Loved this discussion with Shinobi, it's great to have the flip side of the story, even thought I have been oranged pilled by the Bitcoin OG, I've started to believe they may not anymore be the best voices of the original Satoshi mission to bringing Bitcoin (in term of electronic cash - implying self custody) to the whole world, thanks Peter for bringing this guest, looking for more guests on this side of the story
I was planning on not having an opinion on covenants and staying out of it and kind of letting the rest of the network decide but I'm now in favor of what shinobi said basically incremental conservative changes to bitcoin. I said all of that to point out that if my mind is changed maybe more people's minds are changing in support of this. But I'm just a user of the network that doesn't run a node.
If people want to change bitcoin, just copy the code, creat the “perfect bitcoin” and let the market determine if it’s good? People always think “their way” is best, blah blah. Let the free markets determine the best, not some random dude thinking his way is best and trying to change it.
Both are kind of past their prime… they’re in that bitter bitcoiner phase, always makes me think they have a sell or missed buy or three they just can’t stomach 😅
My question would be if transaction fee never hit the target to realize the covenant terms, are the coins burned? I would assume that products/services will have been rendered by then does this mean 27:13 that with 100% consensus, all parties could agree to a higher fee?
Here’s another question: do most people or will most people want to be self-sovereign? And if so, are they willing to accept the responsibilities that come with it?
Nice to have Shinobi back, but it always creates great distrust in me if someone is this unable to frame the opposing sides arguments. Leads me to wonder what their own agenda and blind spots are.
I don't think Bitcoin was designed to handle NFTs etc, could add a layer to it that would be separate but I don't see why Bitcoin needs it. Ethereum etc can handle that stuff.
Please explain technically how one Shares a UTXO. In lightning you create a multisig transaction. With either your own node, or a watchtower you aren't 'Sharing' anything. What's yours is yours. The fees and so on are not just based on supply, but demand as well. If NO ONE CAN AFFORD a transaction, Fees NECESSARILY go down. That's how a fee market works. If you don't have your coins in position to spend in lightning much like if you don't have the ability to melt your gold bullion into coins because forges are too pricey. The fees being low during the ETF launch is showing this perfectly.
The moment at 21:20 where they are describing shared utxo's would be awesome to see Peter get a graphics designer to create a visual represntation of it while they speak.
What are the implications of CTV and ordinals/inscriptions? Does this inadvertently add more abilities for their inscription behavior, like Taproot sorta did?
I didn't understand 90% of this podcast, maybe because I'm not technical enough or maybe it's because of the THC cookie from Canada... But the 10% it was fucking powerful. I'm not a maxi or a mini and I understand shit fuck all about the guts of Bitcoin, but I BELIEVE IN IT and as Knut say's bitcoin is us. I guess I need to do my part and say I'm with you guys and from the crowd in the back of this bus I'm rooting for you. Put it to the network vote, build a form of voting with your sats or with your utxo's somehow democratically if possible. I don't know man I'm high as fuck.. good one Peter
This notion that small wallets cannot self custody is rediculous. Bitcoin is geniusly designed to block the new crew from 'oh I'll make it better"...ala iphone 87.
so it's either gonna be the sandwhiches (CTV) or the cat (OPCAT) that's gonna be the next upgrade. I can't wait for covenant, so we can scale bitcoin from max 100 million users per year up to 1 billion users.
I'm most of the way through this. These 2 are immature and just want to experiment, flexing their brains with something. Something that is very serious without thinking it through far enough.
19:18 - So all covenants do is put restrictions on how you can spend UTXO" -yes - So they're making UTXO's more dynamic... NO YOU DORK! restrictions are the opposite of dynamism!
