Matt Odell is host of Citadel Dispatch, co-host of Rabbit Hole Recap, managing partner at Ten31 and co-founder of OpenSats and Bitcoin Park. In this interview, we discuss Bitcoin conferences and podcasts, the importance of decentralized tech, the implications of identity verification on social media, Nostr’s potential as a censorship-resistant social network, and the involvement of BlackRock in Bitcoin. - - - - Matt Odell is the Bitcoiners Bitcoiner: mission-driven, innovative, generous and yet unyielding in his expectations of the community. Given he’s a fellow podcaster and conference veteran, it was an invaluable opportunity to talk shop, but his wide-ranging expertise means we could again cover a plethora of current hot topics. Matt discussed his views on the surge in global Bitcoin conferences and the changing landscape of Bitcoin podcasts. The boom in events, catering to various niches within the Bitcoin community, is a testament to the growth and diversity of this space. Podcasts too need to stand out from the crowd, whilst taking on mainstream content providers in terms of interviewing adroitness and production quality. We discussed the pros and cons of having a blue checkmark on Twitter: whilst it can help users identify and connect with influential people, there are material concerns about the current identity verification system. The corollary to concerns about traditional social media companies is the potential to disintermediate these closed centralised systems with innovations like Nostr. Together with Bitcoin, Nostr could be a powerful tool for freedom movements. Matt covered the critical importance of educating people on the risks and benefits of decentralization. Individuals with platforms and audiences should explain these risks to lessen the impact and pain that people may experience in a dark dystopian future where censorship and control are prevalent. Finally, Matt provided his take on BlackRock's involvement in Bitcoin. Blackrock is the institution that Bitcoin was designed to resist. However, their involvement is a paradigm shift for Bitcoin’s narrative. Nevertheless, there are risks tied to the proposed Blackrock Bitcoin ETF. It's essential to learn how to hold self-custody of your Bitcoin instead of buying a paper claim. And further, it’s important Blackrock understand they can’t control Bitcoin.   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Dennis Porter is the CEO & co-founder of the Satoshi Action Fund. In this interview, we discuss the intersection of Bitcoin and politics, and how the Satoshi Action Fund is orange-pilling states. Dennis outlines the success the fund is having in changing policy towards Bitcoin mining across multiple jurisdictions by focusing on its clear and direct economic and energy benefits. - - - - Over the past few months, a number of states have been passing laws protecting the right to mine Bitcoin mining. As the success of the US experiment is predicated on the protection of reserved powers within the states, the passing of such laws has the power to determine the trajectory of Bitcoin mining within the US. A number of advocacy bodies are behind this movement. Front and centre is the Satoshi Action Fund. Dennis Porter, CEO and co-founder of the Fund describes his experience of orange pilling states. He discusses the importance of education. Bitcoin obviously takes time to learn and understand. This means advocates need to dedicate time and identify the right people to focus on. He sets out the strategy of finding and focusing on attractors who are open to learning and ignoring detractors who have already solidified an opinion. Dennis also sets out what Bitcoiners should expect in return from politicians. Bitcoiners are now a powerful voting block, so we need to demand more than mere lip service from politicians who claim to support Bitcoin. We should strive for a transition from empty promises to the introduction and passing of policies that truly benefit Bitcoin and its community. Dennis encourages all of us to participate in the political system: active participation is the best way of creating a better environment for Bitcoin. His inspiration is drawn from the founding fathers of the United States, who fought for independence through their political engagement. By getting involved, we can shape policy decisions that facilitate the growth and acceptance of Bitcoin.   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Junseth is an OG Bitcoiner and the former co-host of Bitcoin Uncensored. In this wide ranging interview, we discuss Bitcoin volatility and it’s repetitive cycles, the ossification of the Bitcoin protocol and the current state of development, Bitcoin anonymity and privacy, the profitability of mining, and Bitcoin’s future as an alternative to traditional money in a world of global collapse. - - - - Bitcoin’s development over the past 14 years has been both phenomenal and revelatory. Apart from Hal Finney, nobody saw its significant influence on the energy sector. Furthermore, nobody foresaw the impact of ordinals. That’s why, as we contemplate the potential for Bitcoin to enter a new and significant bull market cycle, questions as to what Bitcoin is and will become are as fascinating as at any time since its launch in January 2009. The debates over the protocol's conservative development are as impassioned as ever. Questions over the persistence of Bitcoin’s price cycles continue to produce significant amounts of content. The complex challenges of maintaining privacy, and the associated misconceptions of average users, endure. The resilient strength of the mining industry never ceases to amaze. However, the bigger picture is still focused on the singular issue of the basic right to transact. The traditional notion of currency control places the state as the arbiter of money. Yet, the past decade has witnessed central banks exerting ever greater control of financial systems and the weaponisation of money by the state. Bitcoin was designed as a vital alternative as trust in traditional processes erodes. Given its power to disintermediate powerful centralised institutions, the primary concern of Bitcoiners is whether governments will seek to control, limit or ban it. Bitcoiners believe that the state's regulation of money should be limited, allowing individuals to freely hold and transact any form of currency. Further, these rights should be codified into a Second Amendment right to hold Bitcoin. We’re back to the cypherpunk philosophy: freedom to transact is freedom of speech.   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Linda Parker is CEO and Maddison Clyne is an Associate Director for Women in Distress. In this interview, we discuss their work aiding survivors of domestic violence and their interest in Bitcoin as a means of financial empowerment. They talk about the rise in domestic violence during the pandemic, the challenges faced by survivors, and the importance of education. - - - - According to a CDC survey, around 41% of women and 26% of men in the U.S. have experienced sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner. It affects millions or people every year. It is a significant public health issue that has devastating physical, emotional, and psychological effects on individuals and families. U.S. crime reports suggest that about 1 in 5 homicide victims are killed by an intimate partner. Having access to resources and support can can be life-changing for victims. However, there is a critical lack of provision. One organisation providing this much-needed support is Women In Distress of Broward County: it is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing support and services to individuals experiencing domestic violence in Broward County, Florida. Their mission is to empower and advocate for victims while promoting a violence-free community. Women In Distress seeks to mitigate the cycle of abuse, power and control dynamics within relationships, societal stigma and shame surrounding domestic violence, and the huge barriers survivors can face when trying to leave an abusive relationship. By offering an array of services, education, and community collaboration, Women In Distress strives to create a society where domestic violence is not tolerated and survivors can rebuild their lives. The organization offers a range of comprehensive services to survivors of domestic violence, which include a 24-hour crisis hotline, counselling and therapy, support groups, legal advocacy, and assistance with obtaining restraining orders. Women In Distress also provides specialized programs for children who have witnessed or experienced domestic violence, as well as outreach and education initiatives to raise awareness. If you are able to donate please do so.   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Robert Breedlove is a philosopher and podcaster within the Bitcoin space. In this wide-ranging interview, we discuss the consequences of the middle class getting destroyed, the hubris of central planning, games of mimetic desire, how Bitcoin is a high-trust environment, Bitcoin’s enemies, fasting and living life beyond the ego. - - - - Robert Breedlove has cemented a role as one of the fiercest freedom maximalists within the Bitcoin space. He is a powerful advocate for decentralization, Bitcoin, and the principles of sound money. And, he is also a fellow podcaster, hosting the "What is Money?" podcast, which explores economics, technology, and financial philosophy from a sound money perspective. The interview delves into the impact of economic factors on culture and politics, and whether growing divisiveness in the US and other countries is a result of the destruction of the middle class and the erosion of property rights. We discuss the consequences of poor incentives, the misallocation of capital, taxation and government. We opine on the advantages and disadvantages of currency and the effects of money printing. The discussion considers the need for a hard reset or a wake-up call to address the flaws of our current economic paradigms, predicated on a “colossal hubris” of thinking the world is a compliant machine enabling the global economic systems to be planned in advance. Robert also explains the concept of mimetic desire and its impact on our work and personal lives. We explore the importance of staying true to oneself, and finding inspiration while avoiding becoming too similar to others. We finish on the benefits of fasting and living life beyond the ego. As I stated, this is a comprehensive show!   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Balaji Srinivasan is an angel investor, tech founder, and author of ‘The Network State’. In this interview, we discuss the idea of starting new countries ("network states”), based on social networks built around a shared ideal that can monetize effectively. We also talk about how and why the media ignores major global news stories, and how to prepare for the coming collapse. - - - - In the past 14 years, we have seen a powerful global community built around a shared ideal. Bitcoin is obviously much more than a technical innovation: it is a vision of building a new economic paradigm from the bottom up, which shifts the centre of power from the state to the individual. Being open-sourced, leaderless and decentralised, it has proven that there are new ways for people to connect, contribute and collaborate to build new systems. Balaji Srinivasan’s latest book takes this revolution one step further, and explores the idea of starting new countries, or what he calls "network states." These network states can be formed by a group of people connected through a social network, with their own income, real estate, and even their own ideological platforms. It's like a political party, but working outside of the limits of national boundaries. The measure of success for these network states lies in their ability to materialise their online presence into the physical world: “You do meetups and eventually you go from crowdfunding brunches to crowdfunding buildings.” It challenges the traditional notion of what a country is and opens up possibilities for new forms of governance and community-building. As legacy nations resort to ever more authoritarian methods to protect the fiat system, the importance of allocation, location and organisation to individuals will become more apparent. But, this is more than a theory. Balaji is allocating a material amount of capital to funding startup ‘Network State’ communities. The aim is to create frontier societies, providing alternatives to failed states and attracting ambitious individuals seeking a new kind of society.   This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence

Aaron Daniel is an Appellate attorney and author of The Bitcoin Brief, a newsletter analysing Bitcoin’s effect on law and society. In this interview, we discuss how justice in arbitration can be applied in a Hyperbitcoinised World. We talk about systemic issues with current legal systems, and how using Bitcoin tools like Fedimint can enable arbitration to become decentralised. - - - - Despite the limitations of our legal systems, at least there are established bodies recognised as intermediaries for dispute resolution, and methods for enforcing judgements on debtors. Aaron Daniels, an attorney and Bitcoiner, has been examining what happens in a hyperbitcoinised world that has circumvented centralised authorities undertaking enforcement action. Aaron has given serious consideration to the concept of anchoring dispute resolution systems into Bitcoin. He is looking at the tools being developed, such as Fedimint, and other systems using escrow agents, arbitration panels and oracles. The emerging ideas promise a new set of arbitration services that are transparent, efficient, affordable, inclusive and localised. This then turns the tables back on the current legal system and focuses on its limitations. It is a system that has become increasingly costly that reinforces societal inequalities. Lack of access to justice based on cost is one of society's more pernicious issues. It results in an asymmetric balance of power in favour of those who have resources against those that don’t. Further, it is a system based on archaic centralised rules that don’t work for many communities. So, we could be on the cusp of a new and evolving set of arbitration services, linked to Bitcoin, that provide individuals with a fair and transparent environment for dispute resolution. And, it is a sign of a mature system that people are putting serious time into working on these issues. This episode’s sponsors: Iris Energy - Bitcoin Mining. Done Sustainably Ledn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlers Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet Wasabi Wallet - Privacy by default Unchained - Secure your bitcoin with confidence Incogni - Personal Information Removal Service

Conor Okus is Product Manager at Spiral. In this interview, we discuss his journey from being a footballer to becoming a Bitcoiner, Real Bedford and the alignment of Bitcoin with a grassroots football club, his current role at Spiral managing the grant programme for developers, and his view on the benefits of open source development of Bitcoin. - - - - Bitcoin has been making waves in various industries, and sports is no exception. Conor Okus is a footballer [a.k.a. Soccer player!] who found Bitcoin. Peter is a Bitcoiner who came back to football. They met in the middle when Conor provided Pete with advice and support in establishing Real Bedford. Real Bedford is using Bitcoin in various ways, such as a treasury reserve asset and for educational efforts. They plan to incorporate it into football games by tipping players with QR codes. The grassroots movement of Bitcoin aligns with Real Bedford's grassroots approach to football, making it a perfect fit. Conor and Pete discuss a new wave of football and sports teams based on ideas that resonate with dispersed communities, and the challenges of setting up a new football club. They also talk about the downside of vested interests looking to exploit sport and fan bases for selfish means. Now Conor lives and works in the US as part of the Spiral team, managing an invaluable grant programme for developers. Conor then shares his experience and expertise in supporting open-source Bitcoin development, scaling Bitcoin transactions through lightning, the importance of the user experience in Bitcoin, and fostering an innovative open-source design community.

Margot Paez is a Bitcoin Mining consultant & Troy Cross is a Professor of Philosophy, and both are Fellows at BPI. In this interview, we discuss the fracturing of political movements (particularly the progressives), why the left is in favour of CBDCs, how Bitcoin is a political tool, the Bitcoin Policy Summit, Bitcoin’s image problem, and the issues and strengths of higher education. - - - - On this episode, we welcome back two eminent friends of the show: Margot Paez and Troy Cross. At the start of 2022, What Bitcoin Did actively searched for progressive voices within the community. It was soon apparent that there was a huge untapped well of thoughtful and brilliant people who had identified the powerful impact Bitcoin could have in supporting progressive causes. However, it is apparent that there is now a shift happening within the left: a fracturing of beliefs and approaches. Some progressives within Bitcoin are starting to align themselves with a more holistic ideology predicated on financial fairness, which is open to debate and collaboration with those on the other side of the aisle. At the root of this conversion is the belief that the promotion and use of Bitcoin itself is a political act. As Margot states: “it’s an act of defiance”, but an act of defiance with teeth. Finally, activists have a tool that can take on the established centres of power. But, if we are to accelerate adoption and battle those who work against Bitcoin, education and advocacy still require a solid evidence base. Unfortunately, the FUD directed at Bitcoin has left an ingrained stain in the minds of many progressives. Margot, one of the main people within our community looking to bring academic rigour to support the claims being made about Bitcoin’s societal benefits, has suffered directly as a result of this. She has effectively been kicked out of university because of her desire to study Bitcoin, by people with a progressive ideology. We must all do what we can to support people like Margot and Troy. They are the ones providing the Bitcoin movement with the analytical heft needed to protect it from institutional attacks. They do it quietly and diligently, pushing against stiff headwinds. We owe them a massive debt of gratitude.

Erik Hersman is the co-founder of Gridless, & Marshall Long is the Head of Architecture for Rhodium Enterprises. In this interview, we discuss Bitcoin in Africa: the need, the use and the support the wider community can give. We also talk about energy poverty in Africa, Bitcoin’s role in supporting mini-grids, and how Gridless’s business model & Marshall’s financing plan accelerate this process. - - - - There are around 800 million people in the world without access to electricity. Around 75`% of those live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Given populations are distributed over vast areas in Africa, and governments have limited access to capital, grid connections can be economically unviable. But mini-grids are also challenging because of the difficulty of getting a return on the high initial investment costs: demand in these poor communities takes time to build. To date, the only option has been well-meaning but unsustainable charitable ventures that can have unintended negative second-order effects. But then Bitcoin mining showed how curtailed energy can be monetised, and a problem has suddenly become an opportunity. It is estimated Africa could produce 2.5 million terawatt hours of wind and solar energy per year (the US uses around 4,000 terawatt hours of energy per year). The business opportunity is huge. In the fascinating interview, Eric Hesman of Gridless discusses how his company is partnering with communities in need of energy to provide subsidised power. Marshall Long sets out how his family office is helping with much-needed finance for energy projects in Africa that utilise Bitcoin mining. Together they set out the transformational impact such initiatives could have for the continent.

Alex Gladstein is Chief Strategy Officer at the Human Rights Foundation & Natalie Smolenski is an Executive Director of the Texas Bitcoin Foundation. In this interview, we discuss Alex’s new book: ‘Hidden Repression: How the IMF and World Bank Sell Exploitation as Development’. We talk about debt traps, western support for dictators, US and UK culpability, and what freedom means. - - - - The IMF and World Bank were originally created to stabilize exchange rates and fund infrastructure in war-torn countries. Alex Gladstein’s work found that there was a pivot in this mission in the late 1960s. The new mission was to target and exploit poor countries for the benefit of the West, neocolonialism replacing colonialism, debt replacing the sword. These institutions have been incredibly harmful to poor countries, but also incredibly beneficial for the West through interest payments, extraction of resources and labour, and control of markets. This has been done with only a limited need for military intervention and subjugation through physical means. The wheels of this process have been oiled by the co-option of dictactors in on the steal. Bitcoin is a way out and may bring some justice. However, there must also be a reckoning with the damage done to poor countries by these exploitative policies. The IMF and World Bank have repeatedly prevented free markets from working normally in such countries forcing them deeper into debt. And when the country has inevitably defaulted, damaging structural adjustments have been imposed limiting government expenditure and hurting the most vulnerable. As Alex Gladstein asserts, changing the monetary paradigm, with the growth of Bitcoin, could break the current system and give hope for a more sustainable future. But in that process, we have to be clear about what we need to repair. As Natalie Smolenski states, without a programme of debt cancellation then we could enter a period of significant geopolitical stress.

Allen Farrington is a professional investor and the co-author of Bitcoin Is Venice. In this interview, we discuss the problems with fiat, or as Allen characterizes it “fiat fuckery”. We talk about how money printing leads to inflation and a misallocation of capital, the complexity of the fiat system hiding the resultant theft of capital, the slow demise of pension funds, and the confusion around what growth is and isn’t. - - - - Fiat currency experiments started centuries ago often resulting in catastrophic failure; since fiat has been ubiquitously assimilated into national economies. Whilst Bitcoiners are well versed in the inherent weaknesses of fiat currencies, there is a general ignorance of the long-lasting consequences for economies and citizens of maintaining an unbending faith in fiat money. Reducing this ignorance is perhaps the best way to grow Bitcoin’s adoption. The obvious problem with fiat currency is the tendency for governments to print money to tackle economic exigencies. The impact of this money printing is often inflation, in which prices rise faster than wages and the purchasing power of money is reduced. Eventually, the currency can be debased, causing individuals to lose money without even realising it. There is cruelty at the heart of this process: the complex nature of the fiat economic system means individuals can easily lose money without even knowing it. Many investors make decisions that are far too complicated for them to understand, and so it is easy to get caught up in financial schemes that value money to the detriment of the individual. But, it is the second-order effect of this inflationary impact that is most pernicious. Businesses and investors are seeking to add value, and the inflation rate is the baseline for any return. When inflation increases, this puts pressure on those seeking investments to match or exceed it. The result is investments made in increasingly more speculative projects. This is the misallocation of capital, which starves more productive uses of capital. The obvious topic of conversation following this is how Bitcoin mitigates these problems. This is a question to be debated with Allen Farrington for a future episode. However, understanding what Allen calls “fiat fuckery” is a sound basis for building the why of Bitcoin.

