The Peter McCormack Show

Travis Kling is the Chief Investment Officer at Ikigai. In this interview, we discuss being on the frontline of the FTX collapse: Ikigai had a large majority of its investment funds in FTX when it stopped withdrawals; Travis had a majority of his liquid net worth also stuck in the bankrupt company. - - - - 2022 will be a defining moment for crypto. In November 2021, the total market valuation was approaching $3 trillion. By the middle of 2022 the market valuation was down to $800 million. UST had depegged in May and caused contagion to ripple through the market: in short order Celsius, 3AC and Voyager all filed for bankruptcy. And yet, the biggest shoe was yet to drop. In January 2022 FTX was valued at $32 billion. The August/September issue of Fortune magazine compared FTX's founder and CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) to Warren Buffet. Commentators, investors and media outlets likened SBF to JP Morgan as he bailed out struggling competitors. He'd been hosted by congressional committees in DC to help shape legislation multiple times. SBF was seemingly untouchable. That all changed in November with a rapid fall. On November 2nd CoinDesk reported on concerning balance sheet issues at FTX's sister company Alameda Research. On November 6th, Binance announced it would liquidate its entire holding of FTX's FTT token. On November 7th a run on FTX began. On November 8th FTX halted withdrawals. Days later it filed for bankruptcy. SBF was orchestrating a years-long fraud of epic proportions. Some in the industry had raised concerns, but many believed the hype. What Bitcoin Did did not have a relationship with FTX, but there are scenarios where that could have been different. Others did have relationships with FTX. For example Travis Kling, who had a large majority of his investment funds and personal liquid net worth stuck in FTX. On November 14th Travis posted a Tweet thread: "I have some pretty bad news to share… I lost my investors' money after they put faith in me to manage risk and I am truly sorry for that. I have publicly endorsed FTX many times and I am truly sorry for that. I was wrong." This show goes through what happened and reflections on where we go from here. As this show goes live shortly after Genesis filed for bankruptcy, it's obvious we're still in the midst of this mess.

Erik Hersman is an entrepreneur and the co-founder of Gridless. In this interview, we discuss how half of all Africans are without access to electricity, the affordability issue affecting the rest who do have access, and how Gridless aims to alleviate this situation by helping to build out cheap sources of stranded renewable energy. - - - - Africa has an energy problem. It has been estimated that the continent has the potential to produce approximately 2.5 million terawatt hours of energy per year from solar and wind energy. To put that into context, the US uses around 4,000 terawatt hours of energy per year. And yet, approximately half of all Africans lack access to electricity. Furthermore, a large number of those with access struggle with the relatively high costs. There are a multitude of reasons why this situation has been allowed to develop. But, despite the focus of major NGOs and developed nations, the issue is getting worse: whilst access to electricity is increasing around the world, it is declining in sub-Saharan Africa. And, without access to energy, any plans to improve Africa's economic future will always be constrained. While some have seen this as a tremendous challenge, others have recognised it as a tremendous opportunity. Whilst the issue of stranded renewable energy was being mitigated by Bitcoin mining, the costs for the associated equipment were prohibitively high. That was until last year when the problems that beset the mining industry in the US, opened the doors for those looking to harness the power of Bitcoin mining in Africa when the price of ASICs dropped sharply. The thesis is simple: Bitcoin miners help subsidise the build-out of mini-grids, providing electricity to dispersed and remote communities. As supply and demand find an economic equilibrium, the Bitcoin miners can be redeployed and the process starts in a new location. It is a market-driven solution that provides a return to all stakeholders. The aim is to catalyse the electrification of Africa. It may result in Africa becoming a new home to Bitcoin miners.

Dr. Josh Hendrickson is an associate professor of economics and chair of the Economics Department at the University of Mississippi. In this interview, we discuss how Bitcoin has influenced his economic teaching, the importance of Bitcoin in the current unprecedented global debt bubble, and why people continue to dismiss Bitcoin. - - - - "Bitcoin and the entire process that led up to it was motivated by the desire to make the world a better place and internet commerce more private. It was a true technological innovation. The market will decide what that innovation is worth." We're used to hearing such statements from ardent Bitcoiners. But this statement was made by Dr Josh Hendrickson, an economics professor who chairs a University Economics Department at one of the US's top public universities. Bitcoin is still dismissed by a significant number of well-placed people within society. We hear from many people who are passionate about Bitcoin but feel unable to discuss this within their work networks for fear of ridicule that could harm their career paths. This is why having esteemed individuals from traditional academic backgrounds advocating for Bitcoin is so critical. A professorship is a hard-won title. It takes years of graft. The history of academia is littered with stories of people being ostracised for taking left-field positions. Therefore, academics, particularly professors and department chairs, are not ones for throwing weight behind ideas that are not inherently sound or principled. So, as with the growing list of people BPI has been attracting, these academics provide the solid rationalisation of Bitcoin's thesis. This is not to state that there is a consensus within these groups regarding Bitcoin's path over the coming years and decades. We live in tumultuous times. The world's economic and political landscape is at the mercy of an almost limitless number of changing variables. But, there is a growing consensus that Bitcoin is a unique innovation, a new form of money with the potential to protect those who need it most. All other debates to justify Bitcoin should fall by the wayside.

Dylan LeClair is a Bitcoin and macro analyst working for Bitcoin Magazine. In this interview, we discuss the carnage in crypto in 2022 that's bleeding into 2023. We talk about the clear signs of Ponzi schemes, the lost fortunes of crypto billionaires, and how Bitcoin regains its footing in the market. - - - - It has been 14 years since Bernie Madoff pleaded guilty to running the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. It should have been a defining moment, and yet, we're now witnessing a tsunami of similar tragedies unfolding in crypto; a period Dylan LeClair is calling "a golden age of fraud". The cruel irony is that the industry was inspired by Bitcoin, formulated in part as a technical correction to such scams. How did this happen? Just 2 months after Bitcoin's release in January 2009, Bernie Madoff stated at his plea hearing: "When I began my Ponzi scheme I believed it would end shortly and I would be able to extricate myself and my clients from the scheme." This may be the fundamental psychology of those involved in Ponzi schemes: it is a short-term workaround that can be resolved, and investors will be made good. We may never know the true intentions of anyone involved in 3AC, Luna, Celsius, FTX and other companies currently in the spotlight, but it's hard to believe that anyone sane could think they could run a perpetual Ponzi. They must all have had an exit strategy in mind. A strategy where they and investors made good. But, time and time again, Ponzi schemes, bound by the realities of the market, fail. So, what did we miss? In an industry that was built on the mantra of "don't trust, verify", how were so many people fooled? We can all in hindsight question FTX's pitch of 15% returns with no risk. But, how many of us assumed the huge customer bases and political endorsements and A-list celebrity advertising had merit because we were not the smartest guys in the room? Maybe it takes the cold logic of a fresh analyst, unencumbered by industry groupthink, to see the warning signs. Dylan LeClair has made a number of successful calls and trades on both sides of the market. He can sense BS, has the strength to call it out, and, as a result, he has witnessed a well-deserved meteoric rise. What's his trick? Simple: don't trust, verify.

Matt Odell is host of the Citadel Dispatch, co-host of Rabbit Hole Recap, venture partner at Ten31 and co-founder of Bitcoin Park. In this interview, we review 2022: the attacks on privacy, the reaffirmation of self-custody, how people who were treated like gods rekted the market, and the responsibility of Bitcoin podcasters in doing right by the audience. - - - - 2022 has been brutal. First, tough lessons were learnt in trying to use Bitcoin for warranted privacy needs within North America. Then, we had our industry's very own global financial crisis when the tide went out and we saw how many of the supposed titans were swimming naked. So many people have been damaged, so many have been rekt. The collateral damage to Bitcoin is unknown, but material. So much of that damage has come from malign and selfish actions by people who knew better. They have exploited a new form of money, which was meant to circumvent systemic centralized greed and corruption, to put into practice new more brutal forms of extraction than anything we witnessed in TradFi. But, there are also those, whose actions have been made in good faith, who need to reflect on the events of the past year. We know where blame is centred, but how far does blame extend? Explicitly, what responsibilities do Bitcoin podcasters in general, and this Bitcoin podcaster in particular, have in regard to protecting and educating their audience? 2022 has been personally brutal for a whole range of reasons. But, it is now time for reflection. It is right therefore that, as a show that assesses and comments on the industry, the tables are turned and a light is shone on this show's decision-making. There is nobody better than Odell to shine that light. Fundamentally, it is the audience who will decide. I look forward to reading any comments listeners may have following one of the toughest podcasts I have hosted.

Steven McClurg is a Co-Founder of Valkyrie Investments. In this interview, we discuss the causes of the crypto crash of 2022 and the effects seeping into 2023. We talk about Genesis, GBTC and Valkyrie's proposal; how over-leverage and debt are leading to a breaking point; the positives of political chaos, and how Bitcoin could have bottomed out. - - - - "In a risk-off environment, Bitcoin definitely goes down, there's no doubt about it." That was Steve McClurg being interviewed on What Bitcoin Did in October 2021. Since then we've witnessed the biggest players in the market going bankrupt one after another in the biggest domino toppling event the ecosystem has ever seen. It is therefore more than timely to unpick what happened with one of those who foresaw problems and who manages one of the investment vehicles not having to charter chapter 11 proceedings. Steve himself admits to being surprised at the scale of the events that have occurred in 2022. The extent of recklessness, greed and criminality has shocked us all. But, there were warning signs. The amount of yield on offer was eye-watering, particularly in the context of a fiat monetary system when lending returns were negligible. This was the canary in the coal mine. The fact that there was no meaningful borrowing market on the other side of these trades seems obvious in hindsight. However, the scale of over-leverage and rehypothecation was able to hide problems until the moment systemic collapse had become all but inevitable. The question is, therefore, what now? Are some of the large funds still locked into active investment vehicles, such as GBTC, still safe? What can we do to protect the industry from such malign actions in the future, or, are crashes like these inevitable? And what about Bitcoin? Has its price bottomed out? Can it yet return as an investment vehicle for the masses? It's time to ask someone at the coal face.