Hey guys, thanks for another great show. Just going along the lines of this episode.. How come your Bedford bitcoin conference is basically excluding many normal earning folk eager to connect and share ideas/learn? £1000 is a little steep.. Let's be honest! It's £333 per day. Which doesn't sound bad if you're doing ok, but out of reach for many out there wanting to step up You always go on about wanting to bring the average joe blogs into bitcoin.. I don't understand the approach here? Tried to get my police dog training instructor bro to come along having got him up to the first level. One look at the fee and he bailed on me. We're both in North West London
36:50 "If there is consensus among the rest of the network that we want to turn something on, miners should not have an option" But when it comes to fixing an OBVIOUS EXPLOIT and filtering spam... Then it's let's not do it because "miners will always mine spam"... CLOWN!
Because base chain fees could become so high that the vast majority of the global population would not be able to afford a transaction, and therefore would not be able to own an utxo.
I'm with you. Does any of this improve scaleability? Or is it just non-sense? Also, If BTC achieves world reserve currency status what prevents "WTFH in 1971" ?
Is it even a "settlement layer" if itcsettles transactions slower than the traditional fiat settlement layer? He wants to trade settlement speed for reducing net fees. If you trade away settlement speed , you effectively remove an aspect of its "salability across time", reducing "the properties of money" score. Result: an attack on bitcoin
Remember CTV is to enable better 2nd layers, it's not about improving actual on-chain usage itself. The whole idea with CTV is that by having transactions that pre-commit to settle on chain, you allow 2nd layers to transact with these VTXOs trustlessly because you can always exit to the base layer at any point. You can think of it sort of like futures contracts compared to spot. But in this case the futures contracts are always 1:1 with spot.
I stand by Saylor, Booth and Breedlove's theses that Bitcoin is a paradigm shift. Rather than that of someone who's just crawled from underneath a rock wearing his pants on his face.
I will say just one thing: Anonymous coding/development proposals. Maybe not be as good on the feedback loop, but at least allows individuals to contribute their ideas to the project without being sacked by the current systems on the meatspace vulnerability vector. We all sorta knew this was coming, people getting persecuted by the old regimes for fighting for a good cause such as bitcoin (example the people who want mixers that enhance privacy and add doubt to chain analysis). Who knows, maybe the future of bitcoin development will be primarily Satoshi style: anonymous contributions to avoid getting found IRL and f*ed with via whatever available means. We know the world is not fair (yet).
Shinobi is spot on about the narrative parroting and the total lack of understanding for where these narratives came from. It’s insane how prevalent it is. Ultimately, those who come from 2017 or earlier knew this day would come. The day the normies and the bad actors, uneducated, or biased, all come and join us. The classic meme “just heard about Bitcoin, and I’m here to fix it”…
@Peter, you are contradicting yourself. You ask, can you be self sovereign without owning a utxo, then you hear about the concept of shared utxos and you just want to be told that it is self sovereign. The point of being self sovereign is that you understand the details at least up to a level so that you remain in control the whole time. To then say you want it all abstracted away is a contradiction. Self sovereign users will appreciate the convenience, but they will also expect to be able to verify the technology, see the inner workings whenever they wish to from time to time, and then they'll carry on using the conveniences. Funnily enough, you are extracting the right information, but by intervening and saying "I don't care about that" or "I want it abstracted away", you're shutting down from learning more. Together, you can come up with abstractions that help others understand, but if you shut it down early, progress in helping people remain sovereign can't be made.
“Narrative wars” hold on a minute. Many people don’t understand the inner workings of a wrist watch yet we can argue till the cows come home on the practical effects time has on our civilization. So don’t give me that, “until you understand the code you can’t have insightful conversations about bitcoin” BS. Replace wrist watch with literally everything (airplanes, electricity, smartphones etc) Shinobi likes the sound of his own voice.
if you batch transactions including inputs that's much more tx per block without increasing size. segwit was block size increase too, impatient thing was it wasn't a forced arbitrary hard fork like morons only do. block size alone is literally the dumbest solution
Everyone self-sovereign is similar to a libertarian ideal of no government or no laws in that it requires all people to be radically more independent than they have come to be. Maybe we can incremental our way there with little damage to normal life, but it would be a trade off between speed of approach and damage to normal people/life.
