Unchained - Uneasy Money: BIP-361 Wants to Freeze Satoshi's Coins. What Happens If It Passes?

Episode Date: April 18, 2026

A Bitcoin developer just proposed freezing wallets that don't upgrade for quantum resistance. Including Satoshi's. Thank you to our sponsors!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Nexo Nexo is the premier digital wealth platform. Receive interest on your crypto, borrow against it without selling, and trade a range of assets. Now available in the U.S with 30 days of exclusive privileges.  Get started at http://nexo.com/unchained Multichain Advisors MultiChain Advisors is an emerging technology growth firm that has helped create $50B+ in enterprise value for 80+ clients over the past 4 years. They're the partner to help navigate markets.  Build real traction today at multichainadv.com Citrea  Bitcoin’s application layer, Citrea, launched its mainnet, expanding Bitcoin’s utility to privacy, lending, BTC yields, and more. Citrea enables: cBTC: The first trust-minimized Bitcoin on a fully programmable platform. ctUSD: A native stablecoin for Bitcoin, allowing for unified liquidity. Bitcoin Capital Markets bringing demand, and utility to the Bitcoin Network. Explore the Citrea Ecosystem. A Bitcoin developer just proposed the unthinkable: freeze every wallet that does not upgrade for quantum resistance, including Satoshi's.  Kain Warwick and Taylor Monahan are here to reckon with BIP-361, the quantum threat to early Bitcoin addresses, and what it means that this proposal exists at all. They also work through who actually wrote Bitcoin — Hal Finney, Adam Back, and Dave Kleiman — and a trail that runs through the Epstein files.  Plus: Justin Sun's frozen World Liberty Financial tokens expose why token holders have no legal rights, EtherFi's exit from Scroll turns into a live platform risk case study, and Circle's decision not to freeze known stolen USDC raises the question of what stablecoin issuers owe to the ecosystem. Hosts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Kain Warwick⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, Founder of Infinex and Synthetix ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Taylor Monahan⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, Security Expert Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey everyone. I'm here with my co-host Taylor Monaghan, security expert. Luca is out today. I believe he's visiting Antarctica. That's what I heard. What? So, no, I'm joking. I'm joking. Obviously, he's not visiting penguins in an arc. I got so jealous. You're like, he's allowed to visit the penguins in Antarctica? I was legitimately just got so jealous. He could be. He could be. I didn't, I never realized that you wanted to wanted to go to Antarctica so badly.

So yeah, it's just the two of us today. So let's kick it off. This first story is, this first story is BIP 361. So this is pretty crazy. I feel like the Bitcoin quantum stuff has been floating around for a while. people are getting freaked out. Nick Carter's losing his mind over it. This is the first thing that we've seen that hasn't been like,

oh, we should think about it, but like we should start doing things. And Bitcoin doesn't usually do things. So, like, I don't know, what's your take on this? Because this builds like a new front in the quantum Bitcoin war right now. I mean, it's wild because it's like the hardline Bitcoin. And I think we talked about this on our previous show, but I said the thing that scares me about Bitcoin and quantum is their ecosystem and their developers, their engineers, their coordination mechanisms are not at all prepared. Like they've just done such hard lines in the sand over so many years. And now where it's getting to the point where it's like, wait, this is actually a legitimate real threat.

now we're sitting here like, what do we do? Right? Like, what do we do? And apparently they still have it in them. They still have the ability to do this. Well, okay, so maybe for for the audience, let's go back, let's go back and go over some Bitcoin more in Bitcoin history. But before we do, let's do a quick ad break. to get started and then we can come back and hit this story. So, all right. So before we go deep into OG Bitcoin lore, here's a word from the sponsors that make this show possible.

Bitcoin changed how money works. Citraea changes how Bitcoin scales. With a trust minimized BTC and a native stable coin, CTUSD, Citraea enables Bitcoin capital markets with lending, privacy, Bitcoin yield, and more. Get started at Citraea. xyz slash unchained. Step into a new era of wealth. Discover Nexo, the premier digital wealth platform.

Manage your crypto portfolio with confidence and control. Receive interest on your digital assets. Borrow against them without selling. Trade a wide range of cryptocurrencies, all in one platform. Now available in the U.S. with 30 days of exclusive privileges for new clients. Experience Wealth Club Premier. access enhanced interest rates, reduced borrowing costs, and crypto cashback on swaps. Get started today at nexo.com slash unchained.

Multi-chain Advisors is an emerging technology growth firm that has helped create $50-plus billion in enterprise value for 80-plus clients over the past four years. They're the partner to help navigate markets. Build real traction today at multi-chain ADV. All right. We're back everyone. So I think Bitcoin 2009, let's talk about Bitcoin, right? 2009, Toshi releases the white paper on the Cypop's mailing list. Most people are like, eh, like, some people are like, cool, they start doing some stuff. They mine some bitcoins, they send some Bitcoin's around. And at this point, you know, if you read those conversations and you read the

discussions and all of that stuff, there is a really strong sense at that point, at least for me. And I'm curious your take that code is code. Like this is a piece of software, right? Like we haven't yet come out of the code as code part of the Bitcoin story, right? And then It goes a bit crazy. Some stuff happens, like 2010, 2011, the first exchanges launch. And it still feels, you know, like there's the first bug where like infinite Bitcoin's get minted. The mug is washed. The chains are all back.

Like we're still in like Coda's Codeland, right? And then somehow between the peak in 2000. 111 into the like bear market that that I guess first-ish bear market right the religion of bitcoin starts to become a thing right Satoshi steps away different people start to like take up the mantle you get these evangelists who come in who are like super excited about Bitcoin and it becomes somewhat religious at that point but still software like there's still software guys doing software to it and that's okay um and then we go through until like the fork wars i guess and that and that's what solid like no no no no no no no no like no more this is no longer code right

yeah yeah and this whole time right ethereum is like 2014 Ethereum white paper Vitalics on stage A lot of Bitcoiners were, even the Bitcoiners who hadn't necessarily been that interested in like the other coins prior to Ethereum, a lot of the Bitcoiners moved to Ethereum or to at least like a multi-coin point of view at that point. And then once the fork wars happened, a lot, you sort of like the people that really remained in. Bitcoin were the ones who were so religious, let's say. Which I mean, you know, that makes sense, right? Like, there's a, there's like a evolutionary self-selection process going on here, right? You know, I think that there was maybe, you know, if you go read like the Bitcoin forums as well, right? There's like already you see this schism starting of people that rejected shitcoins, which back in the day was,

like a fork of Bitcoin, right? Like, you know, colored coin, all of these things, right? They rejected all that stuff. They're like, no, no, no, guys, like Bitcoin is the thing. You have to focus on Bitcoin. And the most interesting thing for me is if you go back and look at the psychology of that, right? It is very transparent, very clear how much of that is driven by financial incentives. The people who didn't go into, you know, like, it starts off as like, no, no, no, my coin is better. I want my coin to go up, right? And then it also fies into my coin is a religion and your coins are the devil. And so that they also like every time anything would happen, right? We had Ethereum, we had the Dow hack, we had EOS trying to put like governments, governance

completely on chain via like a multi-billion dollar ICO. Like you just had so, many things happen. So many chains died. So many, I guess, like, centralized- Charlie Lee, like, Dauley was coins. Like, a lot of bad stuff happened, right? Like. And this validated their position as being correct over time, right? Like, it, um, I mean, I fought with the hardline bitcoins about the Dow work in 2016. And it was like violent. Like, they were very, Like, this was a little bit of, this was always going to happen. This is inevitable. You guys are bad people.