The Rational Root is a Bitcoin on-chain & cycle analyst. In this interview, 9 months on from our last interview, we look into the various Bitcoin price models Root has developed. We again review his Bitcoin Spiral Models, Bitcoin Hodl price models and Bitcoin halving & cycle charts. We discuss the growing evidence of Bitcoin scarcity, and bullish cases as we approach the next halving. - - - - In his first interview on What Bitcoin Did last August, the Rational Root made prescient predictions about Bitcoin bear market lows that occurred a few months later. The caveat is that he also stated “You always have to be a bit sceptical about models that predict the future, they can be wrong.” Nevertheless, the models Rational Root has developed have some conspicuous patterns that are worth consideration. The Bitcoin Spiral chart Rational Root uses is incredibly powerful. It clearly shows a correlation between Bitcoin's price and the halving events. Extrapolating this pattern forward suggests we could be on the cusp of a new bullish price triggered by next year's halving. This phase is predicted to see a material price appreciation between $100,000 and $1 million in the next cycle. We also debate whether Bitcoin is now correlated with other more significant asset markets, in particular the S&P 500. In essence, is there a correlation between Bitcoin’s price and risk appetite in the investment market? If such a link has been established, and a rescission occurs, this could lead to a deviation from the Bitcoin halving cycle patterns. But perhaps the most bullish analysis Rational Root has undertaken involves the assessment of demand and supply indicators, such as his "Hodl Model", which predicts the growth rate of illiquid supply in Bitcoin. It’s simple economics that price is affected by the relationship between demand and supply, and, as Rational Root states “Bitcoin is becoming more scarce, and this data is not being paid attention to by many people."

Matt Corallo is a Bitcoin Core developer and open-source engineer at Block/Spiral. In this interview, we discuss the nexus of ordinals, mining rewards & decentralisation risks. We also talk about the impact of a permanent high fee environment on digital transactions, the challenges faced by Bitcoin wallet developers, and the new wave of talent working on Bitcoin Core. - - - - Bitcoin has come a long way since its inception, but it continues to evolve. The past few months have seen significant discussion regarding the recent development of ordinals, mining rewards, and the challenges of maintaining mining decentralization. In essence, there is a continual battle to ensure Bitcoin’s infrastructure is fit for purpose in enabling an uncensorable, trustless settlement of transactions. These challenges are an inevitable part of the development of innovation. Each issue requires a solution, which in turn, leads to new issues. For example, the impact of a high fee environment has been to highlight limitations and risks with the Lightning Network. Then there are the UX issues associated with wallets and issues in relation to compatibility across different protocols. Whilst each of these technical issues requires discussion and understanding, the wider perspective is that there is a perpetual need to improve Bitcoin's infrastructure and continue to maintain its security and decentralisation. Therefore, we need the right environment for developers to learn, collaborate and deliver. And, the wider community needs to be supportive and nurture this talent, protecting them from toxic attacks and iniquitous litigation. There are certainly a number of big organizations out there who understand this and are modestly and diligently working to support people like Matt and others, to allow them in turn to support Bitcoin and the needs of the whole community. And it is certainly encouraging to hear that there is a new wave of developing talent being brought into the Bitcoin Core “team”. Whilst this interview reinforces the fact that we can never take the huge efforts being applied for granted, it is still amazing to see the strides being made in the world’s most successful open-source project. That we can collaborate voluntarily across the internet to change the world of money, in the face of massive challenges, should leave us all in awe.

Peter St Onge is an Economist at the Heritage Foundation and a Fellow at the Mises Institute. In this interview, we discuss the differences between Keynesian and Austrian economics, the role of marketing in shaping public opinion, and the potential of Bitcoin to displace central banks and cut off one of the main channels that governments use to seize people's resources. - - - - Keynesian economics developed in the wake of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Its aim was to stabilise the volatility caused by market forces through the application of government and central bank resources. Its critics state it has opened up a range of tools that governments have exploited for short-term gain, whilst building up ever greater problems for future generations. Keynes was mocked by major contemporary figures. Winston Churchill, who didn’t believe that state borrowing and expenditure could provide permanent additional employment, famously once said “If you put two economists in a room, you get two opinions, unless one of them is Lord Keynes, in which case you get three opinions.” And yet, governments, on both sides of the political debate, seem to be currently addicted to greater monetary and fiscal interventions in the economy than at any time since the 1930s. Such actions started in 2008, but have continued apace since. They are a major factor in why global debt now stands at an eye-watering $305 trillion. Hayek, the famous Austrian economist, foresaw the coming crisis, concluding that monetary policy only does harm to an economy. In 1976 he called for the denationalisation of money. In a famous 1984 interview, he stated “I don't believe that we should ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government… all we can do is by some sly or roundabout way introduce something they can't stop.” Hayek essentially foresaw Bitcoin. Unsurprisingly, Bitcoin’s trajectory, as an incorruptible digital hard money, started as the deflated global economy was patched up with Keynesian policies in 2009. Over 14 years later, as these policies become ever more unsustainable, it seems like we’re on the cusp of a swing of mainstream opinion away from Keynesian policies, to policies predicated on Austrian economic principles. And Bitcoin could be the centre of this new paradigm.

Jeff Snider is Head of Global Research at Atlas Financial Advisors and Lyn Alden is a macroeconomist and investment strategist. In this interview, they debate whether QE is money printing, if the Treasury market broke in early 2020, dollar shortages, whether there’s an ideal form of money, the importance of Bitcoin, and the problems with central and commercial banks. - - - - Lyn Alden and Jeff Snyder are two of the popular economic experts in the Bitcoin space at the moment. They bring much-needed clarity to discussions on economic and financial systems that are lacking in mainstream media. They do, however, disagree on some fundamental issues. This show is a fascinating discourse between two heavyweights who are at the top of their game. The discussion starts with a debate on the mechanics and implications of quantitative easing (QE), and the role of central banks and commercial banks in money circulation. Lyn and Jeff explore whether QE constitutes money printing, the impact of fiscal deficits on inflation, and the liquidity problems in the treasury market. The discussion then focuses on the emergence and acceptance of different currencies in the global market (including Bitcoin), the role of central banks, the importance of a currency's availability and infrastructure in its acceptance, and the challenges of achieving a self-contained monetary system without central banks or authorities. Lyn and Jeff cover the relationship between debt and economic growth, the concept of a "bail-in," and the need for a sensical monetary structure with the right rules and parameters. They also consider whether there is an ideal money, or, whether the monetary system needs to be dynamic such that it can evolve and adapt to a changing world where new demands arise.

Troy Cross is a Professor of Philosopher and Fellow at BPI, and Harry Sudock is Chief Strategy Officer at Griid. This interview was a live recording made at the Bitcoin 2023 Conference in Miami, where we discussed Bitcoin mining: the industry’s rapid evolution, how it’s optimising other markets, and why its relentless search for cheap energy will facilitate human flourishing. - - - - Bitcoin mining has been the subject of much controversy and debate in mainstream media. The infamous New York Times (NYT) article in April still casts a shadow over the industry: the piece characterised Bitcoin mining as an exploitative parasite feeding off cheap energy at the expense of local users and the environment. And yet, Bitcoin mining is the exact opposite. As Troy Cross states in this live interview, when people get to hear the truth about Bitcoin mining's impact on energy systems it “blows their minds!” Harry Sudock adds more colour by explaining how Bitcoin mining is a black hole that sucks in economic utility and spits it out in its most efficient form, making it a revolutionary tool for human flourishing. Both speakers criticize the media for pushing a biased agenda and cherry-picking data to fit a preconceived narrative. They argue that the truth about Bitcoin mining's impact on energy systems is more complex than the media portrays, but, this doesn’t provide the clickbait media outlets are after. The irony is that the NYT’s mission is “to seek the truth and help people understand the world.” However, we are optimistic that the tide will soon turn. With this show, both Harry and Troy have been on What Bitcoin Did now a combined 13 times (lucky for us!), and they continue to blow our minds with their tales of the possible worlds opened up by the race for cheap and abundant energy. The other side just doesn’t have the calibre of persuasive, authentic and enthusiastic voices we have.

Jason Maier is a teacher and the author of ‘A Progressive’s Case for Bitcoin’. In this interview, we discuss the importance of teaching money and Bitcoin in schools, the future of education in the shadow of AI, and the challenges of having a public persona. We also talk about the feedback Jason has received since publishing his book and Bitcoin’s potential to bring people together. - - - - It is a common feature of any orange pilling exercise that most people are blissfully ignorant of the inherent weakness and structurally unjust nature of the monetary system. And yet, school curriculums are shockingly devoid of requiring schools to provide even rudimentary information on how economies, money and individuals interact. We are a financially illiterate generation. Then there is the impact of technological changes on students. AI is rapidly changing the world in ways forecasters are struggling to predict. It is obvious that most schools aren’t equipping students to enter a world of constant technological revolution. A world in which Bitcoin may play a significant role. Therefore, as the world continues to evolve, the need for education that prepares students for the future is becoming increasingly essential. Students are generally receptive to new ideas and have the agility in being able to develop the skills required to exploit new opportunities opened up by technology. The issue is with the conservative nature of the education system, which in turn is heavily influenced by biases and misconceptions. In this podcast, Jason Maeir shares his experiences in educating students about Bitcoin, and the influence of the emerging properties of AI upon education. There is a fundamental need to change educational principles away from rote learning (i.e. knowing stuff) to developing more holistic skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving and creativity. These have been traditionally seen as ‘soft skills’, but they are in fact the bridge between technology and humans. The goal is to improve productivity and intelligence in a society that is more equal and fair. And it all starts with improving our education.

