Paradigm Shifts with Mark Hart and Worth Wray

Featuring Mark Hart, Worth Wray, Raoul Pal

In this wide-ranging yet deep-diving interview, Mark Hart and Worth Wray of Corriente Advisors sit down with Raoul Pal to examine some of the most profound ways in which our world is changing. Hart and Wray lay out their forecast for the huge geopolitical shift that’s seeing China gain an even footing with the U.S., and discuss what it could mean for global economies and macro markets. They then discuss the incredible rise of bitcoin, as well as the changing of the generational guard.

Published on
16 March, 2018
Topic
Global Outlook, Bitcoin, Macro, Geopolitics
Duration
66 minutes
Asset class
Equities
Rating
203

Comments

  • JM

    John M.

    12 5 2018 11:28

    1       2

    Best SNL skit in years. I almost thought these were real people.

  • JA

    John A.

    20 4 2018 01:59

    0       0

    The negative comments seem to largely miss the point of the video. Raoul says at length in the beginning that the trip was short notice to get their thoughts down and get people thinking. Not sure how it can be much clearer that this was a casual conversation about major paradigm shifts. If you know anything about Real Vision, you know they are around 6 months - 3 years ahead of the news. OF COURSE there will be follow-up videos around these themes. This was only Raoul spotting a chance to get his audience thinking and wet our appetites. Job done.

  • mh

    miles h.

    17 4 2018 23:47

    1       1

    Fantastic discussion. I share Raoul's appreciation for both Mark and Worth's original thinking - Kudos
    BTC = Non Dilutive Reserve, the killer app.

  • ZD

    Zachary D.

    7 4 2018 16:23

    1       0

    Bitcoin Price:
    $19,186- Peak
    $8,281- Publish date
    $6,770- Today
    Given the price drop from peak to publish date, I would doubt that Hart has changed his opinion in the time of this post to the publish date, but it would be very interesting to have Hart back on.

  • SP

    Sat P.

    3 4 2018 09:27

    2       0

    The point about per capita GDP for aging countries was interesting and something I didn't know before. Other than that, I didn't find anything that mind blowing in this interview

  • DY

    Dmytro Y.

    31 3 2018 08:00

    2       0

    Too general of a discussion. Bit disappointing given the high expectations.

  • JV

    Jens V.

    30 3 2018 12:50

    0       1

    Very interesting! Thanks. Great thoughts on bitcoin and many other things.

  • JC

    Joe C.

    28 3 2018 14:49

    0       0

    De facto response to "40,000-ft view" videos: This was a bunch of un-detailed filler!
    De facto response to highly specified videos: This is missing the larger context!

  • AK

    Anthony K.

    28 3 2018 05:56

    0       0

    Lame

  • JO

    Joseph O.

    27 3 2018 23:32

    7       1

    Ridiculous amount of simple trend-lining and wide eyed narrative-spinning here. Mark went to the Valley and took a long deep chug of the Kool Aid. It's embarrassing.

    Where is the instinct to critique, doubt and apply the skepticism that history teaches is wise and warranted?

    Get Nic Nassim Taleb in the room and turn him loose. I would pay a year subscription for that (plus an interview with him, Mike Green and Chris Cole).

    • JW

      Jeremy W.

      10 4 2018 03:58

      3       0

      Been reading some more Taleb lately, and I agree, get him in. Regardless of what he says it will be entertaining at the very least.

    • JA

      John A.

      20 4 2018 01:49

      0       0

      The video was about paradigm shifts that they see happening. They all talked about them and gave brief overviews of their thoughts. Raoul even mentioned this was a short notice trip...

  • JM

    Jamie M.

    27 3 2018 20:20

    3       2

    Have watched many RV videos, first time felt driven the comment. That was lame. Mark got China wrong (at least the timing so far) and seems like a high school kid just learning about crypto and bitcoin. Bring him back once he catches up. Maybe Worth has more to say as Mark seemed to be constantly looking for reassurance from him.

  • TJ

    Terry J.

    26 3 2018 09:50

    6       0

    I made the mistake of reading the comments first and almost did not watch the video due to so many negative comments and thumbs down. However when I finally watched, I really enjoyed it despite the lack of formal structure. I find these philosophical discussions from successful investors just as useful as I do the more detailed analysis of individual asset classes and the overall macro picture, as it exposes my mind to issues I may not even have considered, such as the likely impact of bitcoin on the savings strategy of the millennials. Diverse views and a broad church of honest albeit sometimes controversial opinions are the reasons I subscribe to RVTV. I am seldom disappointed!

  • WM

    William M.

    24 3 2018 19:10

    4       0

    Mostly a philosophical discussion. Amazed at Mark Harts change of views on China over the past year or two.

    Small points
    - Lots of 4th Turning talk by Mark as if it was his idea without crediting Strauss & Howe
    - A little too much disjointed conversation, perhaps after a nice lunch... bare feet made the discussion look a little too casual...
    -

  • JA

    J A.

    24 3 2018 18:26

    5       2

    Wow. From 3 smart people I have never heard such a load of.

    Shoes and judgement were clearly left at the door.

    • GO

      Greg O.

      25 3 2018 19:10

      4       0

      I agree. It was especially painful to listen to Mark Hart, the bitcoin cancer definitely took him over. And was he smoking anything? His comment that ECB is now buying Chinese bonds so the China can't go down... yeah, if Central Banker says so then it must be true because they are never wrong...

      Raoul Pal tried to be the lone voice of reason though.

  • TM

    The-First-James M.

    24 3 2018 02:36

    7       0

    Not sure why all the down votes. Maybe it's because Mark's suggestion that the Millennial Generation may end up valuing Bitcoin over Gold offended some of the more ardent Gold Bugs in the audience. Speaking as somebody who owns both Gold and Bitcoin, I'd suggest it helps to not hold a religious attachment to either and consider them as complementary stores of value - with Bitcoin having greater utility and Gold greater solidity. ;)

    Raoul, I know you talk to Chris Macintosh of CapitalistExploits.at at least once or twice a year. He too has spoken about Metcalfe's Law at length with regards to the Bitcoin Network Adoption rate and price growth, so it's not just Mark who's made this link. Having said this, I know Chris talks to Worth and Mark, so maybe Mark came up with it first... ;)

    Incidentally Raoul, when are you going to get Chris on Realvision? Kind of surprised he hasn't been on already although I suspect he prefers to stay out of camera view. :)

  • RO

    Robert O.

    23 3 2018 18:38

    4       0

    Many disjointed random ideas looking for a theme.
    How would Millennials adoption of Bitcoin as a store of value interact with a rising Asian/China/India who have traditionally valued Gold?

  • KS

    Kim S.

    23 3 2018 05:17

    3       4

    Someone is lost admiring a tree and isnt seeing a forest. Bitcoin is not that unique. If it becomes expensive then people find a different way to exchange value. It's price is actually quite limited.

  • KR

    Kenneth R.

    22 3 2018 21:14

    4       8

    Forks and electricity used mining BTC, sorry you guys ignored these issues. The Idea that 1/2 of Colo. is going to produce Gold dilution is juvenile. Forks , forks and more forks . You can dilute crypto easily.

    Hows your short Oil trade working out Raul?

  • AS

    Alex S.

    22 3 2018 21:14

    1       1

    I think Raouls biggest problem is that he generally holds more intriguing views than his guests and thus would be better suited to be the person having his brains picked rather than picking those of others.

    Still though, good discussion. I am skeptical about the China bull story continuing but we'll just have to wait and see since changes on this scale usually take a long time to play out. It's been 30 years so far, I wonder if they can truly make it to 40. Most estimates of their growth have been cut from where they were about 5 years ago when they expected roughly 8 to 10% annual growth to continue to the new level of around 5 to 7%, still large but some would contest not being sustainable any longer. (Some obstacles being the gigantic cost of One Belt, One Road, the large acceleration in debt accumilation in recent years and the fact that a lot of their political stability appears to be reliant on maintaining high growth rates to keep elevating their poorest citizens out of poverty)

  • MC

    Mat C.

    22 3 2018 16:39

    4       0

    As a political risk analyst I hope this isn't how I sound when I talk markets with CFA's.

  • MS

    Matt S.

    21 3 2018 10:31

    3       1

    I disagree that the "white patriarchy" is being dismantled - far from it; there may be little shouty minority movements (#METOO for example) that are being "allowed" to stand up and shout for a while, but if it gets out of hand, which it clearly is, the white patriarchy is going to come down on them like a tonne of bricks.

  • MS

    Matt S.

    21 3 2018 09:53

    3       2

    Yeah but here's something - if I buy a product from Amazon with my debit card, I pay ZERO fees to my bank or to Amazon, and the product is delivered to my door for free. If I do ANYTHING with Bitcoin... a small percentage is hacked off in transaction fees. Even just send a small amount as a test to another address, I'll lose some Bitcoin.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      23 3 2018 18:29

      4       0

      There's no such thing as a "free lunch". If you're a bank customer then the bank is making money off of you. The fees in the Bitcoin network are part of the incentive structure that keeps the network safe. Also, it's possible to put your private keys on a USB stick and physically hand it over to another person. A perfectly legit BTC transaction which costs nothing.

    • MM

      Matthew M.

      12 4 2018 03:18

      0       1

      @Petter G, that costs you a USB stick it would seem. In any case, I agree the transaction fees are needed with the way the network is structured, how else can you incentivize individuals to do the work. With a large enough network of users, a small (almost insignificant) transaction fee added up can easily make up a large enough reward for miners to continue processing blocks.

  • AP

    Andrew P.

    20 3 2018 22:41

    7       0

    Metcalfe's law discussion was a great paradigm shift vis-a-vis bitcoin/bubbles in price. Got me thinking, thx.

    • TH

      Timo H.

      23 3 2018 06:23

      4       3

      I'm not sure why Metcalfe's law is relevant to cryptocurrencies in any more special sense than it is relevant to any currency. A currency is the settlement mechanism for transactions that a community chooses to execute among its members.

