BTC Sessions - Why Bitcoin Will Be The ONLY Survivor—And Altcoins Are Doomed | Phil Champagne

Episode Date: July 8, 2025

Mentor Sessions Ep.019: Phil Champagne on Bitcoin vs Altcoins, Decentralization, and Satoshi NakamotoBitcoin is the only cryptocurrency that matters—but why? In this must-watch interview on BTC Sessions, we sit down with Phil Champagne, author of The Book of Satoshi and Bitcoin vs Altcoins, to uncover the truth. Phil breaks down the critical role of decentralization and proof of work, explaining why Bitcoin’s security and network effects are unmatched in the blockchain world. He exposes the flaws of altcoins, showing why they can’t rival Bitcoin’s dominance. From Satoshi Nakamoto’s incredible design to the failures of fiat currency, Phil delivers a masterclass in cryptocurrency fundamentals. Whether you’re new to Bitcoin or a seasoned hodler, this discussion will deepen your understanding of why Bitcoin stands alone against altcoins and centralized systems. Don’t miss out—watch now!Key Topics: • Decentralization and Proof of Work • Satoshi Nakamoto and Craig Wright • Bitcoin’s Security and Network Effects • Altcoins vs Bitcoin • Fiat Currency Failures• 00:02:02 - Craig Wright and the Second EditionPhil discusses how the Craig Wright controversy inspired updates in the second edition of The Book of Satoshi.• 00:05:01 - Why Satoshi’s Identity Doesn’t MatterThe focus shifts to Bitcoin’s functionality and why speculation about Satoshi’s identity is secondary.• 00:05:43 - Bitcoin’s Lasting StrengthsPhil outlines the qualities that have kept Bitcoin robust and relevant for over 15 years.• 00:06:01 - Decentralization and Proof of WorkA deep dive into how decentralization and proof of work underpin Bitcoin’s security.• 00:07:01 - What Are 51% Attacks?Phil explains 51% attacks and Bitcoin’s hash power as a defense against them.• 00:08:35 - The Blocksize Wars and Bitcoin CashThe pivotal blocksize debate and the Bitcoin Cash fork’s lasting implications.• 00:12:15 - Lightning Network: Scaling BitcoinHow the Lightning Network tackles Bitcoin’s scalability issues for broader adoption.• 00:14:19 - Network Effects Driving BitcoinThe role of network effects in cementing Bitcoin’s value and dominance.• 00:16:07 - Psychology of Crypto SpeculationInsights into how human behavior fuels speculation in the cryptocurrency market.• 00:20:02 - Bitcoin as a Savings ToolPhil presents Bitcoin as a powerful long-term savings technology.• 00:44:00 - XRP’s Centralization ExposedA critique of XRP’s centralized design under Ripple’s control, compared to Bitcoin’s ethos.• 01:02:41 - Bitcoin’s Transparency EdgeThe importance of transparency and accountability in Bitcoin’s ecosystem.About Phil Champagne: • Author of The Book of Satoshi and Bitcoin vs Altcoins • Twitter: @egg_descrambler• Website: https://philchampagne.com/• Books available on Amazon⚡ POWERED by @Sazmining — the easiest way to mine Bitcoin and take control of your financial future. ⛏️You own the rig 🌍 It runs on clean energy 🔐 You get cheap Bitcoin BELOW Exchange Cost Start stacking wild sats today: 👉 https://qrco.de/bg8Jwq📚 FREE Bitcoin Book Giveaway: New to Bitcoin? Get Magic Internet Money by Jesse Berger FREE! 👉 Click: bitcoinmentororange.com/magic-internet-money 💡BOOK Private Sessions with Bitcoin Mentor: Master self-custody, hardware, multisig, Lightning, privacy, and more. 👉 Visit bitcoinmentor.io Subscribe to Mentor Sessions: Don’t miss out! Follow Us on X: • BTC Sessions: @BTCsessions • Nathan: @theBTCmentor • Gary: @GaryLeeNYC Previous Episode: Check out Keith Dicker on the coming Credit Collapse: https://youtu.be/ft-5JF_LhK4Support the Channel: Smash the like button, share with your Bitcoin crew, and subscribe for more! #Bitcoin #Altcoins #Decentralization #ProofOfWork #SatoshiNakamoto #Cryptocurrency #Blockchain #Security #NetworkEffects #FiatCurrency #MentorSessions #BitcoinPodcast #BitcoinEducation #Podcast #Crypto

Any Ethereum guy, pick a name. And so you're going to have to invest all your wealth into either Bitcoin or any other ones. Which one will you pick? They love that there's 3,000 alt coins out there, the banking system. I'm sure they do love it. The reason why Bitcoin is not going away. Very fundamental reason that we must not forget is decentralization. From the coin that has the most ash power is the one that will be more solid and less likely to be hijacked.

The reason why they didn't crush those old coins like XRP, the banking system, whatever, if we do that, we can't do that to Bitcoin. And people will see that we can't crush Bitcoin, but we can crush all those old coins. And it's actually it's better for them to divide and conquer. There's Bitcoin and then there's everything else. Joining us today is Phil Champagne, author of the Book of Satoshi and Altcoins v Bitcoin, a legend who's been preaching to newcomers for years. In this interview, we're tearing down the Altcoin House of Cards and showing you why Bitcoin stands alone. Phil lays out the critical significance of decentralization and proof of work, Bitcoin's rock-solid foundation that no shit coin can replicate, the importance of network effects,

and Bitcoin's unmatched security, 16 years of attacks and Bitcoin stands tall while Altcoins bleed out. And we're not stopping there, Phil's dropping realizations about Satoshi and knowledge bombs that'll solidify your conviction. Going beyond Bitcoin to give you the skills and insight, to escape the Fiat matrix. This is Mentor Sessions. Phil, thank you very much for joining us today on this very special occasion with your big announcement. So let's get right to it.

Why have you waited so long to reveal that you are indeed Satoshi? And why did you pick our show to do it? No, no. I am not going to plead a Dr. Craig Wright here. Speaking of Craig Wright, that's how you got some additions to your book. You have a second edition of it because of some information that was revealed in us all finding out that Craig Wright, shockingly enough, is not Satoshi. What can you tell us about that?

So, yeah, it's, I had to have a segment in the chapter in the beginning of the book, why there's a second edition. And obviously it goes over all this crazy stories that happened with him. And so much that he was threatening people, you know, so I'm going to sue you because you're saying I'm not Satushian. So basically there's a group of people, Kopa, I think. They sued back, sued him so that to prove, okay, he's not Satoshi. and then this group won in court.

