 Your thoughts on the Bitcoin ETF and its effect on Bitcoin. What happens next to Bitcoin? I have four or five questions on this topic. It's a very hot topic right now. First of all, what is an ETF? An ETF is an exchange-traded fund. An exchange-traded fund is a fund that has usually a custodian or manager. This custodian or manager creates a special financial instrument that can be traded like a stock, but isn't a stock. In this particular case, when we're talking about Bitcoin ETFs, what we're talking about is a fund that holds Bitcoin and then sells shares in this Bitcoin reserve that represent the price of Bitcoin as a stock that people can buy through their regular brokerage account and is traded on the stock market. The idea here is to take a reserve of bitcoins and then make them tradable instruments that can be traded on traditional markets like stocks. This is a custodial reserve system, where basically the custodian holds the actual Bitcoin, and what you're getting is a share in their funds, not Bitcoin, but it allows traditional investors or institutional investors to dabble in the Bitcoin price or speculate on Bitcoin without actually holding Bitcoin, without having to open an exchange and deal with complex things of keys and addresses and hardware tokens and all of those things. Everybody is so excited about ETFs, because what we've seen in other markets is that when an ETF becomes available, as we saw in gold, the price really increases dramatically as suddenly that commodity becomes available to a lot more investors and these investors pile on. But the other side of it is that there's always these claims that the commodities markets are heavily manipulated, and opening up these exchange-traded instruments only increases the ability of institutional investors to manipulate, especially large market makers, to manipulate the prices of commodities, not just in the markets where it's traded as an ETF, but more broadly. If you have a gold ETF and people can trade that, then big market players can manipulate the price of gold worldwide, not just in the ETF, because of course it's a worldwide liquid market. I'm going to burst your bubble. I know a lot of people really want to see an ETF happen, because to the moon and lambos and all of that, I think it's a terrible idea. I still think it's going to happen. I just think it's a terrible idea. I'm actually against ETFs. I think a Bitcoin ETF is going to be damaging to the ecosystem, and here's why. A Bitcoin ETF is basically going to be a very, very large custodial holder of Bitcoin. That large custodial holder of Bitcoin will hold Bitcoin on behalf of the shareholders and give them a traded share in that Bitcoin. But they don't give the owners of the ETF any of the responsibilities and rights that a key holder of Bitcoin has. As someone who holds keys to Bitcoin, I have more rights and responsibilities than someone who is simply trading in an exchange or has an exchange-traded fund. You see, I can do things like, for example, I can use my Bitcoin to vote. I can choose which exchanges to send my Bitcoin to, if I want to send it to an exchange. I can choose to pick up, for example, fork coins in another fork, because I have the original keys. If there is ever a fork debate, which is very likely to happen again in any cryptocurrency, then the funds that control that Bitcoin now has a very large voice. Their shareholders don't. They don't get to choose which fork the fund is going to follow in a Bitcoin debate, and maybe the fund follows both. Maybe it gives them some of their Bitcoin from the other fork. We already saw that level of influence when it actually occurred during the August 1st fork, and the user-activated soft fork, scaling debate, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin XD, all of that scaling debate with all of these fork coins that were available, and the various clients that supported them. We saw that large custodial exchanges had a very strong voice in the ecosystem. They were able to decide if they were going to support or not going to support on behalf of 10 million customers, and essentially moving opinion on a very large amount of currency. ETF will do that, and it will do that on an even bigger scale. It will give institutional players access to Bitcoin, but it won't give them a voice in the consensus and governance of Bitcoin. That will be held by a centralized fund manager, and that centralized fund manager will speak on behalf of all of the people who have that exposure to the ETFs, because they actually hold the keys to Bitcoin. That is a very bad thing. It's not going to be the end of Bitcoin. It is going to cause manipulation of the prices. It is going to cause manipulation of the debates about scaling decisions. If there are forks, it is going to give these parties a very large determining voice in forks, which probably means that eventually you will see them split off and form their own Corpo Bitcoin, a corporate version of Bitcoin. Let me give you a simple example. There is a new change being proposed for the Bitcoin ecosystem that allows completely anonymous, confidential transactions with encrypted values, encrypted senders, encrypted recipients. This change is being proposed as a soft fork. Does the ETF manager adopt this soft fork or not? Well, they have a big problem, because if the authorities are really pushing hard against anonymous private Bitcoin, they may feel obliged to not adopt that change. That means that a hell of a lot of Bitcoin is floating around that doesn't have privacy and anonymity protections, because the custodian of that Bitcoin hasn't adopted that change. Effectively, you now have two markets for Bitcoin, private Bitcoin, and not so private Bitcoin. These are the kinds of problems that happen with an ETF. ETFs fundamentally violate the underlying principle of peer-to-peer money, where each user is not operating through a custodian, but has direct control of their money, because they have direct control of their keys. Your keys, your Bitcoin. Not your keys, not your Bitcoin. An ETF is a multi-billion dollar, not your keys, not your Bitcoin vehicle. That's why I am against it, and I wouldn't buy any, but it is going to happen anyway. It is going to happen because there's enormous market appetite and very little technical knowledge, so institutional investors simply can't at the moment hold Bitcoin directly. I think eventually it's going to create two categories of institutional investors, those who have the technical know-how to actually hold real Bitcoin, and gain all of the advantages of that, and really have financial independence, versus those institutional investors who don't have that technical ability, and therefore always use an intermediary. Very much like in the current Bitcoin ecosystem, you have users who hold their own keys, and users who use a custodian exchange wallet, and effectively are second tier Bitcoin users, if they're even Bitcoin users at all.