Matthew Pines is a Managing Consultant at the Krebs Stamos Group and a Fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute specializing in national security. In this interview, we discuss the rapidly changing geopolitical order as China competes with the US for dominance, and how Bitcoin may become one of a number of alternative global reserve assets to US debt. - - - - There are moments when the world pivots when events change the course of world affairs. The Russian invasion of Ukraine was one such event. More to the point, it was the western sanctions imposed on Russia that will come to be seen as a paradigm shift. It was when the world went from working in an open Eurodollar system to a closed system involving alternative forms of money. In the face of increasingly fraught geopolitics and a loss of faith in the US dollar, certain countries are seeking to diversify the reserve assets they hold. This will create problems for the USD-UST system, at the same time the US is facing significant headwinds: dealing with huge structural debt, 'reshoring, restocking and rewiring', and countering China's rise. What was once a theory is now turning into reality: China is on the cusp of being able to compete with the US, principally within the Asian geopolitical sphere. To this end, China has a strategic imperative to secure reliable commodity and energy sources, and will likely move towards a proto-petroyuan system, and coerce other countries and entities to follow. In this context, Bitcoin is emerging as a viable alternative to fiat currencies and gold as a global reserve asset. It is a unique form of money: a digital commodity with global fungibility, limited counterparty risk, and large liquidity. But critically it is a politically neutral asset, an increasingly attractive attribute for countries seeking to hedge their exposure to increasing geopolitical risk. In the US, the rise of Bitcoin companies, along with the Biden administration's Executive Order on Digital Assets and positive statements by officials, suggests the US could accept Bitcoin's gradual adoption and monetization. From a national security perspective, key decision-makers may realize that allowing Bitcoin to serve as a new global reserve would disproportionately benefit the US.

David Zell is a co-founder of the Bitcoin Policy Institute and Director of Policy at BTC Inc. In this interview, we discuss how the Bitcoin Policy Institute engages to educate politicians in DC through combating FUD, distinguishing Bitcoin from crypto, and aligning Bitcoin with US National Security interests and American values. - - - - Bitcoin was developed on the shoulders of the cypherpunks building new forms of money outside of government control and oversight. Permission was not sought, as permission would not have been granted. Government actively disrupted the cypherpunk vision, seeking to destroy it. Bitcoin's emergence was therefore antithetical to the concerns and endorsement of decision-makers. But, some believe that the initial battle has been won. Bitcoin is now 14 years old. It has spread to all corners of the globe, and radically changed the mindset of those who have interacted with it. This includes some of those in the corridors of power, who have been won over by its ideology and technical resilience. The question now is how Bitcoin development continues. Bitcoin could continue to evolve without seeking to engage with the levers of the state. Experience suggests that this would marginalise Bitcoin and Bitcoiners within the US. In the meantime, other protocols and blockchains would continue to curry favour with lawmakers and mould the regulatory framework to their needs. Who would win in this situation? Or, through advocacy and education and cooperation with those in DC, Bitcoin could be allowed to develop openly within the United States. Much like the internet, the risks posed by this new innovation wouldn't be allowed to throttle the huge benefits it has to offer both individuals and society. In a grand scenario, Bitcoin could allow the United States to continue to compete for hegemonic power whilst continuing to champion individual freedom and sovereignty. This is a huge prize. Perhaps the biggest prize. This is why there are people willing to put in the hard graft to develop and nurture bodies like the Bitcoin Policy Institute. The future owes them gratitude.

Lyn Alden is a macroeconomist and investment strategist. In this interview, we look forward to 2023: what's happening to Japan and China's economies, whether we are entering a recession, and how will investments, including Bitcoin, perform over the next year? - - - - 2022 was when chickens came home to roost. Over 70 years of relative peace across Europe had lured politicians into a false sense of security allowing cold pragmatism to supplant ideology. Then Russia invaded Ukraine, and the wisdom of assimilating energy markets across the old iron curtain was brought into sharp relief. China sent equally belligerent signals to the west. In short order, retreat and resilience have replaced cooperation and efficiency. Assumed certainties that had driven the world economy for generations dissipated in real-time. The economic impact was sudden: stressed supply chains, shortages of goods across all sectors, and dramatic changes in inflation. Excessive sovereign debt has limited governments' options. We're now in the central bankers' worst-case scenario: high inflation, high debt, and low growth. Advanced countries like Japan are now on the ropes. A global recession is looming. So, how does one prepare for 2023? Where should we put our money? According to Lyn Alden, it's far from easy to navigate this market. When a preeminent investment strategist talks of minimising losses you know that we're in unfamiliar territory. And yet, there are still reasons not to lose hope. The world didn't collapse in 2022. China's economy should rebound. It will take time for the world to reorder itself to the new rules of the game. Onshoring and durability are going to require significant investment. Debt levels make it harder to source the funds required. At the same time, we're in a period of stagnation with potential volatility at given moments. Governments will have to chart a steady course through choppy waters. Investors will need to keep a close eye on markets and know where the lifeboats are.

Doomberg is an anonymous collective producing the world's most popular financial substack. In this interview, we discuss the roots of the 2022 energy crisis, why nuclear power needs to be the basis of our energy needs, and how pragmatic decision-making is needed if we're to best fulfil our energy needs. - - - - Just a few years ago energy was abundant and cheap. The oil crisis of the 1970s was a historical anomaly. The assumed understanding was that between governments, major energy companies and the markets, energy provision was becoming more reliable and cost-effective. The Russian invasion of Ukraine showed how paper-thin this impression of the energy sector was. Systemic underinvestment in energy infrastructure, particularly nuclear, has left the industry vulnerable to shocks. And Ukraine has been a heck of a shock. Long-term political strategies for energy provision have had to be rewritten in real-time. The market, unsurprisingly, has been volatile to the upside. One in three UK families are expected to be in fuel poverty in 2023. But, obviously, energy is not a discretionary spend. We all need a minimum material quantum just to survive. It is clear, now we're self-rationing energy, how vital it is to our way of life. Humans flourish with access to energy. The flipside is a retardation of civilisation. So, whilst limitless cheap energy is still decades away, can we supply sufficient energy for our society to prosper? Fundamentally, are we making the right decisions to facilitate the best use of resources? Nuclear power is both reliable, efficient, safe and direct power generation that is carbon-free. Why has investment been curtailed? Material bottlenecks mean we can't produce enough batteries for EVs. So why aren't we maximising the benefits of battery tech through use of hybrids? Ideology and nimbyism have counterproductive effects: serious harm is outsourced to the poorer areas of the world whilst leaving us with insufficient infrastructure at home. Clearly, decisions need to remove dogma and deal with the world as it is. The frustration is that we have the skills and knowledge to resolve this situation. We just need to bring pragmatism out of the dark.

Dominic Frisby is a British author, comedian, voice actor and musical curator. He also produces one of the top 20 financial substacks. In this interview, we discuss a range of issues highlighting how dire our current economic situation is, and if sound money and libertarianism are the solutions, the responsibilities this imposes on us as free citizens. - - - - The global economy is in serious trouble. Our guests know it. Regular listeners know it. Yet many are ignorant of the dangerous predicament we're in. This is despite significant evidence of the coming crisis being available to anyone wishing to look. Portents of things to come abound: rising deficits, unsustainable debt, high inflation and crumbling public services. And there is no political incentive to resolve the situation. This does not mean that governments aren't preparing. For starters, there are tremors in the bedrock of the global reserve currency system. China is discreetly hoarding gold. Russia is seeking to utilize digital currencies. The number of countries adding their name to a new BRICS' based reserve system is growing. The multi-polar world is being built. Then there are the less explicit but equally concerning plans in the traditionally democratic west. If, as expected, the global economy significantly weakens, the public response could destabilise society. There is always more than one path out of any situation, but authoritarian policies are more appealing to those seeking to maintain control. Implementation of schemes designed to control society will require mendacious actions. CBDCs will be sold as benign technology advancements enabling more efficient payment mechanisms between the state and the individual. The risks are clear. Fundamentally, our freedoms will depend on the monetary basis we adopt. These are crucial times. It's up to us to continue to raise the alarm.

In this episode of the podcast, I sit down with Danny Scott, the CEO of CoinCorner, a bitcoin exchange based in the UK. Danny has built CoinCorner into a successful business without relying on VC funding, and he shares his insights on the challenges and opportunities of doing so in the highly competitive world of bitcoin. During our conversation, we discuss the current state of bitcoin adoption and the importance of making cryptocurrency accessible and user-friendly for those who are new to the space. Danny shares his thoughts on the role of the lightning network in driving adoption, and how it can help make bitcoin more useful and functional for everyday use. We also delve into the topic of how you can't force adoption, and the importance of building a product or service that meets the needs of your target audience. Danny shares his thoughts on how to approach building a business in the cryptocurrency space, and the key factors that contribute to success. Overall, it's a fascinating conversation with a true industry leader. Tune in to hear Danny's insights on building a bitcoin business, driving adoption, and the future of the Bitcoin industry.

Jamie Bartlett is the co-writer and presenter of the BBC's podcast The Missing Cryptoqueen, an ongoing investigation into OneCoin and the disappearance of its founder Ruja Ignatova in 2017. In this interview, we discuss the latest updates on the case that triggered the first new episodes in the podcast being released in over 2 years. - - - - OneCoin was called the greatest Ponzi scheme in crypto. Obviously, a lot has happened this year that is likely to result in a reappraisal of that statement. But, the fraud perpetrated was eyewatering: allegedly $4 billion was stolen from investors. This means it ranks as still one of the biggest Ponzi schemes both inside and outside of crypto. Yet, what differentiates OneCoin from other Ponzi schemes is that the lead character has yet to be punished: in 2017, Ruja Ignatova, the glamourous and enigmatic founder of OneCoin, disappeared. Jamie Bartlett, a seasoned investigative journalist, started looking for her in 2019. Rumours turned into breadcrumb trails, which turned into credible leads, which turned into dust. Whilst Ruja remains elusive, the deeper Jamie delves into this case the more ominous the story becomes. What started out as a scam by a set of audacious schemers, soon became a broader criminal enterprise involving organised crime, corrupted state officials and powerful interests. The FBI has made Ruja one of their ten most wanted fugitives. The stakes are massive. A troubling aspect of this case is the willingness of supposedly reputable people and firms to engage in 'legal' support for this fraud, including intimidation of those who seek to uncover the truth. This case cuts to the core of what is wrong in both crypto and wider society: willingness within professional groups to go along with malfeasance when there is money to be made. This is why we need more people like Jamie. More than the dogged determination to see a story through to a suitable conclusion is the dedication to a life without the quick and easy financial payoffs of other professions. Journalists are willing to avoid the incentives offered by other industries to pursue truth. Perhaps such uncelebrated bravery is the real story here.

