The Future of Macro Investing

Published on
July 22nd, 2019
Duration
62 minutes

The Future of Macro Investing

The Interview ·
Featuring Dan Tapiero and Raoul Pal

Published on: July 22nd, 2019 • Duration: 62 minutes

Dan Tapiero, co-founder of Gold Bullion International, has grown increasingly focused on the potential for crypto to reorganize the entire world. In this conversation with Raoul Pal, he defines what bitcoin really is, and explains why he sees bitcoin as the future of investment even in the face of a possible recession. In Tapiero’s view, future generations may remember the creation of the internet as a critical step towards building this new system of currency — rather than seeing it as fostering greater centralization for a small group of companies. Filmed on July 9, 2019 in New York.

Comments

Transcript

  • AV
    Andrew V.
    28 August 2019 @ 16:37
    Not worth your time. Probably the worst video that I've seen from Real Vision. Dan fails to articulate an argument for why simply Bitcoin let alone crypto is a store of value that will be around in the next five years. There's probably an valid argument for crypto that could be articulated by someone that understands how money works, however Dan is not your guy. Disappointing to see since Dan started off starting a physical gold company and understands the value of gold but can't seem to make a valid argument for crypto. “What is it is an invention, you know what it really is is a truth machine. It’s a way to eradicate all fraud and lying by human beings.” Uhhhhh I'm sorry what!? Are we still talking about Bitcoin? Its obvious that even Raoul regrets interviewing Dan on the subject. Take a look at Raoul's face at 9:35. Absolute regret and confusion plastered all over his face.
  • JG
    James G.
    21 August 2019 @ 21:58
    It's not bitcoin. It's the blockchain techology. Bitcoin is incredibly flawed, but there are other associated technologies that will succeed and displace Bitcoin.
    • JB
      Jeff B.
      26 August 2019 @ 20:16
      Could you point out the most severe flaws?
  • MK
    Michael K.
    20 August 2019 @ 02:33
    I was a nocoiner until recently when a friend simply exchanged $10 for BTC for me and helped me set up a new Green wallet. Insanely easy. And it had nothing to do with SWIFT or Mnuchin or visa or MasterCard. It broke my crypto cherry. This stuff is for real. Don’t claim to be anti bitcoin until you’ve at least transacted in it.
  • AE
    Andrew E.
    7 August 2019 @ 04:58
    man all these comments are surprisingly negative on here - thought it was a great interview!
  • RH
    ROBERT H.
    6 August 2019 @ 11:43
    1. Buy bitcoin. 2. Hide key. 3 Get hit by bus. 4. Bye bitcoin.
    • RD
      Rett D.
      9 August 2019 @ 18:46
      1. Buy precious metals 2. Bury precious metals 3. Get hit by bus 4. Bye precious metals
  • TS
    THEODOROS S.
    1 August 2019 @ 19:58
    Very interesting interview, however still I can not be persuaded that Dan Tapiero really understands the difference between investments and technology. Specifically the difference between value investing and technology. No offence but the main point in enterprenership and Capitalism societies is trust and investing in corporate that have tangible, real assets. However there is no doubt that the next 15 years digitialization of currency will happen but that doesn't mean FIAT currency will die. A good alternative but not an investment bet in my opinion.
    • RP
      Ryan P.
      3 August 2019 @ 15:10
      If someone gave you BTC today, would you keep it or sell it to someone who wanted it? If your answer is keep it, why? If your answer is sell it, why and for how much?
  • HH
    HODL H.
    1 August 2019 @ 12:30
    Love that no one ever talks about money laundering with bitcoin or crypto and how bad actors use it to get their money out of countries. Really odd
    • PD
      Peter D.
      5 August 2019 @ 11:09
      Maybe it's because more often it is good actors who want to get their money ... out of bad countries. Besides "money laundering" is a good thing .... it creates a paper/digital trail that cops can use to catch the bad guys.
    • JM
      John M.
      21 August 2019 @ 03:02
      Agree. Currently large value transactions must be reported. Financial institutions must comply with 'know your customer' legislation. Financial institutions must produce tax reporting for their customers. Any large scale adoption of Bitcoin will trigger same regulatory compliance. If not - then what am I missing?
  • MT
    Michael T.
    29 July 2019 @ 19:31
    Executive Summary: I don't understand Bitcoin. Thousands and thousands of smart people put work into it, that's why it has value. If you're under 30 you need to buy then you will understand it. I'ts gonna be amazing but I don't understand it. Exponential. I don't understand it but Bitcoin needs more sales people to push more people in. I can't even form one congruent argument but you need to be in it. Bitcoin is a "truth machine! trust it. Bitcoin is invincible and the most secure thing ever- until the first quantum computer hacks the blockchain? It's bigger than anything anyone has ever seen. The internet was invented so bitcoin can exist. I wouldn't buy a snickers bar from this guy...
  • CB
    Clifford B.
    29 July 2019 @ 18:08
    Too many people are confusing the value blockchain technology itself with the "value" of bitcoin. Too many question marks with Bitcoin. Mystery character invents it, then puts 10% in his own wallet and no one knows who it is and no one seems bothered that this one person/group can crash the market at any time? Massive waste of power, Hashgraph is much more efficient, faster and gets the same job done. Then to top it all off the claim is that it is decentralized. Yet 81% of the mining hashpower is located in China? 50% attack anyone? https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/mining/pools/ Bitcoin trading is bigger fool theory at the highest level.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      31 July 2019 @ 21:39
      - Can you argue why blockchain has value? Blockchain (a chain of blocks) is simply put just a very limited form of a database. I can hardly see a usecase that does not involve prof of woork associated to it (which you argue is a waste of energy) - Can you argue why hashgraph achieves the same purpose? Last time I checked it was a consortium of ~30 machines/companies running this (proprietary, closed source) system. How does this compare with bitcoin's decentralization? - The claim that 80% of the hash power is in China is simply false. Check again what the article says. The mining pool companies are in China, and that's a big difference since the miners themselves can be in an arbitrary geolocation.
  • TW
    Thorne W.
    27 July 2019 @ 01:50
    Dan & Raoul - thanks for your thoughts on Bitcoin & cryptocurrencies. All well and good. My thoughts: we don't need a mathematical solution for trust. We simply have to execute the sons-of-bitches that are responsible for theft and/or (to be most charitable) failure to fulfill fiduciary responsibilities. Slowly, for example by public stoning, beating, ants, televised live burial, or some version of sharia law. Because that is what is going to happen. Not by clueless mobs, but by thoughtful people like me, who have actually contributed something to society. It is that simple. The thieves don't realize it but they are fucked, and they will pay the price. Also, what makes you think Satoshi is a person, as opposed to the Fed, Treasury, CIA, or mathematicians at the Naval Research Laboratories? It is pretty obvious to me Bitcoin and other shitcoins are empirical trial balloons to see how real human beings react to digital currencies, which are of course inevitable as the best-of-all-taxable worlds. When in doubt, read Voltaire.
  • JN
    Jeffrey N.
    26 July 2019 @ 07:52
    A secure, independent transaction ledger technology is obviously an important invention. But why does Bitcoin represent the value of this architecture? If Bitcoin disappears, the ledger technology would still exist and could be applied to other things (as it already is). Bitcoin appears to be just one (clever) use for the architecture.
    • DC
      Dan C.
      26 July 2019 @ 11:22
      Why shouldn’t it? It’s 10yrs and still strong. It’s reportedly adding more users in 5mths at current run rate than next 1500~ coins combined. Lindy effect + networking is very powerful.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      31 July 2019 @ 21:40
      It's not the ledger technology itself that is the invention here but how to achieve consensus of this ledger. The ledger technology itself is actually not a new invention, we had database systems since at least the '70.
  • SH
    Steve H.
    26 July 2019 @ 01:42
    Love Dan’s perspective, but feel he’s betting on the wrong horse. The mining of bitcoin is idiotic, wasting energy and time. In my view Hashgraph, or something similar to it, will win the race. 😐
    • BC
      Brian C.
      26 July 2019 @ 21:04
      https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25 https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1154774802886008833/photo/1
  • LB
    Louis B.
    25 July 2019 @ 07:44
    Who is Satoshi Nakamoto anyway? Great interview and great prognostications about the future of bitcoin, but... personally, as much as I agree this could be life changing in due course like the internet has been: how can we blindly follow the bitcoin road when we know NOTHING about its creator(s)! When will the true/real Satoshi reveal him/her/itself? Until then, call me skeptical, I think this is nothing more than the latest extraordinary popular delusion of humanity - even if I do own some, just in case!
    • Rv
      Rob v.
      26 July 2019 @ 04:25
      Another alien intervention at a turning point for humanity.
    • JA
      Jernej A.
      31 July 2019 @ 21:41
      Do you know who the inventor of every single thing that you rely on is?
  • yz
    yue z.
    25 July 2019 @ 03:12
    a bunch of loaded questions: so bitcoins will be fully mined in another 100+ years time. If this statement is correct/true, what happens once all the bitcoins are mined? (or should i say when will people start pre-empting this issue?) will miners just stop mining? what's their reward to continue mining if no more bitcoins are issued? how much computer power will we need to continue to verify the bitcoin transactions every one for the next 100+ yrs? will we even produce sufficient electricity to keep up with the mining requirement? is the govt going to regulate electricity use for bitcoin (and therefore limits its growth)? will green tech/solar power breakthroughs etc help (will we at the same time solve the global warming issues due to bitcoin electricity use (kill 2 birds with one stone...what a wonderful outcome). Quantum computing or leaps in computing may solve this electricity use?
