Read_855 - The Great Capitulation
46:52 Share

The stakes are openly stated, if the central banks lose, then wealth will be redistributed to the detriment of the current benfica aries of the canyon effect. And this, again, assuming that the coin will bring no value to humanity, bitcoin may reverse the distribution consequences of the euro. And the E C B doesn't like IT.

Panic is rising. Bitcoin, the way out of their giant ponzi scheme, does not want to die, but the survival of the fights system depends on the lack of an alternative. The entire system is therefore in danger. The best in bitcoin made audible. I am guys, swan, and this is bitcoin possible.

What is up, guys? Welcome back to bitcoin. Audible, I am guys, won. The guy who has read more about bitcoin than anybody else, you know.

And this is the show where we read and explore all about bitcoin, open source and the technology of liberty. We break IT all down here for you at bitcoin out of six, seven, seven years running. Now, thirteen hundred, some old episodes, something like that, I don't even know, crazy, just, just a long time.

We have been running welcome, and we've got a great show today. We ve got a great read. Actually we are jumping into an article called the great capitulation.

So I read the I actually intended to read the audio of the entire ecb paper about the redistributive consequences of bitcoin. But holy crap, I could. I literally barely got through IT not recording, because recording is a very slow way to read something.

But I, I, I couldn't really read the whole thing. And then in the midst of this, I happen to find a couple of different articles that were responding to the paper. And I thought this was the most interesting one.

This was the one that hit what rather than like really kind of going point by point because we've done that before. Think one or both of their previous papers about bitcoin we would go through. I think nick karner had a really good point.

My point break down of, I think, their first ecb paper, if a man out mistaken IT may have been a different one. IT was another central banking paper about bitcoin, though. But I didn't really feel like I wanted to do that again.

I just felt so tedious to go through this whole dance again and have to respond to a whole bunch of points that are all so weak to begin with. Like like the whole paper is really pathetic. And I loved I was very short as like hardly anything into this article.

It's like the third paragraph. But he started, he opened this saying, quote, I could question the need to write twenty pages of quote research to establish that when the Price of an asset rises, those who held IT gain more purchasing power than those who do not. And that I was just, i've laugh.

I had to stop and laugh because that's exactly what this whole thing is. The entire ecb paper on the redirect tional consequences of bitcoin is literally twenty pages of cotton quote research that is centrally says if the Price of an asset rises, the people who buy IT will benefit, and the people who don't are, quote unquote unfairly punished. That's the whole thing. But there are some really interesting cave ots out of this article, especially out of this paper, especially IT being their third one, because the tone has changed, the framing has changed.

And I know if you've listen to the show for any links of time, that I talk a lot about mental framing and how to position an argument and how to think about the presumption or the premise on which you are standing win having a conversation into not give the premise, not to give the presumption to their framing, to not allow them to frame IT in their way. And all in the interesting, what I love to out this article is the recognition that the framing has changed. And so I don't anna lead too much.

We're just going to go hidden, get into this article. I will say I have my fold referral link, I have my river referral, a bunch of different links available for services, products and tools that I use in dico. In all the time, I just kind of went to a bunch of them that I really like and that I know of, and I tried to find and feel link some of the a filia links.

But regardless, they're just there for really great resources. And also they are ways that you can support the show if you use my link as opposed to just going to IT. And that really helps me out and IT makes me love you even more.

So thank you guys to everyone who does because the show is brought to you by you guys. And you can except me on fountain or boost on fountain. You can sap me on noster all of those details and where you can follow me and find more my work all right there. And with that was going to get into today's article and it's titled. The great capitulation by Alexander's tatcho er bacon may very well reverse the distribution consequences of the euro in one of the biggest transfers of wealth of the last decades.

