 Let's start with some basic ideas who here knows who is in control of Bitcoin who here thinks no one is in control of Bitcoin? Quite a few people. All right. So this is the fundamental Issue at the heart of many of the debates we're having today The debates about governance the debates about scaling who is in charge Bitcoin expresses a new thing a thing that has rules without rulers and For people this is a very confusing concept Because most everything we've seen before rules come from rulers and you trust the rules Because you trust the rulers what we call appeal to authority Of course appeal to authority is known as a cognitive bias it is a bug in our brain software it makes us Discard logic and reasoning in favor of attribution and authority it makes us associate as tribes teams and political parties and make decisions based on whether the person Expressing authority or ideas is part of our tribe or part of the enemy tribe And we all know that the enemy tribe has always been an enemy is Up to no good and is trying to destroy this beautiful world always The problem is of course that everybody who belongs the enemy tribe thinks that we are up to no good And we are trying to destroy the world You see this emerging in every sphere of human existence And of course you see it emerging in the conversations around Bitcoin and many of the other open blockchains People find it very difficult to accept the idea that a system can exist with rules and Without rulers a system without authority a system in which it doesn't matter Who is most popular or what opinions they have because they are unable to change the rules? And I think that was demonstrated Resolutely just a couple of weeks ago culminating of course two days ago when the rules were not changed again the rules were not changed and This time there was a very large group of people who had a different opinion about the rules Their opinion was not right Their opinion was not wrong. Their opinion was opinion and In Bitcoin opinions are not judged Based on who holds them What matters is Whether they can reach consensus with the overwhelming majority of participants in the system and If they cannot reach consensus with the overwhelming majority of people in the system It doesn't matter how much money they have how much authority they have how much popularity they have and That's how it should be Now a lot of people looked at what happened a week ago and said okay Bitcoin core one victory Which is not true? Bitcoin core did not win Bitcoin core happened to be with the side of consensus or at least with the size of the status quo and If you don't have overwhelming majority to change the rules The system ensures that the rules remain the same So all you have to do in the system is Follow the rules The rules that exist today, and if you want to change the rules you'd better have overwhelming consensus otherwise the system will punish you financially in many cases and Everyone who tries to change the rules without overwhelming majority loses Core didn't win They just didn't try to change the rules without overwhelming consensus and as a result the rules were not changed We will see these battles happen again and again and again in fact the battles we see so far are tiny compared to what's coming if I talked about creating regulations so that People can trust and invest and participate without fair Regulations are the way we used to run governance in systems where there are rulers Because regulations are created by regulators. Those are rules with rulers Good news is they can't change the rules of Bitcoin because they do not have consensus There will be regulations But there will be regulations only of the systems surrounding open blockchains not about when blockchains themselves because open blockchains themselves already are regulated by mathematics By overwhelming consensus By network-based rules. These are not systems without regulations. These are systems with very predictable Deterministic clear Transparent regulations based on mathematics regulations not subject to political power not subject to compromise discussion Change and that is why the system is special It is special precisely because it cannot be changed or subject to political will Now a lot of people don't like that They don't like the existence of a system that is fundamentally supranational and Outside of the traditional controls of political power They don't have to use it. I will and The system will not change to subject itself to the whim of those who do not like the idea of a system that is outside of Traditional governance and regulatory structures the whole point of the system is that it is outside The whole point of the system is that it will not be subject to traditional regulations You can regulate your country out of Bitcoin, but you cannot regulate Bitcoin out of your country and many countries will regulate themselves out of Bitcoin and out of Ethereum and out of all of the other open blockchains and They will end up getting the benefit of the closed block chains the controlled block chains the regulated governments safe Blockchains, I don't want safe. I Want free. I Want innovative. I want global transnational neutral censorship resistant and I will continue to use the system that expresses those principles and through my choice I Will participate in the consensus rules Without rulers These systems will not be regulated and The problem is that when you present the world with a system that cannot be regulated through traditional political power This will not go down easily Fantastic quote by clay shirky comes to mind organizations that exist to solve a problem are Resistant to fixing the problem Bitcoin fixes the problem Without the organizations to solve it without the intermediaries a Lot of people see these open block chains and immediately assume that these will disrupt banking finance payment networks I thought so too and yet The surprising thing is that the first thing disrupted by open block chains is regulation itself and regulators governance and governments it disrupts the idea of hierarchical representative