Dr. Nicholas Weaver: A Computer Scientist's Perspective on Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain | RR: UC7
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- Dr. Nicholas Weaver’s well-known lectures on cryptocurrencies explain why he believes it needs to be “burned with fire.” Today, we speak to Dr. Weaver, an expert in computer science and a long-time observer of the cryptocurrency space. He holds a BA in Astrophysics and Computer Science and a Ph.D. in Computer Science from UC Berkeley, where he was also a lecturer until recently. His primary research focus has been network security, among other topics. His interest and search for comedy “godl” have also resulted in published papers on cryptocurrency. In our conversation, Dr. Weaver untangles the complexities of the perceptions of cryptocurrencies with the actual technology. We talk about decentralization, if cryptocurrencies are achieving it, and the underlying concept of blockchain technology, as well as whether or not blockchains are secure and what the potential benefits of cryptocurrencies are to developing countries. We then go into detail about why Dr. Weaver thinks the crypto space is not beneficial, why prestigious academic institutions are teaching about it, and why he thinks it will never work in the log-run. Please tune in for a truly eye-opening, no-holds-barred episode as we learn the harsh truth about cryptocurrencies with expert, Dr. Nicholas Weaver!
Participate in our Community Discussion about this Episode:
community.rati...
Links From Today’s Episode:
Rational Reminder on iTunes - itunes.apple.c....
Rational Reminder Website - rationalremind...
Shop Merch - shop.rationalr...
Join the Community - community.rati...
Follow us on Twitter - / rationalremind
Follow us on Instagram - @rationalreminder
Benjamin on Twitter - / benjaminwfelix
Cameron on Twitter - / cameronpassmore
Dr. Nicholas Weaver on Twitter - / ncweaver
Dr. Nicholas Weaver’s lecture on blockchain and cryptocurrencies - / @nicholasweaver8487
It's amazing that this only has 14K views. This should have 2M views.
We who are pro bitcoin screw up the algorithm when we give it a thumbs down.
Hahahaha@@jesselaird9698
His comments from 46:50 - 48:00 about FTX, Alameda Binance etc. 4 months before it actually happened says it all.
Says it all what, that bitcoin is scam?😂😂😂
In fact it's bitcoin that exposed this scammers. Not your key not your bitcoin!
Good luck finding 6 honest people in crypto.
Excellent interview. The music will stop. Who will have a chair?
Great episode. Pls ignore the “tell us what we want to hear” requests and stay rational. Crypto is cringe, or as my gfs say “it’s Mary Kay for men”
Ben, I know the comment you were talking about at the 18min mark. I think TH-cam video the guy mentioned in the comment was trying to say the the more people that use Bitcoin, the price should go up exponential (his proof was because it had at that time). I'm still trying to get through that video because it was absolute usual crypto bro garbage, but yeah thats all I learnt from it. Raoul Paul*
Interesting how he mentions FTX and Alameda research around 47:00 in and talks about the shady things they are doing like 4 months before the massively public collapse that happened in November.
Yap scammers and fraudsters will get exposed in bitcoin system! No bailouts this fraudsters, unlike fiat system!😂😂😂
I like this guy. Pretty much echos what I've found in my research and work. Slapping on blockchain to business requests loosens up the purse strings from accounting and executive management.
No matter how high Bitcoin goes, these flaws don’t disappear. For me, it’s not worth investing in. If the Bitcoin sentiment changes it will collapse hard.
Bitcoin only succeeds to the degree fiat currency fails. Yes it is volatile but that is preferred to the steady, slow, uninterrupted, drip by drip decline of the dollar.
@jesselaird9698 “fiat” is a fantasy used by people who don’t understand money to promote Bitcoin. That’s not how money works.
-Ben
@@rationalreminder The dollar today is not the same as the pre 1971 dollar no matter what name you give it.
Damn i am so happy you invited dr nicolas weaver
Why ?? He's clearly wrong
Watching it in July 2023, this episode aged well.
Watching in December 2023, aged terribly
Fantastic watch. From 39:54 to 40:38 my blood ran cold.