    • RD
      Rodger D.
      25 July 2019 @ 08:25
      Hi Yue. 1. Each bitcoin transaction has a fee associate with it. The miner's rewards constitute the newly minted currency as well as the sum of all of these fees from the transactions since the previous block. So while the currency supply will stop increasing the miners will still be rewarded. 2. The computer power to verify the bitcoin transactions effectively resets every 2 weeks based on the previous 2 weeks, as couldnt ever outpace our electricity generation capacity. (unless that was drastically reduced). 3. Should govts regulate electricity use for bitcoin it will not effect the network's capacity to process transactions, though it may have implications for the network security. 4. Most bitcoin mining is already renewable green /solar tech afaik. 5. Quantum computing that suddenly appeared widespread tomorrow morning would be terrible for bitcoin (and online banking and email and everything else that use cryptography). The bitcoin would need to switch to a quantum encryption algorithm to allow for this.
    • DC
      Dan C.
      26 July 2019 @ 11:20
      75% of mining already from renewables. Mining in many cases is actually funding renewable energy projects that would otherwise not exist. Already we see transaction fees growing to a point where I believe it’s fair to say in a few years mining reward won’t matter. Lots of info out there on all your concerns.
  • SS
    Sam S.
    24 July 2019 @ 20:15
    Crypto transaction fees are very high and not I'm sure what Bitcoin buys me? It seems like the comments by Dan "just buy some" come with the concern he said, we can't really explain why you should, but you should. Then late in the interview Dan indicated that Bitcoin may NOT be the mechanism in the crypto space, as so many people working on developing new ideas and framework. If that is true or possible, Bitcoin could get slaughtered once everyone figures it out it's not bitcoin. The big boys like Dan, will be long gone before any of us know it. I really like Dan and his presentation, just not sure if that is best reason to buy?
  • VU
    Vikram U.
    24 July 2019 @ 08:25
    BTC is simply a store of value against geopolitical risk that's more liquid that Gold (trust shares/physical/miners etc.) as it provides censorship resistance against high geopolitical risk. If you're a macro investor geopolitical risk is important to consider and BTC (rather than Au) can help you achieve it efficiently. Other crypto assets are different, they are not like BTC but are highly (positively) correlated to it because their protocol frameworks are derivatives of the bitcoin network.
  • PG
    Petter G.
    24 July 2019 @ 07:56
    The supply side in Bitcoin is fixed. Every 10 minutes there are 12.5 new bitcoins minted (+transaction fees) which are distributed to the miners according to their respective market share (if you have 10% of the total hashrate you get 10% of the reward). Bitcoin mining will over time move to places with extremely cheap electricity. Big upward price moves in BTC will temporarily let high cost miners participate at a profit, but the price rise will attract more and more miners as long as the margins are big enough. After some point, enough miners have joined for the margins to have been squeezed so much that the high opex miners are forced out of business again. More users and more transactions mean more transaction fees. This is a positive thing for the miners. However, when the margins are small the miners are forced to sell a larger part of their rewarded coins to cover their expenses which therefore puts a bigger selling pressure on the market. That's the only relation I can see between the mining business and the market value.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      24 July 2019 @ 07:56
      Sorry, this was meant as a response to Theodores question below.
  • TD
    Theodore D.
    24 July 2019 @ 02:52
    How should an investor consider the costs associated with mining i.e. capital, equipment, energy, labor, etc.? Do these costs have a significant impact the mining process, the large number of transactions to maintain viability of this decentralized system and the bitcoin value currently and in the future? Will having the supply and the increasing number of users and more and more transactions diminish bitcoin value?
  • SS
    Steven S.
    23 July 2019 @ 20:10
    A trust-less decentralized system is only good if it offers true anonymity from those who wish to impose control. (who'd he work under again?) Counter party risks like- ISP's, Fiat bank accts, CX's run by the CB rats or other clowns who have ALL user data, plus metadata crumbs.....this new white horse technology holds either great promise or great sorrow for whatever liberty we have remaining....so new investors -be careful what you wish for. True change can only come from the hearts of the masses - maybe Bitcoin is akin to that long-lived bird that cyclically regenerates or is born again from the flames.... Wonder what Saul Alinsky's take would be on this discussion? I am more of a 'middle way' kind of guy, the path of least harm may not be fully visible while the kindling is still building in this epic global CB led mess. If we are at the end of Globalization -then multi-polar societies and/or communities of people will collectively and democratically decide on their own unique methods of exchange with no official legislation, ivory tower mandates or otherwise. True Bayesian theorem. I just wish there was a equity preserver that would act as a bridge to whatever 'is' universally 'next'....ha...(what's up Grant!)
  • NI
    Nate I.
    23 July 2019 @ 19:59
    If bitcoin owners can generate enough hype to garner new buyers, the price will certainly go up. I totally concede that. If you're nimble enough, you might get out before the last buyer is in and make gains. My problem with bitcoin is that, unlike gold, silver, platinum, ..., you can't do anything useful with it. Metals are not only a good medium of exchange, they are a store of value because they have industrial uses (jewelry, dentistry, electronics, defense, ...) Perhaps people will exchange bitcoins at weddings someday, but I think gold bands will keep their place in that forum. That doesn't mean that someone won't invent a useful application that uniquely runs on top of bitcoin, but that also seems unlikely as newer, better, comes to market in the crypto world. In the end, bitcoin is a very expensive to maintain solution to a math problem. So far no bitcoin advocates have been able to cite any value in that. Perhaps bitcoin can be like jewelry where people just covet holding their expensive math solution like they covet a gold chain around their neck (both are irrational) but call me skeptical about people coveting bitcoin writ large until it can demonstrate a useful application.
    • JB
      Jim B.
      24 July 2019 @ 08:03
      Bitcoin is much better in regards to 1. Fixed scarcity 2. More divisible (100,000,000 units) per bitcoin 3. Easier to verify authenticity 4. Harder to confiscate (brain wallet)
    • ww
      will w.
      28 July 2019 @ 03:44
      useful application: transfer wealth extremely easily across nation-state borders, to escape the predation by rapacious governments that is inflation of their fiat currencies (and their capital controls).
  • BN
    Barrett N.
    23 July 2019 @ 19:38
    Great interview Raoul & RV! Like Dan’s honest, thought provoking, humble direct openness to accept complexities of the crypto market ecosystem and its rapid rate of change. Great interview Raoul, Dan &RV!
  • AP
    Andrew P.
    23 July 2019 @ 18:40
    Anybody have a link for the gold/silver/btc valuation from Plan B(?) on twitter Raoul mentions?
    • AP
      Andrew P.
      23 July 2019 @ 18:50
      https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25
  • DJ
    David J.
    23 July 2019 @ 15:25
    1. Security truth machine = precisely why governments will oppose this invention if it gets in the way of their ability to control the masses. Governments have armies with advanced weapons, how can the bitcoin system defend itself from that? So multi trillion valuation is never reached. However, there’s $ to be made until the tipping point is reached. 2. No one talks about how the miners stay incentivized to maintain the network once the last bitcoin is created. I suppose this is because it’s such a long way off (2140) however still a big problem for de centralization. Debasement in some form logically takes place at said point thus making the security truth machine not so perfect.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 15:40
      1. Agree that the ultimate test will be when the governments finally realizes how much of a threat Bitcoin is to the current system. However, so far the reactions and comments from the congress hearings in the US is net positive. 2. You're missing the fact that miners both get a subsidy (in the form of newly minted bitcoins) *and* transaction fees. As the number of transactions increase over time the transaction fees will become a bigger and bigger part of the total payout. The theory is that miners will be able to sustain their operations without the subsidy in the future.
  • GR
    George R.
    23 July 2019 @ 14:48
    Here's a thought.......Fed prints money to buy all the bitcoin available and acts as global overseer for the blockchain. They have now bought their way into analysing every transaction via the blockchain's audit trail. Big brother here we come.
  • TH
    Timo H.
    23 July 2019 @ 14:14
    Dan is right about the value of bitcoin *as an invention*. It is hard to find a bigger disruptor than bitcoin and the idea of full decentralization, that it proved to be possible. To me, it is clear, that within the next 10 years, the vast majority of the services, that deal with value transfer, will be re-implemented in a completely decentralized manner. New business models will be invented to support the decentralized model. Rewrite of massive systems accompanied by new business models... if that's not a big deal, then I don't know what is! Whether bitcoin-the-currency is eventually a big deal, remains to be seen. If it proves to be a big deal, it will probably survive as "digital gold", not as a payment means. The transaction management model of the bitcoin network makes it unsuitable for immediately final transactions, which payment transactions necessarily need to be. Lightning network (which is apparently not taking off too impressively...) and other "layer 2" solutions do not solve this problem. There's also a problem with bitcoin as digital gold. It is scarce only within the bitcoin network community. Nothing prevents other such competing communities from emerging. Numerous alt-coin communities exist already. When the asset creation stops at bitcoin network and there is a continuing need for such assets, why not set up a new network, maybe for some specific purpose? Bitcoin's problem thus is, that there may be 100 near-similar networks some day. With "analog gold", the "problem" is the opposite: for each truly scarce physical ounce of gold, there are maybe 100 contracts promising to deliver the ounce. When the music stops and true value is sought, 99% of the gold assets, i.e. the synthetic ones, vanish and the remaining real asset becomes very much sought after. In the end, it is the true scarcity, that separates the real stores of value from wannabes.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 15:34
      Further down the comments Timo, you stated that something else will come around and solve the Byzantine General's Problem without the need of a blockchain or a token. How can you be certain about such a thing and at the same time be certain that LN (or any other layer 2 solution) will *not* solve the issue of instant settlement? Very curious about this as the first statement is very much less likely than the second statement. Also, why would you say that LN is not taking off? The channel capacity have gone from $14k to $10M in 1,5 years. I'd say that's pretty good for something that was first drafted in 2016 and is still in development. https://bitcoinvisuals.com/lightning Your argument about Bitcoin loosing its value due to altcoins is an old one. Altcoins come and go but very few survive over time. In the end, businesses will build solutions using the Bitcoin network because it's the safest, most reliable and future-proof solution. Without traction altcoins eventually die off.