top-down jurisdiction geographic-based regulation You cannot decide how these systems will operate within your borders Because they are not within your borders. They do not see borders and this makes many people very very uncomfortable This is a test It is not a test for Bitcoin. It is not a test for open block chains It is a test of democracy. It is a test of self-determination It is a test of freedom of expression. It is a test of freedom of association. Some governments will fail that test some governments will be Intrinsically suspicious of a system that empowers citizens residents just people To use money To engage in commerce without interference without censorship without control and many governments will fail that test They will violate the principles that they claim to hold true Because for the first time those principles will be tested By a network that will force them to reckon with these principles Governance is not something that will be added to Bitcoin It's not something that will be added to open block chains It's something that open block chains already do in a new way in A different way in a way that will not change to suit the old way that is The fundamentally disruptive potential of this technology Now in this entire system there are going to be a lot of debates and a lot of disagreements There are many choices to be made Choices at every step as to how to solve technology scale and architecture problems How to make the system more robust more resilient cheaper more secure faster and able to absorb Billions of people who will need to use systems like this and right now we can't do it Right now the open block chains we have today Cannot support the population that might need to use them That's okay This is still the prototype This is the nine-year-old Right the nine-year-old still going to school Still learning how to be in the world and If you've spent any time with a nine-year-old you'll know that it's pretty awkward Unsure unsteady at times Temperamental throws a tantrum every now and then and That is how this technology is going to be for quite a while That doesn't mean it can't scale that doesn't mean it can't change it will and you can see Within this nine-year-old body you can see the future potential you can see The image of what this person might be or what this technology might be to stretch the metaphor But it's not there yet, and it's important to separate what we have today with what is possible in the future a Lot of people assume that The scalability we have today will simply extrapolate on a linear basis. I Recently read this on Twitter someone said well if It costs five to ten dollars to do a transaction today Then in ten years when there's a billion people it will cost a hundred dollars to do a transaction And then it will be impossible to use for most people if it takes an hour to send a jpeg over the internet in 1990 Then when everybody's sending jpegs over the internet in 2017 it will take ten days to send a jpeg over the internet That is not How scalable exponential systems work But in changing the scale of this system we have to think about what compromises and trade-offs are being made And this is a decision. Everybody has to make You are all participants in these open blockchains if you run the software if you choose a wallet If you choose an exchange you are choosing How the system will evolve you are through your actions through your spending through your choices participating in the formation of the consensus rules of the future and You have to think carefully about convenience versus liberty Do we want a system that is cheap or do you want a system that is free? We might have to go through a period where the system is expensive. That's okay It's not forever. It's not a permanent state of affairs Today, it's a lot harder to use Bitcoin for everyday transactions like buying a cup of coffee than it was in 2013 there's a reason for that and the reason is that Now we're trying to do it on a much greater scale with a lot more demand and It won't be like this forever Already there are many ways to improve the scalability performance security and Speed of the system if you read the debates online This is presented as most questions are Not just as a binary choice between a and b But more importantly as a manikin choice between good and evil One choice is obviously the best way to go. The other is obviously an Illuminati plot to destroy the world Some people will even go as far as to say that both choices are an Illuminati plot Change the world in which case Take two steps back from that person They might be dangerous in my opinion Both sides of the raging debate we've seen about scale Are doing what's best in their mind to scale this network. I Know many of the people who participated these debates. I know them personally. I spent time working with them I have been working with them or acquainted with them since 2012 Some of the most hated personalities in Bitcoin are the people who gave me my first Bitcoin Who introduced me to this who helped me at my first conference who helped me writing my book People who I honestly and truly believe are doing the best they can For the thing they believe in We must not forget that we all share one thing in common and that is we love the idea of Freeing the world from monopoly money a freeing the world for monopoly banking of bringing Economic participation to seven and a half billion people that is the thing we all have in common We can disagree about the how we can disagree about the when but let's not forget. That's what we want It's very easy to assume the people are motivated Immediately and easily by money and don't get me wrong money corrupts people and sometimes it does so in subtle and slow ways But let's not assume that everybody who is making money in this space who has a job who has a Profession and income who's affiliated with a company can be so easily manipulated As to form the basis of their opinions entirely based on who pays them that is appeal to authority It is appeal to authority of their employer and that is just as mistaken as any