONOPOLY or CARTEL on their eventual state-run CBCC they issue. The CB of CBs is already showing you how that works LT - https://youtu.be/aJenw5s5Nao?t=36
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    18 November 2019 @ 16:50
    In suspect Mr. Morehead knows allot more about blockchain business opportunities than this video suggests. Bitcoin was the first, largest network effect, but it's not the last. Real returns will occur for those that solve real problems, like cross border transfers, micro payments, digital asset collateralized equities (stable sticks with oracles). The future is blazingly bright but it's not all Bitcoin, it's all about utility.
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    18 November 2019 @ 16:42
    So storage costs are zero, yes. It's the transactional costs to miners in One that you need to worry about. Be prepared to stand in line, with high fractional miner fees, when there are large movements, liquidity events. It's like Hotel California.
    • MS
      Michael S.
      20 November 2019 @ 21:42
      It cost's nothing to HODL, which is what you should be doing. Bitcoin is a store of value, and there are going to be second layer solutions like lightning network that will allow for an infinite number of transactions, with the cost measured in satoshi's.
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    18 November 2019 @ 16:38
    A reserve currency is as anachronistic as centralization. Hegemony only occurs with leverage (force), not utility so Libra will likely not be reserve either. If you have an interoperable standard, why do you need a reserve if there are market makers? Obsolete thinking. The true network for reserve status is ILP not a single ledger, especially of the entrant costs continue to rise (no longer 1 CPU = 1 vote). Fungibility between networks (a network of networks) is the true secret.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      19 November 2019 @ 20:36
      Until you realize that multiple networks dilute the security of all networks. One super secure network makes more sense.
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    18 November 2019 @ 16:26
    What investors should be worried about with any consensus protocol (like Bitcoin) is a collapse in consensus. If China decided to nationalize ASIC mining and performed a 51% attack, even if a chain reorganization was unsuccessful, there would be mass exodus in relative value. Until these ecosystems are self sustaining in the entirety of their cradle to grave supply chain they will be vulnerable. when wafer manufacturers, utilities, and workers, get paid in digital assets, and those resources are sufficiently global redundant, there is significant vulnerability. It could even be the world's largest honey pot. How's that for FUD.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      19 November 2019 @ 20:41
      China literally did this in 2017 when the Chinese mining giant Bitmain (among others) tried to take over the network. Guess what? It didn't work.
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    18 November 2019 @ 16:16
    The elephant in the room, interoperability. With the rise of supra national digital currencies the world doesn't have to use Bitcoin. People can use whatever they wants so long as the unit of account has liquidity. the future for investors is The Internet of Value using the open source Interledger Protocol. Market makers can act as connectors in a currency agnostic, path finding algorithm for transmitting value. It supersedes any national CBDCs, Bitcoin, ETH, XRP, etc. because it connects them all without counterparty risk. It enables micro payments and liquidity pooling. It's as revolutionary as TCP/IP as a protocol for bridging walled gardens.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      19 November 2019 @ 20:44
      Right, and who's gonna provide the security for these ILPs? Every project sounds rosy until you start dissecting the security aspects.
  • MG
    Mac G.
    18 November 2019 @ 02:42
    Maker and Compound and most of 'defi' is built on top of Ethereum. It's a shame that was not made clear.
  • SS
    Suresh S.
    17 November 2019 @ 20:52
    Bulgaria has bought $BTC as part of their country financial reserve."Back in May 2017, the Southeast European Law Enforcement Centre (SELEC) issued a press release that the country has over 200,000 BTC (around $2.1 billion) as opposed to just 40 tons in gold (around $1.8 billion)." https://www.fxstreet.com/cryptocurrencies/news/bulgaria-has-more-bitcoin-holdings-than-gold-reserves-201907250249
    • PG
      Petter G.
      19 November 2019 @ 20:45
      They seized it. They didn't buy it.
  • AK
    Ado K.