Of course you're going to start doing bad stuff. We told you. There was a lot of like told you so's like. Oh, yeah. And then also like, and now that you've done this, now you have to do it for everything else, right? Which is always the argument. Like once you do it once, you're going to do it for everything. Well, no, actually.

You don't have to do it with everything. Maybe we should have done it for more things. But anyway, so here we are, right? So all of this, like, and we're still in like 2017. Yeah. Right? We're still in 2017. You know, we then have the ICO boom, right?

But Bitcoin also hits 20K, which like was an insane number. Like to go from, you know, there were things that it like kind of kind of, were things that had like kind of gone crazy before like gone up a lot but like this suddenly this thing that was like in the you know hundreds of dollars when i started you know uh when i entered the space right um and was in the like dollars of dollars for a lot of the people who were like still around like you know like you go to a conference and you'd see like you know charlie shrem what like they're all of these guys like wandering around that were like super oachy bitcoins that had been around since 2010, you know, 2011 Euro Bitcoin.

And all of a sudden, it's gone up 20,000 X. Yeah, it's completely insane. And this was, like, it's just insane, right? Like, and it did it, like, I remember, I got on a plane and Bitcoin was 11K, and I got off the plane and it was like 18K. And I was like, what is that? Like, how is this possible, right? So, so we're still, we're still in 2017.

And then from like the 2018 bear market, post for wars, post all of this stuff, Bitcoin just ossified so hard. I'd love to see a graph of like how many bibs. Like the BIP rate slowed down a lot. There were like a lot less Bips, right? And then you, I don't know if this is like the emergence of these people or the ascendancy or they kind of came in. But you had a lot of people come in that turned Bitcoin. It was already somewhat, there was a religiosity at that point, right? But they turned it into like hardcore religion of like no changes, no anything. You know, this is like the not just like the stuff that was in the white paper, right?

Like not like, because you go back to the white paper, it's like this is a payment network. Yeah, right? No. It's like, it is, it is like really deep fundamentalist, like, religion where, like, there are certain ideas that have taken a hold of the, of the Bitcoiners. And there are certain people who, like, sort of dominate the narrative. And one interesting thing is that they're very, like, aggressive and very quick. I think it's, like, a lot of times people describe it as, like, an immune.

system, right? Like a new idea or a new thing. We've seen, we don't want this, right? Yeah. We've seen what happens if we allow people to have ideas. And so it's like all of that gets immediately rejected, even if like, even if, even if people don't understand what the idea is, like, just the idea of having ideas is like shunned and rejected like pretty violently. So you have this phenomenon where like anyone who is actually getting interested in Bitcoin often is pretty rapidly excluded. Like you have to be really, you have to have really thick skin and a really like solid mind and like goal

if you're going to stick around. Otherwise, you have so many other opportunities, right? Like, you can go build anywhere. Why would you, like, why would you sort of like trudge through this shit? But then the other thing that's, I think, interesting is that the only, I guess like the, the only ideas that weren't rejected were these, these sort of like, whatever, like the Satoshi's vision shit, right? Like the ones that were sort of approved.

And so there have been new people that have come into Bitcoin and have a voice in Bitcoin. Or even people like James and Lump, right, who's been in Bitcoin is still in Bitcoin. It's very hard for them to get new ideas in. Like you basically just have to like. Even if you have respect and, you know, energy or whatever. It's still very hard. And, you know, so then this cycle, right, this most recent cycle, we're in a bear market. During the like late, late, bare early bull of lost cycle, some people get some crackhead ideas.

We're going to make like, you know, and it's interesting because there have been things that were like approved acceptable ideas that were done like Lightning Network, right? Lightning Network is one of those things where it's like, I think all of the Bitcoiners are like, no one's going to wait fucking 10 minutes, bro, for like money to settle. Like, so let's just quietly all agree that we need the Lightning Network to allow us to actually be useful, right? And so that was allowed to go through. And that became a thing. And then, you know, like that's an approved side chain, whatever.

Like, and so weird, right? Like, it's like, ah, this is fine. But then, you know, and this, and again, like, this sort of speaks to, I think, this most recent cycle, how little, kind of, how hard it is for things to get even through the like Bitcoin consensus religion, even if they happen, right? So then you have like ordinals and people that were like, they have to start to kind of find end runs around this religion where they're like, oh, what if we take this thing that they thought was safe and we morph it into something where we can like two entities, right? And like we can do these weird bitcoins that it's like a Satoshi that is

special or whatever. And it's like, you know, let's ruin fungibility with this like weird bit of tech that they didn't suspect. And but it's all like end runs around the like the oscillation of the thing, right? And then you have people like sailor coming in that are like, you know, this is a societal thing that's going to protect us. from the world somehow like you know and and you get these like these prophets coming in that are like somewhat self-appointed but they're in the the vein of like Bitcoin religion and so they can kind of create their own little like semi-religious forks right like Mormonism you know like all the sudden you have

Mormons running around who are like this is kind of directionally the same there's like guys and stuff and a book but it's like that And so all of that, the background to all of that is, meanwhile, everyone has known that the cryptography that secures this entire thing is somewhat at risk. Like, is it fair to say, is there anyone of Bitcoin who doesn't believe that quantum cryptography is a risk at all? Like, I haven't seen that. I don't think so.

Uh, I think it's like so religious that they're like, no, no, no, math doesn't matter anymore. Like not only is code not code, but math is not math. Like Bitcoin is stronger than math, right? Like they all can't. I think it's yeah, they accept it to a certain degree. I think they, I think there are people that you'll see on the timeline who it seems like they're saying that like quantum isn't a risk. But I think that the disagreement is like very, yeah, the surface layer and it's like time and a And it's again, it's this immune system reaction where it's like people are trying to change things. We must reject this. Like they're going to corrupt the system or whatever.

