 What's up, Amir? What's up, man? A lot of stuff going on in the industry right now. It's crypto, man. I always said they should make a fucking movie about it. Well, I mean, whoever decides to basically document what's going on now just alone in Canada with the Rodriguez situation, I think it's going to make for a real wicked documentary. What's your take about that? Well, I think a lot of things. Number one, I think, like yourself. I don't really like to judge before all the information in the facts come out, right? And obviously, there is court proceedings that are unwinding at the moment. People are coming out of the woodwork and posting on social media, hey, I lost X, I lost Y, I lost Z. But it's moving forward, and we all know now that EY has been appointed the monitor to look after everything, hopefully figure out where everything is, if there is. And it's going to be a lengthy process. But at the end of the day, if it is proven that there is even a cold storage, or cold storages, plural, and Gerald had all the keys, like... Well, if Gerald had all the keys, then both you and I know that those won't be recovered. They won't be recovered. It's also not sizable enough or big enough, in my opinion, with the ETH holdings to warrant potentially what happened when the DAO occurred. I don't think that would happen either. So you think in exchange, or at least have a multi-sig, like say you and I started investing in Quadruda as investors, and we met the team, or Gerald's a front-facing person. So are you investing in investors in the company, or buying cryptocurrency on them? In the company. Because they've raised money. A real investor. People gave them money. Absolutely. My first question is, who's a custodian? Who's the fiduciary manager of the funds that I'm giving you, and what type of multi-signature wallets have we created to prevent something like what has happened today? So I think, obviously, the first who it falls on the fiduciary portion would be officers, directors of the company. Right? And even CEO. Well, clearly. Well, maybe. In a case like the way that Quadriga structured, it almost seems like it seems like that's the way it was. But for lack of an explanation as to why there was no multi-sig. Number one, again, I don't know if we really know that yet, because we would have to determine if there are any cold storages. But let's just say hot storage, for example. Only most reputable operators in the space right now are using multi-sig for hot wallets as well. Sure. I mean, you need to be able to account for every movement everywhere. But this is the whole premise of why one of the great things about Bitcoin smart contracts is multi-sig. Absolutely. It's beautiful. Multi-signature wallets, both cold and hot, are a beautiful invention. I totally agree. And I think that is the actual technical solution to the problem. The fact that they didn't put in any multi-signature controls in place for either hot or cold, and I don't want to jump to conclusions because that may be the case. But from what we've been able to gather online and from public documents, it seems like if he is the only one, then they were not effectively implementing any controls when the technology existed to prevent that from happening. So that, again, I guess would fall under fiduciary responsibilities aside from crypto, and it would be the responsibility of an officer of the company. We'll see how much that kind of plays into other shareholders. I don't think it does. But then again, based on the level of control that certain people may or may not have had in Quadriga or its associated companies, they may be liable as well. It's a really unfortunate story. I mean, I remember that when Vault of Satoshi disappeared, there was literally nowhere else to go. And up pops Quadriga and they had a payment platform. They partnered with somebody. It was like the one stop in the beginning where you could really sort of get in for a change. That first move advantage, man. First move advantage, yeah. Absolutely. Way before Coinbase, way before CoinSquare, way before any exchanges, man. They're like number one. Devin Mt. Gox. Capitalizing on what had previously happened in the Canadian landscape really set them up to be the number one. But one of the signs that I kind of look back on is being somebody who used Quadriga from the beginning, it didn't really showcase any improvement in the tech or the UI. It seemed like it had always been the flavor that we've seen, albeit minor changes here, the addition of different trading pairs, et cetera, not too many. But it could have been a sign into what was really important amongst management of a company like that. So a lot of notable companies take a philosophy or a premise that constantly updating and improving, and not just for the sake of updating and improving, but it also has that added effect of showing your customer base or potential customers that you're actively working on it. And we all know from being in the crypto space that a lot of ways that the community would judge a project is just simply by looking at the commit history on a GitHub project. So I think there may be some signs that you could go back into history and piece together to understand potentially why Quadriga ends up in the state that it is. But there obviously is a lot of mystery