    17 November 2019 @ 17:07
    Great show, a lot of breakdown points in just 50 minutes. I think people who are skeptical of the Bitcoin space really should see this video. Both Dan Tapeiro and Dan Morehead are very calm, collected and rational. The lending space and DeFI are very interesting, but they are also based on third party custody in many instances. I think and important ethos of Bitcoin is not your keys not your coins, people should not forget this when entering the DeFi space.
  • IO
    Igor O.
    17 November 2019 @ 11:32
    Just mentioned proof of stake at the end but failed to expand on it. And implications for bitcoin. I am not going to say that bitcoin is just a proof of concept before I get bunch of thumbsdown.
  • KR
    Karan R.
    17 November 2019 @ 10:46
    Even computer science professors in American universities confidently teach their students that Bitcoin is fraud. I mean its one thing to have a bias/reservations but they are literally discouraging people from buying. Some people are just so full of themselves
  • SH
    Scott H.
    16 November 2019 @ 13:00
    Interesting interview thanks guys, also you need to get Charles Hoskinson on from IOHK he is insanely knowledgeable guy who is creating a next generation platform called Cardano.
    • KR
      Karan R.
      17 November 2019 @ 10:47
      I think CH is super shady
    • IO
      Igor O.
      17 November 2019 @ 11:34
      Why? What do you know? @Karan
  • RR
    Rex R.
    16 November 2019 @ 02:48
    Dan Tapiero mentioned - DASH. To correct- DASH has Chainlocks - and is actually more secure than Bitcoin.
  • FS
    Fagundes S.
    15 November 2019 @ 23:09
    Gave up on Dan. Pumping losers like XRP and Ethereum at this time shows he's totally out of the loop or just wanting to dump his bags. ETH and XRP? Yeah. I'd rather hold fiat... and definitely would rather 100x hold gold vs those premined centralized scams. BTC was used as a bait for this show, so thumbs down. This is not about Bitcoin.
    • KR
      Karan R.
      17 November 2019 @ 10:51
      Its perspective, ETH is the Blockchain with the most number of devs and dapps, XRP (though I hate it) has real MOUs with real world banks (also check on BNY Mellon partnerships). This is getting real, usually the hated and ignored assets appreciate the most. Paradigm check
  • EB
    Eric B.
    15 November 2019 @ 16:41
    I about spit my lunch out when he mentioned XRP.
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 23:04
      Same here, comparing Bitcoin to premined centralized scams like XRP is always annoying. Shows he's either holding very heavy XRP bags or simply doesn't understand the tech. And I think he understands it, so he's just stuck with that dud in his portfolio from 4 years ago.
  • JW
    Joel W.
    15 November 2019 @ 08:08
    Not sure why this interview suddenly brought out the 'never bitcoiners' :-) Everyone entitled to their own opinion of course. I liked the interview - it went over the multiple use cases for bitcoin as well as touched upon most aspects of why the ecosystem plays such an important role in the acceptance and continuous development of the network (BTC is really only a by-product of this). I am also of the opinion that bitcoin is here to stay. Interesting that Dan supports XRP and Ethereum as well. Would be good to her him expand on that in a follow-up perhaps.
  • NS
    Nathan S.
    15 November 2019 @ 01:50
    There is no “blockchain” or “crypto”. The word is... “BITCOIN”!
    • RM
      Robert M.
      15 November 2019 @ 22:25
      Maximalist blues
  • dw
    douglas w.
    15 November 2019 @ 00:24
    I remember listening to Raoul say that with the creation of Quantum computing all digital currencies could potentially be hacked. Would love to hear the new argument against this. And I love it when bitcoiners call it digital gold. You guys do need a marketing team if that's what you're calling it now.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:15
      Two remarks on that 1. If Quantum computing makes a breakthrough (which is unlikely to happen soon) you can always upgrade Bitcoin to use quantum resistant cryptography. It would be a messy process but there is no reason to assume a roadblock in such an update. 2. Such a breakthrough would also break all communication and internet protocols. So it would be a much greater threat to online banking, all your password protected stuff, encrypted communication and national security. Note also that bitcoin developers might be much more nimble to shift to quantum resistant algorithms than your bank or your government.