But when you get to the heart of it, I think everyone agrees that like at some point, quantum is going to be a thing. And if nothing is done, then the entire blockchain breaks because the core architecture is based on the cryptography. If you break the cryptography, then it's broken. right like you there's everything that the blockchain gives you is gone um and so then the question becomes what the hell do you do about that right you can't just like let it like you can't just take this way and be like oh oops like and we're done right it's still software we can still upgrade it like we can fix this we can address this uh the decision is like how and when and when and when and and you know also consensus right like there is social consensus and you know this is one of the

things that I think, like, Vitalik really gets right. Among, you know, there's a lot of things that Vitalik gets right, but this is one of the ones where it's this idea of like, you know, fuzzy consensus, not having, you know, your point about EOS, right? Like, let's just put it on chain. Well, now there's one, like, there's one guy that's like, actually I will decide everything, right? Like this idea that there is a social consensus layer that must also, you know, that humans are humans and code is for humans and therefore we must, you know, kind of subsume the code consensus part into like the human consensus part. And so now they're like, okay, let's figure this out. Now what is maybe the most interesting thing to me in this proposal? So the proposal is freeze the coins.

I read this and I was like, what is happening right now? And so I just, I want to be, I want to be really clear about how wild this is as a proposal. And even coming from like Jameson, like, it's completely insane, guys. It is the antithesis of Bitcoin, not even like just the hardline Bitcoiners. Like, if you're in Bitcoin, you are against. freezing the word freezing blocking freezing is like yeah and it's not again it's not just a hardline bitcoiners like this is a this is a core tenant of bitcoin is that like the chain the chain gods the people writing the software the people the nodes like cannot do this right like they cannot no one can do

this nobody can take your coins nobody can freeze your coins there's whatever like the number of coins is a religious aspect like all this stuff is really just and then jameson i wake up and i look at my feet and jameson's like so i have a bip to propose that we freeze the coins and i'm just like i'm so excited for the timeline it's gonna this is this is like my my hot take is this will be insane like we're gonna have and it always happens in a bear market right like there's always a bare market thing we're like you know and bitcoin i don't know that Bitcoin can escape scrutiny anymore. I think it is too large of a thing.

It'll be interesting to see if like inner Bitcoin cut schisms make it out into like the larger, but I feel like Saylor or someone's going to get up and talk about this and it's going to turn into it. Like I just don't think you can quietly do weird shit anymore in a bare market and have no one notice. But we'll see. It'll be interesting to see whether or not this happens, right? But even the concept of this being proposed is crazy. But my take when I saw this is this is genius on a couple of levels, right? The reason why people are so religious about the coin number and all of that stuff is like this immutable ledger that, which by the way, you know,

Again, it's not 100% immutable because there was a little mistake back in the day where it became not immutable for a minute. But we'll ignore that for a second. But one of the biggest issues in Bitcoin that is almost like a weird unintended consequence of Satoshi leaving, which was amazing for Bitcoin. So I think everyone agrees Satoshi not being around to say dumb shit on Twitter or whatever would have happened. right has allowed bitcoin to get to this level of you know religious movement whatever but the consequence of that is of course satashi was around early and mined a fuckload of bitcoins so you have the satashi wallets that are sitting there that are like this ticking time bomb of like if these coins move if you know what if satoshi tries to sell them or like what it like what if

his family tries like what are all of these things this in which in what one fell swoop is like, actually no. There's no such a question. This has been part of the conversation for years, right? Like this was like the earliest fud. I think it's on my original fud dice, right? The original fud was Satoshi is actually alive and he just sells all of his coins. The dev is going to dump on us.

The dev will FSH and it'll be over, which, you know, up until. At the time. Yeah, like at the time was true. It would have been catastrophic. well like 2014, 2015, it would have just ended Bitcoin. Like if, if, if, if, if, she woke up and literally just dumped all his coins and just like capped, it was, it would be immediately over. Um, and so I think it's interesting because there were conversations not necessarily by like the Bitcoin community, but there were conversations of people who were saying like, we, we could eliminate this one, this real risk, but also all of the fud if we just freeze Satoshi's coins. Yeah.

And it was never accepted. And this is why I find the governance, right? The way social, like the social system works so interesting is that so often Bitcoin has done this thing where they just reject everything. They never really like debate it or consider it. It's just rejected on the face of it. It's rejected because it's a new idea. It's rejected for whatever reasons.

Fast forward. Like, okay, so you can say, Back then, it was decided that it was not a sufficient risk or threat or it was against the moral values or the religion or whatever to like even propose freezing Sitochi's coins. Right. But now we have quantum. And suddenly it's on the two. There's a reason. Suddenly there's a real devil.

There's a real devil. And this is for like you can, you can imagine someone standing up in front of their parishioners, right? Some Bitcoin priest on, on CNN being like, Like, guys, we must do this. Satashi would have wanted this. This is what Satoshi would have wanted. If Satoshi knew or was alive or whatever the, and we should talk about this, right? Because there was some interesting, Phil Dyan posted a really interesting thing that I wanted to.

I don't know if you saw this. I retweeted it, but we'll get to the Satoshi thing, right? But it's very easy to say Satoshi would. not have wanted those coins to be stolen by fucking Google or whatever like or China or whoever we think has like a magical you know 4,000 cubic quantum computer right so like there's there's an absolute ticking time bomb here of like quantum will get to a point where we can just break the cryptography right and also correct me if I'm wrong the early Bitcoin wallet cryptography was worse than the like the wallets have gotten better over time right and so

part of the the proposal here is it's not it's not like every we're not going to freeze every bitcoin wallet there's like a sense of if the wallet doesn't upgrade or it doesn't have some quantum resistance or something right so you know those OG wallets that were like minted with, you know, whatever, you know, the original software was before, before a bunch of changes that were made. If those coins are still sitting in those original wallets, they will get frozen. Now. Yeah.

I don't understand. So Bitcoin basically has had a few different iterations of like, let's call them, like, the core cryptography. Today, like most people are familiar. here today, if you like make a wallet, you get a Cphrase and that drives addresses and stuff. Back in the day, it was different. The address types are different for, I think, most like there's 39. There's been a bunch of, but again, correct me if I'm wrong, right? Like, the quantum resistanceness, if you will, of these wallets is not identical.

like like so uh you know the the the first few wallets that were until you know whenever like i don't know what the first change was that uh bib 39 was like seed phrases and stuff i don't know if that baked in a bunch i can't remember i don't know my bitcoin lord that well but um but but the early wallets were like just like whatever right it's fine like they weren't designed to be like yeah so the nation state actors trying to hack them, right? Like this is still like a software project. And so those wallets would require less quantum.