Dan Tubb is a podcaster and former venture capitalist. In this interview, we discuss the unprecedented levels of debt within the US and UK. Dan goes through one by one the various options open to the state to bring debt levels back down to manageable levels; tl;dr "none of those options is going to be viable." - - - - Over the past few podcasts, we have discussed state indebtedness. As part of these discussions, we have referenced the amazing USDebtClock.org resource that provides real-time data on debt in the US and across the world. At the time of writing, US debt stands at over $31.4 trillion, whilst UK debt is $3.4 trillion. These figures are so large and unfathomable that we have almost become blind to their meaning. Dan Tubb has been focusing on these figures, to both put them into more meaningful contexts, and to assess the options governments have for paying them off. In summary, debt levels are off the scale: adding outstanding liabilities to US debt results in a total debt worth $1 million for every American adult. In those terms, it's easier to understand that there are no real viable options for paying down this level of debt. The issue is that as citizens are generally tuned out: there is a general assumption that the subject matter is just too complex, and further, those in power must have answers to these issues. After listening to Dan's explanations you'll suddenly realise that these aren't complex subjects to comprehend. The data is literally there for anyone to see. And further, it is then obvious that governments are consciously not dealing with increasingly high levels of unsustainable debt. So, why have such discussions been missing from MSM? There are some great journalists who attempt to cover specific areas. But nobody is yet screaming that the house is on fire although we're all feeling the heat and hearing the cracking of timber. The problem is that governments have limited ways of keeping the system from falling apart. Increasing levels of control are openly being discussed in government institutions, particularly digital identities and CBDCs. Some believe such measures are designed to avert civil unrest. So, it's up to those who have got the receipts to start banging the drum before it's too late.

Mike Brock is the lead at TBD, the Bitcoin-focused subsidiary of Block. In this interview, we discuss being a post-libertarian, reconciling the best elements of libertarianism with support for liberal democracy, and how Bitcoin improves the incentive structures within governing institutions. - - - - The persuasiveness of libertarian ideology is incredibly effective: the idea of individual liberty is both a simple and powerful message in a world where such freedoms are seemingly under perpetual attack. In the 20th century, the basis of modern libertarian thinking was provided by people such Ayn Rand. In recent years libertarianism has witnessed a resurgence and invigoration in the wake of the Iraq war and global financial crisis. Many young people witnessed the transparent failings of the state juxtaposed with increasing encroachments on civil liberties in a new digital world. Bitcoin's innovation of providing financial sovereignty in this context resulted in an understandable bonding of doctrine and technology. But as Bitcoin matures, what was the pipe dream of it being able to change society is increasingly becoming a possibility. Is it therefore time to question the libertarian thinking that has been used to grow Bitcoin's popularity? Can libertarianism provide a complete and robust basis for society? Or, are it's ideas best assimilated into more orthodox political systems? Such discussions may be challenging for those who have been at the forefront of the battle to enable Bitcoin to grow. But, as Bitcoin's popularity widens and it attracts people of all political persuasians, this is the time for a debate to test the limits and strengths of libertarian thinking, and establish the red lines if and when compromises need to be made.

Mark Moss is a serial entrepreneur, author, speaker and host of The Mark Moss Show. In this interview, we discuss his recent co-authored book "The UnCommunist Manifesto", which is a critique of Communist theory in response to its continued influence in our modern world. - - - - The Communist Manifesto was one of the most influential political writings in modern history. It was written by the 19th-century philosophers, historians and political theorists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Despite falling into obscurity for a generation after its initial publication in 1848, it went on to provide a theoretical basis for one of the 20th century's most pervasive ideologies. The Soviet Communist Empire the Manifesto inspired ultimately failed. Proponents have argued that the Soviet political and economic system was not the same form of communism proposed by Marx and Engels. Many others have indicated that the fall of the USSR and its vassal countries showed the inherent fallacy of centralised control being the optimum political system. It wasn't merely that communism failed, but the brutal nature of the system it inspired. There is a debate about whether the quantum of deaths under communist regimes could be referred to as genocide. Semantics aside, tens of millions of people have been killed in Communist countries. Further, it discouraged innovation whilst encouraging waste, corruption and nepotism. Boris Yeltsin acknowledged the Soviet issue when he made an impromptu visit to a US supermarket during a state visit. "There would be a revolution" he stated when contemplating how normal Russians would react to seeing the range and quality of produce. And yet, despite the epic collapse of the USSR, young people are increasingly being drawn to socialist ideas that underpin the Manifesto. Does a review of the Communist Manifesto provide adequate insight into the system it inspired? Can we identify the dangerous tenets of a communist system to better protect society? Is there anything theoretically sound in the Manifesto? Ultimately, do the transparent weaknesses of our current system give rise to society underestimating the weaknesses of competing systems?

BTC Sessions (Ben Perrin), is a Canadian Bitcoin educator with a well-known YouTube channel. In this interview, we discuss his experiences as part of a group of Bitcoiners organising Bitcoin funds for Canadian truckers being targeted by the Canadian government. - - - - In January, a large group of Canadian truckers took part in convoys to protest against their government's Covid vaccination mandates for cross-border movements. The protests grew and the convoys converged on Canada's capital city of Ottawa. Thousands of trucks and protestors blocked the streets. It divided opinion: some Ottawans called for Government action, whilst the protest inspired copycat activities and prominent support in other countries. The Canadian government reacted with some of the most draconian responses to activism seen in any democracy. On February 14th they invoked the Emergencies Act designed to provide legal cover for government actions required in major national emergencies such as war, invasion or insurrection. It was only the 2nd time such actions had been used in peacetime. Attention was focused on the funding sources, with dozens of bank accounts linked to the protest movements being frozen. As a result, a Bitcoin fundraising initiative suddenly took centre stage as the vehicle for getting funds of any description to the truckers. This Bitcoin funding and the associated group managing it then became a target for the Canadian authorities. Ben takes us through what was a rapidly evolving and extremely stressful situation, where a group of well-meaning Bitcoiners found themselves becoming enemies of the state. Did Bitcoin stand up to scrutiny? Bitcoin did provide truckers with a financial lifeline. And, whilst there were issues that occurred, there are some very important caveats. The initial set-up of the Bitcoin fund wasn't with a view to it being the primary source of finance. Further, nobody expected the unprecedented actions taken by the Canadian government. Nevertheless, invaluable lessons have been learned. There is a clear view of the processes required to protect funds and those involved. More importantly, activists now know what actions the state, any state, is prepared to take.

Brandon Quittem is a writer and Communications Director for Swan Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss his latest article: 'Bitcoin is a Pioneer Species', where he compares Bitcoin miners to species that settle and populate barren landscapes triggering the development of more advanced ecosystems. - - - - The acceptance of Bitcoin is an acceptance of the need for continuous education and receptivity. This past year has shown why: Bitcoin mining has been transformed from being a critical but specific cog in the often misunderstood Proof of Work protocol to a tool with the potential to transform the global energy industry. Nobody foresaw this. Going down the rabbit hole now involves gaining knowledge of energy systems: production methods, grids, distribution networks, batteries, energy economics etc. This knowledge is both a blessing and a curse. A blessing in that the veil of ignorance is lifted on this vital industry showing politicians are driving blind with their policy decisions. A curse in that those sceptical that Bitcoin can change finance, are now incredulous when we state it can transform energy too. But the logic is clear. Bitcoin can harness electrical energy anywhere in the world. In doing so it can facilitate and thereby fast-track the build-out of energy in isolated environments, becoming a bridge for costly downstream investment needed to connect such sources to a grid. All of this without any need for a state subsidy, or international coordination. Bitcoin can therefore revitalise existing populations: currently, a billion people don't have access to electricity. Imagine what benefits could be brought by integrating these people into the digital economy. Bitcoin mining can also be the pioneer species for previously uninhabited areas of the planet. It can take barren areas and provide the economic basis from which further development can grow. Contemplating that should make it clear: we're still so very early!

Troy Cross is a Professor of Philosopher and Fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. In this interview, we discuss the changing narrative around Bitcoin mining: is it finding its real utility in a bear market as the ultimate auxiliary tool, and how early are we in discovering its range of uses as a tool? - - - - The trajectory of Bitcoin mining's narrative has been breathtaking. Over the last year, it has gone from being singularly promoted for its principal role in securing the Bitcoin network, to having a whole host of other uses identified and championed: subsidising stranded energy, stabilising energy grids, mitigating methane emissions, and providing heat for a range of activities. Policymakers are struggling to keep up. The tired old FUD of Bitcoin's energy use and carbon footprint are still being used as attack vectors by supposed reputable institutions such as the ECB. It also feeds into the narratives picked up by policymakers such as the White House, who's commissioned report on Bitcoin mining's climate impacts was affected by mainstream ignorance. But, the White House report also included recognition of some of Bitcoin mining's emerging benefits, as well as correcting some misrepresentations of its impacts. This shows that, whilst we are far from getting widespread acceptance of the importance of Bitcoin mining, the effort spent on education and advocacy by the Bitcoin community is having a vital real-world impact. Promoting Bitcoin mining's evolving narrative is critical. This is because we're on the cusp of some far-reaching regulation in the wake of recent crypto scams. Regulators could see this as an opportunity to constrain Bitcoin mining; politicians never let a good crisis go to waste. Yet, we are still early in understanding the scope of Bitcoin mining's value. New uses are being researched and developed all the time: OTEC, water desalination and carbon capture are recent examples. Bitcoin mining is emerging as perhaps an engineer's ultimate auxiliary tool. The mission is therefore to not only continue to convey Bitcoin mining's importance, but provide the widest possible frame for its significance.