They are back ordec been seal director general of market infrastructure and payments at the european central bank, and yuga chaff adviser in the same department published a new article on bitcoin on october twelve four, an obsession for these european central bank collaborators, who are already in less than two years on their third attempt to break the momentum of the direct competitor of the euro. In this new article, the author's chAllenge is to demonstrate the redistributive consequences of bick coin coron quote in a bitcoin positive scenario. In other words, to cook, prove that even if bitcoin does not collapse like the absurd fifteen year old bubbles that IT is supposed to be, IT has redistributive consequences on the wealth of society in general, which they consider deleterious.

I could question the need to write twenty pages of, quote, research to establish that when the Price of an asset rises, those who held IT gain more purchasing power than those who did not. I could do well, only dripping intellectual dishonesty of this paper whose arbitrary hypotheses are numerous and biased. In order to obtain the desired conclusion in this regard, let us innocently note the word cook assume is present more than once per page throughout the document, twenty eight times for twenty one pages of text.

I could dwell on the vocabulary and the contempt biases of the authors who attribute the gains of bacon holders, to quote lambs and rolex es and other village, demonstrating their inability to do real research work beyond twitter and its means. I could dwell on the incongruity of E, C, B employees, including a senior official, using their time paid with taxpayers money to write a new rag every year on an asset they consider not to be a currency. Isn't there enough to do on their own Price stability Mandate? Does the ecb offer in lightning analysis of copper, wood or even specific companies? I could dwell on the departure from neutrality of two ecb employees who make political reMarks that are forbidden in by european treaties and violate the independence of their institution by recommending supporting politicians according to their opinions, and in particular, that of fighting bitcoin.

I could also dwell on the arrogance of the authors and persisting and writing on a subject that they clearly do not master, having twice already demonstrated the ambition vuv of their analysis, in particular by announcing that the fall of F T, X would lead to bitcoin s last gasp before irrelevance, I could well on the willful blindness that leads to analysts to turn a blind eye to the mense amount of evidence that contradicts what they write on their rejection of credible sources from coronal al university to north CarOlina, a university via ucl, when they claim that bitcoin destroyed the environment, going against the scientific consensus, on their silence tinged with rejection, when human rights activists offered to meet them to testify. The primordial usefulness of bitcoin for them, in contrast to the uselessness that they assert as an unquestionable hypothesis. But I have already done all of this for their previous article.

Intellectual honesty and rigor do not interest them. IT was already the case before. IT is still the case today, and most likely IT will still be the case tomorrow, as long as the media don't point out the incoherence and the indignity of their reMarks each time they speak on the subject, they will continue.

I would rather focus on the substance of this article and how IT reveals a moral capitulation on the part of the authors and probably of the ecb. Although IT has refrained from publishing the article on its website, this time a conceptual capitulation bitcoin has won. Let us simply note to begin, that the authors admit that bitcoin may not die.

IT is their working hypothesis symbolic? This is the first capitulation when a journalist asks a candidate in an election what he plans to do if they lose, the candidate knows that they must dismiss the question and state unequivocally that this possibility is excluded. Because if they answer the question, they have already lost by allowing the possibility that they will lose to linger.

Even among their supporters they're still doubt. And so the seeds of defeat themselves so far the E C B has maintained its in bitcoin is not a currency IT is a speculative bubble without interest. Any question about the role of the E C B with regard to bitcoin is stupid because biton will die soon, thus IT does not have to respond on the substance and to possible criticisms of the euro or fiat currency in general by riding a scenario in which bitcoin does not die.

Despite the enormous caution taken by the authors, the E C B is in sterling. Doubt is IT that bitcoin may not die. Of course, IT is improbable.

Bitcoin s detractor still think, but IT is possible. IT is no longer a matter of discussing a funny project of libertarian geeks doomed to failure. IT is a matter of preparing for a scenario that can actually happen.

The debate, changes in nature and substantive questions are allowed. The confession of guilt, the redistributive consequences of the euro. Let us now focus on the heart of the paper's argument. quote. In this paper, we show that even a bitcoin positive scenario is problematic from a social perspective, as all the wealth effects enjoyed by the early adopters through the rising Prices would be at the expense of the late commerce or non holders who are empower shed. Previously, according to the authors, the scenario OS envisaged by the economist, they are used to freQuenting focused rather on the dangers of the bursting of the bitcoin bubble.