Nic Carter is a Partner at Castle Island Ventures and co-founder and Chairman of Coin Metrics. In this interview, we discuss Real Bedford, ordinals, the Bitcoin fee market, Bitcoin culture wars, layer 2 innovations, Chokepoint 2.0 and the 2022 banking crisis, and how people can stand up for Bitcoin against the current US administration. - - - - In categorising a covert attempt by the executive branch to restrict access to Bitcoin and crypto as a modern iteration of Operation Chokepoint, Nic Carter has brought much-needed attention to an otherwise nebulous sense of unease. Nic has clarified the meaning behind a series of different events, tying together inconsistent messages and suspicious decisions. His explicit analysis has even garnered the attention of a presidential candidate, Robert F Kennedy Jnr. At face value, Chokepoint 2.0 is about the government's hostility towards the crypto industry in the wake of FTX. That Bitcoin will be ensnared in this dragnet is of obvious concern. An innovation that could revolutionise and democratise money and energy could be restricted within the world's leading economy. However, there is a bigger issue here: the circumvention of democratic norms. These restrictions are occurring without debate or scrutiny. Then, to add import on top of import, there is the underlying rationale for these restrictions. In a week when the debt ceiling is again the subject of political horse-trading to allow sovereign debt to continue to grow to evermore eye-watering levels, these restrictions are an implicit imposition of soft capital controls on the American people. So, we have unprecedented restrictions on people’s freedoms to protect stores of value being done behind closed doors. Put bluntly, the US government's attempts to restrict the growth of the crypto industry by leaning on private banks are unconstitutional and violate due process. The social contract is being broken. Nic has suggested that injured parties should join efforts to sue the government to enable legal oversight of these decisions. In his opinion, this is a lawsuit that can be won.

John D'Agostino is the Institutional Lead for Advisory and Strategic Partnerships at Coinbase. In this interview, we discuss his background working for the New York Mercantile Exchange, seeking out enjoyment, and the flip side of getting kidnapped. We also talk about the maturity of the Bitcoin market, covering both the regulatory threats and institutional appetite.  - - - -  John D'Agostino is certainly a unique character. He was the subject of a best-selling book back in 2007 after he set out to open up the first oil exchange in the Middle East, which acted as a catalyst for capital markets in the region. However, his life has produced enough for more than a single book: he is the first person I have spoken to who has been kidnapped.    As someone who seeks out new exciting opportunities, it’s not a surprise that John landed a prominent position within the digital assets industry. As a senior advisor to Coinbase, he’s well-positioned to reflect on the state of the industry as it navigates a period of uncertainty. Post FTX, what is the direction of government regulation in the US and abroad? Furthermore, what are institutional investors waiting to do? John sets out what he sees as a huge gap between the US and the rest of the world in terms of digital asset regulation. And yet, not least because of the popular support for digital assets among the electorate, he views this as being a temporary situation which provides international players with a headstart over the US.  John is strongly optimistic about the future of Bitcoin and other digital assets, particularly because of the potential to unlock value through programmable and immutable instruments. He’s also seeing the backed-up demand from institutional investors, just waiting for regulatory clarity. He’s been part of shaping change in the financial world once already. Who’d bet against him doing it again?

James Seyffart is an analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence covering ETFs. In this interview, we discuss the how and why of ETFs, Grayscale’s legal battle with the SEC over the approval of a Bitcoin ETF, and the complexities of Grayscale implementing a redemption program for GBTC. We also talk about the role of the SEC in regulating Bitcoin and Gary Gensler’s political ambitions. - - - -  In two months' time, it will be the 10-year anniversary of the Winklevoss Twins making the first submission to the SEC for a Bitcoin spot ETF. When the SEC rejected this in 2017, it seemed as though it was a temporary blip, and that a US Bitcoin spot ETF would inevitably be approved. And yet, the SEC has rejected a raft of subsequent applications, and many more sit in Gary Gensler’s inbox awaiting a decision.  Grayscale has decided to test the SEC's stance in court. Whilst there are various opinions as to the underlying motivation for Grayscale taking on this case, there is no doubt that this is the best test of the SEC's current intransigence in relation to a Bitcoin spot ETF.  Bloomberg Intelligence’s James Seyffart, an ETF expert, provides his informed opinion on the current status of Grayscale’s case, the likelihood of the SEC losing the case, and whether this will affect the SEC's position of a Bitcoin spot ETF. He also sets out why the SEC is so reluctant to approve what many in the community believe would open up Bitcoin to a new massive wave of adoption.   

Arthur Hayes is an entrepreneur and the former CEO of BitMEX. In my first interview with Arthur, we discuss the state of the world at the moment: what happened with FTX, money printing, the coming collapse, debt jubilees, the need to acquire assets outside the system like Bitcoin, good and bad AI scenarios, and a powder keg of issues that’ll hit the markets this fall.  - - - -  Arthur Hayes was the co-founder and former CEO of BitMEX, which was one of the largest crypto exchanges and derivatives platforms. In 2021, its average daily trading volume was over $2 billion. Hayes was famously charged in the southern district of New York for violating the Bank Secrecy Act. He got 2 years probation and a $10 million fine.  But Hayes remains an authoritative voice within the crypto and Bitcoin communities. Nic Carter called him “One of the good guys of crypto.” He now has a mission to help spread financial literacy and educate investors, which he does through regular medium posts, columns in leading journals and interviews with podcasters. And, he has a knack for calling the market. In this short interview, we pack in a surprising number of issues: Hayes's investment strategy, and views on crypto and Bitcoin; opinions on the FTX scandal; fragility in the banking sector; historical currency debasements and the inevitability of a coming collapse; the use of debt jubilees to right society; investing in assets that can weather the coming storm; the impacts of AI; and the debt ceiling.

    Tor Ekeland & Mike Hassard are defence attorneys representing a Swedish-Russian national, Roman Sterlingov, arrested in early 2021 by the IRS at LAX. He was accused of creating and operating the Bitcoin Fog mixing service to launder over $300 million. He had his assets seized and was incarcerated. He’s awaiting trial. Tor and Mike are still trying to find corroborating evidence. But they’ve uncovered conflicts of interest within the DoJ.  - - - -  Roman Sterlingov has been accused of running Bitcoin Fog, a Bitcoin mixer, and laundering $334 million. On a prima facie basis it seems like a case of the state acting to crack down on nefarious darknet activities. But, delve deeper, as Roman’s lawyers Tor Ekeland & Mike Hassard have done, and it raises serious questions about what the DoJ and various companies are willing to do for selfish motives.  Firstly, there is a distinct lack of evidence against Roman. No evidence has been found on any computer, thumb drive or server that links Roman to the crimes he’s accused of.  The evidence that does exist has been produced by the blockchain forensics company Chainanalysis. But as yet this evidence is not open to scrutiny, and, such evidence has never been challenged in court.  Secondly, the case highlights numerous material conflicts of interest within the DoJ and Chainalysis. A revolving door between the DoJ and Big Tech is a well-known issue. Then there’s the use of cases such as Roman’s to help build the reputation of Chainalysis, helping it to gain a multi billion dollar valuation. The profit incentive has and does skew criminal prosecutions in the US.  And lastly, there’s the overreach of the DoJ, and the tactics it is employing to arrest and prosecute individuals. Roman’s case is a high-stakes situation for both Roman, the Bitcoin community and the wider public. If Roman loses, he could face 50 years to life in prison. If unchallenged, it could also set a dangerous precedent and allow the government to expand its jurisdiction globally through the internet.

Pascal Gauthier is the CEO of Ledger, NVK is the founder of Coinkite, Matt Odell is a podcaster and Bitcoin educator and Harry Sudock is Cheif Strategy Officer at Griid. In this interview, we host a group discussion, regarding Ledger’s Recover firmware update. We talk about the questions this update has raised about the trade-offs between mitigating seed recovery risk over state seizure risks.  - - - -  Full disclosure, Ledger is a sponsor of the What Bitcoin Did Podcast.  Just under a week ago, Ledger launched a seed recovery service called Ledger Recover. There was an immediate backlash on Twitter, with various prominent voices raising concerns about the security implications. Fundamentally, does this feature open up users to hacking or state seizure risks? Or, is this a useful service that will support efforts to get more users to self-custody?  The purpose of this show was to enable Pascal Gauthier, the CEO of Ledger, to explain the aims of Ledger’s seed recovery service, and the methods employed to protect users. The show then enabled trusted independent and prominent voices within the community (including a Ledger competitor) to set out their concerns and discuss them openly with Pascal.  Should security for Bitcoin be provided using open or closed-source software? Given the challenges in providing robust security, are there any acceptable trade-offs? Can we afford anything less than full transparency from commercial companies involved in Bitcoin security?  The rudimentary issue is whether Bitcoin security should be regarded as a binary choice. Should we as a community should aim for a minimum expectation of security? Or, should we take the world as it is and pragmatically make incremental improvements to people’s security? Can we afford as a community to have the majority of people custody on exchanges? Or, do we strive for higher ideals than seeing self-custody as an end in itself?

