 Does having create mining monopolies by forcing smaller operations into unprofitability? If having cuts rewards, then smaller miners will no longer be able to generate a profit. Doesn't this mean that eventually mining will be monopolized? I don't think that's entirely accurate, James. So let's break down that sentence and see how this applies to mining. Having cuts to block subsidy rewards, that is true, cuts them in half, so we go from 12.5 bitcoin per block to 6.25 bitcoin per block, and that will occur sometime in May 2020 by current calculations. Then your next statement is that small miners will no longer be able to generate a profit. Well, here's the thing. The amount of profit you generate doesn't depend on the size of the mining facility. The smoothness of your profitability does, which is why people join mining pools. But if you have an efficient enough hashing system, then your profit will depend primarily on the difference between your input costs, which are the operating costs in terms of electricity, and the amount of bitcoin you generate vis-à-vis the price. So if everybody's running the exact same ASIC and buying electricity at exactly the same price, then when the block subsidy has, everybody's profitability drops by half. But it doesn't drop differently for smaller versus larger operators. The economies of scale come primarily from the ability to purchase lots of ASIC mining equipment at a reduced price and also to purchase large blocks of electricity and situate facilities near inexpensive electricity sources. From that perspective, larger miners may be and are sometimes more profitable than smaller miners. However, with larger miners, you have other problems, such as, for example, having to make massive upgrades of operating infrastructure when a new, more efficient ASIC miner comes out, concentrated risk where, for example, a fire in a warehouse or floods in a warehouse can take out an enormous amount of ASICs, etc., etc. So profitability, especially over the long term, depends on a very large number of factors. And the economies of scale are not as dramatic as the block subsidy reduction. So what happens when the having happens is the least efficient miners become unprofitable. And that's because their ASIC equipment or their input price of electricity makes them unprofitable, or less profitable than the miners who have more advanced, more modern ASICs, or have better electricity prices negotiated. It may be then that at the having, their profitability drops just below the break-even point, where a miner who has more efficient ASICs and the lower price of electricity remains just above profitability, and that forces them, if they believe that this is a long-term problem and they're not going to be able to recover, or that the difficulty is going to remain the same or get worse, it may force them to turn off their ASIC equipment so as to stop using electricity. And again, what will happen then is the difficulty will go down, and that will make everybody more profitable, including some of the miners that were previously unprofitable. It doesn't necessarily mean concentration of mining. The factors that lead to concentration of mining have a lot more to do with the geographic availability of ASIC chips and the geographic availability of cheap electricity, and let's say comfortable regulatory domains or domains where regulation either doesn't exist or can be evaded easily. Those things affect concentration of mining primarily by geography much more so than the amounts in the block subsidy. So, having will increase competition in mining, and depending on all of the other factors, that competition may lead to a bit more centralization or a bit less centralization depending on how effective and efficient different mining concerns are. Jay Smith asks, what impact is the Bitcoin having likely to have on the Bitcoin price? Thank you. Now, I've said this before, I don't answer questions about price, and I don't speculate on price. And the reason I don't is because we actually don't know, and I think it's mostly irresponsible to make predictions about the price. It's the same as astrology and reading tea leaves. These are chaotic systems that respond to sentiment as much as they respond to fundamentals. And in these chaotic systems, saying things like the flag head and shoulders pattern that is declining through the 200-day moving average indicates that blah, blah, blah, is in my mind pretty much equivalent to saying, the price will do this because Mercury is an ascendant in the constellation of Virgo. It's basically guessing. And you can do a lot of expose factor rationalization about why you missed the guess and why only the predictions that you highlight are the ones that are correct and the ones that you don't talk about are the incorrect ones. But the bottom line is, there is a lot of cognitive bias that enters these kinds of conversations. And I don't think that anyone has any idea what's going to happen. If you look at it from a practical perspective, there is a possibility that after the having, the price goes down because people are spooked by the having because they don't understand what will happen. There is a possibility that the hash power declines for a short period of time, and that will result in a slowdown of the network as blocks are found less often until the difficulty retargets. Keep in mind we have so much hash power increase over the last couple of years that even if 50% of the hash power was gone, we still end up somewhere where we were in 2018. And the network will recover in four weeks or three and a half weeks from that. The bottom line is that, in my opinion, what is most likely to happen with the having, at least in the short to medium term, is nothing much. And the only reason I would say that is because that's exactly what happened in the previous two haveings that I experienced. A lot of concern and panic and speculation proceeding in the months before the having, then the having happens, one block rolls into another, the having happens as predicted, and nothing much changes in the network. You have some short-term volatility, because everybody is very excited or very panicked depending on how you look at it, and then everything returns to normal. The essence of Bitcoin is dynamically adjusted stability that reverts to mean to produce 10-minute blocks for 10 years, not missing a beat, and still being there the day after everybody announces it's dead. So, I don't think much at all is going to happen with the having, and I can't tell you what the price is going to do before, during, after, in the medium or in the long term. I don't believe that any such speculation really tells us much.