So now he has to put his statement in his Twitter account. I'm not Satushi. So, but during this court, Marty Malmy and others reveal their all the exchange that they had with Satushi private exchange. So that was being able to collaborate with the interrogation during the court. with Craig Wright about, okay, to see the mismatch between all those conversations and what he was saying. And there was so many, so many irregularities

during his statements that didn't match so that it was just obvious. In fact, the judge had the end, a real strong statement saying that it's incredible, you know. So it was good for that. So that's the one contribution that he's done is at least make us get more private, email exchange that was happening between people. And they were quite interesting stuff between

Martimelmi and Satu Kyi, you know, because of extensive amount of email between the two. You know, I have to say I so, I guess, appreciate the irony of this guy trying to assert that he is Satoshi by using the Fiat courts. Like, could you think of like, you know, a more ironic way to attempt to do it. Like, that alone should have been right then and there. Like, we know this is not the guy. Amazing. Yeah.

And the insult to all this is the Bitcoin white paper. He was suing Coinbase and everything for saying that he owns the copyright to the white paper Bitcoin. I mean, seriously. Yeah. Completely. You know, when you think about the software itself, you know, it's with the MIT license, which is free to distribute.

if Satoshi knew there would be a crazy guy like this, he would have put the MIT license as well on the white paper. Yes, of course. Well, you know, a lot of people speculate sometimes when you first get into Bitcoin, who is Satoshi, what is at a person, is it an organization. But I've heard you discuss before, as we've heard from others, that it's really not important who or what Satoshi was. It's more important to focus on the actual product here, the actual service.

And, you know, what about it works and what maybe might need some improvement along the way? And that kind of gets into certain ways that Bitcoin has changed a little bit over the past. I don't know. What are we on? How many years now? I'm bad at math. What are doing now? 15 years.

15 years. So, you know, we've seen a lot of all coins come along saying that they're a big improvement on Bitcoin. And yet, Bitcoin keeps chugging along. because altcoins keep going by the wayside. So what is it about Bitcoin that makes it so enduring and all the other altcoins, shitcoins? Yeah. So there's multiple aspect to Bitcoin, the software and everything. It's open source.

But, you know, the fact it's actually jumping through so many, converged on many aspects of science and multiple aspects. You know, you've got obviously cryptography, you've got the concept of open software, and you've got the fact that the network effect, these are all parts of element that you have to aggregate together to understand Bitcoin. And the fact that we are not, so many people are missing that point, the reason why Bitcoin is not going away, even though some are, better, faster, and all that is multiple aspect of it. One is the very fundamental reason that we must not forget is decentralization. It's so important.

And the type of technology that is the most solid in terms of decentralization is proof of work. And all the other ones, and certainly things like XRP that is using a permission, not a permission list, but actually a mechanism to, you know, it's a proof of authority, I called it. So all those are way more subject to being hijack, you know. And so that's first of all, that means proof of work. But then proof of work implies that you need to have high power, high amount of hash power. and the most from the coin that has the most

ash power is the one that will be more solid and less likely to be hijacked. And that has been proven with Bitcoin gold, I think, which is a derivative. It's just like Bitcoin cash, you know. And this is also using proof of work.

And at some point, you know, I think the exchange, they asked for something like two weeks of before they actually accept your transaction to be able to... Two weeks of confirmations? Two weeks of confirmations, I'm calling this.

Yeah, yeah. Because they got burned. You know, it's like someone was sending those things. And when he was doing, it was easy to do a 51, 51% attack on those small coins, you know? So if I'm a 7-11, I'm buying a slurpee. Like, do, do, no, no, hang on a second. Just give me, give me a couple weeks. It's almost there.

Jeez. Yeah. Interesting. So I want to expand on that a little bit too, Phil, because there's probably a lot of people in the audience that are hanging out that are listening that are new to the space that are even that are here after the block size wars, right? So they might not even be familiar with the different forks and the different proof of work coins that are necessarily out there? Can you talk a little bit about like we got some other shit coins that are doing the proof of work thing? We had the BSV and we had our B cashers as well too. What's wrong with those, Phil? Those are also using proof of work. Are they just as easily susceptible to this rolling back the clock with the 51%? Which for anyone who, who's not familiar with what the 51% attack is or what the vulnerability is? Could you dive into that a little bit? Yeah. So we can start with that first. So the 51% attack is where, which is talked about by Satuishi's was already,

so many of the points that we, that are brought up today as a point of conversation, actually were discussed in the first two years while Satushi was there. And that's also something that people are so amazed to see. It's like, gosh, those points were all talking. about in the early days. But the 51% attack is that the fact that you, it's the longest chain that is going to be the one that has the Bitcoin that will be confirmed. But a 51% attack, is this someone, an entity or group, as a 51% of all the hash power, they can disregard any other blockchain, know they come up and they say, oh, I have the

next block, but then they kind of disregard this other block and they kind of keep going. And that's what was happening with that Bitcoin gold, you know, regardless of anyone who was actually coming up and making those transactions, different blocks following this, they will pretend they are only themselves and they will keep working on their own blockchain separately. And because by the protocol, it says the longest blockchain, so because they have a higher power, they will always be over the long time, the long run, the longest chain. And so that's why you end up with the 51% attack. Now, yeah, the controversy started in 2014, 2015, yeah, I forgot which year.

But there was all about Bitcoin, only seven transaction per seconds, and we need to buff beef it up and all that. I mean, the funny thing is that with lightning, which is something that, you know, even Satushi never thought about, you know, which proved, you know, the founder didn't even conceive something like this. And so all the writings and everything, it's like, well, okay, obviously the only solution is eventually with super high bandwidth by any person,

we could be able to increase the block size and all that. But what's funny is that he's the one, Satushu actually put up a limit of one one megabyte per block at some point. You know, he just had this thing. So you was aware that it would be a problem if we just let it grow any size of wanted. And that was a big argument about, okay, we need to increase the block size. And there was a big war about that. And the block size war is a book by Jonathan.

Beer. Yes. And it's an excellent story about the whole thing that was going on there back then. And the big blockers were pretty angry, kind of not happy with the fact that there was a segregated witness that came up. And that is a nil feature, a soft fork that happened, where it reorganized. the way the blocks were. So it allowed actually the Lightning Network, but it also allowed the block size to be increased

without any hard fork. But it didn't matter. Bitcoin Cash came in. And one thing I always complain about them is that they're the one who actually did a fork. They should have also changed the format of the Bitcoin address. So many people got burned by sending it on the wrong chain in the beginning. Now they change the format, you know, a year later.

something like that. But in the beginning, people was like, oh, okay, I have those Bitcoin or Bitcoin cash, and then you go to their exchange, but they use the wrong, oh, they click on Bitcoin cash, and they send their Bitcoin and that it's not accounted for and lost, and it's sent to a wrong address that it's not accounted for by the exchange. And so people were born, burn with this. But, you know, when you create a fork, might as well also change the formatting to make sure that you're not going to have those things. So I was really angry about this kind of thing. Wow.