Jason Lowery is a Major in the US Space Force and author of Softwar: A Novel Theory on Power Projection and the National Strategic Significance of Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss how he is building the case within the US Department of Defence that Bitcoin represents a new form of digital warfare that the US government needs to embrace to secure its power projection in cyberspace. - - - -  Jason Lowery burst onto the Bitcoin scene in August 2021. When a senior member of the US Space Force enters the Bitcoin debate it tends to turn heads! But, it was his novel projections of what value Bitcoin presents to society that generated interest and controversy. Bitcoiners have long espoused Bitcoin as a peaceful revolution. Jason thinks Bitcoin can be used as a tool of warfare.  In Softwar, Jason’s recently released book on the national strategic significance of Bitcoin, he explains the background of modern warfare, tracing its roots back to the struggle for survival in all forms of life. From single-cell organisms upwards, all of life is involved in a fight for control over resources and territory. Competition has resulted in an ecological arms race manifested through evolutionary cycles of improvements in physical power and the projection of that power. Softwar explains that humans are just another life form involved in this competition for survival.  Humans, however, have become increasingly efficient at power projection techniques, from wielding fire to using nuclear weapons. Now, as we accelerate through the digital age, humans need to develop and harness new and innovative methods to maintain their advantages over adversaries.  In his role within Space Force, which is developing the means to project power beyond our planet, Jason has been contemplating what other tools will be required as another arena for competition opens up: cyberspace. Jason argues that Bitcoin has the potential to be a revolutionary cybersecurity system. Proof of Work is an innovation that moves the fight to the enemy, imposing a cost on those wishing to undertake an attack.  Softwar is a call to action for the US Department of Defence to adopt Bitcoin as a tool of warfare in the new cyberspace battlefield. Whilst designed to secure money, PoW can in theory be used to secure other forms of data. Whether you agree with this assertion or not, Jason is making progress within the DoD in arguing Bitcoin’s utility makes it too important for the Department of Treasury and Federal Reserve jurisdiction. And who would bet against the DoD in a fight!

Michael Saylor is the CEO of MicroStrategy. In this interview, we discuss his 10 rules for lfie, the opportunities and threats of AI, the importance of Bitcoin in an automated world, the strength of ossification compared to accelerating change, and the criticality of Bitcoin miners to the Bitcoin network. We also talk about Michael’s navigation of the bear market. - - - - Chat GPT was released a little over 6 months ago. It is arguably the most significant tech innovation since the internet. People are now routinely using chatbots to interact with technology and access information tailored to very specific needs. Whilst the impacts of this are yet to be fully understood, it is widely accepted that we have entered a new exciting and equally frightening paradigm. The issue at hand is that the world is becoming increasingly automated. As a result, human beings are being viewed as a constraint on productivity, which AI technology can mitigate. Where does this leave humans? In a world predicated on code and efficiency and automation, what controls are in place to ensure these systems are secure such that they can not be centralised and exploited such that the general population suffers rather than flourishes? Michael Saylor is of the opinion we need an automated tool that is secure and outside of any centralised control. Bitcoin, in this scenario, is the tool that can compete with new digital advances, but, enable humans to retain some control of their lives. As such, it is imperative that we protect the integrity of the innovation such that its utility remains available for both existing and future generations. The question then becomes how do we best protect Bitcoin? Saylor argues that it is the Bitcoin miners that are Bitcoin’s “fortresses”: they provide brute force security, a cryptographic defence, and the means to marshall the means to advocate effectively for Bitcoin within the corridors of power. Bitcoin miners, therefore, need protection to ensure they continue to act as Bitcoin’s standing army. We do this by ensuring stability: ossifying Bitcoin’s base layer protocol.    

Rune Østgård is the Author of ‘Fraudcoin: 1000 Years with Inflation as a Policy’. In this interview, we discuss inflation’s historical introduction and use as an exploitative tool by elites and how, in various phases of history (most recently, the early 20th century), inflation was not viewed as a required economic phenomenon. To Rune, there is no more important subject to understand than inflation.  - - - -  In the 1700s, Scottish philosopher and economist Adam Smith was the first to use the term “inflation” in his book, “The Wealth of Nations.” Smith argued that inflation resulted from an increase in the amount of money in circulation, which caused goods and services to be more expensive.  But inflation is not a modern phenomenon. It has been in existence for centuries. And historical analysis shows that it has been used as an exploitative tool by elites throughout the ages. Rune Ostgard has traced the use of inflation back to its use in his home country of Norway in 1050 AD, its use by a tyrant King, and its role in the effective ending of the Viking era.  Rune states that it is this historical knowledge that shows firstly how ruinous inflation can be and, secondly, why it is not an inevitable or necessary feature of economic systems. Famously during the 19th century, there was a sustained period when deflationary growth occurred in the United States. And yet, for the past 100 years, we have been conditioned to accept inflation as an essential economic driver. Its insidious nature has been hidden by a period of low rates of inflation. Now, however, with inflation rising to double-digit levels across many parts of the world, its destructive compounding impacts are more apparent.  We are now, therefore, at a time when it is necessary to question inflations societal value and whether there are other ways of managing our economies. Whilst Bitcoiners have a viable future mapped out, Bitcoin is still viewed by many with suspicion. But, as the fiat system continues to unravel, the value of Bitcoin becomes ever more easy to explain.  

Obi Nwosu is a co-founder of Fedimint and a board member of Jack Dorsey’s and Jay-Z’s ₿trust. In this interview, we discuss the mission of Fedimint: empowering communities around the world by allowing them to take control of their money. We also talk about the importance of trust models in relation to storing Bitcoin in Fedimint. - - - - It’s hard to believe that Fedimint is only 2 years old. Its development is a regular topic of exciting conversation within the community. It is one of a number of important projects that are leading many to believe we’re on the cusp of a wave of innovation within Bitcoin: Blockstream Developer Neigut expects there will be a ‘Cambrian Explosion’ of Bitcoin Layer 2 Protocols in the future.  Obi Nwosu came back to provide some valuable demonstrations of how Fedimint will work in practice. Lightning transactions, encrypted chat and offline payments are just an example of the developments that the Fedi team have been working on bringing to the Fedimint protocol. All of these back and reinforce the Chaumian mint functionality and multisig custody solution on which Fedimint is predicated. It is now garnering interest from those looking to use it in anger, with a number of Beta applications being tested. Once officially launched, it has the potential to democratise access to financial systems for millions of communities, providing efficiencies and cost savings currently out of reach. Further, it can make the Lightning Network more efficient whilst opening up access to Bitcoin.

Bradley Rettler is an Associate Professor of Philosophy, and a member of the Resistance Money, a philosophy research collective focused on Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss the potential ethical implications of AI, philosophical reflections on money creation and governance, the importance of financial literacy, and combating misinformation about Bitcoin.  - - - -  One of the important groups to emerge within the Bitcoin community over the past few years has been the philosophers studying Bitcoin, led by members of the Resistance Money collective: Andrew Bailey, Bradley Rettle and Craig Warmke (with Troy Cross as an honorary member). They have added academic weight to the consideration of the importance of Bitcoin in the context of fundamental questions regarding money’s role in society.  The Resistance Money collective has been examining Bitcoin from various angles. In the episode, Bradley discusses moral dilemmas posed by a material global transition to this new form of money: the transfer of wealth, energy consumption impacts, the acceptance of privacy for bad and good, and usage by enemies. In addition, considerations about the benefits provided by fiat currency that could be lost: e.g. is there a useful societal function provided by money printing?  But this is where philosophical tools are extremely useful. In a previous episode, Craig Warmke explained the usefulness of the ‘veil of ignorance’ thought experiment, where one assumes they have no knowledge of what position in society they would have, and, from this position, they then determine what monetary system would best serve society for the great good. It is this perspective that is used to establish the Resistence Money thesis on Bitcoin. In a scenario where you could fall into any position in society, it would obviously be better that Bitcoin existed. It is the philosophical equivalent of checking your privilege. Whilst Bitcoin’s potential impact on society is complex and uneven, it is far easier to understand how Bitcoin acts to mitigate global inequality and inequity when assuming a scenario where you need it and it doesn’t exist.

David Bailey is the co-founder & CEO of BTC Inc. In this interview, we discuss the upcoming Bitcoin Conference in Miami, the ongoing saga with Genesis, Grayscale & DCG, as well as the Redeem GBTC campaign that David has been spearheading. - - - -  Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) is a trust product offered by Grayscale, a company owned by Digital Currency Group (DCG). GBTC allows investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin through more traditional investment channels, and currently, Grayscale manages approximately $18.1 billion across various funds. However, Grayscale is facing some significant issues. Since early 2021, GBTC has been trading below its net asset value (NAV) at a discount rate of around -36%. GBTC holders are unable to redeem their shares for the underlying asset and must accept this discount if they want to sell their shares on the open market. To address this, David Bailey has set up the Redeem GBTC campaign to push Grayscale to open withdrawals and allow GBTC holders to access the underlying Bitcoin with minimal impact on the Bitcoin market. Allowing redemptions could also potentially bring the heavy discount to NAV back closer to par.