Because the thing is like quantum computers will get better and faster. So the point of this is the amount of time that a quantum computer would take to break the cryptography is going down. So at the moment, like a standard computer would take longer than the heat death of the universe to break the encryption. Cool. Awesome. right um the best quantum computers we have would still take that long right like it speeds it up by like you know three orders of magnitude but it doesn't matter right like it's still going to take too long to actually crack these things but if you get enough cubits in a quantum computer all of a sudden it goes to like i can break it in 30 seconds right yeah and specifically okay

it's we're going to get a little deep but i'll keep it a little bit simple you have the private key and the public key. And the public key is actually not your address. It's actually a separate thing that then derives your address. And with Bitcoin specifically, because it's not like accounts base, like Ethereum and Solana are, you have the unspent transaction outputs. It's basically like these chains of transactions. You don't have like an account.

It's hard to explain if you don't, if you're not. like Bitcoin first. But basically the different ways that the coins were mined, the different ways that the wallets were generated, whether or not you've signed a transaction with that private key before, there's all these different factors that come into play. And way back in the day, the public key, so again, this isn't necessarily your address, the public key, the way like the early scripting was that public key is actually public, which because it's like kind of your address, it's used to drive your address, that's fine usually, right? Like it's, it's like in Ethereum, it's like an identifier, right? You can't go backwards to the private key, right? Like, that's the

whole thing. If you know someone's Ethereum address or the public key, you can't get their private key. That's, that's cryptography in a nutshell. That's why these things are secure. Quantum threatens that. specifically quantum, like the way that they're assuming the signatures and the cryptography is going to be broken is partially that you're going to basically, let's say, go backwards from the public key. And again, this is like a very oversimplified explanation of this stuff. But there's like a few things that were especially probably with the very early, early Bitcoin addresses that make it more likely that.

these super advanced like quantum mining operations, we'll be able to get those prior to say some of the newer addresses. And then obviously if we evolve stuff, right, if we upgrade stuff and we use cryptography that's, you know, not susceptible to these flaws, then we're fine. The question is like, Sadoshi, Sadochi has all his coins in these addresses with a plus address. The worst address. The worst advocates, right? Like the worst, the most susceptible to quantum stuff. So this is what's really interesting, though, about this proposal. This is why I think it's both genius and also kind of a nightmare, right?

Let's imagine for a second. This is why I think it's important that we talk about Satoshi for a sec, right? Did you find that Phil Dian thread? Yes, yes. Yeah, it was the most recent thing that I retweeted. So if you say, And here's the problem. If you say we're going to freeze all the addresses in 90 days that don't do whatever the thing is to become quantum resistant, right? And, and, you know, this is this is not what this thing is proposing. But if you were to do this, if you were to say, okay, there's a hard deadline for you to upgrade your wallet. In order to upgrade your wallet, in most cases, you're not upgrading your wallet. You're moving your coins. Yeah. And so in order for Satoshi, if this were to pass to be okay, the coins would need to move. So this now becomes a forcing function. If Satoshi has just quietly been sitting there not saying shit for 15 years, right? And all of a sudden it's like, well, actually, I want the optionality of selling my coins, right? I don't want to get locked forever. And this is the problem, right? Let's imagine that we knew.

in 30 days there's going to be quantum computers that will be able to crack all of these addresses, right? The interesting thing about this is then there is no way for anyone to prove that they own the address. Anyone who has a quantum computer that is sufficiently powerful can be like, no, no, no, I'm Satoshi, right? And, you know, I think that's the only way to prove it, right? Like the only way to even if you don't want to, even if you want to upgrade the cryptography, even if you want to do some fancy mechanism that doesn't require like moving the coins. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact where those, like, you're going to sign something, whether it's a signature to move the coins or a signature that upgrades or prove. Exactly. And so the issue, if you do it now,

before quantum, you can like rush assured that like the person who signs is the person is the person of the key, et cetera. Once you get to this point in time, we're like, quantum becomes a real thing and there's supercomputers that can break these, then anyone can like prove their Satoshi and you can't, there's no like the core. In the case of Satoshi, hopefully there's some like other evidence that they could present. But that's the point. The point is we don't want anyone to prove their Satoshi. We want no one to try and prove this.

We've dealt with this before. It was not fun. There is a crazy guy, Craig Wright, who, and so let's, let's, so let's just close out, right? So the thing that's now interesting about this, assume that this passes. There are three phases that are three years and five years, right? And this is where I think this is not amazing. Like, it's not amazing because if it does pass, now you have, like, and the reason why I said 30 days, right, It's because 30 days we can handle.

I don't know if we can handle another eight years of, like, there's a deadline coming that Satoshi needs to do a thing in order to not lose access to these keys. And before it was like, well, it's been 15 years. Like, of course it could happen, but it probably won't. But now it's like, if it could happen, it probably will. Right. Like if someone still controls those keys to move those coins, you would imagine that this will force them to do it, right? Or maybe not.

Maybe they accept them being burned. So if they do, in eight years' time off this passes, there will be a day where the coins will be locked forever. And at that point, you know, if Bitcoin's a million dollars or something, right, it becomes like hundreds of billions of dollars of Bitcoin that's now. just off the market and it's this is never a problem ever again um you have to imagine all that day there's going to be a god candle the likes of which we have not seen before like it'll just be crazy right because all of a sudden the risk of satoshi is just gone right eight years feels like a long time like can we just tighten this down to like a year guys like and just close it out in the fair market like And it's going to be, I mean, it's really interesting because the thing is that let's say that this proposal passes, right? And we all do this. One, it's such a long time period that I feel like people are just going to be like, okay, well, we'll deal with it. Also, things might change. And then all of a sudden, it's going to be like a year from now. And you're like, oh, shit, I need to do something. This is the thing. Like, this is how people do shit. If we have the technology, let's just get it done into bear market. Like, yeah.

going to do shit like this. But then there's another period of time after, right? Like you, this is like an arbitrary self-imposed timeline. Then there's an unknown period of time in between the last date where everything's frozen or whatever and the date where like quantum is real, meaning that like someone broke the keys. During that period of time, if Satoshi or like, you know, people are talking about like, well, what if someone was in jail and they got out of jail and their coins are. frozen. We should have like a process for them. During that interim period of time, there's

theoretically a way where you could either you could do something quite arbitrary, right? Like, right? You could selectively unlock certain things for people to prove or whatever without risk without the quantum risk, right? There's all sorts of things that you could do. However, the question is like, would Bitcoin actually do this? And it's tough because just the freezing of coins themselves sort of undoes a lot of of what I know about Bitcoin, right? And so you can imagine if you actually, if they actually carry on and freeze these coins, I think that the otherwise non-existent conversations will actually exist because

it's kind of moved. they've kind of moved the coal posts on themselves, right? And I think it'll be really interesting, but it's a bit terrifying because even though, I guess, like, you have this, when you lock all these coins and it's, like, definitely locked, that's like a huge, yeah, the God candle. Oh, oh, my God. However, eight years, nine years, ten years of just, like, bud. It's a long time. It's going to dominate the conversation. And I don't know that anyone wants to talk about this forever.