      The problem of bitcoin in this sense is, that is ability to settle transactions is EXTREMELY limited. Essentially only a couple of dozens of transactions per second can be settled, GLOBALLY. US Dollar or Euro are in this sense much better enablers of networking effects than a cryptocurrency.

      Of course, one may argue that this time is different, because the bitcoin network is a network. It actually isn't in a true sense of the word. A true network is able to grow both in terms of functionality and capacity when you add nodes to it. Bitcoin instead is an interconnected group of computers that all are doing the same thing. Unlike with the Internet, adding nodes to the bitcoin network does not bring more transaction processing capacity nor new functionality. It just makes the group of computers doing the same thing bigger. Growing the network does not help its members achieve more. All that's happening is a price peak of a hyped asset people don't really understand. Bitcoins are bought, because the speculators believe the "bitcoin will soon scale infinitely and rule the world" hype. It won't scale without becoming a system that is subject to regulation. For that reason, it won't rule the world.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      24 3 2018 08:04

      2       1

      @D H:

      - "I'm not sure why Metcalfe's law is relevant to cryptocurrencies in any more special sense than it is relevant to any currency."
      > It's more relevant to talk about Metcalfe's law in the crypto space since the adoption rate is much higher in those currencies compared to other currencies. "Metcalfe's law states the effect of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system".

      - "US Dollar or Euro are in this sense much better enablers of networking effects than a cryptocurrency. "
      > Yes, the dollar has one of the strongest network effects in the world. But while the importance of the dollar will go down over time many believe that the importance of cryptocurrencies will go up.

      - "Unlike with the Internet, adding nodes to the bitcoin network does not bring more transaction processing capacity nor new functionality."
      > It's not supposed to! You really don't seem to understand the real purpose of Bitcoin. It's *not* about "transactions per second". It's about independence and censorship resistance. The purpose of running a bitcoin full node is to increase the security of the network and to enable the user to *independently* verify every transaction made on the network. The base layer provide security while the second layer(s) provide throughput/privacy/interoperability etc. There are many high throughput systems out there (Paypal, Visa, Mastercard etc) but none of them provide the independence and security of Bitcoin.

  • HH

    HODL H.

    20 3 2018 22:36

    1       1

    As a millennial, appreciate this viewpoint of given I only eat avocado toast and don’t trade BTC/ETH. Good thing this didn’t air same day, BTC down big time

  • GB

    Gary B.

    20 3 2018 22:18

    11       0

    This interview was both intellectually stimulating and frustrating to watch. It was disconcerting/annoying to watch Wray bob his head up and down every time his boss made a statement. The positioning of the chairs was not good as they had to turn to face each other as each spoke. However, these are small complaints. There was so much packed into the hour program that too much was glossed over. Some of the positions taken were just wild generalizations with no facts or reasons presented. My criticism does not mean that there was a not a huge amount of great content in the discussion but it was too scattered.

    The crypto discussion was fascinating. The large number of comments show that there is much interest in the topic. Please get some participants with much deeper crypto knowledge/experience to participate. As the many comments with great disagreements about crypto demonstrate, there is no agreement about its structure or its future. You should make a whole series on crypto. Overall a flawed but useful and interesting presentation. It made me think and want to know more. That is why I subscribe to RV.

  • pw

    pontus w.

    20 3 2018 20:46

    15       1

    Dorm room conversation after three beers

  • Jc

    Justin c.

    20 3 2018 20:17

    7       1

    Great piece. Negative sentiment is way over the top. I'm not a bitcoin person, but man he convinces every time. He convinced me a year ago with price about $3000 and here he does it again. Either way, the same logic applies. It is a great risk/reward trade and should be considered by everyone. The China stuff was also great.

  • MS

    Matt S.

    20 3 2018 19:55

    2       1

    Raoul! Sporting a beautiful Rolex Platona there! Nice :)

  • MS

    Matt S.

    20 3 2018 18:59

    4       0

    should have sat them in a triangular position, with a circular track around them - Mark looking at his buddy is very distracting!

  • MS

    Matt S.

    20 3 2018 18:49

    4       0

    I'm curious... what "cyber-war" has Russia won?

  • SS

    Sam S.

    20 3 2018 18:41

    8       1

    Love the psychedelic window. Raoul, you didn't mention your previous belief's regarding the break or fork in the road with the software changes within Bitcoin, making it breakable just like other assets. Also no mention of government regulation or the heavy cost of transacting in Bitcoin. Mark, your ideas of socialism and climate change really represent a taxation upon the people. Pollution is very serious issue, for sure. Warming the plant is bogus as we're going into a colder period of time and that doesn't come from burning fuels, comes from the solar system and the cycles of our earth, solar system, sun and our galaxy. Plants love CO2. Socialism is actually what is imploding around the world and the powers to be are fighting tooth and nail to keep these changes from happening. That's the real change. The people need to be free to govern themselves as that creates a real economy and nobody trusts governments, regulation, socialism or the constant bombardment of giving or owing something to someone else just because. NO matter who you are or where you come from, you have to work for it and get in the game. As far as living until 2145, Biotech says you just might with the advancements in gene splicing crisper. Love the enthusiasm, really deep smart thinking and the positive tone towards the future. Thank you guys! Let's do Part II.

    • TM

      The-First-James M.

      24 3 2018 01:18

      3       1

      Re. your comments about Socialism. I have the dubious pleasure of living in the UK, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine the rise of Jeremy Corbyn last year, nor do I think I've imagined the continued growth of his Millenial supporter base since his election inroads of 2017. Also had a long time friend of mine - a teacher who's voted for the Conservative Party his entire adult life - switching over and voting for Corbyn.

      I therefore cannot agree with your comments about Socialism coming apart. It's on the rise in both the UK and Europe. I also suspect that come the next US Election, you'll find Mr Sanders making a bit of a comeback against the Ginger Ninja currently ensconced in the White House (kudos to Chris MacIntosh for that particular pseudonym of the Donald).

    • JC

      John C.

      3 4 2018 17:28

      3       1

      RE socialism it's completely steam-rolled the entire political and economical edifices in the US & Europe. Not really too many true economic and social 'conservatives' out there any more. Especially with so many people on the government dole now (50% or more now in the US). And with rising Feminism/Matriarchy and Millennials asking the government to 'do something' about XYZ real or imagined (mostly imagined at this point) inequity or injustice it's only going to get worse.

      These systems have to implode before they start to get better, but that's a long way away I fear right now.

    • JW

      Jeremy W.

      10 4 2018 06:10

      2       1

      Europeans are going to vote themselves away to being nothing but a basket case non-entity on the global landscape.

    • JW

      Jeremy W.

      10 4 2018 07:03

      1       1

      The reality is whether people want to talk about it or not, as according to a Spectator article citing a UK Conservative Party Advisor (ex-advisor to David Cameron), race is the biggest determinant in how one votes (left or right). Recent non-white immigrants essentially strongly vote left wing. Last UK election, only 19% voted Conservatives. And with demographic change occuring, the vote is moving towards more 'Socialism' (the issue is not so much 'Millennial, as it is race, Millenials are much more racially mixed than any other generation'). Per other articles I have read on the subject / studies, the same applies to other countries. The same occurs in the US (recent immigrants vote strongly for more 'Socialist' oriented policy), same applies in Sweden (they massively vote Socialism). They dominantly vote for 'policies' that support an ever larger government and social program (which to be honest have already been trending this way for 70 years now, it's just likely to continue ever further, governments are likely to get even bigger than they already are (which they are already at historical highs), and growth is likely to get ever slower (most probably stagnating when you combine it in with demographics / ageing)).

      Corbyn doubtfully will win the 2022 election. But the Tories in the UK are in real trouble on any future election, and in the coming London elections, as there at present white generally older base dies out. Of course this can change, and you might / likely will see recent immigrant voters change political beliefs etc and start voting for more generally 'Conservative' and / or pro-'capitalist' policies again. As might some mass reformist politicians appear out of nowhere to enact change. Nothing is ever set in stone, and trends (politics, social sentiment etc) can change dramatically of course. But at present this is essentially what is occurring.

      This applies particularly to Europe I would argue, who already are swung much more to big government, mass regulation, big social program, big interventionism. At least more so than the US. Millennials complain this is justified, they are 'angry' and want 'change', for example big house prices, thus more 'regulation' or more government involvement is the answer. The reality is, per a recently released Reserve Bank of Australia research paper, planning legislation increases house prices by hundreds of thousands of dollars. In some of the most expensive parts of Sydney (per the RBA paper) it can adds as much as $800,000 to the value of a houses. As Milton Friedman correctly stated, the government interventionist crowd clearly acknowledge that markets can 'distort', thus need intervention from the government to 'smooth' this out. Yet they never acknowledge that every time the government intervenes, this also creates distortions (or to put it another way, unintended consequences). I.e. planning laws = higher house prices. Labour laws = job destruction. Energy or environmental policies = higher energy prices / erosion of manufacturing competitiveness. Millenials are likely to vote for more 'equitable' growth (which would be extremely difficult if not impossible to achieve, requiring immense intervention and distortion of the labour market / business environment), likely resulting in slower growth / less efficiency, thus less wealth.

      Perhaps I'm pessimistic, but you have Worth Wray and Raoul talking about the geopolitical aspect of it, and the US against China, or Europe against Russia, and he said how can the West economically compete in a Cold War 2.0 scenario? The US against the Soviets during the Cold War, the Soviets collapsed / failed to due to inefficiency. I think the same applies to the West today. They can't play that game. As the West (the Western voting electorate) is instead very likely to just vote themselves out of the competition and into less efficiency. China doesn't particularly have to do much I think. They just need to implement reforms, trade more with Eurasia, everything they are already doing at present, and then just play the waiting game, as the West becomes ever more inefficient and unable to compete. Notwithstanding dramatic technological change / black swans etc that can dramatically shift outcomes.

  • MM

    Michael M.

    20 3 2018 17:43

    5       4

    one of the best bitcoin points I've heard among all. Mark knocked it out of the park particularly on btc

  • IF

    Ian F.