surrounding not only the people involved, but as you know to the controls in place, and we're living in the blockchain age. And the fact that there's no multi-signature is kind of a head-scratcher, especially for somebody who was first mover, number one player in the space, 100 to 200 million in customer funds. I mean, that's a lot of money. I also think of the blockchain as quite transparent, so we can track all the transactions that have done in the past two, three years. And slowly, but surely, I mean, we're seeing lots of investigators and researchers put together the tracing of funds in and out. And it can simply start with any customer, for example, who received the withdrawal. You can potentially follow the chain back and try to discover the origin or at least the flow of set assets that ended up in your possession. But yeah, it's pretty scary to, let's say, a lot of people who aren't aware of the different types of technologies and then let's just say uneducated regulators, you know, they're looking at this going, they have no words. And again, back to multi-signature, it's something, it's an example like this where we actually have the technology that would have prevented this in the first place. And because it wasn't used, I don't think it has a negative effect too much per se on the community as a whole because it's actually highlighting what not to do. It highlights that if you bite off more than you can chew and you grow faster than you're ready for, you know, you're going to be under the radar of everyone and any little move will eventually be scrutinized. And you know. But there's also a lot of what ifs. They're saying there's 170 million, I think it was 170. Well, I've seen a lot of figures. I've seen 130 US. I've seen 260 Canadian. Let's say a shit ton of fucking bitcoins. Hundreds of millions of dollars, right? That is also what if. I don't have no, there's no way right now I can technically prove that this supposedly, the supposed amount of Bitcoin has been lost. And that's the $100 million question. You know, we are we're thankful for some of the data at Seabix that we have where we were pulling their order books since 2014. So we do have a nice sort of real time pull from the order book information. But unfortunately, trading all occurs on a private database unless you're using a DEX or it's built on top of blockchain technology. So there's no way in effect for us to necessarily link these orders ourselves to any particular blockchain transactions. However, we are making it available to the monitor in order for them to potentially do a cross check. Okay. So, you know, the beauty of the blockchain is is or one of them is immutability, right? However the private database where all the trades occur, you know, that could be done with whatever the operator wants. And so, we're thinking that our collection of data in this data set we have may be of use to the monitor in determining whether there's anything on the internal side that they began to change or alter. Not sure kind of where that would go, but at least it may help in establishing if the record sets that Quedriga itself is providing to the monitor are relatively accurate, right? I mean, just because a database could be modified by somebody doesn't mean that it's not accurate. We just have a harder time to prove that it is accurate. And so I think this case will unfold, you know, of the next several months. I don't think it's going to take as long as traditional cases like this involving an amount that size that's owed, just given how many people are involved in this process at the moment from the company itself to communities. And then of course a lot of traditional financial and forensics experts are, you know, jumping into the fray to help the monitor to help the corporation and either to help law firms representing creditors themselves. So it's quite a story. I really think it should be a documentary like you said. I can almost picture it's like the crypto social network. I think it's a safe bet to say I don't think so people are getting their money back. I think they'll be lucky if they get about 10 cents on the dollar. And where is it going to come back? Well, insurance policy, do they even have insurance policy? Seems like a portion of the total amount is actually in fiat. And so if that can be found, and you know, I think half of it has to do with the third party payment processors who are holding bank graphs from the previous CIBC issue that they had. So we'll see how much that can garner. Company itself may have assets as well. So I imagine that those would be sold. I imagine the customer list is valuable to competitors in the space, myself included, potentially a domain name. I'm not too sure about the IP, the trading platform and the trading software. Just as I kind of mentioned earlier that I don't think it has been improved to the level of being able to compete with what's now out there in Alpha Point, our pro platform, a lot of other sort of high frequency style systems. So we'll see what they'll be able to garner. And of course, it was noted that the monitor can charge up to, I believe, $2 million in its work that it will perform during this proceeding. So it's tough to say. It's tough to say what's there. And then, of course, if a lot of people are starting to get the impression that