    • NG
      Nicolas G.
      15 November 2019 @ 19:38
      For the comment below, sorry but you are wrong. 1.) The process can be so messy and so politicised that has a very high likelihood of not working. You can ready more here: https://faqq.info/but-bitcoin-will-softfork/ https://faqq.info/ (for other bullxxxx laid down by BTC maximalist) 2.) All other communication and internet protocols will not be broken as you said. The reason for it is because these communication systems are CENTRALISED unlike Bitcoin, which is decentralised. This means that if tomorrow Gmail decides to change the encryption of the email protocol, they do not need to ask you for permission, they can do it without you even noticing.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      17 November 2019 @ 08:04
      @Nicolas G. What you are saying is not correct. Two remarks 1. I don't think a hard fork that would literally have zero downside and unlimited upside (bitcoin dies vs bitcoin lives) would be hardy politicized or opposed at all. 2. Email is not centralized, neither is the entire internet stack. Email (aka SMTP) is a open internet protocol pretty much like bitcoin, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Mail_Transfer_Protocol. What you are suggesting with Gmail simply makes no sense in technical terms. 3. Of course there are centralized entities that would be exposed to such risk too but I doubt they'd be more efficient than open source developers. I can't imagine government's bureaucracy updating their operating systems and entire communication channels faster than the open source community changing the BTC protocol.
    • NG
      Nicolas G.
      17 November 2019 @ 10:29
      @Jernej A. 1.) Bitcoin Upgrade to Quantum Resistant Sig. Scheme: Softfork: Any soft-fork solution requires all users to actively participate in moving their funds to new qc-proof BTC addresses. Those who do not, put not only their own funds but the security of the entire network at risk. 2.) Hardfork: Option 2 Hard fork with as a result BTC = old chain, and QRBTC is new chain Option 2A 2A Before the hard fork, you will need to register and you can claim your new QRBTC by proving you owned BTC before the time of the fork. Can be done, but what is the value of the QRBTC blockchain and its coins? Not automatically the same as the original BTC. (By the way. How, for example, was the value of BCH established right after the fork?) Downsides: You will exclude all users of BTC who didn’t register in time. The value of QRBTC will not be the same as the value of the original BTC. While the value of BTC could decline fast due to the fact the QRBTC is the chain that is pursued as the official chain. So the ones that sell their BTC first, will win. They profit of the top price of BTC, and of the price of QRBTC which will be an extra. But the ones that are late selling their BTC, will sell for a lesser price and might end up netting a loss including the price of QRBTC, so $BTC + $QRBTC might < $BTC before fork. This option is not possible when Quantum Computers can already crack ECDSA. Because in that case they could hack the addresses on the original chain and forge registration. Option 2B After the hard fork, you can claim your QRBTC by proving you own BTC. Downsides: This has the same downsides as a soft fork. Because eventually anyone with a quantum computer would be able to find the private keys of the old BTC by deriving it from the public keys. That way they could forge ownership and still get the QRBTC through hacking. Also this has the downside of a hard fork where the new chain has a different value then the old chain and the price of the original BTC might decline fast. Crypto is a volatile market with uncertainty, but this would expand that uncertainty hugely. Source: https://faqq.info/bitcoin-has-plans-for-this/ 2.) Centralisation vs. Decentralisation: - Yes, I agree that I did not illustrate precisely the example of the decentralisation. - I meant that, at an Gmail user level and not at a STMP provider level. For example, Gmail can decide without your permission nor your authorization to use encryption or not in your communications. "Gmail uses TLS by default, but when a secure connection isn't available (both sender and recipient need to use TLS to create a secure connection), Gmail will deliver messages over non-secure connections." Source: https://support.google.com/a/answer/2520500?hl=en Furthemore, TLS is what provides the encryption to STMP email protocol. TLS uses ECDSA non-quantum resistant signature scheme. TLS is developed by Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). So if the voluntary members and participants of IETF decides that ECDSA is not safe and shall be ugraded, they will simply change it in the code and the updated TLS encryption layer of the STMP email protocol will be updated without you even noticing AGAIN. Would you call this a decentralised system or a centralised system from a Gmail user perspective. Now you get my point. - In Bitcoin migrating its signature to another one e.g. Quantum Resistant, EVERY user will have to act to do so and despite of it, still risks of BTC hacking during the process, blockchain devaluation and loss of cofident will persist. The miseries and limitations of the Bitcoin protocol will be aired publicly and this will damage the public confidence. Now, we can continue with the can-kicking or HEDGE this risk!