But OMG, absolutely great watch.
Already subscribed!
My exact feelings regarding crypto, bitcoin and blockchains. The legit usecase for crypto is illicit activities. Blockchains are too slow to have broader applications.
All the crypto people I spoke with want the middlemen and the government especially to not be involved in their money matters. Who would not want those protections and regulations? Only fraudsters.
This professor must be rewarded for such truthful work .
Unfortunately people don't want truth, they love lies from scammers
Index funds are okay. I only understood that bit of his advice tbh.
@@theyjustwantyourmoney4539 who is them scammers though?
Feels like everyone online preaching any financial stuff is one actually
Lol
@@theyjustwantyourmoney4539 the truth is some professor are dumb 😂😂😂😂
"it is a turducken of ponzi schemes" -dr. Weaver. 👍👍
Thank God and thank you!!! for this honest work.
he is so right with every word he says
Are you absolutely sure about this, or are you just a fanboy?
@@puppetmaster1403 i dont know this person, i just support what he says about crypto. you can call me fanboy, but where is here wrong?
@@indeekay I'm only a few minutes into the video and can see he already is spreading misinformation. At the 3:00 & 4:10 minute mark he exaggerates blockchain/crypto's uses in illegal activities and doesn't balance his argument noting that the dollar has enjoyed a monopoly in illicit finance since its inception. You can read an informed view on this topic in a .pdf written by the former deputy director of the CIA - "an analysis of bitcoins use in illicit finance by michael morell".
@@indeekay😂😂😂you are just ignorant fan boi that will echo this misinformation
I think there's an initial flaw in the first few minutes of the podcast: The notion that crypto = "money." Even comparing crypto to other "digital currencies" like bitcoin is misleading. Because "money" is traditionally defined as "that which is used to pay for MOST products and services." Crypto doesn't fit that description. Crypto is just a digital token that SOME people claim is a store of value, but it has no intrinsic value and no material use, and unlike fiat, it's not guaranteed by a powerful state to be legal tender. So it's just a "gift card" redeemable among a certain class of people who are under no obligation whatsoever to trade you anything for whatever "satoshi e-cheese points" are on that card. So calling crypto "money" or comparing crypto to "money" is deceptive. In order to obtain "money" from crypto, a second transaction needs to happen, converting crypto into fiat, and that requires all the institutions, delays, fees, exchange spreads and delays they claim crypto avoids.
Great episode, thank you for this. I really want to know what that ship on the wall is all about tho. In fact, I wonder if that whole background is a bunch of D&D stuff.
The ships are all Lego ships from various sets.
my favorite crypto critics: nicholas weaver, stephen diehl, david gerard .... thank you for this video
Thank you for separating bitcoin id10ts!😂😂😂
The performance of cryptocurrencies could be described by falling into 3 categories. Category 1 are the cryptos that have short and long term potential, these are the most ideal cryptos which are Bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana. Then there are the cryptos that only have long-term potential which are Litecoin, Ripple, Monero. Then there are cryptos with no short or long term potential which are Memecoins, Namecoin, Novacoin and Nanocoin.
Amazing podcast. It‘s so good to finally hear someone speaking about the cold facts on why crypto might be simply a huge bubble.
Edit: he reminds me a bit of Michael Burry, but in crypto. That said, it would be incredibly interesting if you manage to invite Michael Burry to the podcast :)
No everything he just said is a blatant lie and you would know that if you had any clue wtf he was talking about.
@@michaele.4702 Why do you react so offended? Relax. I have a clue what he was talking about, that‘s why I listened to the podcast. Please give me one example of a „balant lie“ he said.
@@umbertopappalardi8667 “Crypto Evangelists Hate This Guy!!!” Lol
@@michaele.4702 “I prefer the term smarter than you.”