there may not have been any cold wallets, well, that's for certain a nail in the coffin towards not being whole or not being made whole. You're right, I might be sure, but I think it's going to, the whole legal process is going to take a look. Look at Mt. Gox. Right. It's still going on. It's still going on. They're all new to Brock Pierce as he owns an item. I don't fucking know. I know. It's crazy. This case is going to take a long time. But I think what I was inferring was we're going to know where everyone stands a lot sooner than I think the court proceeding, right? Like, I think it will be discovered relatively soon, whether or not. Because the case is so interesting. It's like, there's too many people. Yeah, but I was also like, you know, he goes to India, passes away due to medical reasons. And then if you, in keeping up the news, two weeks prior, he wrote his will. His wife has different names over multiple properties, allegedly. You know, it's all allegedly. His business partner has separate names. Allegedly, yeah. Allegedly and has a whole alleged connection to other stories that would peak interest around a situation like this. So there's a lot of like, just like alarm bells that go off in my mind. There's definitely a lot of alarm bells. I think it's harder in sort of a new industry to also discover those because we, we as the community, you know, we take more of an optimistic approach towards almost anything. Sure. And so it's almost like a lot of people do not want to believe that it's true that, that Jerry could do such things or that this money could disappear or that there never was any money. And so these are my rational thinking is there's never money. You know, there's a lot of evidence so far that could certainly help facilitate that assumption. And I wouldn't even bet against that assumption as well again until most of the facts come out. But yeah, the red flags in my opinion have existed far before the last, I don't know, six to eight weeks, you know, starting with last fall, that banking issue. And then prior to that, they had a smart contract screw up. I know, screw them off, 17 million. 17 million. So maybe that may have been a beginning catalyst. But then if you follow it back even further, there was a failed attempt at bringing the deal to capital markets and taking the company public. And I do remember, you know, when that was being publicized. And then it's interesting to see now what the company's financial metrics were when they decided to potentially go down that path. And, you know, they would have been much better off waiting until December. Sure. But then again, I think potentially if you go back that far, you see, okay, what's required in bringing a company to the public markets? There's a lot of compliance. There's a lot of regulation. There's a lot of auditing and fees that are to be done. So it's possible that they didn't even pass that test. And for them, it was just about continuing to take advantage of potentially the unregulated state that we're currently in. And, you know, for better or for worse, it almost seems like their lack of development, these sort of pre-stories would put it in the basket of not thinking about what the next evolution of the landscape here will look like in a regulated environment. Because, you know, I don't think if a company like that couldn't take itself public three years ago when it's a profit, I think that the statement in the article was around $90,000 or $100,000, you know, if you couldn't do it then, when your books would probably be a lot smaller than what they would be now, you know, it was probably also a flag or a hint, if you will, as to the state of Quadriga. Yeah, yeah. And it really pains me to, you know, come to some of these conclusions, because as somebody who used Quadriga personally and somebody who had, you know, for all intents and purposes during the last run, I successfully exited my whole position off the exchange. Maybe it was a timing issue. I tell most people, man, like, unless you're a trader, like using a pro service, if you're buying some crypto buy-down exchange, and if you're planning to hold it long-term, unless the exchange has some kind of insurance policy, like Coinbase has insurance policy, or even them themselves publicizing that they have these vault platforms, etc., which is a fancy cold storage, but at least they're doing it. They're doing it, and if they don't have it, like, take it off. Like, there's no reason for you to hold 5K, 6K, 7K on exchange. I would totally agree. Like, if your whole purpose is holding, like, why hold it there? Just take it off. Absolutely. And we at Bitbuy as well, we put a lot of material and a lot of content to educate our users. You know, what's the beauty of crypto? What's the beauty of blockchain? And, you know, it leads me back to the cliche, be your own bank. And, you know, these customers, clients of these exchanges need to be made aware that, you know, just because they've purchased some crypto, that doesn't mean that you now can take advantage of what blockchain has to offer you, because you have to use it. You have to use the blockchain. You have to set up a wall, that you have to move your assets. And, obviously, there's a bunch of technical barriers to entry for people, but we try our best to teach people about that