It seems like what's you call it? It's like the narcissism of it because they probably didn't want to do it because they were the real Bitcoin. So we're not going to change our format because we're the true. We're the vision of Bitcoin. But if you're going to be, first of all, they have to be, yeah, just like you said, a form of narcissism because that means you assume that the other one will die off immediately. And the second thing is that, you know, you're the one doing the fork. So if you're going to be changing things, might as well change that as well.

Imagine mining Bitcoin, cheaper than buying on an exchange with direct payouts hitting your wallet like clockwork. Saz mining makes it real. You own the rig. No gimmicks. It's your asset pumping out Bitcoin every single day. No markup on hardware or electricity. They get paid when you get paid. Fully aligning incentives.

Mining Bitcoin below exchange cost is a great way to do. DCA your stack. It's so simple, anyone can do it. No tech skills required. You get white glove support and education, a rig performance guarantee. Plus, it's powered by 100% carbon-free energy prioritizing renewables. Ready to take control of your Bitcoin future? Visit SaaSmining.com by scanning the QR code or clicking the link in the description down below to book a free consult and start mining today. Are you still delaying taking self-custody of your Bitcoin? Do you feel secure in your current Bitcoin setup? If something were to happen to you, would your stack make it to your loved ones? At Bitcoin Mentor, we've helped thousands of people level up their Bitcoin security and fast track their understanding.

If you find that you simply don't have the time to go through all the books, the tutorials, the guides, you can book a free one-on-one strategy session with myself, Gary, or any of the other great mentors by visiting BitcoinMentor. Scan the QR code or simply click the link in the description down below to find out how Ben and the entire expert team at Bitcoin Mentor can help you accelerate your Bitcoin journey. Use promo code BTC sessions for 10% off. Phil, I got a question for us. Speaking of Bitcoin Cash, I've heard it argued from people that we're very passionate about it and who in many, many ways otherwise agree with many Bitcoin Maxis philosophically and about economics and everything.

They would argue that Bitcoin Cash is the pure originally intended way to go with Bitcoin and that it's supposed to be a currency that can be exchanged all around the world quickly, peer-to-peer, wherever. And that Bitcoin is the one which doesn't really align with the original vision, what would you say to that? So, first of all, it's trying to, to, sometimes they are trying to use every phrase that Satuishi was saying as an argument in their favor. It's like, okay, you're trying to, again, it's wrong because Satuichi didn't even conceive

of something like the Lightning Network. And we are not going to be able to, you know, It doesn't make sense. And the bullshit vision coin, BSV, will never be able to. They had so many problems because they had so much big blockchain that the network cannot be able to organize itself when the blocks are too big. So at some point, you got a chicken egg. You know, there's a 10 minutes window that we have for every blocks.

And that's very well adjusted with the one, gigabytes blocks and compared to, you know, when you account for all this. I mean, if we have subspace channels like Star Trek where everything is instantly transported, then, yeah, you can imagine, you know, big, big blocks, you know. Phil, I never thought we'd be talking about subspace on a Bitcoin podcast, but here we are. Sure. Why not? Let's go with it.

So, so just you mentioned that. So it's like, so it is, we have to account for, it's a complex. Again, there's a networking technology. involved as well in the complex only as an additional point into Bitcoin technology. It combines so many aspects of technology and human psychology as well. The network effect being so much important. The one thing that is a reason why Bitcoin is gaining over all the other ones is like, okay, has the bigger Bitcoin hash, a more recognizable.

nice value and therefore the expectation is to the value of what a currency. Actually, it was a big debate. I mentioned that in the beginning of Bitcoin versus Alcoin. There was Peter Schiff arguments about all it needs to be a commodity and so on. But in reality, there was, I'm I'm sorry, I should have refreshed my memory about all those economists. But another economist mentioned Austrian school as well, that actually it's more like the expectation that tomorrow is going to have value. So that's what actually makes a currency, getting its, keeping its value, is the expectation that, okay, what it is today will be happening tomorrow.

And when you look at it from a technical analysis perspective, look at charts and all that. You can look at it, okay, the 200 moving day average is what people in their mind without realizing is like, okay, yeah, you know, Bitcoin has always been about $30,000 for the past four years and so on. So then the expectation is like, okay, it might fluctuates, but I know that over the long term with the track record, it's going to keep going like this and growing.

And so it's a safe investment like I can put it and then not think about. it for the next 10 years. I mean, how many, if you were pointing a gun to someone, any Ethereum guy, pick a name, and so you're going to have to invest all your wealth into either Bitcoin or any other ones, which one will you pick? And I'm telling you that if you comes to a situation like this where you don't have a choice and you'll be stuck with it for the next 10 years and 20 years, the majority of people will save Bitcoin because, you know, all the other ones is like, well, okay, X, Y, Z coin. I might love it, but, you know, it's very speculative about if it's going to still be around.

You know, Sula now, pick anyone. And there's always a darling for every cycle. And you're absolutely right, too, because essentially at the end of the day, savings is just preparing for like the uncertainty of the future. That is the whole point of savings, right? Is to be able to carry that forward, but it's to deal with the uncertainty of I don't know what's to come. And so you're going to be looking, you're going to be whether you realize it or not, You're going to be projecting what you think is most likely going to still be there, be the same or be more. And that has to factor into your individual, subjective at the margin valuation of all these things.

Interesting. Very, very cool. I'm curious then, too. So I want to get into some more details about some specifics of why they're terrible shit coins and why no one should touch them. And you should learn these lessons rather than getting burned by the stove. But before I do, I'm really curious your outlook on where we currently are in Bitcoins versus shit coins or all coins, whatever you want to call them. because I found this cycle to be particularly interesting in the sense that, like, you're right, they used to, so there was, we can touch on this as well, too, because there's always a tradeoff there. I think it was Jeff Booth that coined the blockchain Trilema. So you can have security, decentralization, or scalability. Basically, pick two, right? You cannot have all three. And Bitcoin is all in on decentralization and security. And we move scalability to the other layers as well, too. So I'll start with, it used to be the case that these, these people coming in, these scammers were trying to project that, oh, we have some utility, it's going to be faster, was constantly going on to scalability, was always the angle they were kind of usually approaching from, or something new or some like the world's computer, some bullshit like that. But this cycle, no, this cycle, all those pretences have dropped by the wayside. So, Phil, at the very least lie to me. Are we almost at the point where we can be done with

these things? Is meme coins the end of the shit coin cycles? Or is this, or is this, This game going to go on forever. How do you see things progressing in the future? So this goes back to you more like human behavior than technology almost. Yeah. And we're still in a world of fiat where people are trying to save themselves through speculation. When you look at how things were, for example, in Warmer, Germany in the 1930s, the 1920s, they had to figure out a way to, you know, to survive.