His only point that's wrong is it's utility. Gambling is a big thing in weakening economys. Every economy has been struggling since covid world wide. And crypto allows world wide, no rules Gambling. And that's always goong to be a thing with poverty. A man I indian bets 2 dollars on a coin is the same mind frame of a person in America betting 100 . There's 99 percent of the population world wide looking a way out and willing to gamble multiple times. Hence why btc crashes and restarts like all the other coins. Literally millions of people betting various amounts of money to see who can get put at the right time. Of which I understand, and that's what people need to teach and stop the utility talk
Great interview!
“Turducken of Ponzi schemes.” Hilarious.
Excellent stuff.
His shirt says more intelligent than you. Its a shame that majority of the professors are so pretentious. If they were as smart as they claim, they wouldn't be working at a university making 80k a year.
I believe everything he's saying, however, I wish I'd bought bitcoin when he made this video...
Your guest is a breath of fresh air confirming that there are experts that can tell crap from gold and as Charlie Munger of Berkshire Hathaway, another realist, aptly puts it trading in Bitcoin is like trading in turds.
Great video - someone who speaks both comp sci nerd and economics nerd, and knows so much! When is the pro-crypto interview coming, because I’m detecting a theme here so far...
I too feel we deserve a true pro-crypto interviewee.
can we get Greg Foss
@@mcneelynorman1 I’d like to see an informed pro view too (not some evangelist bs). I’m very anti-crypto but the anti-crypto case is almost too strong for its own good, such that a stream of relentless criticism risks making it seem like the anti side is hiding all the good pro arguments. After all, I suspect many people will reason, if crypto is so bad, why have so many billions been poured into it?
@@danieltemelkovski9828 You'd have an easier time finding a pro-syphilis advocate. Some things have no upside.
@@danieltemelkovski9828 coz its the way to cbdcs.. no?
This is eye-opening!
An outstanding interviewee, this Dr. Weaver. Direct, clear, concise answers from start to finish. Bravo.
Lol but right or wrong doesn't matter ??
@@leepreece813 Well, fwiw, I found the views he offered convincing.
Awesome guest. Thanks for the insight
"the only way you can make money in cryptocurrency is get more suckers in" 😂
I'm pro bitcoin but this was a great interview and I'll watch it several times. He made some great points and I'll reconsider some of my assumptions. Pity he couldn't bring himself to see anything positive about the space, e.g. protect wealth from potential theft by banks (bail-ins) and governments or future government control (CBDC's), move wealth out of countries with oppressive regimes.
Those are social problems that can't be solved with technology. Anything that protects your money from any government seizure also makes it trivial to scam people and use the money for criminal purposes. Any system that doesn't allow "bad" uses of money can also be used to deny "good" uses of money.
Bro is hilarious. And dropping that heat lol
At 38 he mentioned there is a lot of real debt in the system now, is that true? Could it just go back to 2017 level?
sounds like it will drop a lot more when the miners have to pay their electric bills.
@@joweb1320 Seems a likely outcome if his he is correct, however this is the part he didn't provide evidence/figures for and didn't compare to previous debt level. With out figures on this, with context figures it is just opinion.
Awesome stuff. Thanks!
I think the required input cost (proof of work) is necessary when whole identity can be spoofed at scale especially with AI. A person fictitious person can be generated, undicernable from a real human on the web of course. I think bitcoin foresaw this AI and acts as a counterbalance to this.
Nick Weaver is a godsend. I’ve been trying to understand wtf is the point of Coinbase’s biz. I had heard its founder talk & felt he was evasive, so I decided to research $COIN as a possible short candidate. Now it all makes sense. Shady guy. Shady biz.
This is great in 2023!
Yes indeed ! Especially post collapse / getting rid of some shady people. Prices are looking good!
Full of S.... i can sell any crypto i own for cash.
Brilliant, lets see all the Crypto Maxi's defame this guy. hes not even going near crypto 'currency' its a non starter! and then just stripping out blockchain for what it really is!
Lol he's not going near a woman either.... you following him on that route too ?
Is cryptocurrency an environment that works like a black market, theoretically a free market? Like a casino, a pyramid scheme and or a multi level marketing scheme. Reminds me of the collectable market economics. Should this type of market exist for those who can operate in this environment? I think we are are spoiled in a good way, to have a modest system we have today, for those who have it. Im hoping the next upcoming guests is someone who can explain the information on how black markets/unregulated market works, to have unheard examples and possible data behind it or failed experiments.