    • TH
      Timo H.
      23 July 2019 @ 16:18
      @Petter G: If you want to build fully decentralized networks, you actually need two interconnected crypto-networks: one for transaction management and another other one for asset (or more precisely, identity) management. The former network holds the trusted history of what has happened and in which order. Only the participants of the transactions see the transaction's data and the transaction is finalized by a notary acknowledged by all participants. The latter one manages the outcomes of the transactions (data assets) distributed to trusted identities, who own the assets. The asset management network can work on a "traditional" blockchain, but the transaction management network requires more like a "transaction chain" approach with instant finality capability. This same approach has been used in relational databases for decades and it can be applied also to decentralized data management networks. (OK... I don't expect anyone to grasp the idea here, but it has actually been proven, that it works. It takes about 30 minutes to walk through the logic. I've done that several time in various occasions and nobody has yet disputed it. Happy to do that, should you be interested. Ask RV for my e-mail address...)
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 16:39
      Thanks for responding Timo. Quite a few questions pop to mind here (sounds like there are multiple central parties in this system, but I might just not understand correctly). If the design have been proven to work I assume there's some sort of documentation that shows this? Care to show me where I might find this?
    • TH
      Timo H.
      23 July 2019 @ 17:10
      @petter g: My presentation is available e.g. at Hyperledger Identity WG meeting materials.
    • TH
      Timo H.
      23 July 2019 @ 17:22
      https://wiki.hyperledger.org/plugins/servlet/mobile?contentId=16319723#content/view/16319723
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 19:03
      Oh you're talking about a permissioned system.. Well, that's something entirely different. I bet there are many enterprise projects around the world where businesses want to get rid of friction and middlemen within their own domains (like getting rid of a third party between two different companies that do some sort of transactions amongst eachother). Blockchain tech might be of some use in such cases, but that would more be like an IT infrastructure upgrade than anything else and nothing that would be "investable". Once you try to run a decentralized system on an untrusted network (such as the internet) where you can't trust anyone but yourself you will end up with a solution looking something like Bitcoin or Ethereum. Thank you for the links!
    • TH
      Timo H.
      23 July 2019 @ 19:26
      The transaction management side must be permissioned in any network, where someone must be liable about the correct functioning of the transaction. Permissionless networks leave any error situations to be the problem of the individual suffering the loss. That's not acceptable in any real business system nor is it legal. Ethereum especially is totally useless in any business use. It lacks trusted identities, privacy and performance needed in business. To remedy these problems, you need to manage transactions and data assets in separate, but interoperable networks that have been optimized for these two tasks.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 21:16
      "The transaction management side must be permissioned in any network, where someone must be liable about the correct functioning of the transaction." > No, Bitcoin (as an example) is trustless. You can download the Bitcoin software from Bitcoin.org, install it, verify the blockchain (ie verify all past transactions) and then send/receive bitcoin to/from it without trusting any middlemen. Your own node verifies that all transactions are valid, no one else. Invalid transactions are discarded if they do not live up to your node's rule set. Not trusting anyone but your own node is the whole point of Bitcoin. "Permissionless networks leave any error situations to be the problem of the individual suffering the loss. That's not acceptable in any real business system nor is it legal." > The only thing you need to be on top of as an individual is to store your private keys for your wallet properly (loose your keys and you loose your money). Not sure what you mean by it not being legal. "Ethereum especially is totally useless in any business use. It lacks trusted identities, privacy and performance needed in business. To remedy these problems, you need to manage transactions and data assets in separate, but interoperable networks that have been optimized for these two tasks." > I have no love for Ethereum, but I think you're looking at totally different use cases than what both Bitcoin and Ethereum are looking to solve. Bitcoin is trying to create money while Ethereum is trying to create an application platform (both in *public* settings). If you have an idea of an application that can't be built on top of Ethereum then it would make sense to use another platform. But that doesn't mean that the platform you choose would be better than Ethereum at what Ethereum is trying to do.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 21:22
      I read your response again and I get the sense that you feel the need to have a permissioned solution for the transaction layer because you want to achieve instant transaction settlements. I've tried to buy coffee with bitcoin using the Lightning Network on testnet and it was even faster than using a credit card in real life. Sure, there are still lots of things that needs to be fixed, but it's getting there.
  • PJ
    Peter J.
    23 July 2019 @ 12:48
    So is Bitcoin the next Netscape or Google or neither?
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 15:44
      Neither. Bitcoin is like the internet itself. It's a public infrastructure.
    • PJ
      Peter J.
      24 July 2019 @ 22:14
      Then I am confused. There is only one internet - 'The Internet'. Bitcoin is public infrastructure based on block chain technology. But surely are there not many other crypto public infrastructures that serve similar purposes to Bitcoin?They cannot all have and maintain the critical position and importance that the internet commands. Why will Bitcoin be the future pre-eminent public infrastructure over all others that are or may yet come into existence?
    • PG
      Petter G.
      28 July 2019 @ 16:39
      Because network protocols tend to converge to just one or a few winners. The reason for this is that as soon as applications, businesses and other protocols starts being built *on top of* a protocol (Bitcoin in this case), the protocol itself gets very sticky and hard to switch out (very strong "network effects"). Bitcoin's first mover advantage is a huge deal. Furthermore, this space is all about open source (the source code is public and accessible to anyone). So if something new and interesting comes along, there's nothing that prevents it from being copied and implemented into Bitcoin as well.
  • AM
    Adam M.
    23 July 2019 @ 12:21
    Dan is the man!
  • SS
    Sam S.
    23 July 2019 @ 11:02
    What about Government Intervention? If I have this right, France has just passed 3% tax on internet sales, which is going to slow down growth and capitalism, as governments are starved for more tax revenue to cover their irresponsible asses, Many US States now charging sales tax, etc, etc. Bitcoin, et al., certainly appears to be the new future, but how the hell can we count/bet on this, knowing the government is going to find a way to screw it up? The blockchain can and will be tracked, not so much for crimes (that will be the news narrative) but to tax the hell out of everything. Not sure any guest on RV can really and truly discuss this. The government will be reactionary only after it all gets going like crazy. Excellent interview by the way!
  • MH
    Michael H.
    23 July 2019 @ 10:40
    Raoul the jacket, pants, and sneakers are brilliant! love the discussion
  • AH
    Ahmed H.
    23 July 2019 @ 10:21
    one of my fav interviews on RV.. and thats saying a LOT.. bravo
  • Nv
    Nick v.
    23 July 2019 @ 09:35
    Misleading headline as this has little to do with macro. Great Bitcoin chat
    • fc
      flavio c.
      23 July 2019 @ 12:46
      I had to stop watching around 30 minutes...
  • KE
    Kathryn E.
    23 July 2019 @ 08:47
    I'm not a crypto person, but I watched every crypto video on RV with the intention of getting convinced on why I should buy BTC other than to speculate, I still don't get it. Dan says it is a great invention and because of that it can be worth much more, but why? I get the truth concept, but that is the blockchain, not Bitcoin. For example, if tomorrow someone solves a great problem using this concept (blockchain), why should bitcoin go higher? During crypto week everyone had different opinions on why to buy bitcoin, but everything seems fake/wish except for a digital speculating asset. My guess is that the hype and increase in price in the last two years is not people running away from fiat, but a signal of excess liquidity in markets trying to search for yield/appreciation. What I mean is that whether you are a PM or a trader who due to the changes in markets is struggling to make good return in the market, then you shift to what is appreciating and now predicate for others to buy because it can be valued to a million, but not sure why. That is what I heard on this interview
    • CB
      Clifford B.
      31 July 2019 @ 01:54
      Well said. so far the largest use case for Bitcoin is to trade/speculate on exchanges. That in itself says something.
  • ET
    Eduard T.
    23 July 2019 @ 08:27
    Enjoyable interview to listen to but short on concrete thoughts. To sum up Dan Tapiero's train of thought: "Bitcoin is an entirely new technological paradigm that has no parallels. It will open up many economic avenues so everyone should own some percentage as part of their overall portfolio." One thing I don't get and I don't believe he adequately addresses is how the development of altcoins will impact Bitcoin liquidity in his view? He also says, "It [BTC] can't go to zero. And he [WSJ author] probably would say that now, too" But it's been noted countless times that Bitcoin protocol is very energy inefficient in scaling. Who is to say in 5 years or a decade that a more efficient protocol with smart contract capabilities won't become more popular and liquidity will shift. No doubt that today Bitcoin has the liquidity advantage compared to other coins, but I don't see why that has to hold indefinitely other than simply the "track record" as Dan T. put it.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 14:51
      One has to remember that in the world of open source software it's always possible to incorporate new tech into Bitcoin if needed. The important things for the network are the decentralization, the UTXO set and the brand name. Not the underlying technology itself.