And at some point, the speculative industry, you know, if you look at it as an industry, was actually sucking up more energy of the market overall than manufacturing or anything at all in services because, you know, the value of the currency was evaporating so much that people were actually had to fight more about. okay, once I have my darch mark, I need to get rid of it. I need to get something. And US dollars or gold coins were not that easily accessible. So now it was like I need to buy a wheelbarrel. I need to anything that has value in it. And that kind of thing is, I'm looking at this, pointing this out as the extreme. But it's just to, it's easier to understand when you look at things from an extreme

perspective. Now, you tone down, we're not an hyperinflation. Well, at least not yet. And so, but we're still in a slight inflation rate, you know, at some point was 10% or maybe at least some, something around there. Phil, the official US CPI estimate says two or three percent. So I don't know what you're talking about. Yeah. Well, yeah. So, yeah, obviously, if you, if you account specific things. You might get away with it. But, you know, actually, there's always this thing where, okay, the value of price of asset are going up. It's, there has to be some value coming out. I mean, more dollars to supply for this increased rate of assets, asset increasing in value. So even if it's not in commodity at some point, it will be. But just looking at gold, it's been going up so much that it's already

already showing a sign that there is still some form of inflation. Now, I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm the ass that interrupted. I apologize. I'm going on a great line of thought here. Oh, yeah, yeah. So with this higher, lower inflation rate, there's still, anyway, people have been known to,

okay, I can't keep my dollars sitting up in my bank account and my checking account. I'll leave it there. It's 30,000, 100,000. I'm million dollars not sitting there and nothing. So I have to figure out something with it. And people, they know, they've been conditioned since the 70s to always have something to speculate. And they're forcing people to speculate while in the 1900s, early 1900s and the 1800s, all you had to do to save for your future was to pile up gold coins or even currency.

the currency that was tied at least to gold. And, you know, it's like something that costs me, if I need $10,000 per year to live comfortably right now, in 30 years, it will still be $10,000 per year. There was really a sense of, you know, calmness financially for people back then, at least. There were other factors, obviously, you were scared about. But on that part, they had at least a certainty.

And that's the reason why companies could provide and define benefits for their employees, et so now, and that all vanished in the 70s. It's like, well, now I have no clue what in 30 years from now, if I need $100,000 today, what would it be in 30 years and 20 years? Nobody has any. No one can, oh, you can make an speculation, oh, okay, fleece in 5% per year, let's say, and over a year, you could have a burst. Whoops, just like we had in 2020 that blow this up, you know.

So based on that, the aspect of, oh, I could get more by buying those old coins that was going to do a jump up, that or, you know, mining stocks or anything. Anything that might have a burst of high, this is very attractive to many people. Mostly those who are just joining Bitcoin and all this real. And they actually do not have any notions of trading. They get slaughtered. But good traders, yeah, fine. I mean, if you know what you're going to do, you can look at those things and figure out,

okay, I expect this thing. I'm going to get out and increase my Bitcoin. I did that in the past year. My goal was actually to get more Bitcoin, not to that shit coin, but to trade between those Bitcoin and shitcoin in the purpose of getting. It's actually not, the dollar was not even involved. You know, it's Bitcoin to that shit coin. And the chart was just like, just this Bitcoin,

the shitcoin versus Bitcoin chart that was looking at, I didn't care about the dollar in that. And my goal was Bitcoin was the, was the end of gold. It's very interesting. You bring up a good point in the sense that even touching back on that idea of basically planning for the future in savings

is that Bitcoin is savings technology and so long as, you know, until Bitcoin can help us restabilize the world and bring that back, people are so uncertain about what's going to happen that they're continued to look for speculation, which means they might continue to be looking for the next big thing,

or they'll be so both fear and greed, fear of the end, few of the unknown in the future and the greed of what they can maybe get now will probably have these stupid things continue chugging along. Interesting. Okay. So with that then, again, I will drill down to some specifics, but I'm curious because you've got in this wonderful book, all coins versus shit coins. Sorry, all coins versus shit coins. Bitcoin versus all coins. What I'm curious about is, and this is actually an incredibly helpful for me, and I'm sure a lot of Bitcoiners as well too, is that I still get questions from people who know that,

like, know what I do, know I'm Bitcoin only, and they'll still be like, yeah, but what about this, right? In your work, in your research, in the time that you've been talking to these people, what have you found has been an effective communication, effective way of illustrating guys, Bitcoin and all coins are in no way, they're not the same thing. This is where you want to be. What message have you found really resonates with people? Most often is to point out that the importance is what is recognized as a much more, demonstrated as a dominant factor and is safe and is being recognized. There is, it's more like, okay, it's been there for a while.

There's a network effect you have to consider. There's multiple aspects, but when you have to whirl it down to someone new, I will say to them, it's like you need to learn more about, Because the thing that is so difficult for many is like they don't, I saw a tweet like this. That was brilliant because there are two things that are very difficult for many to understand. Technology, software technology. It's already blurry for the majority of people. And on top of that, economic, the real, real economy, you know,

the Austrian School of Economy and the reason why, how. How does the dollar work? You work for that shit. Do you know how it actually is created and that it's a debt-based currency? All those things, they don't know. I mean, I remember telling that to someone, they couldn't believe what I was talking about. It's like when you're taking a loan at the bank for your car or if you swipe your credit card and then for a restaurant, $100 is going to get created.

and once you pay it at the end of the month, that $100 is like matter, anti-matter, dollars, and the debt goes back. But the problem is when you've got this recurring debt, like a loan, whatever, that is paid over, but then if the dollar, the debt, the dollar is created out of debt, but the debt keeps increasing with interest, there's always more debt than dollars. And, I mean, these are things that are so beyond, they, they, they, They couldn't believe it. Oh, yeah, wow, wait, the bank is not going to create dollars. And this is how it works.