    20 3 2018 16:51

    9       8

    Mark Hart - "I wanted Trump to lose". For someone who apparently understands macro he sure is clueless to Trump's policy objectives. Just a product of sitting behind a Bloomberg screen all day and having no experience in the real world.

    • JC

      John C.

      3 4 2018 17:34

      1       0

      'Just a product of sitting behind a Bloomberg screen all day and having no experience in the real world.'

      Honestly thats a fair criticism for a lot of us here at RV and I think! :)

  • A1

    Animal 1.

    20 3 2018 14:54

    5       0

    Don't Mark and Worth get cold feet? :-)

  • PP

    Patrick P.

    20 3 2018 13:10

    6       4

    Let's get a couple of Millennials (with their shoes on) that bought BC at $19,000.....(3 months ago) Having fun yet?

    • SS

      Sam S.

      20 3 2018 18:43

      3       1

      Maybe those guys bought Bitcoin at $18,500 and need to get it back?

  • RJ

    Russ J.

    20 3 2018 11:14

    2       8

    Would prefer the interviews to be just with Mark. Sorry, but Worth added nothing to the conversation.

    • SS

      Sam S.

      20 3 2018 18:42

      4       0

      Hell, they wouldn't let him talk----that was unfortunate.

  • FC

    FRED C.

    20 3 2018 11:13

    1       4

    this should have been labeled as a bitcoin vs macro paradigm........too much bitcoin stuff........
    sounds to me like having a conclusion/thesis and then finding reasons for it...................
    why do affluent people /celebrities feel like anyone wants or cares about their social/political views................sad...

  • JB

    Joe B.

    20 3 2018 09:43

    0       2

    Can someone please ask Mark: If Bitcoin is a store of value because of fixed number of issuance, where did Bitcoin cash come from?

    How is what happened between BTC and BCH not exactly like what central banks can do with fiat?

    • NH

      Nigel H.

      20 3 2018 16:04

      0       1

      ... and Bitcoin Gold

    • PG

      Petter G.

      20 3 2018 17:09

      2       0

      If all forks of Bitcoin eventually turn out to be equally succesful then I guess there is no difference. However, I think most believe that just one of these forks will survive in the long run.

    • PN

      Paul N.

      20 3 2018 21:52

      3       1

      Saying that forks dilute bitcoin (or are ‘printing’ bitcoin) is like saying printing Euros dilutes the USD - they are different assets with different exchange rates.

      A fork is really just an altcoin where you try to bootstrap adoption by giving it away to BTC holders, who usually either sell or ignore it.

    • TH

      Timo H.

      22 3 2018 18:39

      3       3

      In the end, it isn't any different. The Bitcoin believers just deny it. They want to believe, that bitcoin is "digital gold" as its amount is limited. The thinking goes something like this:

      "Bitcoin is gold"
      "Bitcoin cash is another kind of gold"
      "Bitcoin gold is yet another kind of gold"
      "Litecoin is yet another kind of gold"
      "Ethereum is yet another kind of gold"
      "Dogecoin is yet another kind of gold"
      "IOTA is yet another kind of gold"
      Ad infinitum...

      https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/03/16/how-many-cryptocurrencies-are-there.aspx

      So, it is all gold to believers, all 1500+ different cryptos. If you need more of it, just create a new crypto and call it "yet another kind of gold".

      Pro tip: If you don't like central banks, buy the real thing. There's only one kind of gold out there. If you don't like the color of gold, buy platinum or silver. But that's about it. No more "different kinds of gold".

    • PG

      Petter G.

      23 3 2018 22:24

      2       0

      @D H: *No one* in the crypto space thinks that every coin/fork/token is "gold". Why would you say that? Many in the crypto space like gold and many are so-called "Bitcoin maximalists" who thinks that *only* Bitcoin will be successful in the long run. Everyone knows that 95% of all altcoins are scams/simple trading vehicles (it's all a game where people try to trade themselves into getting more BTC).

    • TM

      The-First-James M.

      24 3 2018 01:22

      1       0

      Bitcoin should have the Lightning Network by the end of the year. It's already on the Mainnet but not quite ready for full production use. Neither Bitcoin Cash nor Bitcoin Gold will have this.

  • TW

    Thomas W.

    20 3 2018 08:24

    8       0

    If Bitcoin is 500k in 2020, I want to hang with Mark Hart and John McAfee at Burning Man! Gonna be awesome. If not, maybe I stick to the boring stuff... (like Greek banks and shorting Tesla)

  • MC

    Matthew C.

    20 3 2018 00:01

    5       0

    Very enjoyable, I really like the range of formats you get from Real Vision - I have been a subscriber from the beginning and have watched every single video published and for me this loose informal approach in which the guests challenge their ideas in such an open manner is refreshing. These types of conversations with most guests would only be accessible if you got them in the pub for a couple of hours.

  • RP

    Raoul P.

    19 3 2018 22:43

    16       0

    What I love is that conversation has stoked up so much debate, discussion and reaction. It shows we are pushing a few boundaries, which is part of our mission. Its also great to see how everyone is engaging with each other and "unfriendly" comments are being actively policed by others to keep the discourse at a higher level. Thank you all. Lets keep our community engaged but respectful to all concerned.

    • SS

      Sam S.

      20 3 2018 19:37

      4       0

      Raoul, are these "unfriendly" comments or paid subscribers voicing their honest opinions and reactions? Policed seems to mean controlling the perception of others if one doesn't like the narrative. I feel like: "I may not tell you what you want to hear, but I'll tell you the truth".

    • RO

      Robert O.

      25 3 2018 01:53

      0       0

      Policing only appropriate ideas leads to 1984 or Facebook; don't go there.

  • JK

    Jan K.

    19 3 2018 21:26

    3       1

    Superb

  • ST

    Sid T.

    19 3 2018 20:58

    0       0

    Can someone please send me a link to Poloz mentioning Bitcoin could be a reserve asset? I could not find this online. This was something Mark mentioned in the interview. Thank you, Sid.

  • RA

    Ricardo A.

    19 3 2018 20:43

    0       0

    "Not going to be alive by 2040" ???

    • JK

      Jan K.

      19 3 2018 21:29

      0       0

      2140

  • SW

    Scott W.

    19 3 2018 12:05

    15       5

    Dumbest point made paraphrased: "the diminishing power of WHITE males is awesome, I mean look at Saudi Arabia where women are now driving"

    • MM

      Michael M.

      19 3 2018 17:16

      11       4

      Absolutely. I admire these guys, for what they've done. But i'd like to think if my opinion was publicly valued, I wouldn't use the opportunity to get a cheap dopamine hit by denigrating my own people. I mean can you imagine an individual from any other group doing this? Imagine a chinese investor saying 'i'm so glad that chinese companies are losing market share in x industry' - it's absurd on its face. You have to be highly educated and rareified to believe the kind of intersectional nonsense that this self-hatred is based on.

    • FL

      Flavia L.

      20 3 2018 05:38

      7       6

      I think we are watching two completely different interviews, and I'm afraid you are totally missing the point. Nobody is celebrating the diminishing power of white males, what they want to applaud is the releasing of potential human power and leveling of the playing field.

    • ML

      M L.

      20 3 2018 18:32

      2       4

      Clearly the point he is trying to make is that meritocracy is increasingly winning over any sense of racial or gender entitlement/bias. To spell it out, in economic terms: breaking down inefficient barriers or frictions improves productivity.

    • SS

      Sam S.

      20 3 2018 18:48

      1       0

      There's an economic advantage point to letting women and the population become a free and bigger part of the consumption. Belief's regarding women won't change overnight in Saudi or the Middle East. Same with North Korea----behind the scene's things are changing, but the news will keep it down and negative until the big boys own it all.

  • CA

    Craig A.

    19 3 2018 06:48

    11       2

    How come no discussion of his previous predictions that he gave last time on real vision. He was very bearish on CNY - why was this not discussed?
    I'd like to hear his process when things go wrong, and what he has done. Thats where the real value is - seeing expert adapt when things don't go their way. Not talking about this and only focusing on the speculative side of the future made this interview a lot less worthwhile. Rather disappointing.

    • RP

      Raoul P.

      19 3 2018 10:21

      11       1

      He went through this i his last video, a year ago.

  • FG

    Fred G.

    19 3 2018 05:52

    11       0

    Wow, a very thought provoking interview.

    Think about a world where baby boomers are trying to hand off all of their overpriced assets onto the next generation which doesnt want to buy them....

  • PN

    Paul N.

    19 3 2018 01:39

    6       1

    The behavioral economics side of the discussion is extremely well reflected in the online gaming industry - it's one of the reasons World of Warcraft and Diablo were such mega cash cows for Activision-Blizzard for a decade or longer. Companies that can get millennials addicted to dopamine rewards with ingame items, character progression, leader boards, and online tournaments/esports make massive amounts of money.

    E-sports are a massive phenomenon now. The 2017 DOTA2 tournament finals did 5 million live viewers, up from 4.6 in 2016 and 2.0 in 2014. Some estimates put the 'total' viewers of the 2017 tournament at 30 million and the prize pool was a record-setting $24 million. They also filled the Key Arena with 15000+ people who were actually willing to fly in and watch computer gamers compete against each other live on a big screen. The growth in this area is explosive.
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/518201/dota2-championship-viewers/

    • JW

      Jeremy W.

      10 4 2018 07:44

      1       0

      Your comment gave me flashbacks to my Diablo 2 days as a young teen. Distorting the online trading economy via mass duping and botting, until I was banned (caught by the 'regulators').

  • PN

    Paul N.

    19 3 2018 01:05

    19       0

    On the end of bitcoin mining: as the reward gets smaller and smaller, miners are compensated instead by increasing fees and *hopefully* higher bitcoin prices. When block rewards are finished itll be transaction fees only.

    This will lead to much higher fees over time, but thats okay. Almost every developer in this space understands that the bitcoin blockchain is a settlement network not a payment network, since every transaction is spread across 100000 computers and secured with insane amounts of computing power.