other form of appeal to authority Scaling is a difficult problem the answers are not simple because the questions are not simple Can we scale yes But it matters how? we scale Because some ways of scaling have side effects side effects that at least in our community are very dangerous centralization of control is The biggest side effect of any scaling choice And we have to be very very careful to ensure that as the system scale we preserve the most important principles The openness the neutrality the censorship resistance the decentralization we avoid The concentration of power and control and decentralization isn't a boolean. It's not an on off It's not a yes versus. No, it's a scale Is Bitcoin fully decentralized? It's not Is it one of the most decentralized things? Especially in finance to ever happen it is How can we make sure that in the future it is at least as decentralized as it is today or better? At least as private as it is today or better at least as open as it is today or better I talked about rules without rulers and yet There are many people who want to take the role of ruler Who want to dictate rules who want to take control? It's a natural inclination of the human species to see The absence of rulers as An opening a job opening an invitation to ascend to the throne We have to resist that and We fall most prey to that When we make simplistic assessments of other people's opinions associate those opinions with their employer assign them as ultimate evil and condemn them to the opposing side Because what we do then is Simultaneously reflect that back on the people we do believe in and we just Softly and softly push them into taking that throne There are going to be a lot of people who try to Introduce themselves as intermediaries in a system that's designed to remove intermediaries Who will try to hold your keys? for your own safety Who will try to ensure that only good people can do transactions? Will somebody please think of the children? I do think of the children. I Want the children to live in a world where seven and a half billion people have access to an open economy? I want to live in a future where everyone Can participate and more importantly a world in which we do not allow others To make choices about who is good and who is evil because I don't believe in Santa Claus And if you give someone the opportunity to make a list of the good kids and the bad kids that Gives them ultimate power as an adult maybe you read the story of Santa Claus and you realized that He's a fascist dictator No one elected him a Patriarchy, how did this happen? Oh my god We just assigned randomly a red robe dude with a white beard to decide For the children of the entire world, which are evil and which are good. Let's not do that again People will attempt to introduce controls To say that we shouldn't allow everyone to use these systems because bad people may use them We shouldn't allow everyone to transact and use money because bad people will use money and Again that fundamental splitting of the world in manikin terms between good and evil creates rulers Creates power and as soon as power is created powers abused My philosophy is simpler Not most people agree with me. I don't think there is absolute good or absolute evil I think good people do evil things all the time Occasionally evil people might do good things people change But more importantly One of the worst things we can do is give someone else the control over that decision we will scale We will grow Bitcoin We will grow all the open blockchains and they will be attacked They'll be attacked as ideas The networks will be attacked The currencies will be attacked They'll be attacked financially. They'll be attacked legally in Some countries they'll be attacked violently In many cases deadly attacked People who participate in these systems today Are risking their lives In at least a handful of countries around the world. I've spoken to a few people who are using Bitcoin in Venezuela Who do it on their extreme risk, but that risk is worth it Because the greater risk is that they lose The ability to give their family a future and so they're willing to take that risk There will always be someone willing to take that risk If your government bans Access to open finance You really really really need to get yourself some Bitcoin. That's exactly when you need this system most It's hard to explain that in places like Scandinavia. What do you need Bitcoin for? You don't This is one of the most cashless societies in the world You have access to banking Unless you're an immigrant or refugee who's undocumented Or a Bitcoin company that's been shut down by the banks Most people who come to these events. They don't need Bitcoin. I Hope you will see Why it is necessary for everyone else in the world One of the things that is common In countries with strong democratic institutions with equitable and fair governments With strong cultural bonds With a society that is progressive is The people who live in countries like that want everyone to live like that So you don't need Bitcoin But how about everybody else gets what you have and The problem is that banks cannot do that and they cannot do that because banks Concentrate power in the boardroom in the cabinets in the Parliament's Your boardrooms your cabinet your parliament has benign There's 194 countries out there most of them do not have that most of them will probably never have that And part of the reason is because those political systems can control money And if they control money they can control democracy or eradicate it Control of the money is an enormous power most countries should have separation of state and money Just like separation of church and state It seems logical. It is not the case in most of the world The countries that need this technology the most cannot trust their government cannot trust their banks They do not have the social institutions To deliver prosperity and liberty at scale as Sweden does Which means that as early users of this technology the choice you make between convenience and Liberty will affect Billions. Thank you