Lawrence Lepard is an Investment Manager and Austrian Economist. In this interview, we discuss  gold and Bitcoin, comparing their relative benefits as assets over short and long time scales. We also discuss inflation, the potential threats to Bitcoin, inequality in society, and the challenges of finding credible leaders in politics.  - - - -  As the world grapples with an uncertain financial future, it's becoming increasingly important to diversify your investment portfolio. The two obvious assets designed to weather the coming economic storms are Bitcoin and gold. Whilst the relationship between gold bugs and Bitcoiners has been adversarial over the years, the two assets are two sides of the same coin. There are important differences between the two: Bitcoin is digital gold, which enables it to be used in ways beyond the capacity of gold; but gold has a 5,000-year head start on Bitcoin, and can therefore provide less volatility in the short to medium term. But, the primary demand for both as a store of value is predicated on the same thesis of limited supply. They both, therefore, serve as a hedge against inflation.  In essence, the investors in both assets are well aligned in terms of their concerns about the global economic system. Goldbugs and Bitcoiners understand the value in sound money, and the risks posed by the current fiat system. Rather than being suspicious of each other, there is much to be said about orange-pilling gold bugs, and similarly, Bitcoiners being open to investing in gold.   The big picture is that both gold and Bitcoin present a risk to the current economic system. It is likely that they will both be subject to attacks and controls by those seeking to reinforce the current system, as the cracks and fissures widen. Any meaningful divisions can and will be exploited: divide and conquer is a military tactic as old as politics and war. We, therefore, need alliances. Lawrence Lepard is one of those seeking to build a bridge between the two groups.

Freddie New is the Head of Policy at Bitcoin Policy UK. In this interview, we discuss how his childhood experiences living in Zimbabwe and Syria have shaped his understanding of Bitcoin’s unique properties. We also discuss his amazing efforts in setting up Bitcoin Policy UK, a new and much-needed advocacy group promoting Bitcoin to policymakers and the wider public in the United Kingdom. - - - - Danny and I have been very fortunate to travel to a vast array of countries in making this show. In the process, I have been exposed to ideas and experiences that reinforce the importance of Bitcoin. But what strikes me the hardest is coming back to the UK. There is a general lack of interest and consideration for this innovation. It’s an attitude that borders on outright suspicion and derision on occasions. Freddie New is one of the main people behind a new advocacy group: Bitcoin Policy UK. It is a lobbying and educational non-profit that the UK has been in desperate need of. This speaks to the difficulties of getting funding for such initiatives more than anything else. But, as the Bitcoin Policy Institute and Coin Centre attest, it’s about getting the right people to work in such organisations. Freddie is such a person. Whilst he speaks like a typical London professional (which can open many doors in the UK!), his experiences in growing up and escaping Zimbabwe were anything like the typical insular upbringing of many in the UK. At an early age, Freddie was forced to acquire valuable education on the importance of the properties that Bitcoin provides. It is a story that makes you catch your breath. Bitcoin advocacy is about looking beyond the investment potential of the Bitcoin asset and expressing its value as a technology that can protect people. Advocacy needs to be authoritative and tell powerful stories to persuade people who are blind to the economic transition coming down the road. Having someone who can eloquently attest to the need to have means to protect sovereign wealth could be the lightning rod for Bitcoin advocacy in the UK.

On the 14th of April What Bitcoin Did hosted a live show in Bedford. The guests were the founder of LNBits Ben Arc, CEO/Chairman of Ego Death Capital Jeff Booth, Investment Manager Lawrence Lepard and Macro analyst James Lavish. Across these interviews, we discussed Nostr, censorship-resistant marketplaces, hyperinflation, debt, deflationary economics, Bitcoin and AI. - - - - I have taken the What Bitcoin Did podcast all around the world: across the United States, South America and Europe. However, I have always dreamed of hosting a live event in my home town. Never would I have believed that I could have been lucky enough to have 4 of the best voices within the community come to the inaugural What Bitcoin Did Live in Bedford event. The show covered the main issues affecting not only the Bitcoin community at the moment, but the wider economic and social landscape. We discuss the development of the decentralized censorship-resistant social media network Nostr with one of it’s inventors, the amazing Ben Arc, and his work in expanding its application to develop censorship-resistant marketplaces. Lawrence Lepard and James Lavish set out their analysis of the macroeconomic environment in which the current sovereign debt and deficit situation could result in triple-digit inflation in Western economies within the next few years. We discuss balancing mitigating the resultant risk with investment strategies focused on both gold and Bitcoin. Finally, Jeff Booth explains his deflationary thesis, where an unmanipulated economic system allows technology and competition to provide productivity gains to flow through society, how Bitcoin is the only way to measure the productivity falling in a system with monetary inflation, and, the potential for AI to create a superintelligence that will be smarter than humans.

Jeff Booth is the Author of The Price of Tomorrow and CEO/Chairman of Ego Death Capital. In this interview, we discuss the effects of prices falling to the marginal cost of production, Bitcoin and its role in a deflationary economy, how inflation and debt distribute wealth unfairly, and the deflationary influence of AI and its impact on the future. - - - - It is the natural order for prices to fall to the marginal cost of production over time, and this principle applies to all industries. The fiat system works against this by artificially creating scarcity. And it has to work against deflation to maintain its dominance, through manipulation of the monetary system: debt, inflation and an ever more narrow concentration of wealth. As the fiat system falters, could the concept of a deflationary economy take hold? Whilst it involves a massive shift in economic value that is hard to comprehend, as innovation continues to push the boundaries of what is possible, and AI comes of age, a deflationary economy becomes very more likely. Jeff Booth argues that it makes logical sense as a system to enable society to continue to expand. The common narrative is that we need inflation, and deflation would harm living standards. However, Jeff argues that whilst prices will fall in a deflationary economy, wages are sticky: people are not willing to accept wage decreases as fast as prices are falling. This would result in a massive transfer of wealth back to productive members of society. Jeff also promotes Bitcoin as part of an investment strategy as we transition into a deflationary economy: its monetary policy is designed to weather the current inflationary system, it’s outside of anyone’s control and it has no counterparty risk. Further, in a new period of abundance, a reliable fixed currency will become a necessity. It will be the new measurement for productivity and progress.

James Lavish is a Bitcoin advocate and writer of the Informationist newsletter. In this interview, we discuss central banks' manipulation of the monetary system, the eye-melting bailouts to come, an inevitable credit event the Fed will be unable to rectify, why BRICS pressure doesn’t currently threaten the dollar, and how the US rejecting Bitcoin may lead to hyperbitcoinisation. - - - - Last month US Treasury yield curves witnessed their deepest inversion for over 40 years. This means holding bonds over the long term results in a lower return than shorter-duration contracts. It is a classic signal of a looming recession. It is the market expectation that future interest rates will be cut in order to stimulate an economy. Whilst there are historical precedents for this situation, what sets the current paradigm apart is the level of unsustainable government debt: increasingly, countries are having to deal with debt levels in excess of their respective GDP. Whilst high inflation provides a way for reducing these burdens, such levels of inflation are politically damaging, and further, risk damaging economies and thereby tax income. Moreover, they risk damaging critical banking infrastructure. Interest rates, as a result, will oscillate: they have accelerated to reduce rampant inflation, then, as is being forecast, they will need to be cut to stimulate a stagnant economy. All the while, commercial banks will be forced to search for yield. And some of these banks will get on the wrong side of the trade. Recent events have shown how quickly such situations can spiral out of control. But, for how long can governments keep bailing out the banks? James Lavish, a leading market analyst, predicts a precarious situation. For a variety of reasons, the US can’t afford to go into a deep recession. As a result, James predicts a “face-melting print” by the Fed to avoid this situation. But, then, at some point the music will stop, and there could be a watershed credit event where the Fed won’t or can’t step in. The real question is, what comes after this event?

Jason Brett is a former FDIC regulator who worked through the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. In this interview, we discuss the Restrict Act, a proposed piece of US legislation that could enable the Secretary of Commerce to shutter access to Bitcoin. We also talk about Operation Chokepoint 2.0, the banking crisis, and whether Bitcoin is a threat to the banks. - - - - Last month, a bipartisan group of United States senators introduced a bill called “Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act”, which is being referred to as the RESTRICT Act. Principally aimed at mitigating foreign technology threats, the legislation would empower officials to police and restrict Americans' domestic access to a range of technologies, including Bitcoin. Whilst not principally aimed at cryptocurrencies (it has been drafted with the aim of banning companies like TikTok from the United States), the bill has been widely criticised for its broad language. It would enable the secretary of commerce to take action against any information and communication technology connected to a foreign adversary that posed “undue or unacceptable risk”. The US has recent experience of the original intent of laws being stretched to limit American citizens' rights: the 2001 Patriot Act has been used for increasingly pervasive monitoring and surveillance of Americans that included the implementation of bulk data collection programs by the NSA affecting millions of people. The issue at hand is that Bitcoin presents a real and present danger to the Fed: it is both a viable alternative to commercial banks, and Treasury debt as a global reserve asset. History shows decision makers will use any tool available to restrict what they view as an undue and unacceptable risk. Whilst Bitcoin is not the primary target of the Restrict Act, it is feasible that one day it may be used to stop access to Bitcoin for Americans. Prepare accordingly.