    To do the kinds of volume needed to reach VISA levels, there are companies building standard centralized payment systems like Cashpay or Bitpay, and there are researchers building payment channels and smart contracting systems like the Lightning Network which have varying degrees of centralization. The Lightning Network just launched its beta on the bitcoin mainnet and, if it works, will be able to bundle tens of thousands of transactions and settle them on the bitcoin blockchain as one.

    At the same time, other developers have been scaling the base blockchain layer by finding more and more ways to reduce the space used by transactions, including the recently implemented Segregated Witness patch, upcoming upgrades like Schnorr Signature Aggregation and Merkelized Abstract Syntax Trees, and best practices for exchanges like transaction batching and better fee estimation.

    The critics who say Bitcoin cant scale are missing the fact that it literally is scaling as we speak and this crash is just another part of the Bitcoin boom/bust cycle.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      19 3 2018 17:15

      4       0

      Very well put.

  • JB

    Jean B.

    19 3 2018 00:12

    5       7

    Interesting discussion. One thing hits me and it is the general lack of objectivity of many bitcoin adopters. Wonder if we’ll call it a Ponzi scheme a couple of years from now...

    • PG

      Petter G.

      19 3 2018 17:19

      4       3

      Why would you suggest that Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme? If you had studied how Bitcoin actually works you would know this is not the case. Sad to see so many people still are sceptical to Bitcoin 'just because'.

  • PP

    Patrick P.

    18 3 2018 21:23

    10       7

    Bitcoin $19K+ ...Dec2017 ..today March2018 $7644. ----Now that's a store of value you can't go wrong with. NOT !!!

    • dw

      darcy w.

      19 3 2018 19:32

      5       0

      Bitcoin $750 - $920 ...Jan2017. Just adding some perspective.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_bitcoin#2017

    • TT

      Tim T.

      19 3 2018 21:47

      3       2

      Agreed...again, blockchain is a fantastic tech advancement but cryptos are heading down because to many cryptos are chasing too few dollars. Bitcoin is the biggest name but I doubt they end up being the standard. Again, the supply of bitcoin may be limited but the supply of cryptos is limitless. There are always new ones coming out and the tech is 'always better'.
      It's similar to what killed the internet stocks in 2000....too many new shares were coming to a hot market chasing too few available dollars.

    • RM

      Rainer M.

      20 3 2018 16:13

      3       0

      The biggest fallacy might be that low volatility assets like bonds in an over indebted world are "safe" and a Blockchain asset like bitcoin are "risky". BTC 1 year return +700 Investors got paid to assume the volatility risk

  • TS

    Timothy S.

    18 3 2018 17:01

    0       0

    The G2 paradigm shift is an interesting idea. To delve a little deeper, is a critical assessment by Harald Malgren, Martin Armstrong and Anne Stevenson-Yang useful?

    • JS

      John S.

      19 3 2018 00:17

      3       4

      Please don't invite Armstrong back after his last incoherent babble on RVTV

    • TS

      Timothy S.

      19 3 2018 00:56

      9       0

      Armstrong is a difficult interview. He is not verbally adept but is well versed in monetary history, a succesfull trader and has enumerable contacts in China, Europe, as well as the US. He requires a skilled interviewer to keep him focused but worth the effort.

    • WM

      William M.

      24 3 2018 16:30

      0       0

      Big fan of Armstrong and his very knowledgable database and historical acumen. He is a hell of a character. However, I agree he is not an eloquent speaker. The RVT crowd would likely not appreciate his style even with a tight interviewer. Pity, he has so much broad knowledge and one of the most colorful histories of any economic commentator.

  • VS

    Victor S.

    18 3 2018 11:37

    20       9

    With all due respect -i found Mark and worth comments worthless. I like the format of the talk but the content was very lacking and incomplete. For example on bitcoin they never mentioned (WSJ) article “Do you own bitcoin ? The IRS is Coming for You?” 0 for investment content ! If you live in NYC or LA and you win in bitcoin you owe a tax of 50% + . They also understand little of China who is a communist nation who prints their capital. I would love to debate them for $ ?

  • A1

    Animal 1.

    18 3 2018 11:13

    9       8

    Brilliant interview! This changed my perspective on Bitcoin completely. Just wow...!

  • GG

    Georgi G.

    18 3 2018 07:51

    42       4

    Mark is clearly mentally and emotionally bruised by his CNY experience (which was the elephant in the interview room), for which I have huge sympathy. I was left with the impression that this new worldview is an attempt to rationalise and cope with, what appears to him now to be a crushing failure, while Worth played Frasier "I am listening" Crane. When you take on the G2 economy with rigid command system in place, the likely that they can sit you out of the trade is huge.
    The interview reminded me of Soros and Druckenmiller flipping from short to long stocks in March 2000.
    Wish both Mark and Worth well.

    • ns

      niall s.

      19 3 2018 20:42

      4       0

      Maybe that explains the lack of shoes ?

  • WA

    WAYNE A.

    18 3 2018 05:53

    15       17

    Awful The only Realvision video that I really would give a 0 on a scale of 1 to 10. They were children with a little knowledge and no reality and out of touch. China is not going to let Bit Coin exist. It is a nefarious currency and less real than a fiat currency. The only intelligent comment was to read Sapien Raoul.

    • PN

      Paul N.

      18 3 2018 11:41

      14       2

      China already banned cryptocurrencies, ICOs, and mining. They did it last year at like $5k and bitcoin shot up to 20k regardless.

  • DC

    Darrell C.

    18 3 2018 05:35

    11       4

    Sorry, good conversation, but nothing relavatory here. I guess I was hoping for more clarity, I felt the guest were still grasping....

  • SS

    Steve S.

    18 3 2018 05:08

    8       11

    Get these two back on. Brilliant dialogue, so much to digest!

  • SD

    S D.

    18 3 2018 01:22

    4       0

    Does the G20 work? I'd say not.

  • SD

    S D.

    18 3 2018 01:21

    7       0

    It's also all very well to talk about the need for a new institutional framework, or new institutions, implying that the existing institutions particularly globally are out of date - but what does that mean exactly.
    Furthermore, what does it mean when Carney and Legarde speak publicly about the need for crypto regulation - in the context of all this weirdness with Russia.
    There's a whole chapter on Russia right now - ex DC I emphasize - that hasn't been told in the MSM and if I were Realvision that's a gap I'd leap into and vault out of.
    Also, could you please revisit Napier's comments on Turkey which are becoming hyper relevant that nobody's discussing.

  • SD

    S D.

    18 3 2018 00:37

    11       1

    I think this was really great but a bit fuzzy because it's so broad. But that's why it was so interesting. In general - great! Learned a lot. Thanks. Would really appreciate greater insight into the millennial comments, that is something I haven't seen anybody talk about competently previously. The G2 thing is interesting but sort of predictable, albeit constructive and productive perspective on the inevitable. Refreshing to view that shift outside an overtly political framework, regardless on your views on the reasons for and solutions to global disequilibrium. The millennial perspective is probably more useful overall, particularly the disposition towards authoritarianism and the explanation for that which will involve uncomfortable conclusions about the intellectual degradation that's a consequence both of globalism and a failure to think competently about technology. I think the failure to understand the millennial cultural shift is incredibly important when it's combined with these technological shifts. We were all told that assisting China's expansion and emergence would lead to China becoming more like us - what if we're becoming more like them? What if our inheritance to this massive intellectual theft, isn't just climate change and out of control global corruption, but a new Cultural Revolution in the West, aided and abetted by Facebook? It's all very well to talk about an end to white patriarchy, but what if the price for that discussion is due process and a respect for established fact? The West needs to hold fast to its intellectual heritage to navigate these waters, and the reasons we may have a problem with the millennials is because we've been too willing to discard the lessons of the past for the promise of a future that now begs questions about the nature of contemporary progress.

    • TS

      Timothy S.

      18 3 2018 16:43

      4       1

      Bravo!

    • MM

      Michael M.

      19 3 2018 17:48

      1       0

      Great questions. Personal opinion is that Trump is the grey champion predicted/described in the fourth turning, and the order being overturned is the liberal order which is a severe aberration in all human history - thrown into obvious relief by more traditionally oriented socities like china, russia and saudi.

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:01

      0       3

      Sorry Sarah but China appears to be making more positive moves re global warming than the U.S., who seem to be denying and regressing under DT. The 'other' side isn't always bad and wrong, when looking at things objectively.

    • SD

      S D.

      26 3 2018 20:12

      0       0

      To clarify: disrespect for due process and established fact refers to the failures of the criminal justice system to prosecute these crimes effectively. The criminal justice system has to operate properly, because something will step into its place if widespread criminality is allowed to go unpunished like this.

  • VK

    Viresh K.

    17 3 2018 21:03

    6       7

    Excellent, excellent interview. Both Mark and Worth are superstars.

  • PG

    Petter G.

    17 3 2018 19:50

    6       3

    Great stuff RV. Would love if you could bring both of them back in the future.

  • HS

    Hubert S.

    17 3 2018 19:27

    2       0

    will there be a transcript ?

  • TK

    Tanay K.

    17 3 2018 18:12

    14       1

    Mark got one thing right - bearish sentiment on Bitcoin is abundant in these comments

  • bm

    brian m.

    17 3 2018 17:25

    23       14

    I like Real vision...But to put forth the idea of "white patriarchy" is blatant bigotry..If you put forth such an Idea you should ,at the very least have the manners and the decency to explain yourself...Disgraceful

    • dw

      douglas w.

      18 3 2018 03:50

      4       11

      Hey B. I would disagree with your statement of blatant bigotry. If you look at recent statistics in tech, even though asians represent 40% of the tech workforce, as you climb the ladder into upper management it still is predominantly white males that hold these positions of power and influence.
      The average salary of female investment banker at Barclay's in 2017 is half that of male counterparts? Sounds ridiculous but it's still true even in today's "even playing field". I think we have come along way, but I think he's touching on a valid topic that few large fund managers rarely discuss. Kudos to Mark, and I hope he is given a larger platform to go into these issues in more detail.

    • bm

      brian m.