And I suspect, I don't know, I wish we could have talked to Jameson, but like I suspect that he's, part of the reason he's putting this proposal out is to like force people's hands. I agree. It's like, you know, sometimes it's like, let's do something that is unpalatable, right? Yeah. To force people to the table to actually do something that might be more palatable. So it could be just, you know, 40 chess here and it's trying to force the thing.

But you have to imagine that there are some people in their heart apart that are like, it would be really good if we could just deal with these fucking sashi coins and be done with this. Can we please do that? Can we lock these coins? Because if we do, the thing, you know, especially if it was done under the guise of like, we have no choice. This is a math problem, guys. like we have no choice we must do this you know we're not evil we're not doing the wrong thing we're just protecting the coins and again you know i go back to like imagine there's a guy in front of all

of his bitcoin parishioners that's like this is what satashi would have wanted i know he came to me in a dream and said lock the coins yeah lock the coins bro um and so you know if that happens i think this is the only way that you could ever close out that like satoshi fun otherwise like this you can You know, we used to talk about it. What if Bitcoin's $10 million each, right, in like 30 years? And the Satoshi coins are like, it just gets like absurd, right? Like it gets to a point where it's like it's worth more money than like gold times 10. And there's just like one key that's securing all of this value.

It's a bit insane. All right. So before we talk about Satoshi, because I think this is a topical thing. Let's go to another ad break. and we can come back and talk about whether or not this person might be able to unlock the coins. Bitcoin changed how money works. Satrea changes how Bitcoin scales. Satrea uses Bitcoin as both the settlement and data availability layer.

As Bitcoin's application layer, Satrea enables the first trust-minimized BTC on a fully programmable platform and a native stable coin for Bitcoin, CTUSD. Satrea offers Bitcoin capital markets with lending, privacy, payments, Bitcoin yield, trading, and predictions. Citraia expands Bitcoin's utility without sacrificing its security. Citraia Mainnet is live. Get started at satraia.x.Z slash unchanged. Step into a new era of wealth. Discover Nexo, the premier digital wealth platform.

Manage your crypto portfolio with confidence and control. receive interest on your digital assets, borrow against them without selling, trade a wide range of cryptocurrencies, all in one platform, now available in the U.S. with 30 days of exclusive privileges for new clients. Experience Wealth Club Premier, access enhanced interest rates, reduced borrowing costs, and crypto cashback on swaps. Get started today at nexo.com slash unchained. is an emerging technology growth firm that has helped create over $50 billion in enterprise value for more than 80 clients, like Pith, MoonPay Commerce, and Wormhole. They've worked with some of the largest and most impactful companies in the space. They're the partner you want when you're navigating markets and trying to break out from the noise. They help navigate TGE's, go-to-market, BD and partnerships, Capital Markets Advisory, PR, Media Placements, KOWA activations, and more,

driving execution from launch to scale. Their results are measurable. To learn more and start building real traction today, visit multi-chain adv.com. All right, we're back. So there was a story that we were going to cover, and we didn't end up covering a couple weeks ago, where, or maybe even last week,

where the New York Times was like, Adam back is Satoshi. Yes. Right? And, you know, this is, This is like, there's a whole bunch of reasons why like it's not, it's clearly not true, right? But Phil Dian, who is like an OG crypto guy and an Eat guy, has tweeted something, I think, yesterday the day before, right? That was like, it's not Adam back, guys.

Like, it's obviously not Adam back. But, but maybe it was Adam back. because if you look at his style of writing, his style of writing is very similar to the style of writing. You can go back and the New York Times did this, right? Like there has to be something here to this. And so the theory is that Adam Back is the guy that wrote the white paper. Yeah, or was like on some of the accounts, like doing something else.

Yeah. So the idea that this is like a two or three person team, right? And, you know, the idea that Satoshi is not one person, it's multiple people, is going around for a long time, right? And there's questions like, was it 30 people? Was it the CIA? Was it, you know, the NSA? Was it like, you know, there's all like, and I think most of the rejections of that are like, you can't have a conspiracy of the NSA for 15 years and have it not leak out that like actually they wrote Bitcoin, right? And so, you know, there is this like skepticism around this idea that, you know, it's this one guy, right?

There's a skepticism that one person could do it. There's a skepticism that it's multiple people. And then it's like, well, it has to be some, like a human did this. We didn't have agents yet. So clearly a human did this, right? And so the idea is that they've matched up the writing and this is the one guy theory. If there's one guy that did it, it has to be this guy, right? And then a bunch of people like, but look at the code.

Look at the way that like we've got code examples and like there's not the same person writing this code. Like it's very obviously not the same person writing code. And so Phil Dian is like there was a guy that wrote the code. There was a guy that wrote the white paper and like had control of some of the accounts. And then there was like the genius philosopher person that like pulled this whole together. And like, you know, took all this prior art because Bitcoin did not get created from whole cloth in 2000. Right. There was like 20 years of prior art, e-cash, like, you know, a ton of different things, different schemes,

cryptography schemes that someone has cobbled together. That's the genius part, like connecting all of these dots, right? You know, the idea of essentially creating a blockchain from all of these disparate components that have existed, no one had put them together. So the idea is that how Finney is that guy, right? How Finney was the like genius, visionary person that like connected all the dots, right? Adam Back is the guy who was like all, you know,

talking and writing things and like the public face of the thing, right? And that's like, that is credible. Like this is incredible. when you start looking. But then the theory goes for Phil, that there was a guy who wrote the coat. And apparently, he's been saying this for like a decade that it's this David Clyman guy who wrote the coat, right?

So on the weekend, I guess last week, right, Phil sees this thing. And it's like, it's not Adam back. Like it's just obviously not him. He could have been part of it, but it's not him. It's this Phil Climman guy who wrote the coat. The code looks like dotnet, slob code, right? And the closest person who was in the area is this Phil climbing guy, right?

And so, sorry, this Dave, this Dave climbing guy. So then he somehow goes on like an autistic dumpster dot all of this like material and finds an email in the Epstein files. and this email in the Epstein files is like a couple of people talking about something that happened and these computers that were like seized in like one of the early investigations, right? And the person writing the email is like, hey, I've got a guy. I've got a guy. This guy.

This guy cloned the machines and like whatever, did this with the hard drives and like, can we get these hard drives back? And the guy's name is Dave Climmon. And Phil is like, this is it, right? That's the three, this is the third guy. Like this guy is, you know, and so, because apparently Adam Back was on the island and, you know, we know that. Oh, my God. The whole Epstein, the connection. The whole Epstein is the shit go.

But this Epstein nexus of now there is like a direct connection between all of these three people. is crazy, right? And so the interesting thing about this is Dave Clyman is also dead, weird thing. So. And Halfini's also is also dead. And there's another favorite guy. I cannot remember his name, an OG cryptographer who is also dead. It's also dead.