Too many extremely stupid people and mentally/emotionally flawed peeps who want to (or need to) be controlled and "protected". ... Perfect ancap system cant work for the 30 percent idiots
None of this makes me feel comfortable about the future of bitcoin. There should be a Bitcoin constitution that outlines the rules and core values that are nonnegotiable.
If Bitcoin isnt perfect, why doesn’t this dude create his “perfect Bitcoin”, copy the code, and let the market determine if it’s good? There will always be people out there who think “they can do it better”. I run my own node though so maybe l’m bias.
These people just seem like a bunch of children, self centred caring about getting there name in history for contributing to Bitcoin. This is global money for the next 1000 years, you are literally meowing and talking about JPGs and changes to allow shitcoins on Bitcoin. This will not ever happen, do better.
Soft fork, none of the proposals require a hard fork. But Bitcoin will require a hard fork in the future, but we're all dead by then, unless it's done earlier.
totally unwilling to entertain the other side of his argument, appreciate you Danny and Pete for pushing in conversations like this. Don’t f w bitcoin. Especially if you’re hiding your face…sort of
people have known it wouldn't scale since inception. and even if it did, it will never replace the dollar. (btc military slightly smaller than NATO military) doubt the maxis' care about the logistics of building it out. NumBer gO up 2daY 🚀
I really enjoy these technical talks, and demystifying some non factual stuff by actual experts, and not influencers.
brian trollz is an influencer and is absolutely influencing you
Shinobi is one of my favorite thought leaders in the space. Thanks for getting him on
Used to love watching Shinobi's show back in the early days.
one of my favorite episodes to date. great job, all of you!
Loved this discussion with Shinobi, it's great to have the flip side of the story, even thought I have been oranged pilled by the Bitcoin OG, I've started to believe they may not anymore be the best voices of the original Satoshi mission to bringing Bitcoin (in term of electronic cash - implying self custody) to the whole world, thanks Peter for bringing this guest, looking for more guests on this side of the story
This guest seemed so sincere, I wondered if he is satoshi. 🙏
Great interview Peter
This was a fantastic conversation!! Loved it! Thank you!!!
I was planning on not having an opinion on covenants and staying out of it and kind of letting the rest of the network decide but I'm now in favor of what shinobi said basically incremental conservative changes to bitcoin.
I said all of that to point out that if my mind is changed maybe more people's minds are changing in support of this. But I'm just a user of the network that doesn't run a node.
If people want to change bitcoin, just copy the code, creat the “perfect bitcoin” and let the market determine if it’s good? People always think “their way” is best, blah blah. Let the free markets determine the best, not some random dude thinking his way is best and trying to change it.
Great show Peter. Well done all.
Love your wisdom of consensus politics with devs Peter - keep up the good work. So great to see Shinobi and listen to his expertise.
My man Shinobi. Laying the facts out.
Great show! It's a nice change from all the ETF discussions.
Get Shinobi and Jimmy Song to discus whether BTC needs to change or not to achieve a variety of specific goals.
Both are kind of past their prime… they’re in that bitter bitcoiner phase, always makes me think they have a sell or missed buy or three they just can’t stomach 😅
Nobody sees all of the attack vectors while they're busy playing.
More people/interviews like Shinobi please.
My question would be if transaction fee never hit the target to realize the covenant terms, are the coins burned?
I would assume that products/services will have been rendered by then
does this mean 27:13 that with 100% consensus, all parties could agree to a higher fee?
Thats what im wondering too
The most interesting subject rn
nice one, pls more technical stuff!
Here’s another question: do most people or will most people want to be self-sovereign? And if so, are they willing to accept the responsibilities that come with it?
sooooo can anyone tell us who is the guy that joined the pod after it started and sat on Danny's place?
Nice to have Shinobi back, but it always creates great distrust in me if someone is this unable to frame the opposing sides arguments. Leads me to wonder what their own agenda and blind spots are.