  • AB
    AJ B.
    23 July 2019 @ 07:29
    I agree 100% Ash C, Dan's background speaks for itself, as Raoul mentioned he worked for Stan Druckenmiller, the best Macro Investor ever, Dan's is on the money big time here........look forward to discussing post the May 22 halving.......
  • AC
    Ash C.
    23 July 2019 @ 07:13
    I think Dan's Bitcoin description is brilliant, his valuation metric is outstanding [I.E. if the Bitcoin network was to be set-up by a corporation today, it would cost way more than it's current mkt cap] and coining the innovation as the "Truth Machine" is so on the money. People need to respect Dan's view he has had 30 years of macro & value investing......
  • RS
    Robert S.
    23 July 2019 @ 07:03
    IMHO this guy hasn’t got a clue what Bitcoin really is.
  • NH
    Nicholas H.
    23 July 2019 @ 06:59
    Hilarious reading all the comments. Amazed by how many are so short sighted or short term but trying to learn about macro investing. Bitcoin is polarized - you either get it or dont. But for people who dont, please dont throw out idiot comments when all you did is probably read a few hours or watch the cnbc news. You absolutely know nothing about Bitcoin. Dan spent more than 500hrs and still know little about Bitcoin, and yet he is still humble and acknowled that. Be humble, keep an open mind if you want to succeed in macro.investing. P.s. quiz, do you even know what is the difference between Bitcoin v.s. bitcoin 😛
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 15:04
      Agree! People watching don't have to like Bitcoin (or bitcoin for that matter) but if someone want to criticize it then for goodness sake please come up with something better than "tulips", "thin air" or "only used by criminals". If you're reading this and are tempted to use any of these silly arguments, then I suggest you start learning a bit about the subject instead. With all due respect.
  • PN
    Paul N.
    23 July 2019 @ 04:47
    Dan's insistence that he doesn't understand all of bitcoin is a good sign of humility, the willingness to learn, and the fact that he probably gets it better than most people. Yet a lot of you people are hammering him for it...
  • AI
    Alita I.
    23 July 2019 @ 04:26
    I get the BTC value, but will there be an alternative blockchain to solve all the bitcoin weaknesses (e.g speed of transaction)
    • PN
      Paul N.
      23 July 2019 @ 05:50
      Every blockchain that reaches the scale of the bitcoin network will run into the same fundamental limits in terms of bandwidth usage, latency, block verification times, storage space, etc. There would have to be another big leap of innovation 5-10x better to actually beat its network effects at this point. Meanwhile the bigger the bitcoin network grows, the faster it grows, the more secure it gets, the stronger the network effects, etc.
    • ww
      will w.
      26 July 2019 @ 03:39
      @ Paul N - Apparently Hashgraph has the attributes necessary to at least achieve the performance hurdles you posit (if not significantly surpass some of them).
  • PV
    P V.
    23 July 2019 @ 04:06
    Truly awesome... exemplify why RV stands out.... Clearly Gold & BTC are not a zero sum game....yet BTC holds the promise of being more than just an "hedge"....
  • BS
    Bill S.
    23 July 2019 @ 03:25
    Part of the 15% who quit after 15 mins
  • BS
    Bill S.
    23 July 2019 @ 03:23
    A philosophy session...
  • AS
    Alex S.
    23 July 2019 @ 02:50
    To all the haters: this is what RV should be: bringing new ideas and giving you something to think about. You may not like crypto, you may think it’s bullshit, there’s no there there, etc., but this gave me a little bit to think about. It IS the network, the security, the software. Hell, Microsoft built an empire on this. This is just another step toward an actual information economy.
  • rk
    ravi k.
    23 July 2019 @ 02:18
    J
  • tk
    timothy k.
    23 July 2019 @ 02:11
    That was an amazing interview. This is exactly why I subscribe. Great interview. Dan was really interesting. I appreciated his humility. Bitcoin is an exhaustive topic. It appears as though Bitcoin has staked a claim as being the “native money for the internet”. When it comes to money, the hardest money wins over time. It sure seems like bitcoin would be useful in the non G7 countries where most of the currencies are run by despotic leaders. The central bankers in the G7 are experimenting with the goal of debasing, so, it may be useful here as well. If I were the internet, I would want My own currency, one that is effectively global and exists on its territory instead of through the territories of the various nation states that we have today, one that is non political. It appears as though the bitcoin protocol by solving the Byzantine Generals Dilemma through proof of work and incorporating a public block chain on a true peer to peer network while incorporating a scarcity factor has possibly become just that. If that is even possibly true, then an investor can’t afford NOT to do the work. The risk of missing bitcoin is unlike missing a stock. It will impact all investments. Most investments offer the luxury of “taking the pitch”. Just put it in the “too tough pile”. When it comes to currency, the hardest currency will devour the weakest and so one must take the time and do the work on this new protocol. Thanks for getting things started with Tuur Demeester, Dan Moorehead and Wences Casares. Keep it coming would be my suggestion.
  • BG
    Bruno G.
    23 July 2019 @ 00:58
    I am sorry, but he doesn't make a cogent argument to purchase bitcoin other than its this great new technology that he doesn't really understand,(his words) but we all got to own it. I have owned a couple coins for a long time, don't plan to buy any more. Will definitely sell, if it ever reaches $250,000 :)
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 15:09
      To be fair, the quality of his arguments are probably normal given that he's just been studying this subject for 6 months or so :)
    • SM
      Shaun M.
      27 July 2019 @ 08:25
      It's not difficult to search online or youtube to find out more about a particular aspect of bitcoin. If you want more detailed information about possible use cases then go look for it.... this interview isnt the right place for that. This interview was just a intro for many people who may be curious about whether or not to put some of their own time into finding out more.
  • RM
    Ryan M.
    23 July 2019 @ 00:21
    If I were to spend 500 hours over the next few months like Dan did on this topic, where should I start? Anyone ever listen to Hidden Forces? I feel like Demitri has done some good podcast on this possibly? Who else? What should I read, listen to, watch?
    • tk
      timothy k.
      23 July 2019 @ 01:15
      The Bitcoin Standard by Saifedean Ammous to start. All episodes of Stephan Livera podcasts. The interview on Real Vision with Wences Casares, also his speech “why bitcoin matters”. Have fun, that is a great start.
    • TS
      Thomas S.
      23 July 2019 @ 02:58
      Andreas Antonopoulos has 2 books and numerous YouTube videos, Saifedean Ammous has a book called The Bitcoin Standard
    • RR
      Rodrigo R.
      23 July 2019 @ 21:59
      Ryan, I am an university professor that has followed Bitcoin closely since 2011, and I can give you an action plan that you can follow in order to understand Bitcoin as quick as possible. For Bitcoin, I would suggest you to follow these steps: - First, you need to understand the basics of Bitcoin. Chapters 1 and 2 of Antonopoulos’s book will help you on this. - Then, you need to understand the foundations of Bitcoin (Antonopoulos book and videos, plus the Bitcoin wiki (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/) will be of tremendous help). In particular, study the topics that help to answer these questions, one by one, in order: A) “How can we demonstrate that our bitcoin is ours - that we own it?”: Keys and addresses B) “How we move bitcoin from one address to the other?”: Transactions B.1) “How do we know that a certain amount of bitcoin has not been spent?”: UTXO B.2) “How to I perform the transactions - Change the UTXO set?”: Script language (NOTE: You do not need to know how to program this language... but once you understand that Bitcoin is not only a mere transmisión of value system, but something that can be programmable up to a certain extent, it will blow your mind. Check for example this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1mavh9/trustless_bitcoin_bounty_for_sha1_sha256_etc/cc7fiqe) C) “Where are these transactions stored in a secure way and why?”: Blockchain. D) “And who are the maintainers of this Bitcoin Blockchain?”: Bitcoin network. D.1) “And why is the Bitcoin Blockchain secure - from a technological, economical, and social perspective?”: Mining ecosystem and Consensus rules (POW, POS) - After this, you will have enough knowledge to tackle the following topics (again, Andreas, plus bitcoin wiki, blogs, and other sources) 1) “What are the limits of Bitcoin?”: Energy consumption, transactions per second, etc 2) “What are the forks, and why did they happen?”: Bitcoin block size, decentralisation vs. scalability 3) “What are some advanced Bitcoin operations?”: Multisignature, P2SH, Timelocks, Segwit 4) “What are these “layer 2” solutions?”: lighting network, sidechains. 5) “What might be the future of Bitcoin?”: For this, you need to watch the Bitcoin developers mailing list and medium posts, where they discuss these subjects. If you follow this plan (answering the previous questions step by step), it will help you to understand How and Why Bitcoin works, and what it might become. Cheers!
  • JO
    Joseph O.