Why is Blackrock getting involved in it? Doesn't seem to align with what Nick says about crypto.
Blackrock is buying it for the people who is not sure. And they get a commision. So is like i buy from ur money o we do the deal and we get a commision. So is like they are not in.
Very insightful podcast
why does his voice sound so familiar haha..good podcast!
good interview, I agree with the scalability (as a former programmer)
??? I'm not sure where evading the law is coming from ... law enforcement seems to be able to look into most of the blockchain. Unless someone goes to court in a open legal system and all the records come out we don't know how much visibility law enforcement has into the various coins.
It's been a while since I did a deep dive myself (I never owned any crypto) ... when I looked at it only 3 of the blockchains were unbroken, Monero (and later claims were made for zcash and I forget the 3rd - dash maybe?)
Isn't it telling that the US IRS offers a reward to break Monero, but they have no issue with Bitcoin?
It's not really great for avoiding the law *domestically* - this is part of why the darknet markets don't *actually* do a whole lot of volume, and why ransomware is basically always targeted at victims that have no recourse in the jurisdiction of the attacker - i.e. the Russian, DPRK govs aren't going to go after hackers living there that go after US companies
The non-privacycoins aren't even good for tax evasion, as you noted with the IRS example - over 90% of the money the IRS seizes has been crypto for a couple years, they're good at following funds around a blockchain.
I do think that there are a lot of possible *technical* improvements to the privacycoins that may make them more usable, but they all fundamentally function a lot like a mixer and have limited usefulness without adoption, are very vulnerable at the on/offramps, and still require you to be knowledgeable and careful to maintain privacy, as even with the shielding to obscure flows, things like network timing metadata can still give you away if your adversary has access to it.
However, *if* there were a future zcash-like coin with strong enough adoption and default behavior to actually keep users private when monitored by *their own governments* (which I think is very hard but not necessarily impossible) I think we'd be in for a real weird and bad time. Right now its a bad idea to mug someone for their crypto or ransomware a company you work for because you're very likely to get caught - a usable, popular privacycoin could make crypto externalities significantly worse and bring them closer to home
I love how both visibily cringe when weaver swears. 😂
They are so polite. Very Charming 🤭
They’re Canadian I think. That probably answers that.
how about Richard heart (if he's not already one of the planned guests )?
he knows his crypto and actually debated with Nicholas weaver ..cause heart admits weaver is an expert in the space ...heart held his own I might add
Thanks. He was not on our radar. We will look into him!
@@rationalreminder Richard Heart is an absolutely buffoonish character and the purveyor of one of the greatest crypto ponzi schemes in history. He's also a brash, arrogant, nouveau riche gorilla who can't leave the house without putting on 20 Rolex watches or draping himself with the Burberry flag. He also has no real expertise in either finance or computer science. If you want to continue your theme of being anti-cryptocurrency then he'd be an ideal guest.
Also, you might have trouble finding him because his real name isn't Richard Heart.
@@miguelmachete4367 well that certainly made our due diligence easier!
@@rationalreminder hahahaha. I'm glad I could be of service.
Someone who might be more useful to bring on to represent the "other side" of the argument would be Sunny Aggarwal. He's a crypto developer with a phenomenal ability to articulate complex subject matter, and he's not illiterate in economics or finance.
Huge fan of your content btw!
@@miguelmachete4367 hater of heart ? ya he's bombastic but he doesn't beat around the bush ...
Why do anticrypto people seem like they couldnt even change oil in a car ?
Because people with phds in computer science can have crypto bros change it for them
@@hazzdazz yeah, I figured they would turn to the crypto bros when they ran into something that they were incapable of doing.
@hazzdazz wonder why nerd guy got the security issues wrong based on federal court rulings....
@hazzdazz how about that grind down he was referring to ?? 😂
@@hazzdazz I feel like the nerd guy would also call a crypto bro if his blow up doll was aroused.