You know, it's a funny thing is that bankers, bank accountants, whatever, they, they know. Yeah, yeah, we create this thing. But they don't know the whole picture anyway. So it's funny then, you know, they managed to in school or banking school. I don't know what's called. Banking's. Thanks. To mention just that.

part. You know, it's like, you know, just in a bubble itself. This is how the mechanism work. They don't ask question about the overall economy and the fact that, well, that means if on aggregate, there's always going to be more debt than dollars. And therefore, it's only a matter of time that's going to implode unless the debt ceiling is more, should be more called a debt target, you know, because, you know, we raise the debt target.

We're going to get it. We will get it. And we have to. otherwise, and it floats. Absolutely incredible. I want to pivot a little bit, but before I do, Gary, what questions do you have or what's on your mind? No, I just, I had a couple questions, I guess. You know, we make fun of alt coins and shit coins and in many respects, rightly so.

But I guess to play devil's advocate for a moment, they do seem to serve a bit of a purpose. And I think Michael Saylor was saying this. And if he wasn't, maybe it was somebody else that was listening to that they kind of serve as an arena to try out. different things. And if I may make a sports analogy for a moment, you know, you have the National Football League here in the United States and there have been other leagues that have come along, like say the XFL, which everybody knew was going to go nowhere. They didn't have good players. It wasn't that great of a product. But they did have one neat innovation where they had the camera go directly over the field on these wires, which allowed for like a much better view, which the

NFL later adopted. So it seems that there are, you know, certain aspects of some of these altcoins or shit coins where they say, yeah, well, Bitcoin doesn't do this. We do. And I think maybe it was Saylor or somebody else who argued that these advances can be adopted by Bitcoin over the course of its run, either directly, you know, onto the chain itself or through second layers. So are there any recent advancements in Bitcoin, either on chain or in second layer that you think are particularly good or bad or any that you'd like to see in the future? So I totally agree with this statement. I think that, yeah, it's important. For example, the Monero experiment about, you know, I'm hoping that eventually there's a layer two kind of thing

that makes those points about, you know, first of all, we already have the Lightning Network has alleviated the problem of transaction speed and so on. But it could really be improved Lightning Network because it's one to one and then you have to balance the interbalance between those two endpoints. And if it's on balance, you have to rebalance it and all that. It's understandable. But it's also tied to one single.

So there's a possibility that eventually, you know, bank, big banks, for example, will be your endpoints and then you're connecting with banks. Or even they're actually holding your Bitcoin and they are managing a layer two between. in all themselves. You know, that kind of thing is a direction that is not going to be ideal. At least, you know, it could lead to that fractional reserve banking that we don't like. And so it's important to keep an eye on those things. But what I was talking about in the book, at some point there was a point pool kind of thing that was in a discussion. But there's something else that I got heard about.

That's arc. Yeah. And so actually I'm starting reading about it. Because in these kind of things where it's more going to be a pool of things that will allow for multiple people to join or move. And then you've combined those things with all the additional layers of technology that will be similar to what this is happening in all coins. I had an argument with a safety at some point. I was on a show. and you didn't see anything of value going on with all coins.

And one of the thing I mentioned is like, well, these tokens, for example, could be used for, for example, stocks, you know. And then it says, well, you know, Apple shares, they're a physical company. What's the point? But the point is, right now, for unless you have the paper certificate of your, your shares at home, most likely for the majority of people, their shares, your shares are actually held by Schwabes or E-Trade or whatever. And they are with all the fine prints. They're allowed to borrow your shares and lend their shares to somebody else who's going to sell them. So eventually you really have fractional reserve banking of the coin.

Stocks. Yeah, of stocks. So your stock, you know, of a company, you see the, supplied, all that, and the total number of shares. But actually, you have, you're actually, some of your shares are also owned by somebody else that a short seller I sell it to. So we're two people who owns the same share, you know. And obviously it's all in the system. And, but, but that is something that if it was on the blockchain, then this problem will be, I mean, the accounting of a number of shares will be visible for everyone.

So there's actually this value it is. So eventually the problem with all coins like this, Ethereum or all that, is you split up with another currency that has to be used for the underlying payment of those transactions. So ideally, it will be in Bitcoin. So if you have this as a, I mean, in some way, we have this with, liquid network. So that will be something that is much more feasible. The problem with Bitcoin Liquid Network is that it's that too is not decentralized in terms of their system because it's also a proof of authority, this thing.

But we can go. This is just show where things are leading to. And so we might be, I mean, I was thinking it may be a proof, proof of stake of a layer two proof of stake to Bitcoin, where obviously the staking will not provide you any new Bitcoin. The only thing you're going to make money out as a node will be through a transaction and that's it, you know, because real Bitcoin always created on the real blockchain. But it's one to one and all that. So at least it's permissionless, sort of. You need to have Bitcoin to be able to stake. And proof of stake is not as perfect, but at least it's better than proof of authority to me.

And it has to be, even if we're going to roll it out, it has to be built on proof of work with Bitcoin at the base layer to begin with. So essentially it's another abstraction from there. I was saying, you guys are too kind. I take the little more aggressive side on the alt coins there. And the thing for me, but it's interesting that you brought up liquid because I didn't group Lik. Liquid is the federated side chain. I use it all the time for small amounts. I love aqua wallet,

bowl app. I think these things are great, tons of fun and good for small amounts. But you're putting, you're right, there's trust there because it's a federated side chain. Now, a lot of the companies that are involved in that federation,

I'm already sending them my fiat to buy more Bitcoin. So I already had a degree of trust with them. But the distinction that I was going to make, and that is an interesting comparison is that for anyone that, you know, talking about like, Bitcoin doesn't do this thing. So I'm going to try and do this thing elsewhere.

It's like the, it's praxeology. It's action speak louder than words. Like, okay, if you're interested in improving this issue with Bitcoin or this thing that you see as a problem, you do not need a new token. There's no need for a new token. As soon as be like, oh, this is a problem. So I'm going to launch my new token. Then I know your motivation is not improving the situation.

It's just enriching yourself and the founders and the VCs and all those ones as well, too. That would be just my opinion on that one. Yeah. Yeah, it brings that back to a complaint I had with the, you know, a proof of stake, we're going to create a foundation. People with Bitcoin, they get into that coin. They buy, you know, stake of X, Y, Z coin. And then once the coin is launched, you have those things.

And then the foundation has all those piles of Bitcoin. And, you know, it's very different than the mindset of Satu's started, but nothing at all. It just created those things. You didn't pre-mine anything. In fact, he made sure for everyone. And it actually added this part in the second edition. The statement in the first Bitcoin block, which is the Genesis block.