  • PG
    Philippe G.
    15 November 2019 @ 00:19
    Very interesting topic and conversation! I'm still struggling to see the day-to-day use cases for the general public for now (beyond transferring money in emerging markets as mentioned)...In the end, if Facebook and other companies/associations are all working on their own crypto/digital currency and related network in their own silos, then it's only a minor improvement over the current fiat system I'm optimistic for the future, so looking forward to see Dan Morehead more often!!
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:21
      Whatever facebook is doing with libra or any other digital currency is nothing new. It simply emulating Paypal, using "cryptocurrency" as a backdoor to hype itself to relevance. When you send money to Paypal you basically exchanged it with a virtual currency that Paypal controls and promises to back by the equivalent amount of fiat. The whole value proposition of bitcoin is to 1. Have a censorship resistant means of exchange 2. Have a well defined, unchangeable emission schedule of the underlying asset. Anything that is not satisfying point 1. and 2. is essentially redundant and is trying to disguise itself under the "blockchain" hype (at the expense of making overhead by using technological acrobacies).
    • TM
      The-First-James M.
      16 November 2019 @ 00:46
      I live in a country that could see Jeremy Corbyn leading a coalition Government after 12th December. I can see every reason why I'd want to own some Bitcoin...
  • ZH
    Zayd H.
    14 November 2019 @ 21:49
    Dan - super interesting. Thanks for taking the time. Did you say you owned 250,000 BTC???? Is that about 1.5% of all BTC outstanding? Curious as to how much market power you feel you have. Are there folks who own a lot more than you?
  • OK
    Oliver K.
    14 November 2019 @ 21:41
    For me there has been lately a quite a pro bitcoin tendency among realvision guests. I think it would help to ballance it with views e.g. from Jim Rickards, Nouriel Roubini and Erik Townsend.
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:39
      Roubini is no one, a status quo finance salary man. He repeats the same nonsense since BTC was $68 and has been wrong non-stop, 11 years now. At least Krueger won a (somewhat fake) Nobel, although also speaks nonsense. There isn't much to balance. BTC is the inevitable future and is here to stay.
    • OK
      Oliver K.
      15 November 2019 @ 23:12
      Hi Fagundes, exactly this is why we you need Roubini to cover the full spectrum. Leave it to the audience to make up their minds. And Eric Townsend and Jim Rickards have even additional views adding to the full spectrum.
    • TM
      The-First-James M.
      16 November 2019 @ 00:47
      I'd like to see Erik or Jim interviewed by Dan or Raoul.
    • UJ
      Ulf J.
      16 November 2019 @ 16:40
      1889: “Fooling around with alternating current (AC) is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever.” — Thomas Edison 1903: “The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty – a fad.” — President of the Michigan Savings Bank advising Henry Ford’s lawyer, Horace Rackham, not to invest in the Ford Motor Company. Paul krugman: The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in “Metcalfe’s law”–which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants–becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s. "Two years from now, spam will be solved." Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, 2004
  • BN
    Barrett N.
    14 November 2019 @ 20:36
    Epic, The Dan “squared” interview! Both great and, Fantastic interview! Thank You to the Dans & RV for the interview, info and up to date insight! Great interview. B
  • PG
    Petter G.
    14 November 2019 @ 20:10
    Loved it! More from Dan please :)
  • AT
    Andrea T.