Awesome
The level of arrogance is astounding, I wonder if he's ever left his echo chamber
This series is great! Do you plan on talking to any pro-crypto proponents? Or have you found it challenging to find a pro-crypto voice with a positive reputation?
As far as I understand, RR invite guests based on their education and experience. Most of them apparently aren’t pro-crypto because they don’t see any future for it from a scientific point of view.
They would, but Sam Bankman-Fried is in prison.
It's not hard to find if you're looking
@@leepreece813, it's a Ponzi scam. "Positive reputation" means nothing when it's predicated on finding a bigger sucker on whom to unload your cryptocurrency. It's amusing that the word contains "currency" when it's useless as a currency except to buy illicit drugs and kiddie porn, and to pay a ransom. Extortion has exploded in popularity since crypto came into existence. Everyone, of course, immediately converts it into a traditional currency.
Stephen Diehl next please.
They did him 2 episodes ago!
@@CanadianFinanceSimplified Thank you!
ρяσмσѕм 🤩
this guy (upper left) has a not so good shirt on.
*Weaver
I get it, the point was for inviting several past guests for mainly bashing on crypto. There is plenty of good reasons for bashing crypto and public blockchains and a few good points were made. How about to change gears and invite, let me see, Vitalik for example, or someone similar and let them to reexplain all the things from the different angle.
While the whole series was great so far, this episode was very underwhelming mainly because it is easy for Dr. Nicholas Weaver to bash on crypto during its downturns and saying that he called this and that crises.
It wasn't even great. People capitalize during bear markets / bull markets.
What does he mean by colonial pipeline?
17:15 nodes do NOT only pass messages - every single node verifies the blocks and transactions it receives. It's a common misconception that miners can "vote" to change the rules. It's simply not true - nodes will reject invalid blocks or transactions even if 100% of the miners "vote" to for example increase inflation or steal someone's coins. Miners are only relied upon to timestamp transactions and thus prevent double spending.
Mining concentration only looks like a problem if you count a mining POOL as a single miner, but it is not. Pools consist of hundreds or thousands of individual miners. If 3 or 4 pools coordinated to start performing 51% double spending attacks, individual miners would simply leave them to protect their bitcoin and mining gear value. A single temporary attack vs a SUSTAINED attack is not the same thing, the former is heavily disincentivized and the latter practically impossible.
Among some good points there are many more misconceptions that I'm not going to refute one by one, the guest obviously has an axe to grind - see how he answers 24:45 and his generally resentful manner. 1:08:28 Why doesn't he just take down all cryptocurrencies with his profits from "calling" the dot-com bubble AND the housing bubble? :')
The miners effectively form a clique in graph terms, they don't end up having to rely on non-mining nodes to relay messages, so the miners really get no vote of note.
@@nicholasweaver7671 They can send invalid blocks/transactions amongst themselves, but the rest of the network (bitcoin exchanges, merchants, my own node, etc) would ignore them. They would effectively be mining a different cryptocurrency. You haven't replied to my two other paragraphs above (click Read more).
This is THE worst episode to date. And it's coming from a programmer who is mostly agree with all the stuff being said in the episode.
It's not about the information, it's about the way how it's presented.
And I'm not even talking about profanities, I'm fine with it - it's just comes across as narcissistic "I predicted this, I predicted that", and very opinionated speech.
There's also mentions of Dunning-Kruger, that just implies that everyone on the opposing side of the argument is stupid.
What I love about RR is the research-backed topics, and this is just a man's rant. This could be a man that's respected in some circles, but that's just not a RR material.
I couldn't have said it better. Totally agreed.
I’m sure he ‘predicted’ 50 other things that never happened, we just don’t hear about those
I am buying more bitcoin after this
This episode is surprisingly full of ignorance. Watch the video and then follow up by reading a report on crypto put out by the former deputy director of the CIA - "an analysis of bitcoins use in illicit finance by michael morell".