It's the Chancellor's from the break of the thing. Yeah. So that is like the equivalent of, okay, look at the newspaper. it proved that it's actually two days. I didn't pre-mine anything at all. I mean, it's funny if he really had died in mind. It's like, I have to prove that I didn't do any pre-mine, even though actually, you know, it didn't matter, obviously,

because he was the only one who was mining in the beginning. The interest was not that much. But it still shows an aspect of his mindset that I found peculiar, you know. But it shows in a goodwill. There's no, certainly after five years, he's done so much pre-mining that he can. So anyway, that's the thing that is remarkable. But yeah, that's the big difference, is that there is no pre-mining. What it could have done is that, yeah, obviously with proof of stake, you do need to fund it in beginning.

It would split it out to people, you know. But what it could have done is that when those Bitcoin buy back these, those coins on the market, which raised the price again. And then once they exchange Bitcoin for XYZ coins from the public, it's going to raise the price. And then they actually destroy those XYZ coins. Now, basically, the price going up means that they're not going to be buying back the entire supply. It'll be maybe half of the supply initially done because the price have double. But the point is that they could have done exactly the same thing where, yeah, sure, we need to finance this in beginning with this way for distributing the coin. But at least we're not going to be involved with any shenanigans of building up a foundation and giving us a bunch of money.

And then all the things that these are another part that I don't like. I got to point out one, I had never considered it. So the Chancellor on the brink of the second bailout quote in the Genesis block, I always thought it was just like a tip of the hat to like why we're doing this. I never thought of this as like a proof of life. Essentially being like, hey, guys, I'm starting from now. I'm trying to prove to you that I am starting from now. That's an interesting perspective.

That's really cool. That's really cool. I wish I thought about writing this in the first edition. I just added it in the second edition. It's like, oh, yeah, of course. Yeah. Nathan, may I just mention something just to to my own horn? This is the first time ever on the show that I knew something about Bitcoin that you didn't know.

So you've made like my month and I should just leave right now. That's great. All right. Gary, what was it? We're wrapping there. Okay. So speaking of pre-mines, I wanted to ask you, Phil. So tell me, why should I have Bitcoin and not instead rely on a giant Excel spreadsheet controlled by a few people in an Amazon web server?

Would that not be better? And in particular, I want to know because I get this question way more than I should. So, Phil, tell me, what's wrong with XRP? Proof of authority and ripple homes 50% of the Bitcoin. 50% of the Bitcoin, sorry, of the XRP. I was about to say, yeah. That would be terrible. But, you know, they always point, oh, Satushi owns 2 million, 2 million bitcoins, awful, blah, blah, blah.

Okay, that's just 10%, first of all, compared to 50% with ripple, you know. It's proof of authority, and they're trying too much, so much opening that a CBDC of some sort by the European Union or whatever. And they actually pushed this up. Oh, look, it's going to happen. We're going to make a lot of money. Yeah, okay. Yeah, for something devil-related. You know, it's really amazing, like, how you're kind of in favor of this, you know.

It's a totally different mindset. And most of them actually are gold investors and, you know, they are sound money, kind of, many of them. So it's just funny to see how they can not get Bitcoin. At the same time, being proponent of this CBDC stuff, but also we go, I mean, it's very complex. It's very difficult for me to understand exactly what kind of mindset brought them there. But the point is, it's, I will not, when you look at the chart of XRP against Bitcoin, it's a bunch of needles. It's like this, you know, it's something down, and oh yeah, and then crash down. You know, yeah, okay, it goes up by Bitcoin, you know, a factor of three or four, and then it

crashed down big time. And when you're in the past, in 2017, it happened. I mean, obviously those who stick to it, make a lot of money, but ideally they would have sold at the peak of the Bitcoin, of the XRP versus Bitcoin. Bitcoin. But no, they lose all that gain once XRP trashed down in Bitcoin's term. It's amazing. It's still in the top 10, XRP, even though it's been a long time ago. But I think it's actually more something to wonder about, you know, look at lightning, sorry, light coin and Bitcoin cash. They were in the top 10. But now they're number 50 or

60, I can't remember. And it shows that, okay, is it more nefarious? Is it the bankers going there? If you look, you read the creature from Jackal Island, you know, when they wanted to pass the bill, they pretended, the bankers pretended they didn't like the bill. We're going to float the idea, oh, no, it's not good for business.

They actually, you know, came up. When you look at what G. Edward Griffin was telling about in some interview and what you mentioned in the book. He's like, yeah, when the version came up and of the bills, no, it's not good. Okay, well, the banks don't like it. So I guess it's good, you know. So is it something like, okay, we need something to, we can't control Bitcoin. We need something else.

And then we have to float the idea that we're going to be using this. So to suck up people into the XRP stuff, you know, versus actually concentrating and looking at Bitcoin and its true value and where it is from, which is really decentralized, because it's not decentralized. And the point is, when you read how it works, XRP, it's like 90% of, you need, I think it's 80. I might be wrong with the numbers here, but there's a, the aggregate of all the nodes, 90% needs to be approved when you have a list or 80% 90%.

90% of the list of coins you're going to connect to needs to be part of the approved list by ripple. I mean, if you download this thing and you run it, you need to have a list first. Who am I going to connect you? And if you connect all with your friends, you'll be on a separate network. It doesn't work like Bitcoin.

So you have to connect with other nodes, and those nodes have to be 90% of your nodes to be able to have a consortium because it's not based on proof of work and all that. It's just like an agreement, you know. So therefore, 90% has to be from the ripple approved list. But 80% or 85% is the, what is the term that when we say,

all of the 85% of the nodes have to approve something to be consensus consensus and you know there's actually when you have a vote in something you need a certain amount of people to be able to like a super majority no no no to be able to okay we will we have enough people to be able to hold oh quorum quorum yes thank you thank you goodbye for gary today yeah thank you Gary today yeah thank you So you need 85% of the approve list to be from of the coin for the transaction to be approved for the node, 85% of all the nodes. But since 90% of the nodes are the one from approved, they always have at least by a 5% margin, the ability to always have their approved nose approving the thing.

how much of those nodes are actually, you know, part of a consortium of banking cabals or whatever, you know, it's like, you know what, those transactions will get removed or we're not going to do censorship or Bitcoin transaction censorship or a variety of things or even they could at some point, you know, they could rewind the blockchain. And it's not fixed in stone because it's not, there's no proof of work, you know. So they could move things even if you don't want to. I said, whoops, I had that balance and it's no longer there because, you know, they just created a transaction where they take it away from you,

whatever. I mean, there's many, many things that could be happening that will not be happening with Bitcoin. It's like the anti-Bitcoin. It seems completely antithetical to everything that Bitcoin isn't represents in the sense that like, it's the most far.

far away from Bitcoin of all, I think. Yeah. It's, we've got a literally a company pushing this. We've got Ripple. So you've got centralization there. It's voting based with proof of authority, basically on getting consensus of what's going to go through. And like you said, I forget the way they're phrased it, but it's literally a list of trusted nodes. Like it's a system built on trust. Like, oh, these are the trusted validators, the trusted notes. And we'll decide who qualifies and has proper security. these things too to make it on to set list. It's just commercial

banking reimagined. Like there's really, there's nothing else to it. And the other thing too is it's the first, I think it's the first 32,590. They don't call them blocks. They call them ledgers or whatever. Yeah, the first, the beginning of the chain is gone. They had a bug. That's missing.