    14 November 2019 @ 19:44
    You should ask yourself why Xi is so excited about blockchain. Because a transparent ledger with zero privacy features allows for complete surveillance of all financial transactions. Bitcoin lacks fungibility and privacy by default. It's a surveillance coin.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 20:08
      Fungibility is terrible as of today. But Bitcoin is still evolving! Check this out for what's likely to be included in the next softfork of Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDJRy6K_3yo&feature=emb_logo
    • RC
      Richard C.
      14 November 2019 @ 20:18
      1.) Bitcoin, not blockchain. Blockchain is but 1 component of Bitcoin 2.) Read up on Schnorr, Taproot, Dandelion proposals - in code review at the moment. Coinjoin, Lightning already breaks chain analysis.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:25
      The excitement about "blockchain" is simply a classical trojan horse hype that is recently being used to sell "new" solutions that will quietly offer more control to the underlying governments and companies. There is zero technological innovation in centralized digital currencies. That's why the whole blockchain mania offers a good timing to try and introduce them under the guise of technological advancement.
    • TM
      The-First-James M.
      16 November 2019 @ 00:48
      One solution already seeing some use - Coin Join and Wasabi Wallet.
  • DH
    Daniel H.
    14 November 2019 @ 19:28
    I find it amusing to hear that millennials "get it" and boomers don't. Most of the IT we use daily was created by boomers. And they know blockchain is just another database.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 20:03
      But they don't know how to install an app on a smartphone and they still keep cash in their wallets.
    • SL
      Seth L.
      14 November 2019 @ 20:42
      To think it's a database proves the point you don't "get it", boomer.
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      16 November 2019 @ 23:37
      Seth, I spent 35 years writing code all the way down to the metal, and I know what a blockchain is. Grow up, millennial.
  • MT
    Mark T.
    14 November 2019 @ 19:10
    This was pretty good content. I, personally, want even more Bitcoin content but appreciate those that have had enough already. Please continue to include the word BITCOIN in the title on all future articles/videos to ensure the possibility of steadfast avoidance! And keep them coming! We won't be able to tell which were good and which were silly for several years. It is tough to keep the content comprehensible for the uninitiated, while maintaining technical accuracy. Many comments allude to this as though it invalidates all the other content value. Pretty snobby.
  • sc
    sung c.
    14 November 2019 @ 19:06
    Out of many good points, four key points stuck out to me about the future of money: 1) The U.S. dollar has devalued by 45X in less than 80 years. That is, you now need $45 to purchase what it used to take $1. This makes sense since average price of house in 1930 used to be around $6,000 and now is $320,000, or 53X: In 1930, ounce of gold was $19.50/ounce. $100 of gold now costs $7,500 for the same amount, 75X. 2) Number of hedge funds buying and holding a small amount of bitcoin as a hedge is increasing and will only increase over the coming years, further limiting the available BTC in the market as years proceed. 3) Number of outlying nations buying and holding a small amount of bitcoin as a hedge is increasing and will only increase over the coming years, adding further to "hodled" bitcoin as years proceed. 4) The disharmony and discontent among the populace of the world, as witnessed in the riots of Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, Bolivia, Hong Kong, parts of Africa, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and even in the U.S., is only increasing, not decreasing. The dislike and drive to get away from the U.S. dollar as the global reserve currency is also only increasing. All this uncertainty will only drive people to hedge further into owning more gold and bitcoin. I am quickly turning from skeptic to believer.
    • MB
      Milton B.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:49
      why will competing bitcoins not be created BTC 2 BTC3 etc and therefore devalue all outstanding bitcoins?
    • GF
      Gordon F.