I don't think Bitcoin was designed to handle NFTs etc, could add a layer to it that would be separate but I don't see why Bitcoin needs it. Ethereum etc can handle that stuff.
Please explain technically how one Shares a UTXO. In lightning you create a multisig transaction. With either your own node, or a watchtower you aren't 'Sharing' anything. What's yours is yours.
The fees and so on are not just based on supply, but demand as well. If NO ONE CAN AFFORD a transaction, Fees NECESSARILY go down. That's how a fee market works. If you don't have your coins in position to spend in lightning much like if you don't have the ability to melt your gold bullion into coins because forges are too pricey. The fees being low during the ETF launch is showing this perfectly.
Can you finance a house with 15% down at 5% 30 year using only bitcoin?
one btc is worth your house, your wife, your daughters and all your chickens. so no financing necessary
Welcome back, Shinobi!
Very good episode.
Shinobi: "I got into bitcoin because I love money" You have to assume everyone is a bad actor or eventually becomes one. Even guys like Shinobi.
If it aint broke, whats there to fix?
The moment at 21:20 where they are describing shared utxo's would be awesome to see Peter get a graphics designer to create a visual represntation of it while they speak.
What are the implications of CTV and ordinals/inscriptions? Does this inadvertently add more abilities for their inscription behavior, like Taproot sorta did?
Yes.
Covenents, like check template verrify alow for some smart contracts on btc
Great episode
Once upon a time, Shinobi joined Peter and they took Connor Murray and Kurt of bsv to school. Shinobi is a legend.
I didn't understand 90% of this podcast, maybe because I'm not technical enough or maybe it's because of the THC cookie from Canada... But the 10% it was fucking powerful.
I'm not a maxi or a mini and I understand shit fuck all about the guts of Bitcoin, but I BELIEVE IN IT and as Knut say's bitcoin is us. I guess I need to do my part and say I'm with you guys and from the crowd in the back of this bus I'm rooting for you. Put it to the network vote, build a form of voting with your sats or with your utxo's somehow democratically if possible.
I don't know man I'm high as fuck.. good one Peter
can someone tell us who the guy who joined the show after it started and sat on Danny' place is?
When is Block Digest coming back?
This notion that small wallets cannot self custody is rediculous. Bitcoin is geniusly designed to block the new crew from 'oh I'll make it better"...ala iphone 87.
I don’t trust this guy. Reminds me of high school. Immature, not a critical thinker, one-sided.
Agreed slimeball
so it's either gonna be the sandwhiches (CTV) or the cat (OPCAT) that's gonna be the next upgrade. I can't wait for covenant, so we can scale bitcoin from max 100 million users per year up to 1 billion users.
Is there no situation where a covenant is impossible to confirm? Therefore a frozen UTXO persists forever?
1:24:40 one says its the same the other says its more edvanced.
I'm most of the way through this. These 2 are immature and just want to experiment, flexing their brains with something. Something that is very serious without thinking it through far enough.
Another guy who thinks he knows better than everyone else and everyone else is stupid 🤦♀️
19:18 - So all covenants do is put restrictions on how you can spend UTXO"
-yes
- So they're making UTXO's more dynamic...
NO YOU DORK! restrictions are the opposite of dynamism!
If you add enough computers to the block chain u can become the majority 51% and take over the chain.
Hey guys, thanks for another great show. Just going along the lines of this episode.. How come your Bedford bitcoin conference is basically excluding many normal earning folk eager to connect and share ideas/learn?
£1000 is a little steep.. Let's be honest! It's £333 per day. Which doesn't sound bad if you're doing ok, but out of reach for many out there wanting to step up
You always go on about wanting to bring the average joe blogs into bitcoin.. I don't understand the approach here?
Tried to get my police dog training instructor bro to come along having got him up to the first level. One look at the fee and he bailed on me.
We're both in North West London
36:50 "If there is consensus among the rest of the network that we want to turn something on, miners should not have an option" But when it comes to fixing an OBVIOUS EXPLOIT and filtering spam... Then it's let's not do it because "miners will always mine spam"... CLOWN!