Their first 32,590 entries just, poof, gone. Yeah. It might be very convenient if there was any kind of accounting that will be suspicious in any way or whatever. Well, it's gone. Yes, I'm sure that it'll always hold up. It's like, oh, yes, I am.

It's just that never happened. That transaction never happened, which you're right. They have complete control. They could roll it back. It's completely centralized. And that's always what you're giving up. So they're giving up both security and desensualization in order to have speed, which really in this day and you could just use Visa as well, too.

Like there's no necessary. The other thing that I found when I was digging into it a little bit as well is because, again, maybe you can touch on why this is important for decentralization, Phil, but like, you can't, you can't really run an XRP node, right? You can't do that easily. I was trying to figure out the requirements for it. These things have like five to 10 plus terabytes of storage you're going to need to have. Their uptime basically has to be 100%. Your internet bandwidth has to be at high levels as well too. And you're going to need basically, it's recommended to use 64 gigs of RAM. So it's not, right, it isn't like, oh, I can just grab a nice little computer and I can

have the sitting up and I can do it myself. Exactly. It's going to, I was even, I was reading it somewhere, but it's somewhere I was reading that they have cloud backups because they need to be on all the time. It's like you're just on Amazon. Like you're just on Amazon web servers at this point. Yeah. And it's actually funny because you mentioned this, but proof of stake in many cases, the nodes,

those operators, they were running on on the cloud as well. And so if you say, okay, pick a one cardinal, for example, and then you look at it, okay, this one is on Google Cloud, this one is on AWS and this one is, but, you know, 80, 70% is on AWS and 20% Google Cloud. Okay, so that means, yeah, those clouds, any kind of issues or anything that happens to those, and this thing is really having a, a big hard time, you know, figuring out and what happens when those, because when you understand how proof of sake works, you know, it's a forward scheduling of who's going to be mining the next block, you know, mining quote on quote. The, it's based on, you know, a randomness. It's well-crafted on, you know, again, it's well-crafted, but it's more subject to issues than proof of of work because they'll have to schedule ahead.

Okay, the next thousand blocks, we're going to divide that, okay, five of them, it's Gary. He's going to be taking care of block number 200, 205, and 220 and so on. And Nathan, you're going to be mining to 230 to 202, the next block after Gary and so on. And so, but if you're all running in the same cloud and that cloud goes down, a bunch of blog, then it has to be the second layer, because it will be multiple, you know, a second person, third person, whatever, if the first one is not there to mind, but with a delay and on your thing. So it gets slow. It might be possible, but then it's just going to be awkward in terms of what's going to

happen with those things. And the other thing is like, it's an argument I put it up. It's like the guy on the island, think about the gas-away movie, the guy stuck on four years, you know, imagine they just came back and he had Bitcoin and he had Gardanos, for example. And so now when there's a guy comes in with his laptop, he's saying, oh, I can make you, I can buy you the island or whatever, suppose he owns the island. And it could fabricate entirely a new chain of cardinal block.

How would you know unless he remembers all the miners, the node operators, public key to be able to match? Okay, it fixed. I see that it's signed by this node operator and this node operator. while Bitcoin, all you have to do is how many hash power is there in those things. Oh, yeah, it's a continuation, big hash power. That's it. All you have to remember is how many zeros, leading zeros, you know, to be able to via confirmation.

If at least there's a serious amount of zeros, then you know, that's like somebody can't fabricate those things. So that's a big distinction as well. completely agree. It needs to be permissionless and it needs to be tied to reality as well, too. There has to be a physical cost associated with trying to reorg the chain, right? Proof of stake is just self-referential. Proof of authority is not just, it's just, it's just, it's just a, it's a wonderful little reminder. And it's, it's something that I think we've lost with just the fiat system that we've, we've relegated so much of a rest of it. We've, we've relegated so much of a rest of it's. It's just, it's a wonderful little reminder. And it's, it's something that I think we've, we've relegated so much of a rest of a rest of. responsibility to other people, right? And so it's, you know, not your keys, not your coins, don't trust verify. And part of that as well, too, is that if you're not the one running the software, if you're not the one checking, you're relying on somebody else. You're having to trust somebody else, which means there is a centralizing point. There is a centralizing force that can be

coerced or just be malicious against you or even just make a mistake. Yeah. Incredible. Gary, one of the questions you got, man, what's on your mind? Well, you know, you mentioned before, obviously actions speak louder than words. And Phil was saying that there are people in XRP, for instance, who are gold bugs, Austrian economists, but still they're pushing this thing, which is very antithetical to that idea. It's very centralized, very central bank. So I guess my question is, is there anything in the Bitcoin space, whether being pushed maliciously, or even with the best and purist of intentions that you think is bad for Bitcoin? in the future.

Yeah. So, yeah, there's an aspect of, for example, Michael Siller and the micro strategy or strategy now, I think, is he doesn't want

to reveal the Bitcoin address holding. You know, he owns Bitcoin. The company owns Bitcoin. It's a public. company, but they're going to keep the Bitcoin address holding and for a security perspective. Well, do you think it's going to be active if someone knows which Bitcoin address? No, obviously not.

So it's more about, okay, they know it's an accounting that's made that's made public. You know, if they're going to be making the accounting available for, you know, how many, how many pencils they buy and whatever that is, you know, all the operations. but they're not going to make an accounting public of, oh, here's the Bitcoin address we have. I think that's one thing is like that even though I'm not a fan of regulations, whatever, an archa-capitalist that I am. But what I would look forward is actually,

as part of their requirements for any public company that claims to own Bitcoin as they're holding to also publish their Bitcoin address. just to so that at least those who are buying the stock can have a certainty that is no they're not actually buying paper Bitcoin. But at least a company is really invested in Bitcoin. It's not a fake fake fake things. At the risk of sounding cruel, could I just not reply with caveat emptor?