process. And there's great companies now that have created some pretty cool wallet software and services in order to help sort of bring down that complexity of doing something. I mean, I'll never forget, in the very beginning, when I was mining a little bit, okay, I need a wallet to send to, and I'm like, oh, what do I do with the wall? It's, oh, just set up a node. And it's like, I have, I'm running a full node just for my own wallet, right? And it's downloading the blockchain every day. And so, you know, there's been a lot of evolution in this space to sort of reduce that MO for people who use exchanges. But we still see that, according to this situation, there's a lot of people who left assets on the exchange. I was reading an article in Bloomberg about, I believe, one of the lead, one of the gentlemen who's being represented by Bennett Jones, I think he had about $500, $550,000, according to the Bloomberg articles, his life savings, this guy's a programmer. And so, there's the double entendre, though, the programmer. So, you're telling me, if you're a programmer, and you're knowledgeable about how, you know, at least more than the average person about how blockchain works, the different components, the infrastructure. And you left it on an exchange. How much of that is the exchange's fault? Obviously, no exchange should ever go under. And if they steal or take things, they're liable. But fault is a very important test here. Because, you know, we look back at mailbox, it's not the Bitcoin blockchain that got hacked. It's Quedriga. It's not ETH that got hacked. It's not the assets themselves that got hacked. It's the implementation done by these operators. So, then where do you see the Canadian landscape then in the next, like, year now, since Quedriga's gone? So, I think, obviously, that provides a lot of opportunity in the space. We're getting a lot of attention and a lot of press. And we're doing our best to continue to roll out and improve our offering at such a degree that captures sort of what's happening in the marketplace. Our signups have been going through the roof since this began to happen. And people aren't going away from Bitcoin. They just want to find another trusted third party. It pains me to say it. But that's essentially what all these exchanges are. And if they're not transparent and upfront, then, you know, they're going to harm the community as a whole because that's how most people get into crypto. It's simply purchasing the asset. And, you know, then when you get into, you know, values above the middle class and there are a lot of institutional and accredited high net worth individuals who want to play in crypto and they want exposure to crypto. And, you know, if you're going to offer something to that market segment, then you better have, it's not even going to be a question as to whether you should have all of the controls, processes in place because most of these people come from the traditional baskets of where we're trying to bring crypto into. And they expect that level of security, that level of transparency, because that's how they operate in traditional securities markets or forex markets and things like that. So I think it's a good thing. I don't think it's a good thing as far as the people who are obviously left holding the bag. But I think what it does is obviously every time there's a mistake gives you an opportunity to learn what do we do wrong. And this is just another event like that in crypto. It's the Canadian Mt. Gox. And so I think specifically what that does is it kind of points the finger at the Canadian regulators and go, you know, you guys have been taking a really long time since you drafted Bill C-31 in 2014 with five points and zero guidance while you left the industry in a state of limbo and forced certain business people to forge alliances and whatnot that were traditionally outside the norm. And, you know, now I think this may be that catalytic event that actually leads them to flip the switch. My biggest concern with North America, I do a lot of blockings with a lot of business in Asia. The Asian market, it's much more welcoming to crypto. And what I mean by crypto, I'm talking about all crypto tokens, platforms, derivative versions of tokens like ERC-721s, etc. North America needs to make a statement soon because the OSC here will follow what the SEC does, you know, with partners. And it seems like they're on the verge of... Soon, I just saw the statement the other day, you know, they need to make a very black and white law where it states this is what we allow, ABCD, this is what we don't create. Me as a company now, I know where I can operate. Simple as that. Right now it's complete gray. Total gray. But my worry is I don't want North American landscape to sandbox us. And then basically all the smart talent and companies will go over to Asia. And we're famous for doing that. Famous. I mean, you could just look at New York State, for example, with the Bitlice. Oh, fuck, Brown. So draconian laws, man. Right. So now ask yourself from an innovation standard, of course, how far is New York in crypto and blockchain? It's not very far compared to a lot of other jurisdictions where that imprimatur by the state... The United States can be interesting. It's not like Canada because you have like the three levels of government. And