"In a report sponsored by the Crypto Council for Innovation (a lobbying group created by Coinbase, Fidelity Square and Digital Assets), Morell argues that Bitcoin isn't any more exposed to illicit use than other forms of currency. " A LOBBYING GROUP
First two questions:
1. Strawman
2. Motte and bailey/entirely dodges
How can people take this guy seriously? He's obviously driven by ideology rather than truly attempting to understand the other side of the argument and then argue against it
do you guys believe that the price of bitcoin and etherium(or other more efficient coin) will converge in the future?
Are you asking to know if you should invest or something? Pretty clear to me Dr. Weaver thinks this might be the last hurrah for the space.
@@CanadianFinanceSimplified no i have only invested a small portion of my portfolio on carefully selected projects a while ago and not planning to increase any of my positions. Yet, even though DR. Weaver is clearly smarter than anyone on the universe :), the beauty of investing is that you buy the unknown. I can say that Ben is the person i trust the most on investing in the world, seriously, but even he knows deep down there is a small possibility some of the projects might be here to stay.(some games, gambling, optimization companies, coins, you name it.)
They are different enough that convergence seems unlikely (other than convergence at 0).
-Ben
eth will flip BTC in the next bull run
@@ilkerrr98 Yeah, I have 0 issues with your strategy. You do you =D. I was more confused why you'd ask Ben. If you trust him the most, you'd know that he doesn't advise in investing in anything that doesn't have an expected positive return. He has a few videos on why he won't invest in crypto.
And even if he did think some projects could thrive, he would be advising a crypto index.
Respect for everyone in this discussion. I truly appreciate following this journey with you. Sincere thanks!
(Some worry that academics live in a bubble where everyone outside of the tower is a bad guy; sad when education aspires to lift and free the masses. In a weird aside, a friend of mine is interested in solar cars...they want to build a car to efficiency standards that are very high. It's currently illegal (US) to do some of what they want to do--rear facing cameras instead of rear view mirrors for example. Maybe the comparison of current standard computing and bureaucratic inertia is problematic, but is it possible current tech, like current law, needs to advance? Neither delegitimizes the dreamer's vision--even if the current state-o-meter seems like it's stuck on "cesspool". Seems like educating users better might help combat some of the criminalization (?) Curious if a spot ETF materializing would impact any of this in a helpful way.
It's also a strange phenomenon less known outside of the engineering landscape--but some engineers are cannibalistic toward others particularly when they disagree with technical choices. Claims of "no value" are a quick off ramp to wondering about diet preferences of the speaker.)
That said, this is a fantastic series! Thank you so much Ben, Cameron, and Dr. Weaver for the discussion!
As an Engineer I've been a pescetarian. for over 30 years..
The real problem is as Dr. Weaver said is the aspects of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
to put it simply “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge”
this is also why more educated/experienced engineers have "issues" with those less educated/experienced..
also academics in general don't live inside bubbles outside of thoses who simply are "tenured" or instruct in "theoretical applications" that itself is abjectly biased speculation..
most of my professors in my halcyon youth of formal education where involved in projects to try to advance and better the world more so than they found it in. which is one the penultimate reasons I chose to become an engineer.
Thee overly advertent "cheerleading/hype" regarding crypto in general .it is an overt ponzi/pump and dump at best...The concepts of the aspects of the criminality involved in crypto are absolutely massive.. As are the the actual real life /real time effects ..like the massive power consumption /usage and its impact globally (climate change is inherently real and our population is contributing to it as well as the massive pollution we are causing especially in terms of "cheap/ez" and "disposable technology")
For what ultimately only subjectively constitutes to flat out greed...As Dr.Weaver stated crypto /blockchain solves absolutely no issues as it is An "append only " construct for database.
it has however blatantly defrauded millions of people! this is fact! it has devastated entire countries economies! this is also fact! (not that big corporations as well have not done the same or government's which have bailed out those corporations)
Sadly the systems of purported governance in place have elected to allow this to continue mostly due to either flatout inaction/apathy or actual corruption in the government/s themselves! Mostly due to the relative impossibility to adequately enforce ...this is yet another reason why criminal acton also continues because it is impossible to "police" the world nonetheless across countries and sovereign nations/states....but i digress..
p.s. reliance on aspects like a "rear facing camera" vs a mirror has caused more accidents!! as have the integration of other technologies like having "screens" or god forbid the "self driving vehicles in automotives which have heightened the amount of "distraction" while in operation of what constitutes to a 3000 odd lb moving death machine...