Nate Harmon is CEO and cofounder of OceanBit; Steve Barbour is CEO and founder of Upstream Data; both are Bitcoiners. In this interview, we debate climate change: the reliability of climate models, climate change mitigation, adaptation and the forecast inequality of climate change impacts. - - - - What Bitcoin Did has discussed both sides of the climate change debate with a number of esteemed guests. The reasoning is two-fold: firstly, one of Bitcoin's major attack vectors is energy use and associated climate change impacts; secondly, it is one of the major issues of our time, arguably the most pressing issue. These shows have either expressed one side or another, until now. Bitcoiners are a broad church. That is an inherent strength. But is also brings its own internal pressures. Whilst there is broad consensus on Bitcoin's mission, there are divergent opinions on a host of other issues that this new form of money affects. None more so than climate change. Many believe in the need for fossil fuels to enable humans to continue to flourish; others argue that we need to rapidly pivot from fossil fuel reliance if we're to avoid an existential crisis. However, the debate is not open-ended. There is a strong argument that the framing of the current discussion falls within agreed boundaries. It doesn't feel contentious to state both sides of the debate within the Bitcoin community agree that abundant energy is needed and that the climate is warming. The disagreement is focused on the rate of climate change and the approach to mitigation. Obviously, whilst there is agreement that narrows the parameters of any debate, the outstanding issues are complex, contentious and critical. The stakes on both sides are high; discussion and compromise are vital. Can we within the community find common ground? Is it possible to attenuate the growing animosity around this subject? Can Bitcoiners lead the way in being open-minded, receptive and malleable to different ideas? Let's start engaging and find out.

Ted Cruz is a serving US Senator for Texas. In this interview, we discuss the importance of Bitcoin for Texas and the United States, communicating the threat of CBDCs, the political and regulatory challenges, and Bitcoin's symbiotic relationship with energy. - - - - Ted Cruz is one of the most consequential politicians of his generation. He is a strong advocate for liberty and the tools that support freedom within society. It is perhaps no surprise that he is therefore a fan of Bitcoin. But equally, it shows strength and courage as many of those in positions of power still cast aspersions about Bitcoin and its associated community. Yet, as with all firebrand politicians, Ted Cruz divides opinions. He is uncompromising in his approach to certain issues. He is also part of the modern political game whereby the opposition is deemed to be the enemy. There is an obvious political incentive to adopt such characteristics in terms of being able to clearly delineate your position where there is significant competition for attention. There are certainly strong critics of Bitcoin within the Democratic party. However, Bitcoin can not be allowed to become a political football. It is still a nascent technology, and its development in the US could still be derailed by damaging regulation. It is imperative therefore that those who back Bitcoin on both sides of the aisle not only work together, but they are seen to be working together (e.g. Lummis and Gillibrand). Ted Cruz acknowledges this. He knows that his voice has a limited reach within more progressive circles. He needs those who would otherwise be antithetical to his politics to join him, and vice versa, to ensure this technology and its community is not driven out of the US. The basis of the reasoning is sound: it is freedom money that has a symbiotic relationship with energy. Let's work to ensure politicians can see the issues anew by discarding the broken lens of politics.

Alex Gladstein is Chief Strategy Officer at the Human Rights Foundation. In this interview, we discuss the IMF and World Bank - two powerful multinational institutions that have shaped the post-war world for developed nations' benefit. Alex uncovers the exploitation hidden from view and the ongoing real-world costs for the developing world. - - - - The IMF and World Bank are two major multinational institutions that have perhaps shaped the workings of the global economy more than any other. The issue is that, over the course of the past few decades, the IMF's and World Bank's roles and impacts have largely been forgotten. Whilst casual observers are distrustful of the IMF and World Bank, in the main, people's concern is vague, lacking facts or evidence. It's hard to know why this is, but it's worth noting that internally produced IMF and World Bank content dominates google search results at the expense of independent content. And yet, the impact of the IMF and World Bank has been catastrophic for many developing nations. Specifically, it has been problematic for those outside the gilded circles of power in such countries who have had to carry the burden of debt through significant assaults on public services, food security and other fundamental quality-of-life provisions. The reason? Neocolonialism. Extraction of resources from the periphery for the benefit of the centre. Indebtedness has been the tool used. A Ponzi scheme of debt relief to support debt servicing, designed to keep countries subservient to those controlling the IMF and World Bank. The cost is dictatorships, corruption, environmental degradation, and the destruction of potentially millions of lives. It is uncertain whether Bitcoin can fix this. But, it acts as a powerful disincentive and disruption by weakening the exorbitant privilege of the dollar and enabling the innocent people subjugated by the IMF and World Bank and their own elites, an opportunity to opt-out of this system. Our role within Bitcoin is to discuss this history and help free those still bound by its constraints.

Cory Klippsten is the founder and CEO of Swan Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss the exploitation of retail markets by crypto VCs. Cory called out many of the crypto ventures that have recently collapsed, but he saves his biggest criticism for the firm that is still active within the industry: a16z. - - - - Cory Klippsten has a scent for malfeasance within the crypto industry. He explains this by the fact he doesn't listen to what people say, he tracks their actions and determines motivations. This has enabled him to identify ahead of time some of the most notable scams that have unravelled this year. Cory called out FTX in April this year, Luna in March, and Celsius in Dec 2020. Yet, there is another VC company that has risen within the crypto industry that has in recent years been the subject of much discussion and criticism. Andreessen Horowitz (it's also referred to as a16z), founded in 2009, quickly rose to become one of the most influential investors in Silicon Valley after a series of incredibly lucrative stakes in companies such as Skype, Facebook, Twitter, and Airbnb. In 2013, a16z started investing in crypto, most notably with Coinbase and Ripple. In 2018 they made a concerted effort to focus on crypto as a vertical: they started by raising $300m for the first of a number of dedicated crypto funds, and from 2021 they started to lead fundraising rounds for various altcoins and crypto ventures. Many within the industry saw them as serious and reputable players. Until patterns started to emerge. The issue is, as Cory highlighted in a recent Twitter thread, a16z have been involved in promoting numerous tokenised projects that have all had the same price pattern: early hype resulting in a massive short-term increase in the value, followed by an equally rapid fall in value and then stagnation. The pattern appears to resemble classic "pump and dump", followed by "rinse and repeat." Critics have long complained that such VC companies have been able to "create their own weather", exploiting a regulatory void to monetise off the back of their own hyped narratives that appear to lack credibility. A former analyst for the company actually referred to a16z as a "media company that monetizes through VC." But many observers, including Cory, are now calling them out. The pressure is certainly building for more attention to be paid to a16z's activities.

Nick Hansen is the CEO of Bitcoin mining software firm Luxor Technologies. In this interview, we discuss the distress within the Bitcoin mining industry caused by a perfect storm of leverage, stagnant value, huge growth in capacity, energy price shocks and wider headwinds affecting investment. This could become a national security issue. - - - - Exactly one year ago, US Bitcoin mining companies were posting record quarterly profits. A huge amount of investment followed China's mining ban making North America the centre of global Bitcoin mining. It spurred the development of mega miners: companies developing industrial-scale operations. These companies started building out new sources of energy and developing unique relationships with grid operators. And Bitcoin's price was at an ATH. Roll on one year, and the industry is facing a potential crisis. Bitcoin price is at 2-year lows, the hash rate is at an all-time high, investment is drying up due to a range of issues, rig prices have tanked, whilst a swath of companies are struggling to manage debt obligations. Add to this the wider fallout as a result of the FTX collapse. It really is a perfect storm. At the same time, companies are being buffeted by widespread disinformation, and polarised attacks predicated on energy usage concerns. Regulators seeking to acquiesce to those promoting FUD, have considered, recommended, and brought forward poorly designed rules. See the NY moratorium on PoW mining using fossil fuels just passed into law. This is more than a parochial issue for the Bitcoin community. Bitcoin mining provides an unprecedented opportunity for wider society. It's the basis for an alternative to a broken economic system and the means with which to incentivise and support the energy transition at scale. It is the industry to help the US navigate a host of strategic problems. Bitcoin mining is, fundamentally, a national security issue. Its protection should be our primary focus.

Jeff Booth is the Author of The Price of Tomorrow and CEO/Chairman of Ego Death Capital. In this interview, we discuss how Bitcoin fundamentals (such as its approach to the blockchain trilemma, centring on truth, and its deflationary effects) run counter to current economic theories, making Bitcoin's signal harder for some to find. - - - - A common refrain whilst we live through unprecedented global economic turmoil and massive failures within DeFi is "why aren't people flocking to Bitcoin". Obviously, Bitcoin's signal is being lost: the fundamentals that are designed to better protect people against incompetent, corrupt and fraudulent behaviour aren't readily apparent to many. Why is this? As Jeff Booth asserted in a recent article: "protocols create value in the form of a new foundation that emerges slowly & methodically". However, capitalist societies have been conditioned to accept and expect rapid change: 'work fast and break things' has been taken as a given. Systems that run counter to this are viewed as being ripe for disruption. Bitcoin has widely been seen as slow. It's development was famously the subject of a crisis centred on scaling arguments. The outcome was an affirmation of some core principles: Bitcoin would be predicated on decentralization and security. This spurned a tsunami of altcoins that proliferated on the pitch that they improved on Bitcoin by being able to scale. This meant many dismissed it. Bitcoin was old tech. But, as we have seen over the past few months, speed and scale come at a cost. A real-world cost counted in billions of dollars. The blockchain trilemma means that scale means making material tradeoffs in terms of decentralization and security. The result: hacks and fraud. If there is any silver lining to the FTX collapse is that the conflation of crypto and Bitcoin now has more than a theoretical critique. The importance of making the case for Bitcoin, of amplifying the signal, is that it offers a transition to a new system where we can benefit from deflation. A system that protects people. A system based on a layer of truth.