Why not changing Bitcoin will prevent the majority of people from holding their keys exactly?
Because base chain fees could become so high that the vast majority of the global population would not be able to afford a transaction, and therefore would not be able to own an utxo.
I'm with you. Does any of this improve scaleability? Or is it just non-sense? Also, If BTC achieves world reserve currency status what prevents "WTFH in 1971" ?
People in their 30’s and 40’s aren’t ‘trolling’. They’re just being stupid.
more of this please - developer stuff is the source. It's the new macro
Legend.
What about Casey Rodarmor? Is he attacking Bitcoin or does he just like the jpgs?
I can’t take anyone that wears a mask seriously.
I take it you don't take Satoshi seriously either.
Satoshi is legit anonymous this guy is just soy infused beta energy @handyrams4822
how is that covenant ANY DIFFERENT than a legacy swift Final settlement?
Seriously? It's completely different in every way.
covenant is just a Bitcoin script, like every single utxo has a Bitcoin script locking funds. what in the hell are you talking about
Is it even a "settlement layer" if itcsettles transactions slower than the traditional fiat settlement layer? He wants to trade settlement speed for reducing net fees. If you trade away settlement speed , you effectively remove an aspect of its "salability across time", reducing "the properties of money" score. Result: an attack on bitcoin
Remember CTV is to enable better 2nd layers, it's not about improving actual on-chain usage itself. The whole idea with CTV is that by having transactions that pre-commit to settle on chain, you allow 2nd layers to transact with these VTXOs trustlessly because you can always exit to the base layer at any point. You can think of it sort of like futures contracts compared to spot. But in this case the futures contracts are always 1:1 with spot.
55:30 what did you get sued for?
SHINOBI have a X account?
brian_trollz
Unfortunately. Stay away from it
Does this guy really think that mask hides his identity 🤡
Subzero?
100%.. "if you are not attacking Bitcoin, do you even really care about it?". I couldn't agree more!! Love this opening statement!
Same narrative with fiat money, people don’t understand that system either and still fling crap at each other never gonna change
Clearly Shinobi doesn't understand what Bitcoin is all about
Now done. The problem with 'know it alls' is that they can't learn anything. Let's get some mature brains in the room please.
I stand by Saylor, Booth and Breedlove's theses that Bitcoin is a paradigm shift. Rather than that of someone who's just crawled from underneath a rock wearing his pants on his face.
I will say just one thing:
Anonymous coding/development proposals.
Maybe not be as good on the feedback loop, but at least allows individuals to contribute their ideas to the project without being sacked by the current systems on the meatspace vulnerability vector.
We all sorta knew this was coming, people getting persecuted by the old regimes for fighting for a good cause such as bitcoin (example the people who want mixers that enhance privacy and add doubt to chain analysis).
Who knows, maybe the future of bitcoin development will be primarily Satoshi style: anonymous contributions to avoid getting found IRL and f*ed with via whatever available means.
We know the world is not fair (yet).
Shinobi is spot on about the narrative parroting and the total lack of understanding for where these narratives came from.
It’s insane how prevalent it is. Ultimately, those who come from 2017 or earlier knew this day would come. The day the normies and the bad actors, uneducated, or biased, all come and join us.
The classic meme “just heard about Bitcoin, and I’m here to fix it”…
I like to think of myself as fairly tech savvy and I literally had no idea what your talking about more than half the time. 😅
@Peter, you are contradicting yourself. You ask, can you be self sovereign without owning a utxo, then you hear about the concept of shared utxos and you just want to be told that it is self sovereign.
The point of being self sovereign is that you understand the details at least up to a level so that you remain in control the whole time. To then say you want it all abstracted away is a contradiction.
Self sovereign users will appreciate the convenience, but they will also expect to be able to verify the technology, see the inner workings whenever they wish to from time to time, and then they'll carry on using the conveniences.