      18 3 2018 06:24

      15       1

      Douglas w..Thanks for the response..I guess it is possible to interpret his comments in the manner you pointed out..But the western culture was created by white males to a large extent, and the only things you can compare it to is "other cultures" (comparing them to a hypothetical culture is of no use)..and you are not going to find white males among asian cultures..Female salaries are close to male salaries (at the top end) but most of the failed business ventures,bankrupcies and suicides are male...no one is looking for equality among these ranks.
      The legitimate cases of discrimination are far outweighed by ideologically driven dogmas against the white patriarchy..(best described by Thomas Sowell)..Inequality is dangerous, it leads to revolutions and If one is misdiagnosing the problem one is not helping. There has been extensive psychometric studies that have been available for decades which explain the variances between race and gender .

    • bm

      brian m.

      18 3 2018 06:29

      17       3

      The fact that a variance exists does not mean that discrimination is the reason for the variance..

    • MM

      Michael M.

      19 3 2018 17:00

      3       3

      douglas w. - the narrow definition of equality you have in mind is neither achievable, nor desirable. It is simply communism 2.0.

  • TH

    Timo H.

    17 3 2018 16:00

    39       9

    This is the first time as a long-time RV customer, that I have to give some criticism because the interviewees really did not know, what they are talking about when the discussion turned to cryptocurrencies.

    This inverview proved true the recent definition of a cryptocurrency: it combines everything you don't understand about computers with everything, you don't understand about money.

    Mark may understand the money side quite well, but his understanding about the computer stuff seems sub-par. Some points to prove this:

    1) Bitcoin does not scale up. Its design foundation makes that impossible. Bitcoin "network" is a network of computer that all do essentially the same stuff: trying to commit a new block of transactions. Its performance is the same regardless of the number of nodes involved. The network is able to commit the same a couple of dozen of transactions per second regardless of the number of users wanting to use it. Talking about scalability and network effect in general and Metcalfe's law especially in this context is the biggest piece of BS I've heard for a long time. A large number of people wanting to get rich quick is not a "network effect", it is a "tulip mania".

    2) If you try to scale up the Bitcoin network, it loses at least one of the properties that makes it unique. In most cases, you lose the pure peer-to-peer nature of the network. That makes the outcome contain some hubs that are immediately subjects to regulation, AML and KYC. Goodbye anonymity and resistance to censorship. To be a credible payment network, its transaction cost per payment should be in the range of a few cents and its performance should be in the range of 10s of thousands of transactions per second. Neither of these numbers is achievable. For executing payments in distributed ledgers, cryptocurrencies are not even needed. It is a trivial exercise to connect the distributed ledger into payment rails that can execute those 10s of thousands of transactions per second in a AML compliant way. The only requirement is an API that the DLT network can call. For example in Europe, the PSD2 directive makes it mandatory banks to provide such APIs in the near future. Once you understand, that fiat can be used in blockchains, it should be a quite easy decision to decide between a poorly functioning illegal payment network and a payment network that already takes care of the world's payment traffic.

    3) Bitcoin is THE FIRST DEMO written on the basis of the Satoshi's white paper. Since then, a number of better cryptocurrencies, blockchains and distributed ledger architectures have evolved. Why on earth should Bitcoin be the ultimate cryptocurrency, when there is an abundance of technically better implementations of decentralized transaction networks available? Claiming Bitcoin as the superior store of value is therefore plain idiotic. Furthermore, its governance has proven to be below any standards (as evidenced by the number of hard forks). Because it is all open source, anybody can set up a new network (about 1500 persons/entities already have) and most of those new ones are technically more advanced than their predecessors. Why should the first one ever built be the only one ever have any value? The only advantage of Bitcoin over other cryptocurrencies is its brand value. People, who don't understand enough about money nor about computers, buy Bitcoin, because of the noise it has generated.

    Dear RV, if you want to create content about cryptocurrencies, please make sure that your contributors understand enough from both the computer and the money aspect of the equation. We've seen enough snake oil salesmen in this business. Erik Townsend would be such guy.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      17 3 2018 18:50

      7       19

      I'll just write this in case anyone else read the above comment:

      D H. is wrong in a big way. Bitcoin will scale massively in the coming years and will likely be the king of crypto for a very long time. But don't take my word for it. Read, study and form your own opinion. At least don't listen to guys like D H.

      No offence D H.

    • TE

      Tito E.

      17 3 2018 19:38

      6       3

      The 'proof of work' model wont scale and all that computation (and power) going to waste is incredibly inefficient. Digital distributed ledgers are where its going to be at. Blockchain technologies are of course an sub-type of this but possibly just a first prototype.

      Agree that an interview with Erik Townsend on this would be good. Would love to hear Stephen Streater' ideas in this space too

    • TE

      Tito E.

      17 3 2018 19:44

      2       1

      ..personally until there is that better distributed ledger i'm bullish Bitcoin

    • PG

      Petter G.

      17 3 2018 19:58

      5       5

      @Tito: The base layer don't have to scale. It have to be secure. And to be secure it needs to be costly for an attacker to modify the contents of the ledger. This is what PoW provides. Nothing more. Scaling solutions will be provided by protocols built on top of the base layer. This is something that Microsoft also have found to be the best way forward:

      "To support a vast world of users, organizations, and devices, the underlying technology must be capable of scale and performance on par with traditional systems. Some public blockchains (Bitcoin [BTC], Ethereum, Litecoin, to name a select few) provide a solid foundation for rooting DIDs, recording DPKI operations, and anchoring attestations. While some blockchain communities have increased on-chain transaction capacity (e.g. blocksize increases), this approach generally degrades the decentralized state of the network and cannot reach the millions of transactions per second the system would generate at world-scale. To overcome these technical barriers, we are collaborating on decentralized Layer 2 protocols that run atop these public blockchains to achieve global scale, while preserving the attributes of a world class DID system."

      Source:
      https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2018/02/12/decentralized-digital-identities-and-blockchain-the-future-as-we-see-it/

      With that said: It is possible that more efficient and equally secure consensus mechanisms are discovered in the future. But as Bitcoin is software, it is also possible modify the SW and switch to something else than PoW if consensus is found on making that sort of change.

    • PI

      Paul I.

      17 3 2018 20:21

      7       2

      Currencies are social expressions and fiat represents both social acceptance of a payments medium and a political system which can enforce the collection of taxes in that medium to a government with the societal acceptance and/or power to do so. There is a reason the hyper-inflationary collapse of a currency is typically followed by dramatic political change within the affected country. Cryptocurrencies ,and Bitcoin in particular, have captured the imaginations and modest resources of millions of retail buyers ; but for the moment they seem a lot closer to being Beanie Babies or Franklin Mint collectibles than real stores of value or media of exchange.

      The inviolability of Bitcoin is a myth . Apart from the technical issues , anyone willing to subsidize a new cryptocurrency intelligently would have a decent shot at getting their new crypto off the ground , having already banked a significant proportion of the eventual finite supply of tokens. This arbitrage will dilute the aggregate proportion of portfolios that might be placed into cryptocurrencies . A profusion of volatile new issues might be great for speculators and exchanges ; but it will be confusing for would-be store of value types ,and probably fatal to any chance of serious linking to the mainstream financial system.

      Finally, Hart& Co are bass-ackwards on equities. In theory , equities represent a share in the earnings stream of a business. The monetary and economic environment can affect the prosperity and stability in which the business operates ; but my bar should be able to function, pretty much regardless of the payments mechanism by which the patrons pay fro their beers.

    • TH

      Timo H.

      18 3 2018 11:38

      11       5

      @Petter G. I'm offended. What's your pedigree that entitles you to label me as a categorically unreliable source of information in this subject matter? Mine include:

      - 7 granted US patents about distributed transaction management since 1997, currently owned by IBM
      - Current position as the lead DLT architect in the largest bank of my country
      - Decent understanding about how the financial system as a whole works (RV partner, FWIW)

      I may be either right or wrong in my opinions, but you should concentrate on arguing about facts instead of labeling fellow members as unreliable. So far, you've failed to provide any factual counterarguments.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      19 3 2018 18:00

      7       4

      @D H: Sorry to hear that. As I said, I did not mean to offend you and when I now read my post again I can see how it could come across as insulting. I'll try to adjust my tone in the future. However, here are a few of my objections to some of your claims:

      1) You claim that Bitcoin doesn't, can't and won't scale which is factually untrue.
      2) You claim that Bitcoin is an illegal payment network which is also untrue in most juristictions.
      3) You claim that fiat can be used in blockchains and seem to suggest that such a solution would be a good idea. Why on earth would you use a blockchain when you have a central authority that controls the system? A normal SQL database would be much more efficient in a setup like that.
      4) You claim that the governance in Bitcoin is not working which is also untrue. It works exactly as intended. It's *supposed* to be hard to make changes to the base layer (unless clear consensus is found among participants).
      5) You claim that Bitcoin won't last because there are so many others (more advanced) cryptocurrencies out there but fail to recognize that the hard part (now that Satoshi have done the *really* hard part for us) is actually getting a following.

      I can't tell what the future will bring, but when I see a post with so many errors (in my opinion) I feel I should give readers a chance to see the other side of the coin.

      Glad to see that you have a nice resume. But it doesn't change the fact that I think you're wrong.

    • GB

      Gary B.

      20 3 2018 21:45

      1       5

      Petter G- Who appointed you God of Bitcoin/Cryptocurrencies? You should be ashamed of your arrogance and dismissal of anyone who disagrees with your opinion. The value of this interview regarding crypto is that it is still in its infancy. Smart people are still trying to figure it out. Disagreements are all over the place when you have a technology that is so new. It is the disagreements are the basis of learning and moving forward towards what crypto will or will not become in the future. No one, including you Petter G has all the answers.

    • TH

      Timo H.

      22 3 2018 16:04

      2       2

      @PetterG:

      "1) You claim that Bitcoin doesn't, can't and won't scale which is factually untrue. "

      You're yet to present evidence about that. When you do, make sure that you understand the audience has some long-time experts of distributed data management solutions AND banking systems. Specifically, the "Lightning Network" is not the answer, because it will essentially introduce a lousy banking system with quite big payment hubs requiring allocated capital on top of a extremely slow peer-to-peer transaction engine. In clear language: Lightning network tries to solve the problem by creating the same problem that Bitcoin tried to solve.