The originality of the paper according to them is to quote, show that even without a bursting bubble, bitcoin povertie society and leads to a redistribution of wealth from, quote, late comers or non holders to quote, early birds or early bitcoin holders, quote, it's like filling one bucket by draining water from another. The late comers have to give up for the benefit of the early holders. They say, according to them, this is very serious for society as a whole, because IT quote, in dangerous cohesions stability and ultimately democracy, nothing less, the authors seem to linger, particularly on the fate of late comers who would be cheated.

Quote this, redistribution of wealth and purchasing power is unlikely to occur without detrimental consequences for society. Even if the late commerce cannot attribute their loss of purchasing power, they will feel a malays and frustration that will contribute further to an ever more divided society. But let's play along with the authors and suppose that even their absurd zero some game hypothesis is true.

That is, that bit on in itself produces no wealth for society anywhere in the world, who are the early lucky birds suspected of plotting to take over all the world's s lebrato ines regardless of the country. The number one discriminating variable encysted holding is youth in france. According to the K P M G eso twenty twenty four survey, more than half of crypto holders are between eighteen and thirty five years old.

While this age group only represents a quarter of the population, modest individuals are also vastly overrepresented. A third of holders are in a household earning less than eighteen thousand euro per year in the united states, according to the paradise survey. The result is similar, with twenty nine percent of eighteen to thirty four year old owning encrypt s comparing two thousand percent for the general population.

Since cook ethnic surveys are allowed there and forbidden in france, we also discover that ethnic minorities are particularly over represented, with thirty one percent of holders. Even kala Harris has noted this and explicitly mentions the topic of crypto s in her agenda revealed in october twenty twenty four and intended for african americans. These statistics are found globally in all countries in which surveys are conducted, so much so that these disparities are also found between countries according to the same criteria.

According to the latest global adoption index from analysis, the podium of countries where adoption is the strongest is made up of india, nigeria and indonesia, countries four of Young people outside the O, E, C D, and where financial inclusion is lacking. And all of this should not make us forget the countless stories, unfortunately, difficult to objectify by statistics, but which are so obvious to anyone who has understood bitcoin and its usefulness. The story of snow den, or a son who use IT to guarantee the right to inform or reveal state scandals.

The second has just been recognized as a political prisoner by europe and owed his survival in twenty eleven to the existence of bitcoin. The story of royal maroo and afghan n entrepreneur r using bitcoin to pay women, deprive to financial independence and allow her campta riots to flee the taliban regime, who in this regard banned bitcoin shortly after their return. The story of venezuelan opposition leader maria korea, my shadow, for whom, quote, bitcoin has evolved from a humAnitarian tool to a vital means of resistance, making bitcoin a lively as the country sinks deeper into dictatorship and humAnitarian crisis. The story of a manual day night in the vulgar park in congo, whose survival also depended on bitcoin in order to protect the last mountain gorilla. So many people whose only ambition in life would be to acquire a lambo and a rolex, if we are to believe the authors.

On the other hand, if IT is the facts, the statistics and the field that are to be the early birds are Young people, people of modest means, minorities, the underprivileged, those banned from banking, excluded from the financial system, human rights activists and even whistle blowers, and who are the poor late comers struck by providence who have not yet acquired bitcoins, the elderly, the bombers, the retired, the professionals of traditional finance, the holders of financial assets and the ballistic states, all the people who do not see the interest of bitcoin, and who are magnificently embodied by the authors, the personification of the canyon effect, this redistribution of wealth that favors economic agents according to their proximity to the source of money. Why be interested in bitcoin when you yourself are the monetary tap at the heart of the decision making apparatus of the ecb? And besides, the authors strive to show in their section, too, that a toshi knock moto has understood nothing about payments and does not solve any problem.