Jesse Powell is the co-founder and Chairman of Kraken. In this interview, we discuss the rising anger over the FTX collapse, parallels with Mt. Gox, FTX's exploitation of regulatory arbitrage, odd mainstream media reactions, proof of reserves and the future of custodial services. - - - - FTX has caused untold damage. There could be over 1 million creditors, from large institutions to small retail investors. There are going to be numerous heartbreaking stories of people getting rekt. But, the most significant damage caused by this criminality could be ahead of us. There is a significant risk that a misreading of the causes of this crisis will lead to regulatory damage removing access to Satoshi's innovation for future generations. There are many within the industry who were deeply sceptical of FTX and Sam-Bankman-Fried well before the event of the past few weeks played out. The pace of growth, the scale of revenue, and the huge expenditure. To those in the know, none of it made sense unless FTX was involved in nefarious activities. And yet, SBF was rubbing shoulders with DC politicians whilst shaping the laws to be applied to the industry. In short order, the whole facade has come crumbling down. Stories of drug taking, polyamory, and excess within the criminal empire have emerged, confessions have been made that the effective altruism promotion was a sham, and then SBF engaged in a bizarre media campaign via Twitter. FTX's new CEO brought in to organise its bankruptcy process stated in his 40 years of restructuring companies (including Enron) he's never seen anything as bad as this. So, in the face of this obvious narcissistic and incompetent criminality, why have there been a number of puff pieces in the media? Why did DC take the warnings that were made seriously? And how is it justified for politicians to threaten a sweeping global legal framework for Bitcoin and crypto? Strange things are happening, and forces are being aligned against all of us. And yet, we know the community is resilient. This could take years to play out.

James Lavish is a Bitcoin advocate and writer, & Greg Foss is a Bitcoin strategist, and they're both co-founders of Looking Glass education. In this interview, we discuss FTXs lack of checks and balances, how fiat is struggling to find yield, zombie countries and the the debt spiral, and how Bitcoin is the best asymmetric bet of our lifetime. - - - - We live in strange times. Central bankers tell us up is down. Politicians peddle myths. And the seeming robustness of capital, institutions and the state is turning out to be a facade. And yet, the economic machine needs to keep running. Finance needs to generate a return. In this environment, where the economy has turned from being an engine of sound principles into a casino, it's no wonder charlatans like SBF can turn into powerful entities in the blink of an eye. Checks and balances are empty words spoken by people in suits in meetings. A lack of resources, a revolving door, well-financed lobbying, and sheer complexity have all but neutered any meaningful oversight of crypto. On the ground, the reality is bluff and bluster are as effective as following the law. Perhaps such tactics are more effective: after all, FTX nearly achieved regulatory capture. What is the fundamental issue? Arguably it is that the whole framework of state-organised economic control is falling apart. The impacts are manifold. Price and value have no real meaning. Reasonable returns on investment are evaporating. Financial opportunities are being drowned by risk. The real concern is that confidence is rapidly ebbing away. The fiat economy is fundamentally a confidence engine. Trust has replaced hard assets. When trust goes nothing is left. We now live in a world where disillusioned experts are telling us the game is up. State debt is unmanageable, and governments have no obvious solutions. This is why many such people are turning their attention to Bitcoin. When we're facing QE infinity by zombie countries it is wise to go back to first principals: sound money.

Preston Pysh is a co-founder of The Investor Podcast Network. In this interview, we discuss the ongoing trauma following FTX's unprecedented fall from grace, the implications for Bitcoin, and the ever-worsening macro situation where central banks are losing the battle to protect society from excessive government spending. - - - - The FTX drama is still being played out, and it will continue to do so for the weeks, months and years ahead. It feels as though we're still in the shock stage, trying to wrap our heads around not only what happened, but how such a seemingly fragile situation was allowed to get so out of control. Fingers are being pointed, defences prepared, and, even whilst we're still very early in this process, histories are already being rewritten. And yet, the broader economic picture remains the same: a conveyer belt of crises continue to buffet the global economy. Stagnation, growing inflation, mountainous debt, extreme stress in the bond markets, globalisation, and currencies under strain; there is a wall of mounting issues that are building into what seems to be an existential situation for the fiat system. The fundamental issue at hand is that nobody can tell what is up or down in relation to our economy. Price and value have been artificially inflated that they lack any purposeful meaning. Cheap money has enabled massive consolidation making the business environment top-heavy. And inflation has directed citizens to engage in rampant consumption, which results in a myriad of adverse downstream consequences. Both situations, i.e. the imploding of cryptocurrency and the mess of the global economy, have the same mitigation. Reaffirmation of the Bitcoin ideology will enable those with true convictions to begin repairing the damage caused by FTX. Bitcoin will also help the economies to align with reality, thereby facilitating better decisions. Whilst Bitcoin doesn't necessarily fix everything, it is the path to creating a better world.

Lyn Alden is a macroeconomist and investment strategist. In this interview we discuss rampant fraud that led to the FTX bankruptcy, the implications for other businesses and legal precedent, and Lyn's current outlook on markets. - - - - FTX's empire at the beginning of this year was valued at $32 billion. The whole facade has become a bankrupt mess in a little over a week. Every hour of the past 7 days has seen a new claim of malfeasance that exceeds the depravity of the last. This crescendo has seemingly peaked today as SBF posted cryptic tweets suggesting he's struggling to comprehend what has happened. Sam Bankman-Fried was lauded as a financial genius and social revolutionary leading the 'effective altruism' movement. He was on the front cover of Forbes in October 2021. A glowing Bloomberg profile in April this year recounted his interactions with prominent politicians, investors and celebrities. He openly discussed having his attention drawn to dealing with existential issues affecting humanity. SBF had former Presidents and Prime Ministers in his palm. However, Bankman-Fried was a Svengali and a fraud. Some Bitcoin maxi's tried to sound the alarm, but too many people ignored the warning signs and believed the hype. In just 3 short years the 30-year-old managed to beguile not just the industry but also traditional finance. He got a $100 investment from a Canadian pension fund, which one would assume would lead the world in discharging fiduciary duties. In the aftermath, it all seems so obvious. FTX was essentially run by dysfunctional kids. So, how did this happen? It's still very early, and revelations keep dropping as we speak. The truth behind what occurred will take years to piece together. Nevertheless, there are some important lessons that the Bitcoin community rapidly needs to discern and absorb. A political response is inevitable, and many will try to ensnare Bitcoin in this mess.

Austin Mitchell is the Co-Founder and CEO of Synota. In this interview, we discuss his plan to use the Lightning Network to settle transactions in the energy industry, and how this should bring greater equality to the energy market whilst also enabling the whole energy economy to move to the Lightning Network. - - - - Bitcoin is prospectively the best version of money, worldwide instant payments rail, market-based accelerant for energy production, and energy grid stabiliser. It's infuriating that more people aren't waking up to its potential. Perhaps it's the FUD, the passive damage caused by dysfunction in the crypto industry, or the ignorance of there being bitcoin the money and Bitcoin the network. But Bitcoin's story is still being written; as many keep saying - it's still early. We all know that there are nascent layer 2 innovations that are taking Bitcoin in new directions. But even hardened advocates continue to be amazed at the use cases being developed using Bitcoin's various characteristics. Take the Lightning Network: the game-changing payment protocol. It is the layer that enables Bitcoin to scale. But what does that actually mean? Well, quite a lot. Bitcoin is fast becoming an integral part of the energy industry. In addition to the known functions comes a new one: the Lightning Network's instant settlement facility and distributed payment network is set to transform energy finance. The current system is predicated on old analogue payment processes, full of inefficiencies that unnecessarily bloat costs for producers and consumers. The prize is a real-time payment system that simplifies energy finance whilst enabling greater functionality. It could make the market more flexible, dynamic and equitable. The result could be that it draws the whole energy economy onto the Lightning Network. It's a lightbulb moment given how big that industry is: $4.5 trillion is spent on energy a year. There are additional services that could be included. The lightbulb fuses when you think about what other industries could find similar utility. The lightbulb explodes when you remember Lightning is just one of many layer 2 innovations. We're still so very very early.

Perianne Boring is the Founder and CEO of the Chamber of Digital Commerce. In this interview, we discuss the history of Bitcoin spot ETF proposals, the numerous rejections and changing conditions for approval, and why the SEC won't approve a Bitcoin spot ETF. - - - - The first application for a Bitcoin spot ETF in the US was made by the Winklevoss brothers back in 2013. The SEC rejected this proposal in 2017. Since then the SEC has rejected applications from at least 16 different companies, some of whom have made multiple applications. The last rejection was in early October. It's not that the SEC dislikes ETFs. There are over 2,500 ETFs in the US market with over $7.2 trillion AUM. Further, there is also strong demand in the market: over 99% of the 11,400 letters sent to the SEC in relation to Grayscale's ETC application were in support. In the meantime, Bitcoin spot ETFs are being approved across the world, most notably across the border in Canada. The Chamber of Digital Commerce, the blockchain trade association, has assessed the history of Bitcoin spot ETF applications accounted for in a report. This outlines major inconsistencies in the way the SEC treats applications: denials have conditions applied for subsequent applications; these conditions are met, the new applications are denied; rinse and repeat. In addition, in 2021 the SEC approved the first US Bitcoin futures ETF. Whilst the performance of the Bitcoin futures ETF has tracked the Bitcoin price reasonably closely, futures markets are by their very nature volatile as futures contracts can be unpredictable. So, it is potentially a less safe vehicle for investment. The obvious question is, therefore: why won't the SEC approve a Bitcoin spot ETF? Perianne Boring, the CEO of the Chamber of Digital Commerce, is of the opinion the decision is political in nature. There is a wave of money waiting to invest in such an ETF, which would accelerate the adoption of Bitcoin. This is something many decision-makers are resistant to. What's clear is that with Grayscale suing the SEC the issue is coming to a head.