    22 July 2019 @ 23:50
    Vague. Enthusiasm without support. Unconvincing. The problem is not our lack of imagination. The problem is the lack of coherent positive arguments or rebuttals of legitimate counterpoints from the interviewee here (no matter the ethos of his resume). Sounds like a "you either 'get it (meaning the narrative)' or you don't" pitch. Lots of narrative peddling without substantiation. Please simply admit this is a gut bet behind trends your framework likes (e.g. decentralized systems) that offers what you deem to be an attractive risk/reward skew with a convex right tail. Then I actually like that proposition.
    • JO
      Joseph O.
      22 July 2019 @ 23:59
      Continued: there is way too much idolatry of the programmer / technologist among people in other industries! So much of the classic buzzwords (blockchain, AI / ML / DL, etc.) is simply clever marketing already (they are already there Dan and they got you). Computing really has not changed for a long time. None of this is brilliant new theory. Instead, compute power finally caught up.
  • mF
    michael F.
    22 July 2019 @ 23:48
    People will watch this interview in few years and be like ''that guy was right'', but this guy has no diea what BTC is today and why it will increase in value over time. I actually think Raoul understand BTC better than him.
  • DH
    Daniel H.
    22 July 2019 @ 23:39
    The label is Recession Watch, but the interview is crypto hype. RealVision, I am losing trust in you. You are becoming click bait for millennials, and the interviewee says only under 30 get it, over 50 too jaded. This is sick. Not one new reason for crypto other than shouting THIS IS BIG. To me, it is a liquidity play and when QE4ever starts, Bitcoin will take off, but that does not assure succcess. It has a lot of hurdles to get over with authorities.
    • RP
      Raoul P. | Founder
      23 July 2019 @ 00:29
      Why the anger? It’s just someone’s opinion which is what we stand for at RV
    • SD
      Serenna D.
      23 July 2019 @ 03:21
      Hi Daniel, I'd like to share my perspective if I may. I am a millennial. I studied Social Science and have a successful career (yes we do get jobs ;-) ), but now being in my early thirties have realized (possibly a bit late) that I know squat about finance. Stumbling across Real Vision has been a godsend. I don't understand everything I watch on it, but it has provided me with tremendous value and I am learning rapidly. I was one of those people who came across bitcoin four or five years ago and not through financial discussions, but because my understanding of social science led me to the conclusion that we have economic challenges not being met by our current global financial system that are deeply impacting society. Many viewers of real vision call these challenges 'sectors' or 'markets' - we look at them as "people with jobs and families". Bitcoin, although new, although messy presents a new paradigm for Finance to consider and my generation can see that and feel it is worth exploring because we are so far behind in many respects. If there is one thing Millenials understand is how to exercise their own power (sometimes obnoxiously, and I do apologize about those people!) For us, Bitcoin presents an opportunity to reallocate (some) of the power from 'market makers' and decentralize it a bit more across the masses. Therefore the value in Bitcoin is the value is being given by millennials who can't access the current system, and that shouldn't be glossed over because they are hungry and they are struggling. They're choosing bitcoin on principle, I suppose you can call it political. And it will grow - because we are also ascending to positions of authority faster than people are age did before. I dont pretend it will be 'the answer' to everything or not have a thousand kinks to work through, but the way Bitcoin is being discussed in this interview is the way my friends and I were discussing it five years ago when I didn't know what liquidity, QE4 or EBITDA even were. Just some food for thought. Serenna
  • SA
    Stephen A.
    22 July 2019 @ 23:26
    Whatever this guy buys is going to make money because everybody else in Manhattan will want to be doing what he is doing. It doesn't matter what he is doing. This guy is one of those "everybody wants to be him" type of people and the things these type of people touch are a success just by virtue of their personalities. He reminds me of the Victor Ziegler character in Eyes Wide Shut (the host of the first party played by Sydney Pollack).
  • DS
    David S.
    22 July 2019 @ 22:06
    Is Bitcoin or blockchain the real invention? DLS
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      22 July 2019 @ 23:57
      Blockchain has been available since 2009, but Bitcoin is still the only application.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 06:59
      Bitcoin is the real invention. The blockchain technology was invented in order to create Bitcoin.
    • TH
      Timo H.
      23 July 2019 @ 14:21
      No, the big deal is, that Bitcoin proved, that value-transferring systems can be implemented in a decentralized manner without trust-managing third parties. The truly working implementations of such networks very probably don't need cryptocurrencies or even blockchains.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      23 July 2019 @ 14:40
      @Timo: The blockchain and the economic incentives are critical parts of Satoshi's invention and Bitcoin is a truly working implementation of such a system. Saying that these component are "probably" not needed are not true as far as I can tell. If you have an example on how to solve the same problem without these components I would be very interested to hear about it (I assume you're talking about public systems like Bitcoin, not private/permissioned systems).
  • BT
    Bryan T.
    22 July 2019 @ 21:51
    Sorry for the gibberish below, keyboard issue and RV has no way to edit or delete your post provided. Re. goverments banning BTC. It should be remembered that Bitcoin was designed in a decentralized manner specifically to prevent such a shutdown of the network. It's a software network that runs on computers spread around the globe, so any efforts to close it down would resemble a game of wack-a-mole. However a more compelling possible reason for the unlikely ban is that Bitcoin is also free speech. it can't be made illegal in the U.S. thanks to the First Amendment. That's because bitcoin is just code, and code is just speech, which is based on legal precedent established during the so-called crypto wars of the early 90s. In 1993, Phil Zimmerman faced possible criminal charges for writing the encryption software PGP. The government said that it was as dangerous as guns and bombs. To make the point that PGP's source code is protected speech, MIT Press printed it in a book, sold it abroad, and Zimmerman was never indicted. Then in 1995, with help from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, mathematician Daniel Bernstein sued the U.S. government on First Amendment grounds for blocking publication of his encryption program. "Computer language is just that, language," wrote Judge Marilyn Hall Patel. Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit Court affirmed Patel's ruling that code has the free speech constitutional protections. If the world transitions from a dollar standard to a cryptocurrency standard, by then, software will have made it easier for users to maintain and trade their own cryptocurrency without involving a regulated company.
    • RP
      Raoul P. | Founder
      22 July 2019 @ 21:56
      Fascinating... thanks
  • FC
    Fractal C.
    22 July 2019 @ 21:38
    Looking at the comments below and the number of thumbs down, it appears that Dan has something very useful to say! Was looking forward to hearing from him again for a while! Thanks RVTV.
  • RP
    Raoul P. | Founder
    22 July 2019 @ 21:38
    It's very interesting here to see the comments section - nothing splits peoples opinions more than bitcoin but art Real Vision we dont shy from giving alternative ideas. Even our first piece of content included a discussion about the merits of bitcoin. It is part of our DNA because it represents an alternative future of finance, in as much as gold does too. We support debate about both. They are not mutually exclusive. What I found fascinating about Dan is he has 30 years experience in macro investing and worked for Julian Robertson, Stan Druckenmiller, Stevie Cohen, Graham Capital, Mike Steinhardt and like so many well known and highly regarded macro investors has gravitated towards bitcoin and the digitisation space, where they perceive the risk/reward to be the most favourable in the world. So far, that has proven right but as we all know, past performance is no indicator of future performance. What is important to note is Dan's reluctance to suggest he understands the space in its fullness. The level of complexity from the deep cryptography, technology, mathematics, engineering and maybe even more so the philosophical forecasting and analysis make this extreme challenging for anyone. The macro world is similar - the levels of complexity are frankly absurd, but the job of a great macro thinker is to make a simple framework against which any hypothesis can be tested. I think a few of the comments misunderstood what Dan was aiming for in his admission of not knowing... anyone who claims they do is frankly misrepresenting themselves. You have to simplify to understand deeply. Love it or hate, this alternative finance space is not going away. It may morph. There will be bubbles, busts, scams and incredible business models. How it plays out, no one knows and that is fine. Also, something many of you missed, is that Dan is a founder and major shareholder of one of the largest gold custody businesses in the world. He is a gold guy too. He see that macro picture as well. Gold and bitcoin can coexist. Its not Godzilla vs King Kong! ;-)
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:00
      Then don't slip it in with a Recession Watch label. I expect better of you. And the conclusion is that it will do well no matter what happens. It could also fizzle if the CBs feel threatened.
    • mF
      michael F.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:05
      In the short term gold and bitcoin can coexist, but in the long term bitcoin will grab the ''store of value'' premium in gold. Which is a net positive thing for society because the gold value will be lower so it will be used more for industrials needs and electronics. But that's a long process and everyday that pass without bitcoin dying the probability of the process happening increase.
    • DB
      Douglas B.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:05
      Daniel H.......with the misdirected anger.
    • MS
      Michael S.
      23 July 2019 @ 04:43
      It always seems so funny to me that people want to be part of an "alternative" something, but there can only be one "alternative". So "alternative", but no "alternative to the alternative"?
  • BT
    Bryan T.
    22 July 2019 @ 21:36
    Oitfffffffddddd dkaldkfkjdOI
  • hr
    harlan r.
    22 July 2019 @ 21:26
    liar, liar, pants on fire. There are a lot of financial professionals that cannot really think by the comments below. Bitcoin is going to eliminate most of your useless jobs. A mathematical solution to trust and elimination of middlemen. Yes, it is much more than that.
  • RS
    Ranjit S.
    22 July 2019 @ 20:55
    It’s not clear what makes bitcoin so interesting? Store of value Decentralised authentication Currency for digital assets A case can be made for each of these....but maybe the real one is fear of missing out....100 trillion to start! Markets form opinions.