      "2) You claim that Bitcoin is an illegal payment network which is also untrue in most juristictions."

      Once the scalability problem has been "solved", there are entities, such as the payment hubs, in the ecosystem, that become subject to regulation. Those entities must comply with all AML and KYC requirements out there. 100% guaranteed.

      "3) You claim that fiat can be used in blockchains and seem to suggest that such a solution would be a good idea. Why on earth would you use a blockchain when you have a central authority that controls the system? A normal SQL database would be much more efficient in a setup like that."

      The whole blockchain revolution is about making cross-organization business transaction management by orders of magnitude more efficient than what such systems are today. Those business transactions need to be settled on-ledger, but the settlement mechanism does not require a cryptocurrency. Fiat will do just fine, and it is trivial to implement.

      "4) You claim that the governance in Bitcoin is not working which is also untrue. It works exactly as intended. It's *supposed* to be hard to make changes to the base layer (unless clear consensus is found among participants)."

      For any real use, the "consensus of unknown contributors" governance model is completely unusable. You need to have sufficient degree of certainty about the capabilities of the base layer, if you want to implement any business solutions on top of it.

      "5) You claim that Bitcoin won't last because there are so many others (more advanced) cryptocurrencies out there but fail to recognize that the hard part (now that Satoshi have done the *really* hard part for us) is actually getting a following."

      Bitcoin has superior brand value over the other cryptocurrencies, but that's it. In many other respects, it is just a first demo of a very cool innovation. That, unfortunately, is not alone sufficient for a commercially viable solution.

    • PG

      Petter G.

      23 3 2018 20:16

      2       0

      @D H:

      1) The Lightning Network will enable borderless, peer-to-peer micro-transactions on the worlds most secure decentralized settlement platform. See what I did there? I claimed something for a *fact* just as you did when you started this whole thread. You don't know. I don't know. But claiming that Bitcoin *won't* scale is naive. The question is how *much* and in what *way* it will scale?

      2) Once scalability have been solved payment hubs won't be an issue. Because if they *are* an issue then scalability have not been solved. Lightning is not the final solution. But it is *a* solution.

      3) The whole blockchain revolution is here because someone decided that it would be a good thing to have a neutral, open, borderless and censorship resistant global currency. It took about 15 years to find it but now it's here. And it's called Bitcoin. It has never been about businesses.

      4) You seem to think that you argue *against* the Bitcoin consensus model on this point (but you're really not). Changing Bitcoin is *very* hard. This in turn create a great deal of certainty for anyone who want to build stuff on top or use it in any way.

      5) There's one important difference in this case. Basically all cryptos out there are open source. So if everyone agrees that feature X should be adopted by Bitcoin then it *will* be adopted by Bitcoin. Also, Bitcoin is the largest open source project the world have ever seen. It's not a demo. Not anymore.

      Cheers.

      PS. I'd really like you to stop trying to scare me (and others) from speaknig our minds by saying stuff like:

      "When you do, make sure that you understand the audience has some long-time experts of distributed data management solutions AND banking systems. "

      This comment section is open to all who subscribe to RV. And you have no clue what *my* credentials are. So just stop.

      PPS. This is the last comment I will make on this thread. If people want to know more about Bitcoin and/or Lightning Network I would recommend you listen to Andreas Antonopoulos on youtube.

  • Nv

    Nick v.

    17 3 2018 15:21

    14       8

    oh dear. Network adoption in Bitcoin is almost zero. It is purely a speculative tool
    It is expensive to use and everyday use has actually fallen. Its electricity usage is ridiculous

    Bitcoin not dilutive? Are you kidding me?
    Bitcoin futures supply is .......infinite

    Somedays you lose an hour, you will never get back

    • Nv

      Nick v.

      17 3 2018 15:30

      5       0

      and I forgot...Bitcoin has broken DOWN

    • PG

      Petter G.

      17 3 2018 18:52

      7       15

      Your comment is ridiculous.

  • MK

    Mark K.

    17 3 2018 15:16

    13       2

    Much is being said about “the network” “adopting” bitcoin without defining what adoption means. Bitcoin enthusiasts seem to assume it is for 1) a store of value or 2) a medium of exchange. However, every person I’ve asked why they own Bitcoin says it’s becuase they think the price is going up...i.e. speculation. So is the premise of genuine adoption really valid?

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:12

      2       2

      Well said Mark. That's what it basically boils down to, relying on some other bigger idiot who will pay more than you. It's wild speculation.

    • MK

      Mark K.

      23 3 2018 16:09

      2       0

      Thanks Eric. I’m neutral on bitcoin but I don’t think it’s fair to call people who own it idiots. Speculators yes, but as they say that’s what makes markets. The big question is what are the supply/demand dynamics that will drive price?

  • S

    Sean .

    17 3 2018 14:32

    1       0

    One other pooint. The Belt & Road initiative works in Eurasia also because China has their equivalent if the Quad which includes Russia and Iran. They have a common “foe” in the US, so the US tries to

  • S

    Sean .

    17 3 2018 14:26

    0       0

    The reason why China is trying to be nicer to India is because of Modi. Hence the Quad, and closer cooperation with the other modern military powers in Asia excl. China.

  • RI

    R I.

    17 3 2018 13:47

    4       11

    Mark Hart implied that there's a chance he will be alive in 2140 (122 years from now). Hope is not an investment strategy, Mark. Such an implication takes away from the rest of your theories, for better or worse.

  • MD

    Mathieu D.

    17 3 2018 10:44

    4       3

    Great interview, Is it possible to have the transcript ? Thanks

  • JG

    Jay G.

    17 3 2018 07:23

    2       14

    Brilliant. Inspiring. But Raoul kept talking over the millennial, typical gen x behaviour.

  • BA

    Brian A.

    17 3 2018 05:45

    46       3

    First off, Rauol must ask what Mark Hart is on...I want some!

    Second, if I get this right Mark Hart has switched sides from being a China Bear to an all-out China Bull. And hey, I don't mind people changing their minds and that's what excellent managers do but this is a big shift. In my opinion, Rauol should have probed this major shift some more.

    Third, this new G2 world is currently being negotiated... Really! Do we all think the US is going to roll over and let this happen. The boys from Austin should be reading Graham Allison's "Destined For War" and his many great YouTube videos on "Thucydides's Trap"! Again, the odds of a peaceful transfer of power from a dominate power to an emerging power are quite low.

    Fourth, the boys from Austin should have given credit to Neil Howe and Bill Strauss on their scholarly work and plugged their book "The Fourth Turning".

    Fifth, I believe in blockchain and thanks for Rauol to parse this out. But bitcoin as a store of value?...is just speculative on everybody's part at this present time and the boys of Austin didn't convince me that it wasn't. Bitcoin maybe worth millions or zero in my estimation but anyone can flip that coin.

    Sixth, and my last comment... Thank goodness Worth Wray said there is a dark side to "Me Too" movement and other left wing equality based movements taking over the western world. Again, the boys from Austin should put their shoes on and go to their computers and watch some YouTube videos or better yet buy Jordan Peterson book, "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos". Dr. Peterson not only currently has the #1 bestselling book at the moment but is enjoying rock star status in the western world on how equality based societies will not only end up being bad for all of us but will follow the footsteps of Stalin's Russia and Mao's China. I'm sure with a little thoughtful consideration of history, that Dr. Peterson painfully tries to explain to anybody who wants to listen, Mr. Hart will be less bullish on than his current utopia western view he obviously currently possesses

    • MT

      Michael T.

      17 3 2018 09:19

      5       3

      Jordan Peterson FTW!

    • Av

      Ad v.

      17 3 2018 13:53

      4       9

      It the hard left crazy? Yes. Is the hard right crazy? Yes. Is Jordan Peterson an overhyped intellectual lightweight? Yes.

    • RA

      Robert A.

      17 3 2018 23:03

      13       0

      I would really like to have heard the timing and reasoning for Mark’s “hard reversal” on China. I figured he and Kyle Bass have been essentially “timed out” on their China plays even if they wind up being right in the end. When RV, Grant, or Raoul become aware of such a 180 degree reversal on a well thought out and argued major Maco position it would sure be great to get us a presentation for the reasoning behind it asap.

    • PD

      Paul D.

      19 3 2018 16:08

      1       0

      I would say that Nikolai Kondratieff is the one who deserves the credit for the Fourth Turning. His ideas and he got shot for them!

  • JM

    John M.

    17 3 2018 05:24

    23       3

    I am not sure I follow Mark's comments about the dilution potential of gold. I thought it took at least 10 years or so & billions of dollars to develop sizeable new gold deposits (not to mention the political risk of certain foreign jurisdictions). Also I don't think any new major gold discoveries have been made recently either? Any way maybe I'm missing something.

  • SZ

    SALEH Z.

    17 3 2018 04:27

    5       0

    Good stuff - the “ peace dividend” comment explains a lot

  • JD

    John D.

    17 3 2018 04:17

    6       2

    Great Conversation...

  • KC

    Klendathu C.

    17 3 2018 02:50

    11       4

    Interviews like this pay for the subscription and then some.

  • SN

    Sean N.

    17 3 2018 02:38

    10       3

    Thats why Real Vision is worth every penny.

  • TT

    Tim T.

    17 3 2018 01:23

    20       16

    Tell Mark Hart there's an elephant in the room WRT Bitcoin.

    I agree that blockchain is a huge leap and important. However, bitcoin has no monopoly on blockchain. Their is LIMITLESS amounts of crypto currencies that can be created. Newer cryptos that are of better tech could rapidly eclipse bitcoin. His infatuation with bitcoin is perplexing I would expect Hart to be more discerning. As far as no dilutive...what about the endless supply of new crypto currencies...mabybe bitcoin is non-dilutive but other cryptos 'dilute' bitcoin.

    Was very unimpressed with Hart this interview....almost looked like he suddenly lost one or two of his marbles.

    • js

      jacob s.