Phil Geiger is the Managing Director of Concierge Services at Unchained Capital. In this interview, we discuss how a robust protocol and monetary policy, a vital utility for energy producers and a committed community of hodlers, makes Bitcoin an extremely low-risk investment. - - - - No other scalable commodity, currency or asset has as robust a fixed supply issuance as Bitcoin. 21 million coins. That's it. The rough consensus governance process, miners' financial incentives, and a highly decentralized node verification process combine to make this digital scarcity rigid. No altcoin can compete. "Digital scarcity is a one-time phenomenon" - Phil Geiger, April 2020. There are those that have been pushing the edges of this assumed commitment. They are motivated by different concerns, chiefly that a declining supply will impact security: how can a 51% attack be avoided when the volume of Bitcoin issued becomes significantly low and eventually finishes? Can transaction fees alone secure the network? But it is the fixed supply schedule that supports Bitcoin's value, from which all other considerations follow. According to Phil Geiger, these 21 million coins already exist. Both in terms of the supply schedule and the fixed limit. This is what underpins the huge investment by miners: a transparent monetary policy, and scarcity that supports the price. Changes to this could seriously damage minings assimilation into energy production. This is what makes, in Phil's view, Bitcoin an extremely low-risk investment compared to other assets (both digital and physical). The proof is in the hodling behaviour. Using Bitcoin is vital for the transition of Bitcoin from a defensive store of value to a productive medium of exchange, the fact that those hodling Bitcoin for more than a year is at an ATH shows investors still remain extremely confident in its long-term success. So, what about long-term security? Decreasing block rewards will incentivise miners to maximise the use of block space. Combined with more users this should drive up Bitcoin transaction prices, thereby supporting the transition to a post-block reward world. The issue is whether there are enough incentives to ensure miners don't game the system. This needs to be debated. But, making Bitcoin inflationary isn't the answer, because this is the essence of Bitcoin.

Parker Lewis is Head of Business Development at Unchained Capital. In this interview, we discuss the failure of currencies, the collapse of the economic engine and Bitcoin being the largest tidal wave that's ever existed. - - - - In the nearly 14 years since Bitcoin was launched the global order has continued to shudder in the wake of a rolling set of crises. Front and centre is the unwinding of the global economic order. Fiat currencies are straining, inflation is rising, and central banks are using ever more extreme and counter-productive measures to keep the economy afloat. We're in the final throes of the long-term debt cycle. Everyone can see it. And yet governments and central banks are refusing to accept the inevitable. Money printing continues, in part to deal with the second-order effects of the previous round of money printing. Bitcoin rose sharply at the beginning of this period, but it has stalled in the shadow of Covid as the world struggles to repair economies whilst dealing with growing geopolitical tensions. Throughout this turmoil, as Parker Lewis states in our interview, Bitcoin's value proposition has remained the same. Why is it then that Bitcoin has been in a bear market? The protocol has proven itself to be a solid basis for a new form of money. Yet, its volatility in the wake of rising inflation has resulted in a wave of commentators dismissing its value. This has an effect. We all know people who still think Bitcoin is a crazy fad. This issue, as Parker Lewis contends, is that you need to do the work to understand Bitcoin's vital importance. Bitcoin adoption is a function of knowledge distribution. Those of us who are in the know must therefore keep spreading the word, educating, advocating, orange pilling. If we do that then Bitcoin can't lose.

Nic Carter is a Partner at Castle Island Ventures & Lane Rettig is a core developer for Spacemesh. In this interview, we discuss the Ethereum merge specifically addressing the issue around increasing censorship of Ethereum transactions, the chilling state attacks on privacy and what Bitcoiners could learn. - - - - In November 2013 Vitalik Buterin produced the Ethereum White Paper, which set out that Ethereum was to utilise the Proof of Work mechanism to facilitate participation in the transaction validation process. Eight months later, hidden away in the announcement about the Ether ICO, Vitalik stated that "We may choose later on to adopt alternative consensus strategies, such as hybrid proof of stake…". Ethereum's merge in the first 2 weeks of September has been the biggest event in crypto this year. Part of the reason is that it has been a very long time coming. Further, it has been a huge engineering challenge: transitioning from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake in a live blockchain for the second-largest digital currency. Many predicted that it would result in technical issues. They were wrong. The merge was a success. And yet, in the months that have followed, events have shown that just as Ethereum has sought to resolve some issues, it has caused others. Yes, Ethereum now uses significantly less energy, albeit a smaller drop in energy consumption than they would have many believe. But, evidence of a concerning concentration of staked ETH indicates that not only is the consensus becoming centralised, but it is becoming dominated by entities who are censoring transactions. The result is a very clear distinction between Bitcoin and Ethereum. The issue at hand for Bitcoiners is that the battle to win the argument with political decision-makers over the importance of Bitcoin's energy usage is still yet to be won. But, more importantly, there are downstream centralisation and capture risks for Bitcoin. Forewarned is forearmed.

Steven Lubka is Managing Director of Private Client Services at Swan Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss how the misallocation of money by central banks distorts money, destroys capital, and creates zombie companies. Steven calls for money to be left to find its natural state within a free market. - - - - Society has become accustomed to the intervention of central banks in the economy. The underlying narrative is that central banks have the power to direct the economy through the manipulation of money. A principle level is through the control of interest rates: artificial adjustments to the cost of borrowing money aimed at promoting or tempering growth. You don't have to be an economics expert though to know that central banks' interventions seem to have become excessive. We have had a decade of near-zero interest rates. In addition to this, central banks have heavily lent on money printing to maintain economic stability: one-fifth of all US dollars were printed in 2020 alone. These significant adjustments to the money supply set in train damaging second-order impacts. Given rising debt levels and recessionary forces, governments are seeking ways to stimulate growth. However, the economy has not been allowed to function normally for an extended period. We may therefore be in a position where significant businesses aren't able to operate with a more natural cost of money. Many businesses have developed in a period where the cost of money has been artificially low. This has created zombie companies, which need support to survive. This leads to a cascading series of issues: such companies divert resources from more efficient enterprises, but they are destined to fail, which destroys capital. It effectively hollows out parts of the economy. The misallocation of capital is therefore counterproductive: short-term stability is a mirage that hides long-term systemic vulnerability. Steven Lubka's thesis is that Bitcoin is the answer. It is a real tangible asset with a fixed monetary policy that enables price to be reflective of reality. The result is a market that can make rational decisions, build robust companies, and allow order to emerge In short, Bitcoin fixes the money.

Andrew Bailey is a philosopher, professor, fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, and co-founder of Resistance Money. In this interview, we discuss the philosophy of money in respect of what it is, what makes good money, the traps we can fall into with money, and why Bitcoin is a bulldozer that makes us rethink money anew. - - - - Economists, historians, philosophers, bankers and politicians have all contended with the concept of money. What it is, what it can be, what it's not, what it's useful for, how it should be used, how it can be misused: there are a myriad of questions that have spurned a myriad of theories. Consensus has formed around different ideas lasting for generations, only to be followed by sudden shifts as perceived universal truths are dissolved. Debates and evolving thinking around money have always been a feature of its existence, certainly within modern capitalist structures of the past few hundred years. And yet, we do seem to be in a rare period. Firstly, we are entering a new paradigm of money, when established norms are suddenly being uprooted. Secondly, laypeople are joining the ranks of the so-called specialists in the debate around money. This change has been spurned by the failures of fiat money. Suddenly, people realise that the assumed solid ground is shifting beneath them. Within a short space of time, we have experienced a flurry of unprecedented events: bank runs, money printing on a vast scale, massive stimulus packages, huge volatility in the markets, systemic inflation, and currency collapses. The debate has also been spurned by the revolutionary innovation of Bitcoin. A totally new form of money has enabled a reevaluation of the principles and qualities of what we use to store value and what we use to exchange value. This process is being undertaken at all levels: if Bitcoin can continue to flourish, it will serve as a check on those in power. It could for the first time enable money to become pluralistic. All this means we are living in a time when the debate around money is live and fluid in which we all get a say. Buying Bitcoin, developing Bitcoin and orange pilling are all positive actions that force us to consider these fundamental questions. And, in this process, we'll find we are asking the most fundamental questions of all - what is the essence of a good life and how does money help to achieve that end?

Joe Consorti is a Market Analyst at The Bitcoin Layer. In this interview, we discuss Austrian economics, Credit Suisse & the risk of large scale defaults, price distortions and how Bitcoin fixes this. - - - - When faced with economic turmoil, central banks have a few tools they can turn to, one of which is interest rates. Since interest rates are the price to borrow money, and prices are emergent, manipulating rates is an intentional distortion analogous to fixing prices. Rates instead should be a factor of the supply and demand of credit, risk of default, and a reflection of opportunity cost. However, during the financial crisis in 2007/2008, the US federal reserve had little option but to step in and repeatedly cut rates. They did this in an attempt to prevent complete collapse and to restart the credit-seized economy. Rates went to basically zero (and even negative in some countries), and since 2008, we have been in an era of cheap credit. Now, we are potentially in the midst of another financial crisis. Countries across the globe are battling with inflation issues for a raft of reasons, including supply-side constraints, excessive money printing during covid, and war in Europe causing energy shortages. To battle this, central banks are raising rates in an attempt to regain control. So does cheap access to credit really boost the economy and stimulate growth, or has it prolonged an artificial bull market in equities, over-financialised assets, incentivised mal-investment, added to the growing wealth divide and played a key role in near double-digit inflation?

Nic Carter is a Partner at Castle Island Ventures and co-founder and Chairman of Coin Metrics. In this interview, we discuss the White House bitcoin mining research paper, regulation and the role of renewables in the energy mix. - - - - In September, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) published a study which looked into the climate impacts of bitcoin mining. The report successfully acknowledged the differences between PoS and PoW, the contribution of bitcoin mining to grid flexibility & demand response and the potential to unlock stranded renewables, but the rest of the report offers little, if any merit. Overall, the findings in this report were quite damning. The report relies on non-peer-reviewed and often totally flawed data from the likes of De Vries and Digiconomist and even cites the absurd 2018 Mora et al paper. As Nic says in his article, "The Mora reference is shocking. It's a bit like reading a scientific government report on the history of the moon landing and finding a reference to a conspiracy website claiming that the entire thing was faked." With papers like this from the White House, the New York Mining Moratorium Bill and general growing disdain for Bitcoin mining, the US risks giving up its headstart. It is the country with the most to lose, and as we saw when China banned mining, Bitcoin is totally agnostic, and by banning, or overregulating, America won't hurt bitcoin, only itself. "If you ban it, you empower your enemies, like Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea. If you embrace it, you directly hurt them, and give their citizens tools to free themselves from those oppressive regimes."