  • DW
    Daniel W.
    22 July 2019 @ 20:16
    To me all those "big" (or not so big) thinkers are overcomplicating bitcoin. I stay with Mayer Amschel Rothschild: "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!". This alone makes me confident that bitcoin will never play a role of importance. In case it ever gets close it will simply be banned. Purely a matter of speculation (happy to use it for that purpose) but never a store of value.
  • DC
    Dave C.
    22 July 2019 @ 20:05
    Racoon anyone?
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:01
      I wonder if Ben Hunt will see that. He has been on RV.
  • IF
    Ian F.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:52
    Damn fine head of hair.
  • WM
    Will M.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:46
    Its seems simple to me, Bitcoin is a great speculation until governments wrest control under the auspices of criminality, or it is recognized that is primarily a Chinese "artifact". No doubt to could double triple or quintuple a bet with bit coin, yet be prepared to lose most of that downpayment. Bitcoin requires confidence to survive. Gold is a STORE of wealth, backed by 3,000 years of value, which if kept outside the banking system, with a prudent storage facility and preferably not in your own country of tax domicile, has no counterpart (or hacker) risk. Gold is the ultimate bedrock of confidence in the financial system, past and future. As quoted "Gold IS money, everything else is credit" (or fiat).
    • TS
      Tor S.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:11
      Which government? Control? Key takeaway here, It's a new invention. Government will control but by adoption, in due time off course.
    • DB
      Douglas B.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:10
      Someone needs to brush up on there game theory.
    • PN
      Paul N.
      23 July 2019 @ 04:38
      Wait so bitcoin will be coopted or banned by government but gold won't be? 1934 anyone?
  • Sv
    Sid v.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:45
    this all smells like tulips!
  • Sv
    Sid v.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:33
    sound and fury signifying …..?
  • DF
    Dillon F.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:11
    Not much hard substance discussed here...He sounds like every moonboi from 2017--relax, Bitcoin is just the first internet meme exchangeable with USD. Solving the byzantine general problem with PoW is cool, but solving it with programmable PoS is 100 times more useful.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 19:57
      Proving that PoS is as secure as PoW would also be awesome ;)
    • DF
      Dillon F.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:47
      Petter G., Bitcoin is secure because of the incentives for miners (assuming they choose not to collude). If those incentives are replicated by other means, the network remains secure. Real world examples are difficult to find due to the age of PoS, but Tezos' mainnet has been up for almost a year now without being 51% attacked. How long until that is evidence enough? BTW Lightning network takes collateral to punish bad actors, Just like PoS. I don't get what's so controversial about it. PoS is clearly the way to go, we'll all find that out in time.
    • PN
      Paul N.
      23 July 2019 @ 04:39
      PoS systems don't get attacked in the early stages because the potential attackers are the founders themselves. i.e. the ones who own the largest stakes.
  • AD
    Anna D.
    22 July 2019 @ 19:05
    Bring Nouriel Roubini to have a more complete explanation, this interview was a bit biased.
    • TS
      Tor S.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:27
      Nouriel Roubini is a respected critical voice in economics, but in crypto he dos not understand the technology. He sees no need for "it". A little like the guys at Kodak on digital cams. Look up the senate hearing on crypto. He calls the ICO scams, exchange scams, hack scandals etc and rightfully so, but he misses the bigger picture.
  • GF
    Gaye F.
    22 July 2019 @ 18:56
    Raoul, Please continue this exploration of block chain. If you were to bring on Charles Hoskinson again and give him time he needs to discuss this, I think it would help your listeners understand a bit more. There is so much here. I've been reading and learning and investing since late 2017. I'm still in the game and wiser now. It is worth the journey. Gaye VF
  • HA
    Harrison A.
    22 July 2019 @ 18:51
    I genuinely hope someone will answer this question: Why won’t a better, faster, blockchain/crypto supplant bitcoin?
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 19:15
      The first mover advantage is very different in the world of protocols compared to the world of applications. The reason for this is that a protocol is the "language" used to communicate between applications. So as soon as you change the protocol ALL applications that use the protocol to communicate will have to be updated, tested and re-deployed (deployment also need to be done in a synchronized fashion in order to prevent system downtime). This is the reason why a protocol is very "sticky" once it get some traction. As an example you can look at the IP protocol which is powering the internet. Just a few percent of the global internet communication is using IPv6 even though it was accepted by IETF in 1994 and fully supported by the root DNS servers in 2004. This shows you how powerful the network effects are of IPv4 (not even an upgrade of the protocol is easily adopted). This is the reason why it's so hard to displace Bitcoin. It's the first, the biggest and the most trusted chain. The network effects are massive and only seem to increase over time.
    • TS
      Tor S.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:39
      An other example of this is the metric vs imperial systems. The latter was created, and later tweaked and tuned to rip off pessants. The metric system vas created from math - immutable, much as a result of the French revolution, as a means to take back control. Do you fill up in liters or gallons? US or imperial? Some things just stick. The e-mail SMTP protocol is another. Total utter garbage, it lack allmost all features you would like when communicating. Features are constantly beeing added on top of the protocol - in the application layer. 270.000.000.000 mails are sent pr. day using SMTP. Same can be done with BTC. Lightning for instance.
  • HK
    Heji K.
    22 July 2019 @ 18:02
    Even as a bitcoin and gold investor, I feel uncomfortable with bitcoin promoters that show a messianic conviction without adequately addressing very real existential problems. One shouldn’t tout bitcoin for an hour without discussing problems of energy consumption and the halvening. IMHO halvening may have a negative impact on some miners ability to continue if bitcoin’s price does not appreciate significantly. The newest Bitmain 7nm ASIC(custom board for mining) is only a 28.6% improvement in power efficiency. Possibly EUV lithography which is only coming on line now will provide faster less energy consumptive chips to keep the show going, but these chips will be an expensive capital outlay for the miners.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 19:23
      The halvening (ie the fact that the subsidy paid to miners is halved roughly every 4 years) is not a problem. Sure, some miners will have to shut down if the price drops and/or if the block subsidy is not enough to sustain their operating expenses. But once X amount of miners drops off the network the network automatically readjusts the mining diffuculty so that it becomes easier to mine for those that are still in business (ie the profitability increases for those still running). This auto-adjusting of mining difficulty will make sure that mining is always profitable somewhere in the world. Energy consumption is a harder topic. If a new consensus algorithm is invented which is equally secure as Proof of Work then I'd be all for it. Today however we are stuck with PoW which is very energy intensive.
    • BN
      Barrett N.
      22 July 2019 @ 20:29
      Watch, Tony Seba “Clean Disruption, Energy & Transportation” June 2017 lecture to feel better about the energy consumption going forward. It’s an eye opener. Best, B
    • TS
      Tor S.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:54
      I dont get the energy problem. It is said it consumes el. like Irland. So, there is no el. left for the Irish? Off course there is. How about all energy used for Youtube hosting cat videos, Laundry, Gaming, Wasted food, Traditional banking financial sector, War. aso aso. Understand that all energy produced is spent more or less real time, most of it on waist. BTC mining flows to where there is cheap surplus el. production. Most of it would go to waist if nut used mining. If BTC has value, it is in a way converting energy to value, using energy that otherwise mostly would be wasted
    • TS
      Tor S.
      22 July 2019 @ 21:58
      Let me add that burning coal for BTC mining is probably not a god idea, what I am trying to say is that if this realy is a great invention for mankind, then the opex is cheap.
    • HK
      Heji K.
      23 July 2019 @ 17:47
      Hi Barrett, The solar industry needs someone like Tony Seba to give hope but he does not give a comprehensive picture of global energy use but relies only the end of the consumption cycle. Solar panels are created abroad mostly in China using dirty coal, transported in diesel trucks onto container ships that use bunker fuels. Iron ore is smelted into steel for automotive manufacturing not with solar nor wind. Electrification of consumer vehicles is only one medium part of the solution. Those electric cars probably will run off gas powered plants for a long time as we are still building new gas plants this year even in California. But trucks/container ships/ are will not be electrified which make up such a significant part of facilitating our global economy. I’ve worked in maritime logistics so whenever I bristle when I hear Tony Seba type naive arguments for a bright new clean energy future without mentioning all the industrial fossil fuel use from mining to car manufacture to delivery that preceded him to get his electrical vehicle. Yes it’s possible for bitcoin mining to run off cleaner energy as do those running off geothermal in Iceland but the reality is that significant number of mines in Mongolia and China run off cheap coal. The latest carbon footprint report for bitcoin from Joule was a level between Jordan and SriLanka. Thankfully newer blockchain protocols rely on proof of stake over proof of work but I don’y see bitcoin going away. Best to you as well.
  • MS
    Matthew S.
    22 July 2019 @ 16:49
    How many times does he acknowledge he doesn't understand it? And yet he's pounding the table that it's a good investment...
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:03
      Reminds me of the Bitcoin Billionaire youtube video. This was long on hype and very short on substance.
  • MS
    Matthew S.
    22 July 2019 @ 16:48
    Hard to listen to. All hyperbole. Crytpo has never demonstrated itself to be anything more than a speculative mania and means of transacting illicitly. It's not a safehaven. It's not a stable store of value. It's not an efficient means of transacting.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 17:08
      I'm sorry but please show me how Bitcoin is not an efficient means of transacting? You can literally send billions of dollars to anywhere in the world in a heartbeat, without the risk of censorship/confiscation for a 1 dollar transaction fee. Show me any system that can do that outside of crypto.