      17 3 2018 04:23

      7       2

      The very reason why there can be an infinity amount of crypto is why bitcoin is so valuable. In terms of the development of new tech, in order to scale, every cryptocurrency is going to need a 2nd layer off chain scaling solutions which is highly dependent on user base. The lighting network just rolled out for bitcoin as the 2nd layer. As for smart contracts, Rootstock is being built and being run on the testnet.

      To be honest though, I think people are either going to believe in crypto or they're not. But you shouldn't chastise people that are taking part in this new belief system.

      Bottom line, they believe in it and like it or not, that makes it real.

    • KW

      Ken W.

      17 3 2018 04:42

      4       3

      I think you missed the point with bitcoin and Metcalfe's Law. If the network adopts bitcoin as the standard, what's the use of having better tech if no one uses it?

      The internet as a whole uses the DARPA developed OSI 7 layer network model still. More secure and faster protocols have been developed, but haven't caught on. We've instead developed technology like FTCP and MPTCP and infrastructure like CDNs around the standard that's been adopted by the network. In the last few decades, we've gone from transmitting simple text packets to video streaming of major events like the Super Bowl

    • VE

      Viktor E.

      17 3 2018 11:18

      10       1

      A lot of the value for Bitcoin is in the security of the network. It would cost ~$7,000,000,000+ to buy the hardware alone for trying to do a 51% attack today (that would allow you to double spend etc, not modify anything that’s already written to the blockchain). On top of that it would cost you approximately $13,000,000 per day in electricity cost. That’s one of the reasons why the network effect is so huge with the PoW (Proof of Work) mining system. Sure, you can copy the code, but you can’t copy the network, the community and the security. There’s not room for that many currencies that rely on PoW and PoW is the most secure way to store data that we know of today. The winner kind of takes it all. It’s also why the debate about the high electricity cost for the bitcoin network is somewhat ridiculous. If anything, it’s something good because it’s a proof that you can trust the security of the network because an attack would be extremely expensive to perform.

      Then you could build layers on top of this network for performing day to day transactions (like the lightning network tries to) or build a new system that’s designed to handle smart contracts (Ethereum etc) or use PoS (Proof of Stake) to handle more and cheaper transactions. But then you’ll have to cut corners with the security and people will probably look for the most secure place to store the majority of their funds. Today that place is bitcoin and it won’t be easy to replace.

      Thank you for the interview Real Vision, really interesting!

  • pd

    patrick d.

    17 3 2018 01:04

    6       1

    Loved Mark's prior interview. Helped push me to invest in bitcoin and what a fantastic trade that was until Christmas. Open to reallocating if it overcomes that heavy resistance, generating intense millennial get rich quick FOMO once again. Alas...evil CME manipulators yada yada but most importantly google search enthusiasms dead. By 2020 it should hit support on a log chart, maybe it'll move, until then and as always, continue hoarding gold. Any ways... onto this interview. Reeeeeaaaaallllllyyy wild that Worth would get blazed for his inaugural RV intvw .. pretty funny to watch mark and worth try to look at mark/raoul or worth/raoul in equal time allotments. frantic!

    • PP

      Patrick P.

      18 3 2018 11:28

      1       5

      Worth reminded me of a bobblehead doll for a moment anyway.

  • DS

    David S.

    17 3 2018 00:46

    7       6

    Excellent interview. One point of disagreement: Bitcoin is not a non-diluted store of "value". It is an established number of bitcoins available over time. Governments will not be able to agree on any new monetary system, but it will be in their interest to eliminate bitcoin to control currency flows. Money can be made in bitcoin in the meantime, but eventually bitcoin will be illegal in most major jurisdictions, even Japan. Each country will have its own digital currency using block chain technology where they will have the control. DLS

    • js

      jacob s.

      17 3 2018 04:45

      5       0

      Would I buy a 'Fedcoin'?

      Yeah sure maybe a few if they were cheap.

      Would I store my wealth in 'Fedcoin'?

      No way.

    • DS

      David S.

      19 3 2018 03:27

      1       0

      Fedcoin will just be a digital currency for convenience. Just like any another form of currency. It will be just as fiat as the next dollar. I would not collect them either; just like I do not collect dollars. DLS

  • GF

    Guillaume F.

    17 3 2018 00:39

    3       3

    Fantastic! Can’t wait to have them back!

  • BK

    Bruce K.

    17 3 2018 00:31

    7       2

    Mark's enthusiasm for Bitcoin is infectious. I've been working with blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies for the past three years, so I share much of his enthusiasm.

    Mark did a fabulous job articulating the bull case for Bitcoin. With that said, he discussed only advantages. And like everything, there ARE disadvantages. For those of you interested in BOTH this 'pros' AND 'cons', I humbly submit my recent series of blog posts:
    https://hackernoon.com/demons-in-digital-gold-87354fb9300

    I am NOT taking anything away from Mark ... he's brilliant! My objective is to help people understand the "whole picture" and make informed decisions for themselves.

  • JC

    Juan C.

    16 3 2018 21:49

    0       0

    Interesting thesis to consider. Taiwan would probably be a big looser under that environment (new security blanket under a communist country) so it could be the canary in the coal mine.

  • JB

    Jean B.

    16 3 2018 21:34

    4       0

    All the way back to Econ 101 - If a Central Bank doubles its monetary base, it ends up by directly impacting customers purchasing power. How would bitcoin’s forks get away from this reality? Could be

    • KS

      Kathleen S.

      16 3 2018 23:33

      7       11

      What do you not get -- it makes a completely new currency that has no connection to the previous currency -- thus there is no diluting in the first currency. If the currency becomes something fine, if not fine. I always love young people because they get this - they are not trapped. Maybe you should stick to stocks, that actually have no finite value because they like the US dollar can be printed into infinity.

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:23

      3       1

      It's not really a completely new currency and it certainly doesn't have no connection to the previous currency. You undermine your own points. The hard forks completely undermine this and I don't understand how anyone can have faith in such a system. To call it a currency is a joke. Btw, what do you think the average age of e.g. BTC is across the whole network? I bet you it is not that young...

  • TS

    Tom S.

    16 3 2018 20:21

    7       1

    This interview feels important and powerful. I can't inpoint why but could any past generation predict the future of the new generation with precicse accuracy? There are certainly big shifts occuring which are hard to explain (hence the convoluted nature of the interview) and I do think they identify some of them reasonably clearly. The key and most difficult to pin down is what is the right thing's to own for the new world. Adoption is clearly one method for determining value now e.g. Amazon, Netflix, Facebook, Bitcoin all have high adoption rates and 'market values' whilst baby boomer traditional assets have declined as flow of capital into them has stopped growing. Examples that spring to mind are GE, WPP. The US dollar could even be another potentially (millenials have inherited/taken to a world of excessive debt/credit (short dollars) to fund lifestlyes whilst also have attracted to Bitcoin. Just my stream of consciousness but I think that to consider this interview 'dissapointing' or 'a waste of time' is harsh.

    • bh

      bjorn h.

      16 3 2018 22:50

      8       0

      The ideas revolving around G2 are refreshing. The part I don't get is why investment managers always need to promote the relative value angle on a certain asset versus it's comp. In this case, bitcoin versus gold as a store of value. I've tried to read a bit on the whole issue of quantum computing and whether that can lead to circumvention of the finite of supply of bitcoin to come. The only argument I see is that quantum computers are too expensive and pose some form of money printing type breakthrough on Bitcoin until the cost of quantum computers, let's say converge to certain ratio versus the bitcoin mining operations. Maybe there is some relative trade where supply of bitcoin gets disrupted, just like money supply and central banking. Another curiosity for future real vision episodes would be whether the forking is already a form of stock split or new bitcoin supply in "like wolf in sheep's clothing". It's like trying to modify the definition of what new supply actually is. I would like to know more on why brand value of Bitcoin is so important. Brands are valuable until they become really "uncool". We like in a world where Jenna Kardashian can give snapchat a really hard time. If crypto currency illuminates turn against their creations, a bit like Vitalik Buterin.. isn't that a brand issue? Another anecdote from perspective of growing up in Japan, where people love to speculate on currency and have adopted Bitcoin as a currency on margin speculation mania is the Kokusai global sovereign fund mania.. which was the biggest bubble in EUR carry trade at the retail level that ever existed. I remember that the size of that fund inflated to be the largest retail mutual fund in Japan. Japanese retail exposure to bitcoin now exceeds that the last FX retail bubble before the last EUR carry trade unwinded. I buy "u should hold a small X% of your assets in crypto" argument. Mrs. Watanabe are not the world's best market timers. Maybe this time could be different. Final thought would be to investigate whether to what extent the bitcoin limited supply thesis is absolutely bullet proof. I don't have enough datapoint to make that assessment. Maybe Peter Thiel has the answer. He is a brilliant technologist and VC, but at the same time a somewhat failed macro hedge fund manager that didn't get the timeframes right on broad macro trend bets. If bitcoin falls into the category of the big asset allocation bet, I have yet to hear someone with the right asset allocation argument on Bitcoin that relies on nothing more than the greater fools theory.

    • PN

      Paul N.

      19 3 2018 08:13

      0       0

      The main arguments against the quantum are (a) its still a pipedream with todays Quantum computers only doing 69 qubits when u need 1500+ to break private keys and (b) quantum resistant cryptography ALREADY exists and can likely be added to bitcoin via softfork

  • PU

    Peter U.

    16 3 2018 19:58

    16       16

    Is Worth Wray Mark Hart's groupie?

  • KS

    Kathleen S.