According to them, quote, proof of work is highly in practical itself, as IT is costly and inefficient compared to alternative ways to secure the safety and prevent double spending of a payment instrument. But what alternative are they talking about? The use of trusted third parties? Of course, they do not realize the absurdity of the statement they are making, blaming the toshi noc moto for solving a problem that does not exist in their world in a perfectly coherent and rational way.

The late commerce are therefore those who benefit the most from the current monetary situation by depLoring the transfer of wealth from the rich retired bombers and traditional financial professionals to the Young, disadvantaged, modest people excluded from the financial system. The author's score an own goal, they revealed the quote, distributional consequences of theod currencies, a second defeat, a declaration of war with a taste of panic from this confession arises a clear recommendation. Quote, current non holders should realize that they have compelling reasons to oppose bitcoin and advocate for legislation against IT, aiming to prevent bitcoin Prices from rising or to see bitcoin disappear altogether.

Late cumbers and non holders and their political representatives should emphasize that the idea of bitcoin as an investment relates to redistribution at their expense. According to the authors, the laggards and their political representatives must therefore unite to fight against bitcoin, because in the unlikely event that IT does not die on its own, IT will be at their expense. In short, war has been declared, but by declaring war, the authors give credibility to their target.

Bitcoin is therefore dangerous enough to be design native as the enemy to be defeated. The stakes are openly stated. If the central banks lose, then wealth will be redistributed to the detriment of the current beneficiaries of the country on effect.

And this, again, assuming that biton will bring no value to humanity, bitcoin may reverse the distribution consequences of the euro. And the ecb doesn't like IT. Panic is rising.

Bitcoin, the way out of their giant panzi scheme, does not want to die, but the survival of the fights system depends on the lack of an alternative. The entire system is therefore in danger. Conceptual, this text is the first nail in the coffin of the euro and a moral capitulation of the E.

C. B, although not an open one, because not published on the blog, an unworthy paper riddled with errors and lies, guilty with intellectual dishonesty, whose hypotheses were established in order to obtain a preexisting conclusion. My favorite sentence being the following quote, to refrain from an explicit judgment that bitumen is a speculative bubble which would inevitably burst.

We replace the term bubble in the remainders of this paper by Price exuberance. These gentleman are too generous and grant us the term Price ubs rather than bubble, so as not to be biased. It's an absolute joke in a well mad world.

This paper should be unattended, decried by the entire present, by all citizens, para gonds and detractors alike. Why is the E C B diverting so many resources from its real missions to focus on IT? Either biton is not the joke with no future that they care to present, or IT is a concious waste of public money.

In both cases, IT is problematic. The chAllenge is to take down bitcoin to install the digital euro. The bitcoin has already survived much worse and should survive again.

In any case, bitcoin surviving is now the main working hypothesis, including of the E, C, B. And that is Priceless. You know, one of the funniest things about the paper, the E, C, B paper, is the sheer.

And now, I mean, he points this out because I didn't think about IT in my mind as this. But I love the fact that he typically counted the number of times they use the word assume, but the entire paper just sounds like IT. It's the most clearly subjective, like just the most blatant dumping of opinion into something that they call a research paper that is the most unscientific nonsense, like as as someone who calls themselves and intellectual.

These people should be embarrassed for the sheer stupidity and total lack of anything resembling research or actually looking at the statistics or trying to do some sort of legitimate analysis on this thing. And it's specifically unreadable because of how bad IT is at this because it's so clearly has a is not biased where they have a conclusion and they're just trying to find or come up with any argument they can in order to make IT appear as if that conclusion holds any water at all. And the argument is so thin that the vast majority of what they are even saying is a series of assumptions about what a thing means from that.