So there's like multiple ways that this could have been two people, three people, four people, and most of them are dead except for Adam back. right um and and and so i know right um and and so uh so so so anyway this this is a whole thing this this conspiracy theory that it like this is the group of people but the most interesting thing about this conspiracy theory is it's not exactly a conspiracy theory because someone had to do this like there is an answer to the question of who was satashi and it was either one person or multiple people and even for me i'm like This is the closest.

I haven't like scrutinized this like super deeply. But I, you know, I trust Phil's autism. And I'm like, this is a good theory. I mean, I think that like my takeaway is,

I don't think we'll ever know for sure. I think at this point, it's, they're, either they're dead or if they're alive, like they made the decision long ago to like, destroy everything, like really destroy it. And like, no matter how much they regret that choice today, like they can't, they can't go back. Yeah. But you know, so motives are interesting, right?

But if someone did that, let's say in 2011, right, there was a single Satoshi and that single person burned all the coins and is still alive, right? It would, it's, you know, they've gone 15 years without like trying to chase glory, right? And also, Satoshi had like a bunch of addresses, right? So like there's like a cluster of the main addresses, but it's possible that that person burned the main addresses and still has hundreds of millions of dollars for the Bitcoin today, right?

So, you know, it's not like they're like living in poverty and, you know, a back alley somewhere or whatever. So anyway, we can, maybe we can get Phil on the show and talk about this, talk about this theory. Yeah, I mean, I love, I love this, I'm all of them. It's so interesting.

It's so interesting. But this is the only, this is the first time that I've seen like a coherent theory of like, here's the group of people that was small enough to be small enough and dead enough in the nicest possible. Like, literally, like, if your theory is, it was these five people and they're all alive

and they never talk to each other or whatever. Like, I just don't believe that. Like, I don't know that that's possible for that to be the case that there were five people in 2009 that were all collaborating and conspiring to do this thing and none of them have broken ranks or none of them have ever been seen in the same room. Like, that just beggars belief, right? Anyway, let's move on to our next story, which is conveniently also about freezing coins. And so this is World Liberty Financial versus Justin Sun.

And the situation is, and this is the thing that happened a while ago, but Justin, I think, has come out and somehow something's broken his brain. And he's like, I'm not going to just quietly sit here anymore. I'm going to actually like start, you know, firing shots back. Maybe he's mad that we're not winning as much as we were promised. I think that's, so that's part of it is that he's just mad. And the other part of it is that I guess the world liberty financial guys have. propose the okay so if you bought you bought these coins right they're all I did not so no I went to the I bought the I bought the Trump coin I know no no I

bought Trump coin I did not go into the World Liberty I see oh I would stupidly I wish that I had but I did not do it and and I so I bought I bought Trump coin and interestingly I bought Trump coin I went to that first Trump dinner and Justin's son was there and he got presented with the Trump watch and he was very happy about at the time. So it's gone a little bit. The relationship is stoured a little bit over the intervening year or so. Interesting. Okay. So there was an ICO for, I can't keep all this straight, but I know this. There was an ICL in like late 2024 for World Liberty Financial. The terms were the tokens are locked. The end. We'll figure it out later. But right now you can buy in, but they're

in a rush. We're in a rush, guys. We don't have time to think through all the detail. Let's just get And so I guess now it's not that today has arrived where they figure out the details, but today is the day that they have decided to propose the new lock structure. But it's created an interesting dynamic because, well, because everyone bought these tokens with literally accepting the fact that they would be locked until someone decided at a future date that something else would be done to change the circumstances. And so now they're making a proposal that basically is like there's some of the coins. It's going to be a two-year lock with another two-year cliff. With some of the coins, it's like a two-year lock with a three-year cliff. Maybe there's some other things, et cetera, et cetera. That's what they're proposing.

Justin's coins are. They're frozen, though. They're frozen. They're like lost. It's weird because. yes because nobody can transfer their coins but there's a few people who bought the coins who then had the coins additionally frozen so even if even if they could even if the global rules lift and they're allowed to transfer the bugs yeah there's a select group of people

where they can't they'll still be block listed so that's why I just Justin's upset, rightfully. So everyone else is also upset because they're like, we don't like these terms. And then it's, again, to me, it's the interesting, the perverse incentives, right? Your choice is carry on how things were, which is literally they're going to be locked forever. Yeah. Or accept these terms. And people are mad that they have to make that choice.

Why did you buy into the ICO with those terms in the first? They thought we're going to win. They thought we're going to keep. winning and there's going to be so much winning that they wouldn't care they wouldn't need the money they would have plenty of money they would have won so much this was a detail this was a minor detail back in in 2025 so so um one thing that that i think we've talked about in the show quite a bit is like you know this idea of token holder rights you know and what rights to token holders have and when we're looking at the story the thing that kind of jumped out at me is like

like part of the tension here, right, is as a token holder, you have no legal rights usually, right? The interesting thing about tokens is most of the time, the most rights you ever have is when you have the piece of paper that says that you will get tokens in the future. That's actually like a legal document in most cases, right? Now, there's usually a bunch of ways that that document has, you know, little loopholes written in where things can change. but like at least you can go to a court of law and say like, hey, I've got this thing. And if they give this to someone, they've got to give the same thing to me, even if they change all of the terms and make it terrible for everyone. And I was reflecting on like part of the tension here is that in normal reality, you have the ability

to adapt to the world through the issuance of new shares. Right. So you was a founder. You're an idiot. Right. And one of my, one of my best examples of this is like Shane from Polymarket, right? So Shane from Polymarket, who I went into the seed round. I knew him, I knew him quite well at the time. I'd go and visit him in New York when I was in New York and hang out. And this guy was like the most cracked guy. Like you couldn't bring him out in public. Like he was so like, Just for the mission, he just wanted to talk about like, you know, he was just like so, so deep down the like prediction market rabbit hole and why it was so critical and why it was so important. Like genuinely like ideologically, but also a really good startup founder, which is a scary combination, right? When you have someone who gets startups, gets the grind, gets all of these things, like is trying to be successful, trying to build something. but also is like ideologically like jacked in right and so so he as everyone does when they're an early founder like does a bunch of dumb shit like raise the money from idiots and like does all this

stuff and like almost runs out of money and you know he had the double uh whammy of like also having three letter agencies coming after him all the time for fucking annoying reasons right back in the day And he, you know, he resisted all of that, fought through it. This is the guy who, like, got right about the FBI and then tweeted an hour later, new phone through this. Like, just like an absolute crackhead person, right? Like, just crackhead energy. But the interesting thing is you never hear anything about people complaining about, like, you know, there's no token. There's no polymark.