    • MS
      Matthew S.
      22 July 2019 @ 19:11
      @ Petter G. Anyone who needs to send billions using Bitcoin is trying to evade the law. My point re efficiency is that it's an unnecessary and less efficient means of conducting commerce (i.e., everyday purchases). A solution in search of a problem...
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 19:53
      I agree that it doesn't make sense to use the Bitcoin base layer for buying coffee. The Lightning Network is meant to fix that but that's not a solution that's fully developed/adopted yet. But that doesn't mean Bitcoin isn't solving any problems today. The global remittance market is using Bitcoin simply because it's cheaper and faster than the legacy solutions. I recommend you listen to the WBD episode sent from the Oslo Freedom Forum: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/wbd-live-bitcoin-around-the-world-panel-at-the-oslo-freedom-forum
  • JB
    J B.
    22 July 2019 @ 15:14
    Whenever I see these nontechnical espousers, I immediately think charlatan.
  • MC
    Mike C.
    22 July 2019 @ 15:03
    Fantastic interview. Please keep crypto content coming!
    • DH
      Daniel H.
      23 July 2019 @ 00:04
      OK, but not during Recession Watch two weeks. Label it as Bitcoin Watch. Truth in advertising please.
  • SV
    Santiago V.
    22 July 2019 @ 12:21
    There is something bigger, more valuable and more beautiful that has not been discussed but has been enabled by the technology underpinning Bitcoin, and that's the Internet of Value. The paradigm hurdle of Bitcoin is really threefold: (1) decentralized incentive structures, (2) elimination of counterparty risk (Byzantine's General problem), (3) Value expression by ecosystems that are not nations (non-geographical). These three concepts together enable the possibility of an Internet of Value in which disruption, competition, and value can be manifested without enablers, value can be transferred (expressed) as easily, globally, as email is today. interoperability between ledgers, liquidity pools, tokenized digital assets, is the real gem that will emerge from the Bitcoin seed, not Bitcoin. Not to say that Bitcoin will go the way of the dodo, simply saying that consensus value determination and exchange will dictate relative value. Imagine every human on Earth being able to issue a digital security in themselves, increase it's value to others, receive and leverage that value in exchange for goods and services, all on top of platforms that support this most fundamental forms of human expression. The Internet of Value will be transformative from a socioeconomic perspective because it breaks down barriers preventing people from interacting globally without using centralized (risk laden) 3rd parties from introducing cost and friction into the transaction. Please educate yourself on the Interledger Protocol and how that's only the beginning in connecting ecosystems. Bitcoin will have to continually prove itself to support it's consensus value, as will all value ecosystems.
    • BF
      Brad F.
      22 July 2019 @ 15:18
      Excellent summary. I think the interviewee here is right in the sentiment of his thesis but treating bitcoin as equity participation in the internet of value is misguided. Like the internet of data the protocol is the enabler of massive value but owning equity in TCP/IP won’t make anyone rich.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 16:58
      We have just begun to scratch the surface of what's possible to do with Bitcoin and yet people run off and invest in coins and protocols that might perhaps, maybe, possibly work some time in the future. Even Ethereum which is the second largest blockchain and which is the host of *thousands* of other coins is having big issues. This chain is exploding in size which will force full nodes (or archive nodes as they prefer to call them) to be run in datacenters rather than on consumer hardware (which is a big deal if you want the network to be decentralized). I'm not saying you shouldn't look at other projects, but please do so only if you've already studied up on Bitcoin and come to the conclusion that you want something else.
    • ww
      will w.
      24 July 2019 @ 18:10
      I wonder how Hedera Hashgraph fits into your interesting vision? From what (little) understanding of it I have, it seems Hashgraph might be a quite useful/ important part of your vision. I know there's lots of concern among many in the crypto community about the proprietary aspects of Hashgraph, but I think those limited proprietary elements are 1] not at all fatal to the decentralized/ censor-resistant ethos that's so appealing to us BTC/ crypto fans; and 2] provides some quite valuable - perhaps even essential - 'diversification of control' capability during the difficult initial network/ system development. There's a lot of info about the Hashgraph project in various Hidden Forces podcasts, including a quite recently-released special episode on it: https://www.patreon.com/posts/early-episode-to-28264247 For better or worse, this one is (currently) behind Kofinas' Patreon paywall - tho' i think subscribing to Hidden Forces is WELL worth it. I believe Demetri will be (re-) releasing this podcast on his public (non-subscription) site hiddenforces.io sometime in near future, at the time the Hashgraph network is publicly opened.
  • IC
    Ibrahim C.
    22 July 2019 @ 11:56
    The more I have heard about Bitcoin, the less attractive it has become as an investment. Why? Please read what ROBERT H. and Fred G. wrote about it below. I want to really see the people at the moment when they understand that the King is really naked!
  • SG
    Sven G.
    22 July 2019 @ 11:00
    enjoyed the interview... yes he does seem crazy when he says Bitcoin is the biggest investment opportunity but who's to say he is wrong. 7:42 remaining on the tape Dan says something very interesting "there is so much intervention now in traditional markets". Why is that interesting? Because when people say look how volatile Bitcoin is, they fail to realize there is no Crypto central bank stepping in every time Bitcoin has a bad day, like there is with traditional markets. Raoul... please get Plan B on, would be an interesting conversation for sure!
  • AH
    Alfred H.
    22 July 2019 @ 10:57
    As stores of wealth, the similarities between bitcoin and gold take very different value paths when viewed through a lense of their respective dependence on technology. In parking funds in one or the other, I'm basically choosing a spot outside the system that is going to become more in demand as the system turns to poo. It's essentially a slightly paranoid hedge against a range of worst case scenarios. Bitcoin is now said to be an acceptable alternative in this space. However, what I rarely hear discussed in relation to bitcoin, is that the amalgam of software and hardware it exists on is totally vulnerable - particularly so in the very situations it could be used as a kind of digital ersatz gold. So with a bit of a trade war going on etc, there are various extrapolations that are inflating these assets right now. However, we should also extrapolate the trade war a bit: Without going to extremes, I can foresee a next logical escalation of an unresolved and bitter trade war as a war of cyber sabitage that could impact hugely on every level of access and movement of digital currency. At very least, we need functional hardware and software to be in crypto. As I see it, the entire crypto space is in the epicentre of the very trouble it is expected to hedge against. Perhaps simplistic, but as a doom, gloom and calamity store of wealth, I can't see crypto as a good alternative. In my firm we recently had an ordinary power failure. It was hugely expensive. And that's just one complex system. As I see it, Crypto is dependent on far too many complex systems to be a good friend in foul weather. The wisdom of Marshal McLuhan's message of interconnectedness in technology should be heeded in relation to bitcoin in this context. Its systems base is too complex to weather the kind of breakdown that sends markets looking for the simplicity of gold.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 14:02
      If you think you will find yourself in a prolonged situation without electricity or access to the internet then it would absolutely be wise to own some gold. But then again, why not own both?
    • PU
      Peter U.
      22 July 2019 @ 17:59
      Very well thought out Alfred. I agree with your comments.
  • ME
    Michael E.
    22 July 2019 @ 10:52
    Raoul, Thanks for bringing the old RV back. Excellent.
    • RP
      Raoul P. | Founder
      22 July 2019 @ 17:09
      It never went away... its just how it is delivered that changed.
    • CL
      Charles L.
      6 August 2019 @ 08:17
      Michael ... I wholeheartedly concur Raoul ... it has become kind of hard to see "the old RV" these days. Besides "how" it is delivered, it has been obscured by much fray. I understand you want to grow RV. Personally, though, I have no interest in daytrading (or weektrading as it were), {and I don't care for ads added to the information I consume.} my two cents: (A) how about creating a separate section for videos like this series - select content, based in facts&numbers, with a vision well beyond the span of one year. (B) regarding bitcoin ... liked this video, though not its placement in the recession series. Especially I liked the expression "truth machine" -- which refers to blockchain, not just bitcoin. Imagine what will happen, once all respectable news sources adopted blockchain to facilitate verifying their content! No more "fake news".
  • RH
    ROBERT H.
    22 July 2019 @ 10:50
    Let's be fair. Nobody on earth "understands" tulips, yet, time seems to have brought some way to reconcile supply and demand. Bitcoin is much harder to propagate than tulips, so supply is pretty easy to understand. That leaves demand as the big issue. Personally, I have no need for a secretive number with no intrinsic value which is difficult to trade, can be irretrievably stolen and which depends entirely on a functioning and accessible internet.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 13:44
      Yes, Bitcoin requires an internet connection. But if that's the reason why you don't want to own it then I guess you're also buying guns, ammo and canned food right?
    • RS
      Ryan S.
      22 July 2019 @ 20:31
      Nothing has intrinsic value, it's a fallacy to believe otherwise. People are the backers of value. Gold bugs love to punt the yellow metal but there are plenty of historical societies who couldn't care less for the stuff. Our entire value system is currently built on fancy paper backed by a bunch of palooka's called the government. No idea how you got to the conclusion that Bitcoin is difficult to trade. Cash can also be 'irretrievably stolen' and since much of our fiat exchange is done online these days anyway, many of us would currently be f*ked without a functioning and accessible internet.