so you have like federal, state, the municipal. And each of them right now have their own criteria and definitions of what a crypto is. And there's a big difference between me comparing, say, Bitcoin to some kind of like shitty fucking ERC-20 token. Massive difference. Totally. And so you can have like the SEC saying, oh, no, no, no, they don't understand. This is a commodity, right? Bitcoin. Think of it as gold, right? So you pay capital loss, capital gains. It's an asset. Cool. But then I might go places like in some municipality like, no, it's not an asset. It's a currency. Well, how do I use it? And what taxes am I paying? Like who am I following? Am I following federal? Am I following municipal? Then I go to Japan. No, it's currency. Well, I have business in Japan. How am I registering here and then Canada? Like how am I... It's crazy. And then the tax agency comes out and goes, oh, yeah, it's an asset, but it's not in security. It's not in security now. It's like real estate. Yeah, it's like real estate. And it's like, okay, make up your mind. No, I think that that's nothing new with respect to government regulators. I mean, that's why I kind of actually applaud the Canadian approach from the perspective of most people who are known in the industry in Canada have had active discussions and or sessions or letters sent back and forth with the regulators because they're genuinely asking, hey, we don't know anything about this. So I think that then boils down to who do you have working there? And I think in the bigger the bureaucracy, the worse you're going to get. And I think that's kind of why Canada has a little bit of a leg up, let's say at the federal level on that. But the United States could be a totally different animal. And you see that some states have been rushing as fast as they can, but New York, California, BitLicence, et cetera. And they really want to drop it into the basket of their traditional securities commodities for X and currency jurisdictions, which makes perfect sense. And I don't really know why, let's say here in Canada too, even though they've been taking that proactive approach, why it's taken so long. And I think the longer you take, the more you let a quadriga CX situation happen. You know, had you slapped down more guidance a year ago or a year ago before that, quadriga may not have been allowed to potentially operate reserve style, if you will. And, you know, it shouldn't. No crypto company should. Because no company in general. No company. Well, tell that to the banks. Head of Fed. But every dollar becomes $10. And you're still insured between one and 200,000. Never mind that. But yeah, I think it just depends. I heard rumblings from different management teams at the different big five banks, where some of them are still traditionally managed by senior gray hair type executives. But at BMO, apparently there's a team, and it's really young guys like 40 and under, that are in the power positions. And that would sort of align with the banks adoption towards cannabis and block. Yeah, if banks in Canada don't smart enough, like we won't need them. Like you go to Asia, everything I do is on WeChat. I go to Korea, Seoul, everything's on a mobile. There's really full mobile banks. I don't need to step foot in the bank. It's amazing. And everything's happening on mobile. It's faster, cheaper. I always say, you know, I have a business. We go to BMO, CBC, TD, whatever. Why the fuck do I have to pay to have an account there? I'm paying you so you can hold my money to not just hold my money, but then to take my money and basically do whatever you want with it. This model's broken. And hope that we all don't come back to the bank at the same time and ask for it. Look, I think Amazon's making a play for virtual banks. Oh, really? Well, you know, I really don't understand why none of the big banks and not just in Canada, but anywhere around the world, literally announced to the world, we're redoing our bank infrastructure on blockchain. Even if it was centralized, I don't know, even if it was a centralized chain just for auditing purposes, then even amongst the regulators themselves, nobody can play any business. Because I think, you know, you obviously can't have everything you want. But I think that the medium ground between them worried about losing to blockchain, but them also using blockchain is their saving grace. So cool. Yeah. Awesome. Interesting times. Any final words? Final words are not to sweat about Quadriga CX. There's a lot of great players in this space, including ourselves at BitBye. And so at BitBye, we're going to be launching a pro platform, full exchange, advance the orders. And not only that, just basically on the security and transparency side, we do implement cold, warm and hot wallet infrastructure. We do have multi-signature. We do have backups of the backups of the backups. Basically, that's just the layman's for multiple off-site disaster recovery, which is a term I borrow from traditional web hosting. But basically, in the event that any particular person of control isn't available or something happens, there is always recourse for our customers to be able to be made whole and to prevent a situation like a Quadriga from happening at BitBye. So BitBye.ch. Always a pleasure, brother. Cheers, man. Yeah. All right. Cool.