Cathie Wood is the founder, CEO and CIO of Ark Invest. In this interview, we discuss investing in disruptive technologies, the importance of research for investment, deflationary signals, uncertainty in the Fed's decision-making, and Ark's continued bullish outlook for Bitcoin. - - - - Back in 2015, Cathie Wood's Ark Invest became the first public fund manager to invest in Bitcoin. This was a very early trade for an institutional basis, prior to some of the major news events that have led others to have followed Ark in recent years. But this is Ark's business, identifying nascent technologies that could serve to be the basis for real societal change. Cathie Wood's business strategy is to get into the detail of the markets they're interested in. This means research by informed analysts who can unpick the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for each specific industry. Any bullish statement they make is based on hard business data, not just an extrapolation of financial performance. The elephant in the room for Ark is that their Innovation ETF is down 75% from its highs in the early part of 2021. This has placed Ark and Cathie in the firing line of commentators. And for every negative article or tv piece, there will be a line of nervous investors seeking reassurance. This is when research pays off - it matters when you have a strong narrative to fall back on if you want to maintain investor confidence. So, when Ark makes statements about Bitcoin we should all take note, as they're not in the market for unwarranted hyperbole. Well, they remain one of the biggest cheerleaders for Bitcoin within the institutional space. Ark followed up a bullish prediction for Bitcoin's valuation at the beginning of this year by doubling down on their forecast a few weeks ago: they are expecting a $1 million per coin valuation in the coming years. In an interview with Bloomberg earlier this month, Ark stated Bitcoin is in "an arms race" against traditional finance and asset classes. Ark is confident of Bitcoin's ability to be at the heart of a revolution in money given its multiple use cases. Seeing as their fund has tracked the performance of the S&P500 over the past few years, despite it being an extended and brutal bear market for tech stocks, you wouldn't bet against them getting this call right.

Sam Abbassi is the founder and CEO of Hoseki. In this interview, we discuss the growing demand for proof of reserves. Whilst the use case for businesses is clear, there is also an increasing retail need: it enables individuals to use Bitcoin as collateral, but also validates financial credentials. It is another means for assimilating Bitcoin into the fiat-dominated world. - - - - The hodl mantra has been a vital behaviour within the Bitcoin community. It was emblematic of the transition from the current credit-based paradigm into a low-time preference mindset that reasserts storing of value. It has also been technically important in supporting the price. However, up until recently, hodling was akin to storing gold in a box or cash under a mattress. It was inward-looking. As Bitcoin matures and its volatility declines, the value that can be ascribed to an individual by their Bitcoin holding becomes more important and useful. For a growing cohort, Bitcoin's utility requires an outward engagement with the fiat world. As society increasingly seeks to store value in Bitcoin, it is increasingly going to become some people's main source of wealth. Therefore, reintegrating Bitcoin's store of value into the arena of working capital is becoming more acceptable; there are growing opportunities to use that Bitcoin to access working capital for things such as mortgages and other loans requiring collateral. Bitcoin can also be used to support residency applications and other activities requiring validation of financial security. It is likely that the purposes for which we need to provide proof of our Bitcoin holdings is going to increase. However, without proof of property Bitcoin has no utility beyond its resale value. How does one prove to a third party proof of property in a still nascent digital asset? This is where Hoseki comes in. They are seeking to provide a much-needed service in the market to produce independent and trustworthy proof of Bitcoin reserves, opening up Bitcoin's value. Being developed by Bitcoiners means that the basic principles of privacy and security are top of mind in terms of their product development. It also means they are in lockstep with the Bitcoin philosophy.

Jeff Snider is co-host of the Eurodollar University podcast and Head of Global Research at Atlas Financial Advisors. In this interview, we discuss the crazy possibility that nobody knows what money is, and as a result, nobody knows how to run or fix the economy. Central banks and governments are essentially engaged in a high-risk game of pretend. - - - - Every year around 800 million containers (categorised as Twenty-foot Equivalent Units, TEUs) are handled by ports every year. This represents around 80% of official global trade. Harvard has produced an incredible visualization of total global trade. They have populated the globe with the origin of exports of every type of product. Each tiny dot represents $100 million of exports. The globe is covered in a mass of tiny dots. This complex, interconnected and shadowy web of global trade, where final products, intermediate inputs and raw materials are exchanged on a massive scale, represents about 50-60% of global GDP. The rest is made up of all kinds of activities, business investment, personal consumption and government expenditure. The IMF predicts that the combined GDP of the world economies will exceed $100 trillion by the end of 2022. However, this is dwarfed by global wealth, which is estimated to be over $1,500 trillion. To put these numbers into context, US debt is currently estimated to be over $31 trillion, whilst global debt is reckoned to be over $300 trillion. Global finance, which helps manage and fuel global trade and debt, is expected to be valued at $25 trillion this year. These are obvious gigantic numbers. Yet, these figures aren't the thing that should give you pause for thought. What should stop you in your tracks is that nobody really understands the workings of this complex system, let alone is in control of the resultant global economy. Most of the global trade is conducted in Eurodollars, which is money generated outside of any control of the US or the nexus of other countries' Central Banking/Government institutional structures. Eurodollars are not understood by the major actors involved in oversight or management roles affecting global economics. That is why nobody knows how to fix the issues with the global economy. It's because nobody knows what money actually is.

Nik Bhatia is Author of Layered Money and founder of TheBitcoinLayer.com. In this interview, we discuss Jeff Snider's Eurodollar ideas: how all money is credit money; why Bitcoin will be a check, but will not replace, fractional reserve banking; and how Bitcoin will complement the dollar as a generational store of value. - - - - Three months ago we interviewed Jeff Snider who discussed the Eurodollar system, how Central Banks aren't in control of the levers of money, and why we could be entering a deflationary depression. The show generated a huge amount of interest, particularly because despite the Eurodollar system being opaque and poorly understood, it is arguably a central cog in the global economy. Nik Bhatia, amongst other esteemed commentators, was compelled to respond to Jeff's show. This is because Jeff's ideas and the way he presents them are enlightening and engaging. There is broad agreement regarding the unacknowledged criticality of this part of the global economic system, and the resultant challenge it presents for being able to define money. There is also consensus that inflation won't be the runaway phenomenon some are warning of, because the impact of QE was offset by tightening in the Eurodollar market. As such, deflationary pressures could soon become apparent meaning banks should be taking more risk to stimulate growth. It is fair to state Nic is an admirer of Jeff: Nic attributes Jeff's seminal work to helping him develop Layered Money. However, Nic does also have some important divergent opinions from Jeff. Nik believes that the banking system isn't out of control. Whilst it doesn't necessarily have the power it seeks to portray it does, neither is it an impotent bystander. The recent moves to quell inflation have only just begun in earnest. Could the Fed show that it has teeth in this regard? What is most illuminating however is their convergent ideas around Bitcoin. Whilst presented in different ways, they both see Bitcoin's role as an important store of value. They also agree that fiat's elasticity will continue to be a desired utility. What Nik leads on in this regard is that Bitcoin can act as a vital check on fiat and Central Banks: it makes money pluralist.

Natalie Smolenski is an Executive Director of the Texas Bitcoin Foundation and a Fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. In this interview, we discuss the elimination of cash, the importance of Bitcoin to a free society, and the clear and present danger posed by CBDCs. - - - - Like the fable of a frog being not perceiving danger when slowly boiled, citizens in mature democracies have been surrendering to the steady erosion of their privacy and rights. The issue is that society now stands unknowingly at the edge of a precipice. Governments and compliant businesses are working on a technology that they will sell as providing utility but could herald the end of democracy: CBDCs. Whilst Bitcoiners are aware of the dangers, it seems as though the rest of society, including decision-makers, are ignorant. Faster, less costly, more convenient payment systems - what's the problem many will ask. The risks of providing unfettered access to arguably the most critical component of our private data do not resonate with those who have already traded their privacy with social media companies. But, there is obviously a massive difference between surveillance capitalism and unprecendented government oversight of individuals' financial data. And further, as Natalie Smolenski alludes to in the whitepaper she has written with Dan Held, "Why the U.S. Should Reject Central Bank Digital Currencies", adopting CBDCs could be a one-way valve: reversing political will and technology is formidably hard. Once cash has gone, it won't be coming back. The battle is not only for democracy, it is for prosperity. The American experiment has shown that bottom up innovation can thrive in a free society. It is hard to imagine the industrial revolution occurring if feudalism was still the dominant form of societal organisation. It was the enlightenment, the development of ideas of freedom, tolerance, fraternity and rights that enabled humans to flourish. This is perhaps Bitcoiners' most important fight. Education, advocacy and conviction are our weapons. Maintaining our personal sovereignty is the prize.

Lyn Alden is a macroeconomist and investment strategist. In this interview, we discuss the recent market turmoil that followed the UK government's proposed tax cuts. Why did the market reaction nearly result in the collapse of UK pension funds? What are the underlying issues? Where are we heading? - - - - Liz Truss became the UK's new Prime Minister on the 6th of September. She immediately worked to develop a financial package that would protect people from unprecedented hikes in energy prices. At the same time, Truss was keen to implement a long-held economic ideology predicated on stimulating growth through low taxes and reduced regulatory burdens. A political judgement was made to prioritise promulgating tax cuts ahead of any assessment of what spending cuts would be required to balance the budget; a huge emergency fiscal package was being combined with reductions in revenue. In the absence of any other information, the market took fright: the government wasn't deemed to be in control of a burgeoning debt pile. Immediately following the government announcement, the bond interest rates rose sharply whilst the British pound dropped precipitously. Despite government protests that the market response was due to external factors, the messaging was clear: the UK economy is becoming dangerously unbalanced. Within days the Bank of England had to react and start a £65 billion purchase programme to save a number of pension funds from collapse. So, what actually happened? Experts, commentators and politicians have argued about the causes and outlook, whilst mortgage rates have rocketed such that emergency payments for energy costs will be dwarfed by additional mortgage payments. Is the UK economy at risk? If so, why, and what is the outlook? Does history teach us anything? And, fundamentally, can debt be brought back under control?