      15 November 2019 @ 02:50
      Milton, Competing bitcoins have been created, but people who are looking to buy Bitcoin want to buy the one that is already established and has a track record, not a knockoff that is unlikely to ever get wide adoption. If any of those "knockoffs" ever do get real traction and widespread usage, then they could compete, but it would be on the same order of challenge as a startup deciding they are going to take on Amazon or Google. Anyone with a little skill and knowledge can set up a company to do what Amazon and Google do, but getting traffic that currently goes to those sites to change to the new ones is almost impossible. Your question seems to imply that the knockoff bitcoins would be indistinguishable from the originals, and that is certainly NOT the case.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:29
      @Milton B. In the same way as competing currencies do not devalue the US dollar. I am sure the printing press in Zimbabwe is not affecting the demand for USD. The Zimbabwean dollar is as related to USD as is BTC to any of its stupid forks. Similarly with natural elements, I would doubt that the supply of copper is affecting the demand of gold.
  • RM
    Russell M.
    14 November 2019 @ 17:48
    The haters and the lovers waxing philsophical (refering to the comments). Sigh. Any traders out there? Anyone ever hear of position sizing? A very small position of gbtc is tradeable for indivual traders not trying to jam colossal amounts of money into it. A position size a 30th of my normal sizing produces enough beta per trade.
  • TH
    Timo H.
    14 November 2019 @ 17:34
    A hour full of inaccuracies. For example, digital identity is bitcoin-inspired, but it is not require bitcoin-the-currency. Cross-border payments can utilize bitcoin-inspired distributed ledgers, but don't really require bitcoin. Etc. etc. Furthermore, Dan mentioned bitcoin, ethereum and XRP as the top-three cryptos. Two of them are essentially frauds. Ethereum has failed its promise to scale up and needs a rewrite, which essentially renders the currency worthless. XRP on the other hand is a classic pump-and-dump fraud. Good luck Investing on either. Bitcoin is not much different. It's just an uber-cool demo of a mathematically created digital collectible, but not much else. The real value is in the follow-on inventions of bitcoin. Anyone who wants to invest in Crypto, should have a good look at those inventions.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:52
      Yet again(!) you fail to distinguish between public and private blockchains Timo. A decentralized, public blockchain require a native currency to use as a payout for those who secure the network. People will only participate in securing the network if they are economically compensated for that effort. And in a system without a central authority the network itself need to provide that payment mechanism. A public blockchain has completely different requirements than a private/permissioned blockchain. I do agree with you on Ethereum and Ripple though. Avoid.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:36
      I am surprised at the amount of negative comments this post is getting given that is not far from the truth. The vibe from XRP (company around it, shills, the vision they are selling) is very similar to Herbalife. @Potter G. A private blockchain is kind of an oxymoron. If a company deploys a blockhain then it can change the data on it (by forking the chain). If they can change the data on the chain, why not simply use a database? This would offer them a massive advantage in terms of overhead costs. There seem to be a striking correlation between failing/struggling companies and their stance on blockchain.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      15 November 2019 @ 17:09
      @Jernej: I agree that private blockchains are silly. I'm simply stating that it's important to understand that public and private blockchains have completely different security requirements and that comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges. Not sure if I misunderstood Timo (sorry if that's the case!), but if he suggesting that the Bitcoin network could work without BTC (the currency) then he's incorrect. However, if he's saying that cross-border payments can be done without using the Bitcoin network then he's obviously correct.
  • CB
    Connor B.
    14 November 2019 @ 16:23
    Stop it with all this Bitcoin nonsense. It's a fascinating time in the traditional markets.
    • TM
      The-First-James M.
      16 November 2019 @ 00:52
      Have you not considerd that Bitcoin is one aspect of this time that makes traditional markets so fascinating?
  • SL
    Seth L.
    14 November 2019 @ 15:40
    How about having Alex Saunders over for a deep dive into defi and the broader space of cryptocurrencies? Would be interesting, informative and educative in moving beyond just bitcoin and open the mind to possibilities this space has to offer. (and, why not, well argumentatively break some btc myths)
  • KS
    Karen S.
    14 November 2019 @ 15:40
    The bulgarian gov has the largest known gov amount of bitcoin. But I would assume other governments are buying.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:54
      They confiscated those coins though. They didn't buy them in the open market as far as I know.
  • TJ
    Terry J.