Funnily enough, you are extracting the right information, but by intervening and saying "I don't care about that" or "I want it abstracted away", you're shutting down from learning more. Together, you can come up with abstractions that help others understand, but if you shut it down early, progress in helping people remain sovereign can't be made.
Great post
“Narrative wars” hold on a minute. Many people don’t understand the inner workings of a wrist watch yet we can argue till the cows come home on the practical effects time has on our civilization. So don’t give me that, “until you understand the code you can’t have insightful conversations about bitcoin” BS.
Replace wrist watch with literally everything (airplanes, electricity, smartphones etc)
Shinobi likes the sound of his own voice.
I barely understand any of this, but still an interesting watch.
Wondering if its even something that normies should even focus on.
Bitcoin = good.
It's annoying to hear The Blocksize War constantly referred to in plural, by almost everyone. It's not fucking Star Wars
a virtual utxo is a promise to pay...
that entire covenant sounds pretty bad...
I don't trust this dude.
Same. Snake
If you want to watch Jeremy talk about this at length just watch the Hell Money podcast.
Is it Halloween again?
Finally all maxis are starting to realize small blocks is insane
Increasing the block size is not a solution, because it directly threatens decentralisation.
No. Decentralization is key. There will be banks on top of these layers.
if you batch transactions including inputs that's much more tx per block without increasing size. segwit was block size increase too, impatient thing was it wasn't a forced arbitrary hard fork like morons only do. block size alone is literally the dumbest solution
Naaaaa 😂
Everyone self-sovereign is similar to a libertarian ideal of no government or no laws in that it requires all people to be radically more independent than they have come to be.
Maybe we can incremental our way there with little damage to normal life, but it would be a trade off between speed of approach and damage to normal people/life.
Too many extremely stupid people and mentally/emotionally flawed peeps who want to (or need to) be controlled and "protected". ... Perfect ancap system cant work for the 30 percent idiots
Satoshi?
Is Jason Lowery next?
None of this makes me feel comfortable about the future of bitcoin. There should be a Bitcoin constitution that outlines the rules and core values that are nonnegotiable.
If Bitcoin isnt perfect, why doesn’t this dude create his “perfect Bitcoin”, copy the code, and let the market determine if it’s good? There will always be people out there who think “they can do it better”. I run my own node though so maybe l’m bias.
One more thing. If these punks screw this up, I'm selling out and buying gold.
GUYS!!! Right now big glitches are happening on the DEX, I did a vldeo showing that, when you exchange it gives you x 9
The twist I don’t think most people want self custody.
Erica next
These people just seem like a bunch of children, self centred caring about getting there name in history for contributing to Bitcoin. This is global money for the next 1000 years, you are literally meowing and talking about JPGs and changes to allow shitcoins on Bitcoin. This will not ever happen, do better.
This guy disapeared from Twitter
I'm 13 mins in.
Is the guess arguing for a hard fork or for soft forks?
Soft fork, none of the proposals require a hard fork. But Bitcoin will require a hard fork in the future, but we're all dead by then, unless it's done earlier.
This guy doesn’t seem very fun to hang out with.
government covenant coming to a town near YOU!
What's the point of the mask if he's showing his eyes?... Isn't that the bigger risk than mouth/face?
lol I always laugh when you have shinobi on because you guys have such a love hate relationship when I see you guys talk on twitter.
How about getting the Wizzards on the show and let them make their case instead of speculating what they want or don't want
Brain melted
totally unwilling to entertain the other side of his argument, appreciate you Danny and Pete for pushing in conversations like this. Don’t f w bitcoin. Especially if you’re hiding your face…sort of
Don't like this guy at all. Really creepy aura about him
Everything he proposes my node will reject.
people have known it wouldn't scale since inception. and even if it did, it will never replace the dollar. (btc military slightly smaller than NATO military) doubt the maxis' care about the logistics of building it out. NumBer gO up 2daY 🚀
So much technical debt to avoid increasing blocksize. Such a shame
❤
What's the fancy dress all about?
mask??