According to Newton's second law of motion, a 3,000-pound vehicle traveling at 70 miles per hour has approximately 15.8 million pounds of forward-moving force to release in the event of a collision. just saying we need better laws regarding the licensing of people to be able to operate said devices...mostly due to the massive amounts of liability.. which also crypto has almost zero liability its self and mostly is entirely in opposition to many laws in many countries
@@Azraiel.Bridger Excellent points! Thanks. +1 (Part of me views these as a lens into more of the good/bad challenges that we all face as we dive deeper. Whether the focusing of that lens then contributes in a net positive or net negative way is probably a way to quantify the impact over time. For me, its hard to know if the ideals of crypto will actually be manifest given the trajectory we see currently. I love tech--even though both great and awful things have come through its pursuit.) Anyway, love the topic and appreciate your insights! Thanks!
Why do you guys only invite skeptical nerds? It would be interesting to hear to different opinions...not always the same kind of personality
They are coming, don’t worry! We talked about this on yesterday’s regular RR podcast. There are less skeptical nerds on their way (they were just harder to find).
-Ben
You mean someone who says "unbank yourself" "amazing opportunities" "have fun staying poor"
@@Momfasa nope. Just someone with a wider mind. This man is too vertical on his world, he's limited. Innovations doesn't come from people like him: they can only improve what already has been invented.
@@Drift0x Yes mr Dunning Kruger, absolutely yes.
@@Momfasa can you elaborate an original argument, or will you go on quoting useless slogans? Sorry for your little mind
you've been picking guests who are largely anti crypto
bring O'Leary on pls ! or Greg foss or Jeff booth , although I understand foss is a controversial figure
O'Leary, Greg Foss, and Jeff Booth are the last people on the planet that you (or at least we) want to use as input for critical thinking. We do have upcoming guests who are not critics. We talked about this in yesterday's regular RR episode.
-Ben
@@rationalreminder
curious to see why you wouldn't want olearly on ? he was anti crypto then changed his stance after doing research
I can understand why you wouldn't want to have foss on, though
O'Leary goes where the quick money is, which is fine, but should not be confused with credibility. The history of the O'Leary funds contain a lot of information about why you might not want to take his financial advice.
@@rationalreminder true but he's an overall savvy and very wealthy investor imo nonetheless ... credible enough for me
@@Dwightchang443 savvy is questionable. His business history has been interesting to say the least. Wealthy, yes, but equating wealth (which may come from luck or skill) with credibility is a major error.
-Ben
Why are you even bothering to discuss crypto on your podcast when you have no interest and little understanding? Can't you choose something you're enthusiastic about?
Are there people you think we should be talking to? We find the topic fascinating.
@@rationalreminder Michael Saylor(doer), Saifdean Ammous(writer), Adam Back (researcher).
54:35 - The temperature sensitive sticker on the box can be compromised by it being swapped somewhere along the supply chain.
You Sir are the 🤡- 54:17
Supply chains have to be verified by someone. i.e. trust, which is why “trustless” is BS
@@04141940 And this is the reason they use "permissioned blockchains" vs. "open blockchains" in supply chain solutions 🙄
This guy called the dot com bubble and the housing bubble and I've never heard his name before? If he did than why is he not the richest person in the world? I smell something. It smells like bull shit. Once I saw his shirt I knew everything I needed to know
Unfortunately, Dr. Weaver is weaving a story that is not true. What’s worse is that the people interviewing him don’t have the knowledge to be able to stand up to his incorrect comments and arguments. I suggest when interviewing someone like him, also invite someone who understands the Blockchain and its potential and can provide clarifying rebuttals. Either most of the top engineers in the world and some of the smartest people on the planet are wrong or Mr. Weaver is wrong. ;)