People kind of say, when is the token coming, right? But those are usually people who are farming the air draw. But you never hear investor complaints about like, oh, Shane, you know, screwed me over or whatever. And, you know, despite the fact that they raised a ton of money from a ton of places from like ICE or whatever, he really flipped the three-letter agency thing and it was like, yeah, you know, money from ice. And so anyway, so different ice, just to clarify. And so, but interestingly, like, as seed investors, and there's a bunch of people that were like seed investors, then they went in the series A, series B. There is this mechanism where your early mistakes as a, in his case, like 18-year-old founder or a 17-year-old founder or whatever, where you raise money from the wrong people, get erased over time. You raise more money, you issue more shares. There is like a built-in, very clear, well-understood mechanism where you can raise some money.

and have not the best terms, but like, it's very easy for you to like over time, kind of water that down and get to a better structure that makes more sense for you. Tokens, unfortunately, it's like, hey, we're going to sell all the tokens. There's 50 of them. I'm going to sell them to 20 people. One of them is Justin's son. He owns 30 of them. And then 20 minutes later, you're like, ah, that was dumb.

Like, why did I do? And so then you're forced into being like, well, what can I do? I'll just freeze his tokens. That'll be fine, right? So like, but seriously, like you, you don't have, there's no relief, Val, for the dumb things that you do early on in token land because they're immutable, fixed supply things and you can't issue more of them. And I think this is like the, the nexus of the tension that creates all of these issues, right? Yeah, that and, and by the way, and the fact that like nobody is being clear on these things. like at all ever right like nobody has clarity on what i'm sorry but like why why did you invest in

an iCO where like everything is indefinitely locked until like i thought i was going to win bro i don't know how many times i like i was sure this guy told me we're going to win so much but we never won that much before you're trusting these people who are not have zero incentive to tell me about down the right. Like you're just trusting that. But legitimately, this is the reason, right? When you invest in any token, if you are clear-eyed about it, you know that there's, there's no rights so they can do anything to you. And the problem with that is it means that there is no gradient of like risk. Yeah. At any moment, at any time, anyone who is a token issuer can completely fuck you over and just go, ah, like, we just changed the tokens, bro. Like, I don't know what, you know,

I don't know why you thought we wouldn't. We just froze your, we just did, you know, we can do almost anything, which means that they become uninvestable. If anyone can do anything to you at any time and there is no legal recourse, right? I mean, you know, I go back, like, there's still a lawsuit, uh, to the best of my knowledge. I gave up. I capitulated off for like five years, right there's still a lawsuit where a bunch of us invested in curve we gave michael in curve a bunch of money you know at the time this is pre-difai summer this is like you know call it may 2020 right and at the time michael didn't really need the money he'd done well from uh from like Swiss board a couple of other previous startups whatever and so but he thought it was a good idea to raise

some money from like good investors. They would help to like evangelize curve, whatever. And then two months later, D-Fi summer starts. And he's like, yeah, I don't need your money anymore. I just said, no, right? I'm not. Now, the interesting thing about that is he says, no, I don't want your money. And we all say, we won't take it back. And so the money sits. Now, he could have sent it back, but like, I don't know why he didn't send it back, but he didn't. So I sent him $80,000 in USDT. I'm pretty sure it's 80 grand in USDT. At least it was an e-brose. Jesus. No, no, there's stables. Yeah, it was a Stable coin exchange.

Come on. I couldn't take E. Okay, okay, okay. What was you going to put next to a rap deep like an idiot? Like, anyway, so, so, so we send stables and there's this like Mexican standoff for five years of like the investors who are involved go off to him. They sue him in Switzerland. They sue him in America. They sue him in like every jurisdiction they can find, right? And they keep losing because I have to imagine, and I never read like the transcripts or like, I don't even know if there are transcripts, but I have to imagine the judge was like, you gave, you sent someone some magic beans. Yeah. Five years ago and never got like, what do you expect? What did you expect? There's no structure. There's no

And so, you know, like Michael took everyone's money, refused to give it back or didn't want to give it back or whatever. And then, but then eventually, like, I was like, all right, clearly I'm never getting these curve tokens. So I just went and messaged him one day and was like, can I have my 80 grand USDT back? And he's like, yeah, sure thing. Set it straight back. It was like actually quite easy. And so. Wait, so he just didn't want, he just didn't want to do like the curve part of it.

Yes. He just didn't want to solve it. He was like, because the. Because the token price was like... Because he didn't need to. Zero, zero, zero, once. You know, we would have gotten... When Defy Summer hit and the curve price went to like $7, right?

We would have... And in fairness, you know, like to him, selling tokens to people too cheaply is the worst possible thing you can do to your protocol. Because they will dump on you the instant they get the chance, right? And so he was just like, actually, this is negative BV. I'm giving you the money back. And he didn't have to because you guys didn't agree to anything up front. He held it.

But he literally sitting in the same. Every once in like every three months, I'd be like, I wonder if the money's still there. It was always still there. He never touched it. He just left it sitting in a wall. You didn't need it. I know. This is, okay.

At some point, we're going to have to fix this, but I'm not, I'm not going to. Leshner is trying to fix it for us, right? Robert Leshner. Yeah. We should have him on the show at some point. He's basically saying, like, guys, this. nonsense token shenanigans. You can't have no rights.

Like, of course people are going to get screwed. And by the way, like, even if they don't get screwed, right? Even if the objectively best possible outcome happens for all involved parties, people are still going to be upset because they think they got screwed, right? Because the grass is always greener and you didn't have clarity. The expectations are out of whack. Whenever you have misaligned expectations, people start feeling betrayed. Then people get very irrational and very,

illogical and and everything goes out the freaking window. And so until we get to a point where there's like, it's not just, it's not just like this trust like we're going to do right or, you know, or there are no laws. Like we're not going to do anything. So everything's fine. Like, right? Like, no, neither one of those is true. Like if you're investing in something, if you're buying something, especially with a lockup. I don't know. It's just insane terms. Yeah, I don't know. Investing in something that has a lockup where there's literally no forcing function, timing, anything to ensure that your, like the choices they make in the future are going to uphold you. Like they're not going to. It's not they're not going to.

Something will break. Yeah. Like given enough time, something will break and it will break and it will break down. And, you know, again, why did this happen? Incentives. It happened because the incentives were really skewed towards it'll be fine, right? We don't need to worry about this because it's positive EV to give people money, send them stables. You know, like at that time, I didn't know Michael that well. He wasn't like a, you know, like he was a guy that I knew, but like I just sent him 80 grand. Like there's no, I don't think there was even, I can't remember signing a contract.

I just sent him. There absolutely was not a contract. otherwise you would have some recourse. Yeah. You wouldn't be like jurisdiction hopping, finding a judge explains the magical being situation. Oh, man. All right.