    14 November 2019 @ 13:16
    Wow! Brilliant discussion from the two Dan's and so insightful! One of the very best videos of recent times on RV and there has been plenty of competition in my opinion. With the primary institutional investor obstacles now resolved, it is hard to see why most investors will not in due course insist upon exposure to BTC purely for diversification reasons, let alone the asymmetric risk reward argument. Thank you RV for airing this priceless video.
  • MF
    Michael F.
    14 November 2019 @ 13:15
    Too much bitcoin hype here lately for my taste, would prefer more sector deep-dives instead. Bring back Paul Hodges et al.
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:46
      Why discuss FAX machines and TV when the Internet is being born?
  • CB
    Clifford B.
    14 November 2019 @ 12:29
    Did he just compare owning Bitcoin to owning Apple shares? Would love to see the cash flow comparison behind owning a speculative asset/BTC and an actual business Wow, shill much. Again, bigger fool theory on steroids. Blockchain Technology again is being confused with Bitcoin and value held. How do you quantify the value of BTC which is different to the value of the tech. A friend of mine sold his car for BTC at the all time high, and held on thinking it would go higher. store of value? I think not. In 2 years the BTC value depreciated faster than his car would have. BTC for crossborder transactions? You could use USDT or any other stable coin for that without the value change risk. Most people are holding/hodling their BTC (reference to Pizza purchase for 10K BTC) so that this does not happen to them. Everyone's hoping it will climb higher. BTC as global reserve? Nope. there has to be some sort of regulation and ability to reverse transactions if lets say an elderly person sends it to the wrong address (basic example). The above said. I have bought, hodled and traded BTC and other coins and made ridiculous gains but was done as pure speculation which is why there are so many people trying to load the bus with people buying it. ie: shilling. Kitco and many others are doing the same for Gold/silver daily but at the very least you can sell gold/silver to a tech company to use on a circuit board. BTC, think not.
    • sc
      sung c.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:12
      Back in the 80's, I had 1,000 shares of Apple stock at $8/share. My close friend, supposedly a computer geek, told me to sell because everything was going PC based and Apple software was not selling at Egghead Software stores. 30 years later, Apple is at $200+, after numerous splits, and Egghead Software is out of business. Moral of the story, don't be so certain about everything. Invest as if you don't know anything, and everything is possible.
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:49
      good point. still have btc left over but am unamused with the hype
    • DA
      Daniel A.
      14 November 2019 @ 21:49
      BTC is the most secure way to send information to somebody else across the globe without having to rely on an intermediary. It solved the Byzantine General's problem. How valuable is a network that can do that without a central authority? I say it's worth many trillions. Maybe even as much as 100 trillion. That BTC goes up and down vs the USD is not any different than other commodities such as Gold and Silver.
    • RS
      Ryan S.
      14 November 2019 @ 23:05
      I use BTC for cross-border transactions every month. Why the hell would I want a US based stablecoin? I've never been to the US or held a dollar. My local exchange and the exchange I use in Europe do not support USDT. What they do support is Bitcoin. Stablecoins will only last as long as their unstable fiat counterparts are around.
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:42
      APPL is the new Nokia, the new Kodak. BTC will be the new world reserve currency. The ones who keep being lazy to do their research will arrive at that conclusion much later than necessary. BTC is the Internet of Money. It's 1990. There's 11 years of data to look at. Why still deny the obvious?
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      15 November 2019 @ 13:45
      @Daniel A - this may be true but how does this actually transmit into value? again Blockchain tech vs Bitcoin argument. @Ryan S. - BTC will only keep going as long as GW's of power keep churning over those ASICs. As far as the USDT statement, this was meant as an example as far as transmission of value. Why use something that could very possibly drop in value by huge percentages by the time u get it? @Fagundes S. - Again, i have done tonnes of research on the tech end, financial end, have traded very profitably and am well aware of all the different arguments around all 3. Pros and cons alike and to date not one person has been able to tell me logically why BTC has value vs blockchain technology. All the arguments revolve around speculative hype, first mover advantage, the"you just don't get it" millennial vs boomer argument" As i said, i have some remaining waiting for the moon just like every other hodling speculator but logically I don't think it will happen.