Their like stupid, shallow opinion, like they are talk about like lambs like this entire paper, literally just feels like an embarrassing attempt to try to turn an angry twitter post into something that sounds scientific and stretch the argument. They could have literally been covered in one hundred and twenty eight characters and basically boiled down to everyone in bitcoin is only there for limbos and roxas. And if biton actually keeps growing, well, they're gonna money and everyone else will be poor forever. So it's time to make IT illegal. That's literally the entire paper summing up.

But because they want to paint IT sophisticated and don't know how to do anything without wasting enormous amounts of tax, pay your money for no reason, they decided to draw out this rather pathetic argument into twenty pages of suo science that goes out of its way to not get any real data or references and just hunts for anything that might appeared to reinforce the opinion that actually originated while one of the authors was sitting on the crap for forty five minutes, having a completely imaginary argument, which he was so winning with that dude who had laser eyes on twitter and told him to have the stay poor. Trust me, if you didn't read the E C, B paper on the redistributive consequences of bitcoin, you already know everything. You need to know that basically the level of substance.

But what's really funny about them getting people to think about the redistributive consequences of the money and how the money works, it's so funny. Because IT reveals just how terrible the euro and the dollar is, how terrible fee audience. If you actually expand on the concept, if you actually take this to its logical conclusion and look at how the euro look actually works, it's only biton is not zero sum b because the society is not zero some, but printing money literally is zero sum.

IT actually is an unfair advantage that creates explicit poverty, because that is genuinely taking resource. Nobody who cocote buys big and holds that is taking resources from anyone. Money is not a resource.

Money is not a resource. You don't eat IT. You don't stick IT in a furness to burn to melt steel.

You don't use IT to build buildings. You don't use IT to make clothes. Money is nothing but a record keeping system. To save money is an act of providing resources to the economy.

IT is saying, I will work and give stuff to you, and I will hold on this receipt, which is nothing but my trust that society will one day pay IT back. Savings is literally an investment in society itself is a skin in the game testimony, a declaration that says, I will put my value into the economy for other people to use. And in exchange, I will hold this receipt.

I will hold this promise from society, and I will trust, society will grow. Society will know and believe that this promise is Better than all other promises. And I will differ my consumption explicitly to the benefit of everyone else.

And I will take the risk. I will take the risk that society will be Better in the future. And I will leave my resources in the economy to ensure that that is what I am putting my value toward.

IT is literally saying, I leave my resources, I give them to you, because I trust that you will make society Better. And I will wait. I will wait.

I will not eat today. I will not buy the house that I want to buy. I will not live the life that I want to live, because I believe society will be Better if you have the resources that I made today.

And here's the really funny thing, you can't get any value out of IT if there are aren't late commerce. In other words, someone has to voluntarily say at a later date that they want to give up their resources in order to have bacon. Because bitcoin is the superior promise, it's the Better trust in the society y's record keeping an ability to grow.

And so if that's not true and nobody trusts that, nobody gets any value out of IT like my buying of bitcoin is just me donating to society of bitcoin is nothing. I lose everything, literally everything, all the things that were all the financial and economic value that we have we put into bitcoin. No, obviously, I don't lose my real life value.

I don't lose my well, I might lose my house. I don't lose my family and my health and all of that good stuff. But from a purely financial stamp, we would be ruined. And it's so funny that if you actually look at the distribution consequences of resources from there in the transfer of that value from dollars to bitcoin, the holding of bitcoin is actually the that not even the living of your own resources, but the living of the resources. Like, for example.

So let's say I, you know, taking extreme example and say you got in a big round when I was two dollars, and you sold a car for something like a thousand and a car a very low cost, like not like a ton of value, whatever. You saved a thousand dollar car or excuse me, sold a thousand dollar car and you put IT all in a big coin. So you had a ton of bitcoin and then you held IT until today and now you have thirty million dollars.