Lane Rettig is a core developer for Spacemesh. In this interview, we discuss the much-criticised New York Times article that attacked Bitcoin mining, specifically focusing on its strange attacks on demand response and the strange use of marginal emissions accounting. We also talk about the difficulties of finding truth in a world with misaligned incentives. - - - - On April 11th, The New York Times (NYT) published a piece of investigative journalism by Gabriel J.X. Dance entitled “The Real-World Costs of the Digital Race for Bitcoin”. The piece stated Bitcoin mines “cash in on electricity — by devouring it, selling it, even turning it off — and they cause immense pollution. In many cases, the public pays a price.” As Margot Paez stated in a brilliant review of the article for the Bitcoin Policy Institute, The NYT’s hit piece is “Absurd”. The article had been long expected as a number of prominent people within the community have been interviewed for it. What transpired was that any pro-Bitcoin information provided had been ignored. The flip side was the biased representation of Bitcoin mining using flawed analysis, false equivalences, wild extrapolations and incorrect deductions. It is an exemplar of confirmation bias writ large, where the conclusions preceded the investigation. That Gabriel Dance has no experience of Bitcoin or crypto in any of his previous work is neither here nor there. Any journalist worth their salt knows the basic tenets of reporting: a clinical gathering of evidence, cold interrogation of facts, and an unbiased and clear interpretation of the results. The NYT put’s it best in its mission statement: "seek the truth & help people understand the world". So, what has happened? A commissioning editor would have signed this off following a modicum of independent fact checking. That it has been published whilst being riven with distortions and mistruths suggests either a corruption of the journalistic practices at The NYT or that their internal systems have been stripped to the bone and the drive for clickbait trumps everything else. Either way, we have a problem, as mainstream fake information spreads like a virus.

Calle is a Bitcoin and Lightning developer contributing to LNBits and the Cashu ecash system. In this interview, we discuss Cashu’s mission and development, undertake a live demonstration of it in action, the importance of privacy, removing ideology from Bitcoin, and the future of AI and robots. - - - - “By providing a high degree of privacy in payments, cash helps to slow the growing information asymmetry between consumers and companies… between citizens and public authorities… privacy is crucial for individuals to safeguard their position when dealing with organisations which are more powerful than a single person.” Not the words of an anarcho-capitalist, but a prominent Deutsche Bank economist from 2019. It is a truism that privacy is the bedrock of democracy. The problem is we’re sleepwalking into a cashless society where digital payments are tracked, recorded and stored. You can learn everything about someone through their transactions. Privacy in other areas means nothing in this environment. The issue has been how to replicate the utility of cash in the digital world. David Chaum solved this problem in 1982: his dissertation “Computer Systems Established, Maintained and Trusted By Mutually Suspicious Groups” was the original blueprint for blockchains (excluding the proof of work consensus mechanism). His company Digicash launched ecash in 1995, predicated on Chaum’s blind signature innovation. For various reasons, ecash did not take root. Until now. Amongst a small number of initiatives aiming to revive ecash under the Bitcoin umbrella, is Cashu, which allows for private ecash payments over the Lightning Network. It is essentially digital cash, backed by Bitcoin. It requires no accounts or personal information, and everyone involved in the system is blind to other users' transactions. There are tradeoffs: it’s a custodial system where sats are deposited in ‘mints’ to create ecash. The creator Calle, a respected Bitcoin and Lightning Network developer, is working on technical solutions to overcome concerns. Even so, given how well the test version of Cashu is working, Cashu could be the go-to digital cash feature we’re all using very soon, and the feature that enables the next cycle of adoption.

Luke Gromen is the Founder and President of Forest for the Trees (FFTT). In this interview, we discuss how governments can navigate the first busting global debt bubble in 100 years. We talk about historical precedents: namely the Weimar Republic in the 1930s and Israel in the 1980s, and how governments may be forced to allow for a compressed period of triple-digit inflation. - - - - Israel in the mid-1980s faced an existential economic crisis. After a decade of stagnation and rising government expenditure fuelled by money printing, commercial banks started to buckle. Further, the inflation rate was skyrocketing. In 1979 it had reached 111%. By 1984 it had grown to 450%, with fears it could exceed 1,000% by the end of 1985. Despite the real risk that the sovereign debt bubble may soon burst leading to unprecedented levels of inflation, those in the west have become inured to a belief that very high rates of inflation only happen in developing countries. And yet, the experience of hyperinflation in an advanced democratic country was felt much more recently than most people think. It is important therefore to consider the lessons from Israel’s inflationary crisis of the 1980s. The policies enacted by Israel to mitigate the situation were socially bruising. Markets were liberalised, government spending was significantly cut, wages were controlled, the Shekel was sharply devalued, and interest rates were raised to punitive levels. The result was a recession in the 1990s with high unemployment. But inflation was tamed. And Israel did not fail as a state. Nevertheless, the taming of inflation in Israel benefited from various fortuitous factors: high levels of cheap immigrant labour, the technology boom, and the peace process opening up new markets. There aren’t any such obvious pressure-release valves for the west. Furthermore, will those in the West feel as culturally tied to their home nation to stick through such periods of pain? In essence, is Israel a useful case study, or a distracting aside? We may hope it's the former. Otherwise, we may be entering a period for which the precedent goes back to the 1920s Weimar Republic. Or, even more worryingly, we may experience a crisis for which there is no historical precedent. Prepare accordingly.

Matthew Mežinskis is the creator of the Crypto Voices podcast and Porkopolis Economics website. In this interview, we discuss why free banking has always failed due to central bank interference, and how Bitcoin changes the rules of the game. We also talk about how credit is a natural economic phenomenon, and why narrow banking is centralising in nature. - - - - The history of free banking goes back over 1,000 years and it has existed in over 60 countries. It was widespread in the 19th century, but from the early 20th century onwards it was supplanted by central banking in modern economies. However, despite some common narratives, it’s demise was more to do with pressure from governments to create monopolies for currency issuance, than inherent weaknesses in the free banking system. The idea of free banking is re-emerging as a response to the failures of central banks. It is well documented that monopolies often result in market failure due to their constraining of efficiency and innovation. Further, without competition, those running monopolies distort prices and capital through subjective and misaligned priorities. A sovereign debt spiral is a symptom of such centralising control. Matthew Mežinskis is able to bring colour to this issue through his peerless analysis of the different types of money flowing through the economy, and how these are currently out of kilter with the economic system they are intended to support. At the root of the problem is that central banks control both the base money (i.e. the money supply) and the credit supplied to the economy through commercial banks. These tools have been abused. Further, commercial banks have been allowed to get around the rules of the system for decades. As a result, bailouts for commercial banks are happening with alarming regularity. As Matthew asserts in the show: “In the last 100 years, the central bank, the premier banking institution in the United States, has gone to three extremes; [this] never ever has happened in recorded history.” Thank god we have Bitcoin.

Eric Wall is a researcher and investor, and in this interview, we discuss how Eric became a notable critical voice within the HEX community, his ongoing fight with prominent Bitcoin maximalists, and Taproot Wizards. - - - - What Bitcoin stands for and should be is a debate that has been raging since 2009. Bitcoin’s unique characteristics have drawn many people into its gravity. The realisation that its immaculate conception may never be replicated has resulted in many of those same people guarding Bitcoin’s development with uncompromising zeal. The result has been the rise of Bitcoin Maximalism. Maximalist ideology can be a fuzzy concept: there are no clearly agreed rules or principles; there have been various iterations with different priorities over time. However, it is clearly characterised by conservatism over the development of the protocol, and intolerance for those with differing attitudes. Nevertheless, that is not to say that Bitcoin development can forever remain in stasis. There are and have been pressures requiring upgrades both to the base layer, and in the development of additional layers. This means there is always a creative tension on what changes are required, and how quickly these need to be implemented. Further, as Bitcoin has no leader, it has engendered an ecosystem where advocates organically emerge, who can gain traction and have an outsized influence on the community. This creates further tensions as Bitcoin’s purpose is being proselytized using competing and sometimes muddied beliefs. Thus, it is important that Bitcoiners enable an open dialogue where all ideas are questioned, scrutinized and tested. And such debates should be open to all Bitcoiners, without fear or favour to any powerful interests. Is the question therefore how intolerant we should be of those with differing views? And, can we live without trolling, or is this a necessary defensive tool?

Ahmed Gatnash is an author, activist and co-founder of the Kawaakibi Foundation. In this interview, we discuss how the hope of the Arab Spring has been ruthlessly suppressed, meaning the middle east is further from democracy than ever. It’s a breathtaking story of brave activists fighting Twitter’s exploitation, Jamal Khashoggi’s murder and the blackmailing of Jeff Bezos. - - - - The history of the Middle East is a modern tragedy: the cradle of civilisation has been exploited by powerful Western interests that have enabled corrupt and cruel authoritarian rule to dominate the region. Democratic movements have long struggled to gain any traction. However, a wave of optimism spread through the region in 2011 as the Arab Spring saw numerous popular uprisings. The ruthless response indicated that the region's path to freedom will be a long one. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Except in the Middle East. The wave of protests predicated on the pent-up anger at decades of corruption and economic stagnation heralded an era of extreme brutality against citizens throughout the region. The cruel irony is that the Western social media technology that enabled the coordination of demonstrations, has now been effectively harnessed by those seeking to protect the established centres of power. The cruelty lies in the knowing actions of those directly involved in the violent repression of dissent. It also lies in the wanton ignorance of those living in the West. Those who marginalise a continent of people. Those who prioritise profit over other considerations. Those who talk of freedom but know nothing of those who are staking their lives for freedom in today’s world. This is a tale about brave activists fighting for the rights we in the West take for granted to be provided to their peers in the Middle East. It is a story of an outsized fight where those fighting for democracy are facing entrenched and ruthless authoritarians, self-interested Westerners and a largely indifferent media. It is an interview you need to hear. We all need to check our privilege.