Before we wrap up. I wanted to just super quickly, because this is the same, it's basically the same conversation, right? Have you been following the scroll etherifying? I have not. Let's talk about it. Okay.

So basically, there's some tea. We don't know the tea. There's tea. It'll come out later. Okay, but basically Etherfi is leaving scroll. And then it appears that scroll has like... Is it weird that I didn't know if I was on scroll?

They're not just on scroll. Like what, like... No, I don't know. There's no way that they're just on scroll. They're not just on scroll. So like, this seems weak. Like they were on a chain and they're leaving the chain. It doesn't seem like that big of a drama.

But maybe I'm missing. Okay. Well, yeah. I mean, but I guess because scroll is... That was probably like one of their biggest things. Scroll is obviously like, oh, shoot. So scroll then the validators or the fee mechanisms, like, because I guess ether fight has to like migrate stuff off

and like do things to wind things down, whatever. I guess they like cranked up the fees on the, on the chain to like make it really expensive. Sorry. It's great. It's so funny. Yeah. They're like,

you're leaving is like let's charge a but like we're going to make you pay as much as possible that's the story so far i don't know if there's some other stuff going on too the much as possible is like 15 grand a day right like it's not like um okay so like zero dollars a day to to like 50 grand or something like that um across across you know a few yeah but so basically it says like for ether-by things, the fees like originally were 250 a day and then it cranked up to 16K day. However, there's other activity. These are like network fees, right? So there's other activity on the network that also now have to pay higher fees. And so I think that's one of the conversations is like other people are like, wait, just because you're like punishing them or

whatever. Like why? Can you collectively punish them instead of punishing us? Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know. Like the whole thing to me is just, it's just, I don't know, it's a very weird. Well, so I've got a conspiracy theory for you now. We can start a conspiracy theory here. Let's go. Let's go. Why has Polymarket not left Polygon, i.e. Matic, right, for like seven years. When they easily could, what if Sandeep the entire time, is the CEO of Maddoch, what if the entire time he's been saying to Shane, if you try and leave, we will, product, $100 per transaction. Yeah. I mean, I didn't know this was possible to be out. I mean, I guess like I never thought about it. Everything's possible. That's the whole point of blockchain, right? Anything's possible. Anything can happen.

So that's wild. I also think it's just a wild choice because if your blockchain is not getting the desired traction in terms of usage and then when you're like main guys is leaving, I feel like you're The worst possible choice to make is to make it more unusable by making it more expensive. Yeah, but it's like on the way out, we're just going to burn everything down, right? Like my favorite, my favorite thing in like startup reality, like dimension of like, you know, optimization and risk is platform risk. Platform risk is like the realest risk that you, you know, and there's like just amazing examples across all of startups of like Farmville on Facebook.

and then they're like, actually, we're going to do games ourselves. Like so many examples of like people that were like, we've made it. It's going amazingly well. And then the platform's like, ha, ha, we own you, right? This is just such another great example of platform risk. Like you think you're going to like an immutable ledger and these ZK moon math guys are going to like be your good friends. And then they're like, actually, we own a platform and you can't leave.

Yeah. And now I think the platform risk, I think a lot of times people like look at it a bit black and white, like, can they freeze you, right? That's the conversation. Are they going to run? There's ways. There's always a way. But it's like there is so much risk introduced when you're dealing with this sort of stuff. And I think that a lot of people are like, well, they would never freeze us. Like, scroll would never freeze either five. Like, and if they did, there would actually be like recourse. But that's not the only risk, right? There's a lot of risk. You never told you the fees would be cheap, bro. Like, I bet they did. I bet you, like, the first thing that they said in their, like,

white papers, like, the fees will always be the cheapest year ever. And they're like, ah, just delete the white paper. It's fine. Just get rid. It's just the whole thing is crazy. And I don't know, again, like, I, a lot of times, like, when we talk about, like, the L2s and, like, the centralization and the risk, I feel like we're, we're not, we're still not having mature enough conversations about this where, like, we're actually thinking about the risk and then actually mitigating the risk. I think it's just often the conversation turns again back to this like the FBI is going to force us to freeze your wallets and so long as that's not possible then it's fine. No, it's not freaking fine. The perverse incentives are real and people will screw each other over.

And if you have no accountability, no recourse, like you just got to sit there and eat your fees. Like, oops. Okay. So this is this, I think there's a through line. We've got two more stories. like quickly speed run them right um the next one is cal so i got like i got four minutes though all right let's do this so this is platform risk all the way down right so cow swaps dns gets hijacked which is a thing that happens to like a bunch of people all the time it happened to my family office um they were able to like get into my domain hosting place for my family office URL and social engineer that, like, it happens all the time. DNS is a giant fucking platform risk for every single crypto company. And so one of the things that I saw someone say is they're like, oh, there's like

some better DNS service that, but DNS is like a thing, right? Like it's a thing on the internet that you can't get away from, right? So I don't know if you have any hot takes on this before we before we go to the next thing. There's, we're at the point where the DNS hijacks that we're seeing are not actually compromising the team's accounts. They're social engineering people behind the scenes. And this is what happened to me. I went and they said, no, no, no, our agents, these were human agents. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Our agents are not able to change DNS, right? And then I went social engineered. This is my favorite part. I went in social engineered another one of the agents and was like, hey, I had this problem. You seemed like a really nice guy. Like we went through a whole thing and the guy was like, oh yeah, we can totally do that. I just admitted that I was like, well, okay, that's good. At least I have some closure here.

Yes, that's exactly what probably happened. Like, of course they can change the things. They're in the system. Like, come on, guys. So the final thing is cash tag, speaking of platform risk, because my hot take is that X is one of the most giant. It's been platform risk all year where they keep nuking all of the crypto stuff. And then the key to gets on the timeline is like,

it's been a bad year for crypto. And it's like, you caused this. Like, it's so much of this is you doing insane things to us and killing our reach and like whatever, right? It's like, it's been a bad year. So we're going to replace our old cash tag system with this new cash tag system so that you're now even more locked in to X and beholden to us. And we will determine whose cash tags are shown when you have a certain ticker.

They're basically turning themselves into like the ticker police. now where they own the like tickers it's crazy also who the fuck uses cash tags like this is such a 2017 because Elon well no no no they nerfed cash tags Elon yeah anyone who use the cash tags you're we're like nerffing you you're not getting any reach like whatever and then they're like crypto scammer obviously oh man So, yeah, platform risk all the way down. Oh, God. Let's wrap it up here.

So thanks for joining us. Hopefully we'll have Luca back from Antarctica next week. Maybe Tay will go to Antarctica next week. I don't know. Now we know that it's your life's dream. Low-key is, dude. Yeah, I get it. I get it.

Remember, what happens on chain never stays on chain. We'll be back next week. Until then, do your own research before aping in. See ya. Bye.