There were something like that. I I don't know what the conversion would be. Know if you have a thousand knowledge, five hundred it's five hundred big coins, so it's it's fifty million because bitcoins one hundred thousand wow mouth is really easy when you just have whole numbers.

okay? Since the coins rather one hundred thousand and eight b fifty fifty million dollars. Now here's the funny thing is that holding bitcoin actually means and or buying lambs, which is actually really funny because, bang, lamb s is the dumbest thing that you can do IT, because it's so unbelievably stupid.

But the really good thing about a bunch crypto or a big coin, nars, who don't know anything about bitcoin selling their returns and buying a lambo, is that that's the that's the crap ous thing that they can do with IT, and it's the least important resource that they could take off of the economy. So if they buy, you know, been half a million dollars buying a lamborghini, that's actually great because who the hell needs a lamborghini? Go ahead and take those off the market.

Who even cares? But here's the funny thing is if they are lit, if they're holding their bitcoin and they're living modestly and they just have like a small house, two hundred thousand thousand house or three hundred thousand, that's not in much of a house I had. The median house was like three hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

Yeah, three hundred fifty thousand is now I am not mistaken. I live modestly and they don't spend their money. We'll think about what they are doing like it's not just that they provided a thousand dollar car to the economy and then they now they have unspoken the unfair returns. What they actually did is they they made a floor.

They propped up the benefit and exit the prop up the value of a Better system of trade when IT was insanely risky and insanely vulnerable to its demise, to the fact that he might not survive, when people were still unsure if I did have a future, they were actually the ones that held IT up. And that that conviction is exactly why that new sist, that far superior system of trade. Could potentially exist in the future.

There are the ones that provided the liquidity early on to give IT a market and to propose that I can do exactly what IT does. But they also aren't buying fifty million dollars. You could buy what are hundred and fifty houses.

You could just buy and own all of that. Take IT off the market, jack up the Prices in your lisa, you wanted to do that in your city. You could just totally jack up the Prices, take all of these things off the markets. They're not available for older people now. They're more expensive.

Now the person who thought they could get alone at this interest rate and at this aml and handle at this monthly cost, now they can do IT because you just bought up literally one hundred and fifty, bought all of the houses they are available in their area right now. Now the only way to get is they have to outbid you, which means they have to spend more on a house that they otherwise would have gotten for lower cost IT would have been more affordable. But now it's not because you just wasted ted all of your bitcoin on a bunch of houses.

But that's stupid. You wouldn't do that because houses aren't an investment. Houses are reliability.

Houses degrade. They barely they don't they actually do not keep up with inflation. If you just compare them to the m two, they have degraded in value.

And anyone who understands money will just hold bitcoin because they is not good. IT is a detrimental thing. IT is bad for you to buy a bunch of resources.

They will just lose money. They will lose value. And they explicit take that ownership from other people. Consumption should be done if it's a valuable and useful thing, if it's worth IT to you in order to maybe even lose all the money because you believe the thing that you are risking IT all on is worth IT because IT makes society Better, because IT makes you Better, because IT has the potential to profit massively, because of the unbelievable opportunity and the problem that this thing could solve. Well, then IT makes sense for you to do IT.

But if you're just parking money in a bunch of houses that other people actually need and that you don't need, but all you want to do is just suck him up off the market and then get essentially never have to pay them back because you're going to buy buy them with debt and that debt going to be devalued because of inflation in the housing. Your interest rate is not going to match inflation at all because it's all manipulated bullshit by the central bank. Saving in bitcoin is actually the good thing to do.

IT is good for society. IT is good for the economy, because IT explicitly makes things that people need affordable because you're not wasting all of that value buying IT all up. Instead, you're just holding onto bitcoin.

You're just holding onto the trust, the unit of trust in that society that you believe resources will be there when they when you need them to Better your life or when you think you have found an idea or some sort of an investment or some sort of a project that gives enough value in order for you to risk on that. And IT reinforces the very opinions, the very conviction and the very knowledge that LED to people adopting a Better trading system. Rather, the ideology that literally uses parasitically, uses taxpayer money, stolen money, to a waste time turning their tweet level opinion in the twenty pages of super science garbage.