  • PL
    Patrick L.
    14 November 2019 @ 10:14
    It is important to point out, Bitcoin is the real innovation, this is where the useful engineering takes place. On the other hand, Ethereum at this stage is equivalent to a classical database with a few spares, and Ethereum can't be anything else, this is just an incentive issue.
  • OB
    Oliver B.
    14 November 2019 @ 09:56
    after this interview i really want to short the f* out of bitcoin.
    • SG
      Sviatoslav G.
      14 November 2019 @ 12:50
      You are more than welcome to do so if you have enough guts
    • sc
      sung c.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:14
      If you are that definite, I think you should definitely short the F___ out of BTC. I don't see what is stopping you? :)
    • JS
      Jason S.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:27
      u won't
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:43
      Short TSLA too while at it so you get rekt twice shorting the inevitable.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      15 November 2019 @ 10:41
      I am leaving this here in case you actually go through with what you just said. Best of luck https://www.bitmex.com/register/WMvrbi https://www.deribit.com/reg-5904.5210?q=home
  • dd
    david d.
    14 November 2019 @ 09:39
    another sh*tcoin video... thanks RV for your obsession with this ponzi scheme
    • sc
      sung c.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:15
      Sounds like a good reason to short Bitcoin. I hear the CME offers that option.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:58
      How many hours have you spent reading about Bitcoin?
    • RS
      Ryan S.
      14 November 2019 @ 23:09
      Haters gonna hate. Still have no idea why people watch these videos if they hate Bitcoin so much ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:44
      Show me someone using the terms "tulips", "ponzi", "criminals" in a Bitcoin thread and I'll show you someone who was too lazy to do their own proper research. Repeating years-old refuted fallacies is a bit embarassing now, with so much quality information available. Saifedean Ammous, Andreas Antonopolous, etc.
  • SR
    Steve R.
    14 November 2019 @ 09:29
    "So why do smart guys still not get it?" - probably because they understand no major Government is going to give up control of their country's currency. Its the one big question no one ever seems to address, why?
    • MP
      M P.
      14 November 2019 @ 15:09
      Yes, governments will indeed not give up control of their currencies, that is the whole point of Bitcoin. They cannot gain control of Bitcoin and stop people from using it, because it is permissionless, decentralized and globally seamless.
    • sc
      sung c.
      14 November 2019 @ 19:24
      While it's true Central Banks will now want to give up their control of currencies, it is happening before their eyes, and that is why they push so hard against BTC, Libra, and anything they can't control. Meanwhile they devalue your currency by 99%. They've killed the purchasing power of the individual and wonder why inflation is low, when in fact inflation by devaluation of purchasing power is through the roof. The housing price and rental rates have gone up at 2.5 times the rate of wage increases, and wonder why the individual is not buying more. Hint: they don't have any money left after paying their housing, education, and utility fee increases. That is just one of the reasons why Bitcoin is gaining in popularity; because people are tired of the same old s--t of being manipulated by the Central Bankers. FYI: Central Banks are not government owned and are not government controlled. They are privately run institutions.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      14 November 2019 @ 20:00
      You don't have to think that Bitcoin will become the world's reserve currency to believe in Bitcoin.
    • DA
      Daniel A.
      14 November 2019 @ 22:03
      They don't have a choice because they can't stop it. Bitcoin is permissionless and decentralized, hence unstoppable. People are slowly realizing that they would rather hold bitcoin than a national currency like the US dollar that has been depreciating at a rate of 10% a year through inflation over the past decade (based on 1980 definition of CPI).
    • FS
      Fagundes S.
      15 November 2019 @ 00:45
      They have no alternative. Government can't stop it. It's clear by now.
  • GE
    Glenn E.
    14 November 2019 @ 06:49
    Would be interested in hearing opinions on fintech conference