  • CH
    Chris H.
    22 July 2019 @ 10:04
    These are the key points from this interview... 1. "I'm not the right guy to talk to about this." 2. "I don't understand half of the white paper." 3. "I don't know how to value it." 4. "I'm not the guy to talk about its applications." Just seems like a lot of claims being made with anything to back up the claims. Has this guy been sent out to pump bitcoin so someone else can unload their position?
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 13:57
      I'd say he seems to know just about as much as anyone who has been studying this subject for about 6 months. It's an enormous topic! Even though some currently might know a bit more than Dan about this space, it is very interesting to hear his view from a macro standpoint.
  • FG
    Fred G.
    22 July 2019 @ 08:47
    Im always dubious when someone is almost evangelical about something who readily admits in the conversation that they understand less than half of what the product actually is, and repeating quotes about what the Winklevoss think something is worth doesn’t bode well. Freely admit I really don’t understand bitcoin but from the outside looking in it seems to me the bitcoin is essentially just a protocol that some people for now have put faith in, but I don’t really see clear reasons why another protocol could not be invented (or thousands of other protocols for that matter) and we all give up on this one. A well informed friend has advised me that the maximum transaction processing rate for the Bitcoin ecosystem is about 5 transactions per second which doesn’t really sound like its ready for world domination - I think my local supermarket probably handles a similar amount of transactions and I believe the combined credit card issuers process about 4000/second. Other anecdotes say that the ecosystem only exists for now because there is money in mining and once that disappears a lot of people won’t keep the infrastructure as it will be hard to monetize. The mysterious founder of bitcoin apparently still holds 10% of the currency, i don’t think (if true) its appropriate for one individual to hold potentially 10% of world money supply should all this pan out as the Bitcoin buffs hope... Distributed ledger makes sense for a lot of applications but I think if there is going to be a crypto currency it will likely be formed and controlled by a coordinated government effort like it or not - ultimately they control the electricity supply and ability to control large parts of the telecommunication networks and for anyone who has tried to use Facebook in China or Skype in the UAE you will soon realise if they want to stamp on something they will find a way to do so. In summary I will take Gold and its 1000+++ year history vs Bitcoin’s 10 years but I wait with interest and my popcorn on the sidelines to see how the story unfolds. I am ready to be wrong and admit I don’t understand enough to put any of my money or gold into it.
    • Av
      Ad v.
      22 July 2019 @ 09:08
      "Freely admit I really don’t understand bitcoin" ... ok.
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 09:30
      I see what you mean Fred and this is exactly what Dan is talking about in the interview. The hyperbole and evangelism is hard to swallow for most. Let me just give some answers to your concerns (even though you probably will have to investigate this space yourself a bit before you can appreciate them): 1. I don’t really see clear reasons why another protocol could not be invented. > The space will converge towards using just one or a few protocols just as the internet did. When digital systems are integrating (talking to each other) it makes no sense to use a lot of different languages (protocols). Why Bicoin? First mover advantage, best developers/scientists in the space, proven track record etc etc (network effects). 2. The maximum transaction processing rate for the Bitcoin ecosystem is about 5 transactions per second. > This is true for the base layer. In order to relay ongoing transactions around the world within 10 minutes (settlement happens every 10 minutes) and without requiring massive hardware of the participants, the block size (ie the amount of transactions) have been set to 1 MB. So 1 MB worth of transactions have to be propagatged to everyone on the network every 10 minutes. However, the layer on top of the Bitcoin base layer will let you transact thousands of times faster since this layer let you transact x amount of times in between each settlement (this layer is referred to as the Lightning Network). So the base layer is slow, clunky and suuuper secure so that stuff built on top of it can leverage that security while providing other features like high throughput or privacy. 3. The mysterious founder of bitcoin apparently still holds 10% of the currency. > Yes Satoshi hold a lot of coins. However, he/she have been gone for a long time. Many think he/she is deceased but no one knows. As price rises, the "whales" in this space will eventually part with their coins and that will most likely cause a lot of volatility, but that's just how it is. 4. If there is going to be a crypto currency it will likely be formed and controlled by a coordinated government. > The elegant part of the Bitcoin network is that there is no HQ to send the subpoena to. Can governments make life difficult for Bitcoin users/businesses? Most certainly. Can they shut it down? If they can shut down the internet then yes, otherwise no. Last words: I own both Bitcoin and gold. They are not mutually exclusive :)
    • CH
      Chris H.
      22 July 2019 @ 09:33
      I don't trust this man. Having worked for a Rothschild is enough of a warning for me.
    • FG
      Fred G.
      22 July 2019 @ 13:32
      Thanks Petter for your intelligent and polite response. I am clearly not read up enough on the topic and take a 35,000ft view of the matter. I have neither the time or the inclination to study it, who knows maybe in 20 years time I will be cleaning the toilets of the multi-billionaire bitcoin early adopters, but until then I am happy to watch from the sidelines, accept that I could be wrong, see how the future evolves and take my chances. Just on one point regarding the first mover advantage, I don’t believe in the Technology space that has always been an advantage - not sure how many on this platform still use Myspace or MSN Messenger for example or how many active blackberry users there still are? Regards
    • PG
      Petter G.
      22 July 2019 @ 13:51
      Any time Fred and I fully respect your stance on this. But just to comment on your last point regarding MySpace et al: There's quite the difference between developing a protocol and an application. On top of a protocol there's applications and/or more protocols that depend on the protocol(s) lower down the stack. As more and more applications, businesses and protocols develop on top of Bitcoin it gets harder and harder to displace.
    • DB
      Douglas B.
      22 July 2019 @ 15:52
      “Freely admit I don’t understand Bitcoin”. Because of this you posit exhausted objections that have been addressed ad nauseam. “In summary, I will take Gold and it’s 1000+++ history vs. Bitcoin’s 10” As you should. Someone who is unwilling to do the necessary due diligence on new technology should stick with what they know. Yet, opining on said technology when you fully admit that you so not understand it, is rather pointless, no?
    • FG
      Fred G.
      22 July 2019 @ 16:54
      Douglas B. I am not unwilling to do the research but simply have a very busy life and I think this requires a significant amount of time to research before investing in. Perhaps the gentleman in the interview has done this but over the course of the video I didn’t really get any sense other than suggesting what a brilliant new technology it is rather than exactly why it should be bitcoin and not something else; my basic understanding is there are other potential options as well. In a world of investment opportunities which can be potentially understood with a little more ease I prefer to avoid it and in general I have no stomach for asset classes which are volatile and I think Bitcoin’s record speaks for itself in that regard at least to date, of course many will understand it and how to play the volatility and I wish them the very best of luck and success with it. I have made some cursory comments which as I alluded to are very much on a surface level and I am sure you are right that people involved in the space have provided very satisfactory and in-depth responses to quell all my concerns. My only major question would be what is to stop someone else coming up with another “system” for want of a better word and everybody deciding thats the one they now want to go with thus making bitcoin worthless? If you have any link or video where this is well discussed I would be grateful to receive it. I understand scarcity within the bitcoin protocol, I don’t understand the scarcity of protocols themselves other than the limits of human imagination. I respect ones right to invest in any product or market they believe in, but as always intelligent debate comes from providing facts and figures to support your argument rather than simply implying the other person is stupid or misinformed.
    • NC
      Nic C.
      22 July 2019 @ 18:29
      how many people do you know who are evangelical about something but at the same time admit that they know less than half? 0?that type of honesty should inspire the opposite of doubt
    • JM
      John M.
      22 July 2019 @ 18:59
      Didn't like the interview (except last ten minutes). I would appreciate a refresh on Bitcoin. How is distribution of ownership - how many people own 80% of Bitcoins? Looks like hedge funds are bigger buyers holders of Bitcoin? what % of Bitcoin trades daily versus total holdings? Are most Bitcoinn trades in China? What % of trades relate to gaming? Talking about 'Bitcoin' as though it were a single homogenous commodity is not enlightening IMO.
  • PG
    Petter G.
    22 July 2019 @ 08:29
    Great to hear Dan's thoughts on this! Seems like he gets it. The only thing I would point out is that there is no "they" or elected leadership that controlls or leads the Bitcoin community. That's why it's so hard to find a coherent marketing pitch. People are free to use, define and describe this system as they see fit which obviously makes it very hard to grasp .This also makes it easy to get sidetracked by scams claiming that their coins are much better than Bitcoin etc (avoid Bitcoin.com for instance, use Bitcoin.org instead). My two cents to anyone reading: Read the Bitcoin whitepaper. It's short and not very hard to understand (at least not on a higher level). Then I would start listening to some podcasts or youtube videos. Start with the "What Bitcoin Did Podcast" (great for newcomers) and some youtube videos by Andreas Antonopoulos. That said, it's great to see RV sticking to the Bitcoin theme as it becomes clearer by the day that it's here to stay. Thanks
  • JS
    John S.
    22 July 2019 @ 06:22
    Great discussion
  • MT
    Mark T.
    22 July 2019 @ 05:51
    Finally!!!! Lightbulb moment.
    • tr
      tom r.
      22 July 2019 @ 23:07
      Long but well worth it. To me, the many comments from so many people are almost as interesting as the video. Some very bright people out there watching these obviously. I think investing 1% of your invested income for starters is an excellent choice. Al Gore didn't have anything to do with this either which is a big plus to me.