    16 3 2018 19:58

    13       7

    Thank God Metcalf's law -- I have been yelling this and writing this on every fiancial comment section that says bitcoin is in a bubble-- bitcoin is not in a bubble it is growing expotentially by network adoption --- YES!!! Anyone that reads this and doesn't already own bitcoin should go and buy a little bit and get a wallet and see how easy it is to send it to anyone, anywhere, anytime, without having to ask a 3rd party's permission and it gets there within minutes -- this is HUGE. And those that say bitcoin can't do this or is too expensive - Not True the bitcoin developers have come up with the lightning network that allows bitcoin to be sent anywhere fast and for pennies (look it up- not to mention atomic swaps and decentralized exchanges). So happy to see that these two super smart guys see what I see. I dont remember if they mentioned this aspect of crypto, but there are like 3 billion people around the world that are unbanked and have no access to financial services -- with a phone and a crypto wallet this all changes. Crypto is 0 .175% of world assets -- if this number over the next 3 years moves to 2% the gains would be astronomical. So much exciting news in crypto - rebuilding internet on block chain protocol, smart contracts, new type of venture capital with ICO funding - it is a new asset class something the world has not see in hundreds of years. Like Worth I too compare it to the creation of the printing press. Would love to see more on crypto investment, I also know Mark Yusko is bullish on it.

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:30

      2       1

      How is there huge network adoption when the absolute huge majority of BTC is actually held by a minority? I bought in and sold out of BTC, as well as other cryptos, and it's nowhere near as quick to send as you suggest. I share you excitement about the potential, but the problem is don't specially need bitcoin for any of that.

    • WM

      William M.

      24 3 2018 16:05

      0       0

      Kathleen I think you are getting too bought into the Bitcoin fad. Crypto will have a place I am sure, but only if mainstreamed. As Eric notes, a few people appear to own a huge chunk of Bitcoin. Governments are going to shut bitcoin down or place heavy controls on it, this seems obvious to me because of the threat Bitcoin represents. If people want to speculate great. To me gold and silver are not speculation they are almost a guarantee once we come out the other end of this credit binge and government interest rate manipulation farrago.

  • PU

    Peter U.

    16 3 2018 19:44

    29       13

    with due respect to Raoul, this was like interviewing young teenagers playing make believe

    • IF

      Ian F.

      20 3 2018 17:48

      3       1

      No kidding. Especially Worth's comments that if the Euro gets too strong they can just go buy some Yuan to ease the pressure. Can you imagine the global response if the world's 2nd largest currency was actively managing its exchange rate against the world's 3rd largest...? Completely make believe as you said.

  • JG

    John G.

    16 3 2018 19:20

    5       1

    I enjoy "big picture" discussions and this was definitely worth my time. Investing in China (as well as India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia) will be much more lucrative in the next 5 to 10 years than in the U.S. I also have a better idea of what explains the huge rally in Bitcoin and why it does not mean a bubble. Thanks Raoul.

  • HH

    HODL H.

    16 3 2018 19:17

    5       0

    Can we bring Peter zeihan on beyond the podcast episode and have him and worth converse/argue different view points?

    • AS

      Alex S.

      22 3 2018 15:58

      0       0

      Would certainly love to see this.

      The Bullish vs Bearish China debate is one of the most interesting in my opinion, and I'm sure they'd both have a lot to say.

  • HH

    HODL H.

    16 3 2018 19:15

    13       1

    BTC seems to have performed fairly well since this recording, down ~25% now. No avocado toast for me this weekend.

  • EL

    Eugene L.

    16 3 2018 19:09

    6       9

    Amazing interview with Mark Hart. This is the second video from RV that made me go RV is worth it for this video alone. Subbed since Nov 17

  • PU

    Peter U.

    16 3 2018 19:09

    7       17

    at least put some proper socks on! wtf!

  • ss

    sid s.

    16 3 2018 18:52

    23       4

    we need an hour long interview with just Worth to expand on the new global order forming before our eyes. great thinker..

    • SP

      Steve P.

      17 3 2018 23:21

      3       2

      Agree - Worth shows his worth through an excellent grasp of history and the inter linked economic/ financial implications over time

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:31

      1       1

      Sorry, Worth just wasn't worth it for me.

  • IO

    Igor O.

    16 3 2018 18:15

    6       1

    I just hope it goes the way where the role of governments is diminishing not the other way around.

    That is first time bitcoin bull case is rational and makes sense to me.

    • IO

      Igor O.

      16 3 2018 18:55

      8       2

      Keep thinking about it...
      If it's generational trend for new asset class and millennials going to do to crypto same what boomers done to stock market, then it doesn't have to be bitcoin.
      Same framework will apply for any alternative with same or better properties.
      I am sceptical of bitcoin. Mining is wasteful. Got to be a better way.

  • MT

    Michael T.

    16 3 2018 18:14

    34       8

    I never thought I'd give a Mark Hart video a thumbs down..
    No new Ideas in a conversation that was all over the place.

  • JB

    Jean B.

    16 3 2018 18:10

    13       8

    Deceiving material quality here. Doubt Mark really gets Bitcoin and its forks while referring to its non dilutive property...

    • KS

      Kathleen S.

      16 3 2018 20:05

      18       6

      I am sorry but it is you that does not understand what a fork is; when a block chain is forked a new cryptocurrency is created it does not diminish the amount of the original. As with Bitcoin cash - the number of bitcoins did not go up and those that owned the original bitcoin got BCash -- BTC is still at 21 million. If bcash died off because nobody adopted it - it would no way effect the original btc. Look it up.

    • SR

      Steve R.

      17 3 2018 07:25

      4       10

      You must be one of these crypto-maniacs I keep reading about.
      Seriously, there is just so much you don't understand about bitcoin and blockchain adoption on a global basis.
      All you hear in the positive spin and hype - you need to check the reality!

    • KS

      Kathleen S.

      17 3 2018 14:16

      7       5

      Hey Steve R, someone doesn't understand that it is impossible to dilute bitcoin and I correct them and you call me a maniac-- LOL!!! U sound pretty ignorant -- maybe u should educate yourself by following experts in the space like Andres Antonopoulus or Nick Szabo --

    • SR

      Steve R.

      17 3 2018 22:07

      3       6

      Kathleen S. - Seriously, you need to get out more!

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:35

      2       4

      Kathleen, you clearly don't understand what dilution means. I would argue that if you held pre fork then possibly you haven't got diluted but anyone buying in after one of more forks is definitely getting diluted.

  • ZH

    Zayd H.

    16 3 2018 17:58

    17       2

    Gotta love barefoot Texans talking China and Bitcoin...couldn't stop chuckling. But seriously...RV, we need to hear more from Worth Wray. Sure seems like he's the driving force behind a lot of the differentiated ideas. I would also disagree with sentiment around Bitcoin...it's no more bullish or bearish than sentiment around Tesla (ie. plenty of violent bulls and bears on each side).

  • bm

    brian m.

    16 3 2018 17:57

    26       7

    White Patriarchy?? Seriously?? ..I would expect more from real vision

    • MS

      Mark S.

      17 3 2018 01:46

      15       4

      Totally agree. Hart has very innovative views on many topics and will listen to the interview again but Hart's perception that these social movements like 'metoo' or ones like them will be successful is naive. Many of these movements philosophies are paper thin, contradicting themselves over and over. To reference 'white patriarchy' as if it is something that is oppressive in and of itself is silly. All the white men I know don't sit around figuring out how to maintain power among white men.

    • bm

      brian m.

      18 3 2018 06:59

      0       2

      Thanks for responding Mark..I always felt like I was getting my moneys worth from real vision and happy to pay for info free from Mainstream Ideologies..But that comment was an anomaly

    • bm

      brian m.

      18 3 2018 06:59

      0       0

      Thanks for responding Mark..I always felt like I was getting my moneys worth from real vision and happy to pay for info free from Mainstream Ideologies..But that comment was an anomaly

  • JM

    James M.

    16 3 2018 17:13

    5       0

    I'm a boomer and I have avoided bitcoin and the like because I have no real understanding of how to place a value on it. This discussion has really opened up my mind. I am also someone who has long been attracted to the "four turning" principal and I believe that we have a coming cultural and economic dislocation that few are anticipating.

  • KJ

    Keith J.

    16 3 2018 16:11

    10       0

    Please can you get back to posting the audio downloads at the same time as the videos? I would love to sit down and watch all the videos but time dictates I have to listen to most of them on the move audio only.

    • KJ

      Keith J.

      16 3 2018 16:12

      4       0

      I appreciate the transcripts may take longer but surely it is almost automatic to produce the audio files at the same time?

  • AG

    Amir G.

    16 3 2018 15:55

    29       46

    Not even a single new idea. This was just a filler interview to fulfill the 3 per week commitment. The speakers’ thoughts & talks were so erratic that it was hard to follow and derive anything meaningful out of it. Also this kind of casual and unorganized discussion format is better suited for a coffee shop not for a RV type interview. I really don’t understand why it received so many thumbs up! I thought it was horrible.

    • GF

      George F.

      16 3 2018 16:43

      13       0

      In fairness, RV doesn't really know what they are going to say. Some interviewers force the issue with give me your 10 best ideas or predictions type questions. BTW, can Anne Stevenson-Yang update her opinion on VIPShop?

    • JD

      Jonnathan D.

      16 3 2018 17:08

      45       3

      Your expectations from RV are unrealistic. You complained about receiving ideas too late in the video on the Genomics revolution and now you're complaining about not receiving specific trade/investing ideas. RV is MEDIA, not your personal source of alpha.

    • TS

      Tyler S.

      16 3 2018 17:11

      9       4

      you clearly did not watch this.

    • IO

      Igor O.

      16 3 2018 18:18

      6       14

      Just shut up already

  • GS

    George S.

    16 3 2018 15:29

    19       5

    Mark Hart (the 3rd) never ever disappoints!!

    • ss

      sid s.

      16 3 2018 18:16

      14       10

      He sounded drunk.

    • PU

      Peter U.

      16 3 2018 19:54

      21       20

      Mark Hart is so unimpressive. I have interns in my office that have more coherent global macro messages.

    • TT

      Tim T.

      17 3 2018 02:02

      24       6

      The first Mark Hart interview was fantastic. Every interview that followed was a further letdown.

    • MK

      Michael K.

      19 3 2018 11:52

      5       3

      45th minute in Raoul realises Mark has upped his coke intake 10 fold!!

    • EF

      Eric F.

      19 3 2018 22:37

      2       1

      Oh yes he does! Not good, sounds desperate to be brutally honest.