Avik Roy is president of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity think tank and a policy Editor at Forbes. In this interview, we discuss how society can improve social mobility through free markets, individual liberty, innovation, social integration, energy freedom, housing growth and harnessing good deflation. - - - - America was built on the notion of social mobility. The 'land of opportunity' opened its arms to the world. And they came from all corners. Most arrived with little to their name. But countless stories of aspirational success followed. Hard work, tenacity, and innovation were rewarded. It wasn't perfect, but the American Dream was a theme that built a new hegemonic power not on privilege, but on the closest any major power has come to meritocratic society. That was America up to the 1970s. Since then social mobility has all but seized up, and has even started to decline. We are now entering a period when future generations are likely to be worse off than their predecessors. Is this because governments have failed? Are the libertarians right? Do we need to unshackle humans from collective interference? Or, is there a way for society to flourish with the help of institutional collaboration? The Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP) have a mission to expand "economic opportunity to those who least have it". They provide policy advice on all the major areas of governmental concern: criminal justice, health, education, energy, finance, housing, trade etc. etc. The tools it advocates politicians use are individual liberty, free enterprise, technological innovation, and pluralism. The aim is to make society more equal. Reducing inequality makes society more prosperous. American history is the best evidence for that. Misjudged policies and a reactive and intrusive approach from governments have allowed inequality to increase over the past decades. To change means that the status quo must be challenged. Such change means looking forward not backwards. Whilst history can inspire, it doesn't necessarily show the way. New ways of thinking must be embraced. The deflationary forces of innovation must be harnessed. And destructive polarisation must be defeated. American exceptionalism requires a renewed collaborative spirit. Bitcoiners can help drive that movement.

Nathaniel Harmon is an oceanographer, Bitcoiner and cofounder of OceanBit. In this interview, we discuss how an old technology deriving energy from ocean temperature differences can provide unlimited renewable baseload energy, and Bitcoin's vital and symbiotic role. - - - - In the 1880s, a French engineer devised an engine that generated renewable energy from the oceans: Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC). It works by harnessing the large temperature differences between warm ocean surfaces and cold deep waters. This can occur within relatively short vertical distances (i.e. 100m). Such differences can be used to evaporate ammonia, driving a turbine, after which the ammonia can be re-liquified in a closed cycle system. The issue since the 1880s has been the technology has not been able to achieve economies of scale in competition with cheaper energy sources i.e. coal, oil and gas. The first OTEC plant was built in the 1930s, following which a further 14 test plants have been built at various times and geographies. But, no project has been able to overcome the hurdle of progressing from prototype to operational plant. And yet, given the size of the ocean, OTEC is the largest untapped renewable energy source in the world. Further, given the temperature differences don't subside at night, it is a baseload supply. The potential is obviously huge. Anything that could be used to offset the capital costs of the R&D phase could lead to a new energy revolution. Enter Bitcoin. Bitcoin mining's utility in directly monetising energy provides significant flexibility for developing a capital-efficient OTEC prototype. Such a facility would not need to be tethered to transmission lines: it would be able to exploit the best locations for OTEC around the equator. The genius in the proposal though is that OTEC and Bitcoin mining are symbiotic: access to limitless cold water means mining efficiency can be maximised. And there's more. The production of energy in the ocean opens up all kinds of opportunities that could literally change the world. All from a technology that had all but been forgotten, but now stands to be reinvigorated by Bitcoin.

Harald Rauter is an environmentalist and Bitcoiner. In this interview, we discuss how UN climate change action is predicated on socio-economic scenarios that no longer apply (i.e. a cooperative world with improving equality), and how Bitcoin's trustless market-based support for the energy transition could be the solution. - - - - The Paris Climate Accords in 2016 set the goal to limit global warming to below 2°C, but preferably 1.5°C, from pre-industrial levels. Following this, the UN'S Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2018 produced a report setting out the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C, and the pathways to keep warming below 1.5°C. The pathways were developed from forecasts of greenhouse gas emissions and radiative forces affecting climate change, and five different plausible scenarios of how the world may evolve in the future in socio-economic terms. These extend from an optimistic scenario where society starts shifting to a sustainable future, to a pessimistic scenario of a multi-polar world focused on national interests. Not all of the scenarios had mitigation pathways developed. The issue is that the world has changed drastically in the short time since the IPCC produced the report: it now resembles the pessimistic scenarios for which we have no mitigation pathways. This is obviously a problem, but not one that is being widely discussed, let alone having potential solutions considered. However, there are some working with environmental investors and policymakers who are seeing Bitcoin's utility in a new light. The world is waking up to Bitcoin being able to support energy grids, subsidise the harnessing of stranded renewable energy and utilise waste methane. What isn't commonly discussed is that it can do all of this without the need for cooperation: it is a trustless protocol with a market-based utility. Bitcoin mining could potentially be an important factor in mitigating climate change and limiting warming to 1.5°C, in an uncooperative world. What is needed is for it to be accounted for in the open source modelling work the IPCC has made available. Once we can quantify its importance, we can educate the decision-makers, and the market should take care of the rest.

Nima Tabatabai is co-founder of Optimize Infrastructure. In this interview, we discuss how battery technology for energy grids, solar's overwhelming economic case, energy sovereignty, and how combining batteries, Bitcoin and solar results in the most flexible energy assets possible. - - - - In 2010 solar power generated 34 terawatt hours (TWh) per year across the globe. By the end of 2021, this has increased to 1,033 TWh per year. There are a number of reasons for this dramatic increase, but a prime driver is a reduction in costs. Between 2009 and 2019 the price of electricity from solar declined by 89%. The International Energy Agency in 2020 declared solar power offered the "cheapest…electricity in history". As Nima Tabatabai states in this podcast, this drop in price is perhaps the greatest example of Jeff Booth's assertion that technology is deflationary. Research and development of solar technologies have been affected positively and negatively by crises and political dogmas. Nevertheless, since the 1970s there has been a strong 'learning effect' across the whole production process resulting in an exponential reduction in costs. Nevertheless, the discussion of solar energy as a reliable part of the energy mix still stirs strong negative responses. Intermittency is a major concern: solar can't work at night, and it's deemed to be materially ineffective in cloudy weather and at high latitudes. Essentially, detractors state solar power supply can't efficiently fit demand. There are also issues around land requirements, input materials and waste. But, are these concerns valid? Can solar be a reliable and sizeable source of energy? If so, what are the constraints and limitations? Could battery technology resolve concerns over intermittency? What would be needed to complement solar energy? Are our energy grids ready to assimilate decentralized power sources? And, what needs to be done to maximise the potential of Bitcoin in subsidising solar?

Nicholas Gregory is the CEO of Commerce Block, the company behind Mercury Wallet. In this interview, we discuss how they have used statechains to develop a virtual version of Opendime, the balance of trust and privacy on layer 2 protocols, and onboarding Lightning users. - - - - One of the most novel innovations to come out of the Bitcoin ecosystem in recent years has been Opendime. The aim was to turn Bitcoin into a version of physical cash. An Opendime, is essentially a USB stick, that can be traded between individuals without the need to confirm such transactions on the bitcoin base chain. The USB can be verified but is only redeemed by the last user, by breaking the device and accessing its private key. Opendime enables people to use Bitcoin as anonymous, untraceable cash. The limitation is that it requires a physical transfer. That was until Mercury Wallet was launched. Mercury Wallet is essentially a layer 2 protocol based on statechains. Statechains enable the offchain transfer of UTXOs (turned into a bearer asset referred to as a "statecoin") between parties. The limitation of statechains is the requirement for a trusted third party, in this case, Mercury Wallet. The third party is non-custodial; they collaborate as a blind partner in the cryptographic transfer of keys. Whilst there are theoretical security issues, they have been mitigated by Mercury Wallet. The issue to overcome is what tradeoffs people are willing to make between ease of use, value transfer and security requirements. But, this is just the first of a number of growing use cases for Mecury Wallet. It enables unlimited free swaps of Bitcoin UTXOs providing privacy benefits. Through the conversion of underlying assets into statecoins, the transfer of assets using Discreet Log Contracts can be facilitated. Further, by layering the Lightning network on top of statechains, it could even enable the transfer of Lightning channels.

Tibor Ballai is the co-founder and CTO of Fortris. In this interview, we discuss the challenges of running a business on Bitcoin, how Fortis enables businesses to use Bitcoin as an operational currency, and why this will be the next step in the adoption cycle. - - - - It is one thing for an individual to move towards converting to a Bitcoin standard, it's quite another for a company. Running a business is hard enough without having to navigate around emerging regulations and evolving technical innovations that come with using Bitcoin as an operational currency. Without professional support, many businesses will choose the path of least resistance, which will be sticking with fiat. This is how companies like Fortris can provide material help in the next wave of the adoption cycle. If Bitcoin is to become a widely used form of money, obviously businesses will need to adopt it. Having both the expertise and enterprise applications to smooth the transition to Bitcoin adoption is what is required, and what Fortis can offer. The thing is, there is a myriad of different internal policy and external regulatory hurdles that need to be overcome. Who can sign off transactions? How is the Bitcoin to be held? What are the tax implications, and methods to limit tax liabilities? How should payments, domestic and international, be managed? What are the means for using Bitcoin for payroll? How should Bitcoin treasuries be assimilated into management reporting functions? These are the hurdles and questions that I am personally having to tackle as I use Bitcoin within both my media business and the football club that I run. So, I am as interested as anyone in what services companies like Fortris offer, and how they can help people like me maximise the benefits of Bitcoin without being tripped up by bureaucratic or technical issues.