The paper itself, the redistributive consequences of bitcoin, has caused more direct poverty than bitcoin and any holders ever will. They get paid with text money. No bitcoin holder stole anything from you, you idiot.

But going back to the fact that IT reveals the euro and IT reveals was happening with fiat, think about IT is that if you benefit from being near the money printer and you, or you get dead and you buy a house or you buy a stock, you, you invest in anything, this quote outpace inflation. And specifically, you do IT with newly printed money, then you are literally doing the opposite of what the bitcoin saver is doing. You are taking resources out of the economy that you haven't even put in.

You are taking value and things that other people need completely unfairly, simply because you are near the machine. This just arbitrarily printing these favor receipts. They they are totally fake.

They are not real. They are not receipts for any real favors. Nobody made a skin in the game decision to give you that value. You're just defrauding them.

Money works as a means to organize and coordinate society to specifically because every decision that happens with money, with value that is actually earned, skinning the game opinions, excuse me, skinning the game decisions, a ninety day difference from some social or verbal or twitter opinion. People will say, I want this, you should do this. And all never ending on slot of cheap B.

S. opinions. But when they are required to use their money, those decisions change very, very quickly. There's a lot of people who want the ward IT with ukraine to escalate. There's a lot of people who say russia's the evil devil.

But if they had to sign an explicit check every single month for the thousand dollars that they have to contribute to IT, I guarantee you ninety nine percent of its support would vanish like that. The only reason they can spout their vapid opinion is they literally think that they are getting IT for free. And the only people that even keep would even keep pushing.

And other people who sit next to the money printer and think that the cost of things doesn't matter. And we can just print a vigilant dollar out of thin air and fund or create or do whatever the help we want, because the money partner is a magic one that just makes resources appear out of nothing of what's actually happening. They're stealing all of these resources from.

They are delivered. They are explicitly making all of us poor, leaving fewer houses for us. They're buying up all of the assets.

They're owning all of the stocks. They're controlling all of the businesses while we get poor and poor Prices keep getting higher and higher. Everything keeps getting more expensive.

The lives, our lives and our standard of living and our help keep getting further and further away from what we want. We have less and less time. We own less and less of the literal country that we occupy. We rent all of the important things of our lives that can be taken from us, that can be used to control us. And suddenly our lives s come with strings attached.

And the pathetic, want to be tired at the ecb literally tell us we're going to go into a future where O O O O O E, if you eagle so IT doesn't matter, you'll have to be happy or you'll go to the guo legs that way they can reeducate you on how great everything really is. But funny thing about this whole paper is what a self owned IT is. Their whole.

The whole premise of this E C B paper is that bitcoin won't die after years of them saying bitcoin was complete nonsense and IT was gonna bust and all. Of course, they had their own sophisticated research papers about how dangerous IT was for the economy, for the bitcoin bubble to burst. But now, now that's not the conversation. Now that's not the frame.

The frame is, well, how terrible will IT be if bitcoin doesn't die? Here's why you should fight IT. Here's why you should make sure it's outlaw.

Because if you don't buy bitcoin, all of the people who do by bitcoin will get super rich on, everyone else will be poor. And it's hilarious because it's kind of an argument that you should buy bitcoin now rather than later. Now Alexander brings up a really good point is that you don't you don't they just admitted that bitcoin might not die.

They just admitted that, okay, what if I just keeps going like this and that's that's the capitulation and I love the the a the framing or the one of last sections, whatever capitulation. With a touch of panic, quote, IT is no longer a matter of discussing a funny project of libertarian geeks doomed to failure. IT is a matter of preparing for a scenario that can actually happen.

The debate changes in nature and substantive questions are allowed. And probably my favorite of IT, where they just talk about how the ocean automotive didn't solve anything, when literally the problem they solve is the E, C. Beast is the problem in the quin sick.

