 David asks, how can non-tech older people adopt Bitcoin? Andreas has mentioned that cryptocurrencies are not meant for everyone, at least for now. I live in Mexico, and we have higher inflation than other countries. Our governments have already been proven not to be reliable with our currency. Older members of my family avoid any Mexican peso risks by USD. But for them, it's a way to secure a little better their hard-earned savings. What solutions can be developed so that they can protect their savings in USD, but also keep some of them in BTC or other cryptocurrency? The problem with buying USD as protection against inflation is that USD is difficult to transport, it's difficult to store, and it's difficult to divide into smaller denominations. In order to make USD very portable and easier to hide, you need high denominations. For example, you live in Venezuela, and your government has said you can't use USD. If you are found with USD, you will be arrested and put into prison. This has happened in many different countries over the years. Not happening in Mexico right now, you can buy USD. But if that USD was ever to be very, very useful because the peso really collapses in value, then you will immediately see currency controls on foreign currencies, and people being accused of hoarding foreign currencies to collude with the enemy and support foreign forces. At which point it becomes a crime to have these currencies. From conversations I've had with people who send money to Venezuela, one of the interesting things is that if they send $100 bills, which are very portable, light weight, and they can send them through the mail fairly easily without it being intercepted, then the people who receive it at the other end, who are desperate for this money, because it supports entire families, they find that it's actually difficult to exchange. Imagine if you are someone who has a USD 100 bill, and your local currency is depreciating very, very fast. That is the case with Venezuela. You want to spend $20 per week, which is enough, and you have a $100 bill. You try to exchange it for pesos. They are going to exchange the entire thing and give you the change in pesos. They are not going to give you change in USD. Now you are holding USD 100 in pesos, but you can't spend them all right away, so you have to hold them for a month, or maybe two months. Two months later, that $100 in pesos is worth $20 in pesos, or even $10 in pesos, because the currency is depreciating. One of the advantages of having Bitcoin instead is that the denomination doesn't matter. Bitcoin is transportable and easy to hide for those who are in hostile regimes. You can divide it to eight decimal places. If you want to sell a tiny bit just to get enough pesos for now, you can do that and still keep the rest in Bitcoin, so it doesn't depreciate. You don't have to get change in pesos. You can sell a tenth of a thousandth of the Bitcoin for what you need for the next few days, and then next week sell it again at, most likely, a much better exchange rate because the other currency is dropping. How can you get non-tech holder people to adopt Bitcoin? It's not meant for everyone, at least not for now. The answer is that right now, in a place like Mexico where you have inflation, and where people are trying to protect their long-term savings, the US dollar is a perfectly good alternative. Compared to the peso, it's strong. They could do the same with Swiss francs. They could do the same with a number of other currencies, but certainly the US dollar is the easiest to get in Mexico. So that makes sense. Honestly, if your relatives tried to use Bitcoin, they would probably use it with an exchange that had a custodial system. They wouldn't know how to control their own keys, and that would expose them to a much greater risk. Because those exchanges would get hacked, their money would get stolen, or the government could come in and confiscate it. Not your keys, not your coins, is a pretty big barrier for all the people to overcome, and it's not easy. You have to have a very good reason. In some countries, people have a very good reason, where it's worth learning the complicated processes needed to manage your own custody of keys and crypto, and Mexico isn't one of those places. Not yet, and hopefully not for a very long time or ever. We will make these technologies better and easier over time. We're improving education, we're improving user interfaces. All of this is getting easier. When it's easier to do than the risks of not doing it, like the currency is having a lot of trouble, then people will do it. Dietmar asks, I'm afraid we are still distant from significant adoption of cryptocurrencies. Every time we spend fiat, we reinforce the system. How could we speed up adoption of crypto payments? Well, earn and spend crypto directly. The question has already been answered by yourself. Every time we spend fiat, we reinforce the system. Spend less fiat, spend more crypto. Earn less fiat, earn more crypto. Shift more of your economic activity into the crypto economy. Now, I understand this is very difficult for people to do. It's a chicken and egg problem. In order to earn, you have to find someone who wants to spend. In order to spend, you have to find someone who wants to sell you something for crypto. This is difficult when you're bootstrapping. However, there are many opportunities in niche environments. For example, cross-border transactions where you're paying subcontractors, or various non-geographic professions like web design, graphic design, web development, programming, translation work, etc. All of those are services that I have purchased already with crypto in other countries. They are a great way to spend crypto for me. But they are also a great way for these people to earn crypto through their professional skills. Here's a theoretical question. Would it have been possible to have a fully operational Bitcoin network if it was introduced, let's say, five or ten years earlier? I am talking about the speed and reliability of the internet at the time. Was it introduced in 2008, just in time when the internet speed and capacity made it possible for such a network to exist? If the latter is the case, then it could make one think that it was more than a coincidence. No, not really. Honestly, I think Bitcoin could have operated five, ten years earlier. Even more, Bitcoin could have operated on the internet with its scale, speed, and capacity. Probably all the way back to the mid-90s or early 2000s, I was operating on the internet at the time. The web existed, DNS existed. Those things were operating at fairly robust scale. Bitcoin isn't a very bandwidth-hungry system, at least not at first, and it doesn't require a lot of CPU resources. Now, if it had been bootstrapped in 1997, let's say, and then ran continuously, I think ten years later, in 2007, the scalability problem would have been much, much worse if it had caught on earlier. But there was nothing really preventing Bitcoin from running then. Many of the peer-to-peer technologies like BitTorrent had already, I guess, launched. I remember using peer-to-peer technologies in the late 90s. I may be wrong on the timeline, but just off the top of my head, peer-to-peer technologies existed, digital signatures existed. Something very much like Bitcoin could have been done then. Does that mean it was launched because of the economic crisis? I don't think so, because the time it was launched was pretty much right on the break of the economic crisis, unless it was developed and kept secret until then. But I think that's really unlikely. I think it was mostly a coincidence and perhaps a coincidence that accelerated its deployment and development as Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they might be, noticed that the world economy was in crisis and used that as a motivation to launch this faster, maybe before it was quite ready, or maybe they were not quite done with testing, but they launched it. Who knows? This is all speculation, of course. Nothing technical prevented Bitcoin from existing earlier, I don't think.