Dan Tubb is a podcaster and former venture capitalist. In this interview, we discuss the problems with fixing the sovereign debt problem in the context of broken media, broken politics and broken international institutions. We talk about the general ignorance of the problems facing society, and how this compounds the difficulty of resolving the situation. - - - - The last show with Dan Tubb was extremely popular. Dan set out in clear terms why the current economic system is at a crossroads: continuation of the accumulation of debt without rebalancing fiscal commitments is unsustainable; equally, there are no easy solutions. But when debt payments become one of the main government expenditures it’s well past the time to act. In this follow-up show we discuss the causes, ramifications and potential mitigations with Dan. How did the boomer generation unintentionally fuel the current economic problems, and why are they reluctant to change tack? Why is government becoming increasingly dogmatic and coercive in their policy application? Can AI provide a source of growth for the economy that averts the debt spiral? Should we expect the government to resolve all these issues? These aren’t theoretical concerns; there is evidence abounds that society's relationship with the state is shifting: Macron’s difficulties in reigning in state spending in France; the growth in power of the Dutch farmers; Brexit. For too long those in government have taken the electorate for granted, whilst feathering their own nests. However, the issue is whether this break between the people and power will only exacerbate problems. The solution surely has to be in more direct engagement between decision-makers and citizens. States rights in the US have long served as a beacon of governance for other parts of the world: bottom up democracy that provides for competition and innovation. It’s not that we need less government, it's that we need more representative and localised government. Further, if we want a functioning democracy, we need to entice the best back into government.

Jan Čapek and Pavel Moravec are the co-founders of Braiins, a Bitcoin Mining company. In this interview, we discuss Braiins update to their updated Stratum V2 protocol software for pooled mining, how it helps solve Bitcoin mining’s centralisation problem, and why Braiins has given the Stratum software away to the community as open source. - - - - The development and growth in pooled Bitcoin mining has been a critical part of maintaining Bitcoin’s security. The synergies of scale were always going to affect Bitcoin as it transitioned into a more mature technology. However, centralisation is an existential threat to Bitcoin. Mining pools, started in 2010 by Jan and Pavel, therefore enabled small-scale miners to continue to gain value from limited hash power, which thereby strengthened the network's security. Nevertheless, just as the rise of the mega miners concentrated the hashrate, so did the rise of major mining pools. In February over 52% of the hashrate was controlled by just 2 mining pools (Foundry USA and Antpool). This is not to state that these mining pools have malevolent intentions. But Bitcoin must always guard against an attack through trustless mechanisms. Marathon’s flip-flopping over filtering non-OFAC-compliant transactions in 2021 was a warning. The solution to the problem lies in the communication protocol used to connect miners with mining pools. The existing protocol, Stratum V1, was developed and distributed as open-source software by Braiins in 2012. Whilst it has successfully supported Bitcoin mining pools since then, it was in need of an upgrade for a series of reasons. Such an upgrade enabled this centralisation issue to be tackled head-on. Stratum V2 transfers the power for writing new blocks from the pool operators and into the hands of individual miners. This is enabled by a sub-protocol within Stratum V2 called the “Job Negiotator”. The incentive for adoption is that the other updates enable faster (i.e. more profitable) and more secure communications. It is an elegant solution built with the same technical and community-facing ethos as Bitcoin’s open-source code. Děkuji Braiins!

Lyn Alden is a macroeconomist and investment strategist. In this interview, we discuss the recent run of bank failures: the causes, the impacts on the banking sector, federal support and exposure, and the likelihood of continued stress in the system. We also discuss a coming decade of recurring inflation and the emergence of reserve currency competition in a multi-polar world. - - - - “The vast majority of commercial banks that have ever operated in the U.S. have disappeared… the slow and steady decline in bank numbers continues.” This 2021 analysis by a St Louis Federal Reserve economist is as applicable now as then. Whilst the dramatic decline in bank numbers (from over 30,000 in 1921 to circa 4,000 now) mostly occurred in the 1930s, the past 3 decades have been characterized by a continued contraction that shows no sign of stopping. There are obviously inherent risks in banking centralization. As we have seen in recent years, governments are delegating more regulatory authority to private banks, bypassing democratic norms in the process. As banks require central bank permission to operate, they have no incentive to resist such demands. Nevertheless, banking centralisation is a symptom of a more fundamental issue: a fiscal spiral that’s creating an increasingly volatile economic environment. Unsustainable levels of debt are hampering central banks' ability to address growing inflation. Restraining economic growth decreases the ability of governments to reduce deficits. Further, the political cycle results in difficult but necessary policy decisions around fiscal constraints being deferred. The result is a yo-yo-ing of rate rises and bailouts. This increases the risk for all types of investment, even traditional safe havens. Banks struggle, and depositors run. A situation that begins with investors seeking safer banks, if not resolved, can lead to investors seeking to divest themselves of sovereign currencies. This is where capital controls kick in. The fundamental issue is that governments will seek to protect the system, not the individual. The denial of licences for narrow banks is part of the same toolbox that includes gold seizures and potential restrictions on Bitcoin. Prepare accordingly.

Aleks Svetski is an entrepreneur, author and Bitcoin advocate. In this interview, we discuss his upcoming book “The Bushido of Bitcoin”. We cover the negative impacts of wealth, how Bitcoiners can mitigate such negative influences by becoming virtuous and disciplined, and why famous warrior classes are examples to follow. - - - - It seems like we’re entering another bull run. If it is sustained and we enter another cycle, Bitcoin’s price appreciation will be matched by reappraisals of the hyperbitcoinisation thesis. Can it replace the role of stores of value? Can it become a new global monetary reserve? Will it become a prevalent medium of exchange? Whilst all these questions are important, there one area of discussion doesn’t get adequately debated: what do Bitcoiners do if and when their place within society becomes elevated? Material personal benefits will be offset by newfound responsibilities. If they are to be the flag bearers of the change Bitcoin promises, how should Bitcoiners behave? Aleks Svetski tackles this issue in his soon-to-be-released book ‘The Bushido of Bitcoin”. Bushido is the samurai moral code. The word literally means “warrior way”. The samurai were Japanese nobility, and Bushido adhered them to follow various virtues (honour, honesty, self-control, loyalty, compassion, respect, righteousness and courage). It has had a lasting impact on Japanese culture. The importance of Bushido in the modern context is that elites now operate outside of any moral code. Post war liberal society has developed a system of norms, where expected behaviours have not been codified into law. Increasingly, elites have exploited these norms: if it isn’t illegal, then it’s okay. The roots of societal decay can be extrapolated from this situation. What is needed is a new moral code. It could be argued that Bitcoin maximalists have been developing such a moral framework for Bitcoiners. But, it is important to take a step back and understand the tenets of a moral code first before defining which actions should be encouraged or discouraged. In essence, what should the Bushido of Bitcoin be?

Izabella Kaminska is a journalist and founder and editor of The Blind Spot. In this interview, we discuss the failure of current mainstream journalism to cover subjects properly, why the destruction of the middle class is dangerous for democracy, the endemic problem of corruption in politics, and the need for an honest economic orthodoxy. - - - - In a lot of ways, we are in a gold age of media. There have never been so many different ways to consume news and opinion. This has been triggered by many factors: deregulation, technology and the atomisation of modern society. But, this also creates a significant number of problems. Principally, whilst there is more freely accessible information, it is now harder to discern fact from fake. The commercialisation of news has resulted in a race for clickbait: polarising reporting, increasing sensationalism, and relegating in-depth examination. Conversely, those organisations seeking to remain impartial such as the BBC, end up getting lost in a sea of conflicting missions. This has resulted in the BBC failing in its main mission to inform, educate and entertain. This is why new media brands are becoming important promulgators of information, increasingly at the expense of traditional media organisations. Amongst all the noise, people are looking for honest and relatable brokers of news. Further, people are craving more intellectually curious, nuanced and detailed analysis. This is the demand Izabella Kaminska’s The Blind Spot media venture is seeking to fill. A demand that mainstream media is unwilling or unable to satisfy. It’s hard: building a new brand takes time. But, without such content, groups on both the left and right will continue to mischaracterize issues that require understanding, trade-offs and proportionality. This will exacerbate the problems of polarisation and the veiled promotion of corporate interests. We need more journalists like Isabella willing to report the truth.

Sergej Kotliar is the founder and CEO of Bitrefill. In this interview, we discuss enabling Bitcoin circular economies, the mission of Bitrefill to be a financial empowerment company, the risks and rewards of using zero-confs for processing transactions, and the many different cultures and communities Bitcoin has spawned. - - - - Bitrefill is the largest crypto e-commerce platform in the world. It aims to facilitate the development of crypto circular economies. Whilst Bitcoin makes up a significant portion of their business, they are not a Bitcoin-only company. The mission is aimed at empowering people to undertake transactions on the internet that would otherwise not be possible for them. To that end, they pragmatically enable the use of Bitcoin, stablecoins, and a limited number of altcoins. The argument in favour of their strategy is compelling. Not everyone will respond to ideological arguments in favour of Bitcoin. Whilst there are many who will get drawn in by Bitcoin’s compelling theoretical roots, there are many others who are more concerned with prosaic day-to-day concerns. To maximise efforts to increase adoption we, therefore, need to appeal to a range of visions for Bitcoin. One important vision is focused on Bitcoin’s dry technical utilities. In our discussion, Sergej refers to the increase in the use of the internet and other technologies such as VPN. The widespread growth in the use of such technologies occurs as a result of a practical benefit being provided to users, not because adopters are seeking to mitigate a certain political or ethical concern. That’s not to say that selling Bitcoin as freedom money isn’t critical. Rather, we need to augment it with other strategies.