This is from the article, not the research paper. So embassies, the authors strive to show in their section, too, that a total ac motor has understood nothing about payments and does not solve any problem. According to them, quote, proof of work is highly in practical itself, as IT is costly and inefficient, compared red to alternative ways to secure the safety and prevent del spending of a payment instrument.

But what alternative are they talking about? The use of trusted dirt parties. Of course, they do not realize the absurdity of the statement that they are making, blaming the total knocked moto for solving a problem that does not exist in their world.

And I would actually worn IT a little bit differently than that. It's not that the problem doesn't exist in their world, it's that having to trust them is the solution that they claim is already perfect. They are literally the third party that we are forced to trust.

And so from their viewpoint, bitcoin doesn't solve any problem. Except that if you actually ask a bitcoin, er, they are the problem. The E C B is the problem. We are sick of being stolen from.

We are sick of being the puppets in their giant system of just controlling everything that we own when they literally, literally, openly talk about a future where nobody will own anything except for them, and everyone will be happy about that. Because you don't have a choice. You are the problem, you arrogant idiot. Everyone is sick of trusting you because you have destroyed the western world we've got in the modern world of its integrity, of its founding, of its value base, of its culture, of its diversity.

And they've suffocated IT in this allow arbitrary financial 的， where the people who actually do the work of society, who keep the pipes running, who pave the roads, who build the houses, who do the actual things that make society exist and keep food on their plates, are completely overrun and completely dominated by people who just trade a bunch of financial derivatives, who have no, who think the whole world is just a bunch of numbers in a computer screen. And that power is distributed through the higher archy of how close you are to the giant defraying tary mechanism, while they literally waste taxpayer money, stolen funds, waxing sophisticated in twenty pages of nonsense, where they literally tell people that because they're in charge, there is no problem and everyone should just do whatever they say. Payments work great because we are the ones who control the letter.

There's not even a problem to solve. Guys, you are the problem that big coin solves. It's not theoretical.

It's not like maybe a little bit. And no, we're not trying to be diplomatic about IT. We are solving you.

We are trying to put you out of business forever. We are trying to destroy the industry of money, printers and political power via fraud. And you are at its center.

You are its core, right? As many research papers as you want, please, as many euros as you can, and fund all of the research, because IT will only make bitcoin go up even more, and you will keep having to capitulated over and over the framing more and more because the every year that goes by and bitcoin doesn't die and IT doesn't blow up and people actually have their lives improve and they stop getting destroyed and stolen from because they're holding your cheap shitty paper. Promises are just the token of your unearned opulence.

You only make yourself look more and more pathetic. And I hope you take as long as you possibly can to buy bitcoin. I hope you are the very last one who does IT. And IT almost upsets me.

The most frustrating thing about bitcoin is that in the end, your life will still be made Better by bitcoin, because IT will put the entire society into a set of CoOperative incentives, where, if everyone and succeed, IT makes the value in the life of the other people, of the people who did not contribute Better, just because they all they get to benefit from everyone else is success. Everything always gets more affordable. And because they'll actually have to do some sort of contribution to IT, they might actually be made into Better people rather than the empty solar counter fitters that they are today.

So please double down, write another paper next year. I can't wait the covered on the show and with that we will cause this one out a huge thanks to Alexander uh who I have never actually read a piece by on the show. I don't believe um the first one so uh, shout out to him.

I don't forget to follow him on medium. I will have the link to the article right there in the show notes as well as the other products and services in the affiliate and all the great things that you can do to support this show. Or but of course, just to support yourself, get some bitcoin, keep IT with your cold storage, all of those great things.

These are my top recommendations. And with that, i'm out. Thank you guys so much for listening.

Thank you guys for boosting. Thank you guys for streaming sats for zapping on noster. Hi and guys swan, this is bitcoin audible. And until next time everybody take IT, these guys.

He was given me enough a rope to hang myself with. Apparently he didn't realize that once a new is tied, IT will fit one neck as easily as another go from the name of the wind.