If the company does something nefarious, that's all the more reason to. buy Bitcoin directly instead of trying to get exposure through a company. So lesson learned. Oh, yeah, yeah. The number one rule is always to be more interested in buying Bitcoin directly, holding them and yourself. And I understand that for many people, it's just too freaking scary to home Bitcoin and hold them themselves. It's like, what if I die? I need to provide this. But then if I write that down the paper, if my house burns them. the paper is burned down. I have a treasure map

and a series of riddles. My family is fine. That's the way to do it. They're going to be on the one year's search. But yeah, it's a, did you base that on the movie? It was Goonies, actually. Oh, okay. Yeah.

Beautiful. And I just had a curiosity. just a little light speculation, just a little light speculation. Because I agree, there's no security risk necessarily with giving out the public address. Or even signing a message from that address as well, too, right? It's not exposing the keys. But if I understand, if ever correctly, like there's some split between different custodians, but mostly with Coinbase. The only thing I can think of, and maybe it is, so I'll give, I'll give, like the steel man in the sense, like, okay, perhaps the Bitcoin for Microstrategy is held at, say, a customer.

their coin base, but whoever's involved in control or access to those keys, maybe they rotate, just people either leaving the company and move through different positions, or maybe there's some sort of just like key management rotation protocol in play, which if, which would mean that the coins might actually move to different wallets. You might see it hopping around to different addresses. And so that's publicly exposed, that might have people think, if you knew Sayler's address and you saw it move, what's every Twitter feed going to say, he's selling, he's dumping, it's hack, right? Every single time, which would just be a pain in the ass for his stock price.

So that I can give some like some credence to. But I'm curious, yeah, I'm curious if we go the other side, if this is maybe not a best intentions or maybe there is something else, what what motivations or reasons do you think there might be for obscuring that information? Well, peer speculation. We don't know anything. Maybe I need a lawyer here. Well, yeah, I don't know.

The thing is there was a movement at some point. I think Jim is Lop was beyond that too. You know, a day every once a year that everyone pulls out their private, their Bitcoin and they hold it themselves, anything they have on an exchange, you move it too off. So for 24 hours, all the exchange in the world, they're empty out. And that prevents any kind of shenanigans where, okay, the exchange pretends they actually home and you're trading more Bitcoin, which is something that is happening with

the silver and gold futures. There's something like 100 times more paper silver contracts than actual ounces. I think it's even maybe 200, you know. Wow. Yeah, yeah. Which means that, you know, you could have a severe situation crazy on that. And, you know, where a spike of the price like crazy in any kind of crisis. But we, for Bitcoin, with fact, it's by nature, electronic does not have, there's no excuse to the overall system, financial system of any country.

to make it obscuring this aspect when you can have it with an accounting that is visible for anyone. And that's the beauty of it. And people should remember this. And then to leverage this aspect of Bitcoin. Completely agree. It's the instant rug pull, right? I remember I think Lynn Olens talked about this too, that compared to like the bank runs of histories, that these can happen much more frequently and much more violently in Bitcoin,

which doesn't mean that like people won't re-hypothecate and pull these stupid games after TX, Quedriga CX, like Mount Galaxy issues and stuff as well too. But it means that they'll probably happen at such a speed and cadence that eventually everyone's like, no, we've seen too much of this go wrong. Hopefully

again, they'll touch that stove, they'll get burned and they won't repeat it anymore. Before we get to kind of wrapping the stuff up here a second, I did want to ask. So we touched on earlier some of the additional writings and new additions to the book of Satoshi's will do, which by the way, was the second book I read when I

gotten to Bitcoin. So I really, really, really appreciate that. It was one of my favorites. I think I was, I don't even remember the mindset, but probably initially he's like, I gotta know who this guy is. I got to find out a little bit more about him. Kind of the same thing for me. Was there anything in the new additions, the new writings and emails and communications that were found? One, I'm kind of curious, what was the context of the conversations that we're having if you have any insight into that in the new emails? And was there any other insights that you gleaned from it that you found particularly interesting or surprising? There were tidbits of information interesting, mostly between Satushi and Martimani.

Because with the other ones, the exchange were so small that wasn't any enough information to get an idea of how it awaits and so much. But with Martin Malmy, you know, sheer amount of emails. And so at some point you get to form a, you know, a familiarity with someone, I guess. And there's a bit of a conversation. But still, it remains very, very technical all the time, all related to Bitcoin. Never mentioned anything about himself. And Martin never asked either. But there were a couple of things that are interesting.

including actually a passage about ripple, which is funny. And so obviously, I think the ripple guy picked up this thing, and they blasted it off. But when you read between the lines, you understand that, you know, you have to, he was not really praising at Ripple XRP. He was not just pointing out at the time, because this actually, the technology, the idea of something like Ripple was always, prior to 2008, there was some form of existing concept like this before. And it's like, okay, before you can think of breaking the problem of the Byzantine generals problem, which is what was proof of work resolved, before you had that concept,

the best thing you could imagine was something like this, like what was done, what Ripple XRP, you know, which is, you know, Not perfect, but at least you had something. Obviously, it's not something that is going to stand against a big banking system. If that currency, XRP, was the thing that came out, not Bitcoin, or if we didn't have had anything like proof of work, they would have been able to crush this. The reason why they didn't crush those all coins like XRP, the banking system, whatever, is the reason why is like, well, if we do that, we can't do that to Bitcoin.

And people will see that it will even give more value to Bitcoin. People will say, yeah, we can't crush Bitcoin, but we can crush all those old coins like this. And it's actually, it's better for them to divide and conquerors, let them spread their loves across all those alt coins. They love that there's 3,000 alt coins out there, the banking system. I'm sure they do love it because then it's actually, you know, it divides and conquer. But that's a nice big, you know. Very cool. Gary? I'm gold. I don't want to take too much of your time, Phil.

We're already like an hour, seven minutes. Beautiful. All right. So with that, Phil, please tell me, where can people go to get the books? Where can they go to follow your work? Give them all that information. Yeah, it's available on Amazon. So this and the book, Bitcoin for Solcoin. And now the problem, I need to contact Amazon here because what do you go to, Book of Satuichie will show you the first edition. You have to go and click other editions or whatever, and then you click down,

and then you see all the variations of all the other formats, including other edition. I wish, I'm not sure why, but it still shows the first edition. And the art cover, the Book of Situci second edition, is separate. So I also have to ask them to bring it back. and so they have the same account as the other one with the same reviews and all that for the second edition. So of the hardcover, yeah.

Phil, what's the price of your books in Sats? My God. It's above one. Good answer. Okay. Beautiful. And Phil, where can people go to follow you? Twitter.

Yes, Twitter. Egg underscore Descrambler. If you enjoyed this video with Phil Champagne, please like, share, and subscribe, and check out our previous video with macro analyst Keith Dicker.