 Bitcoin is a really powerful tool for accumulating capital because it allows people to control their own private keys. It makes it harder for wealth to be taken away and I've heard Bitcoin is described as a hypercapitalist kind of system. Capitalism itself is an ideology in a legal system that enables the accumulation of capital rather than wide redistribution of capital. This accumulation of capital concentrates power and resources into smaller and smaller, fewer fewer hands over time. Do you think that capitalism is compatible with decentralization and accountability and some of the ideas you're talking about there with power and hierarchies or do you think that capitalism decentralization are at all its concepts? I think they're orthogonal in that I don't think... I think capitalism in itself is a specific way of organizing the pyramid. When you take away the pyramid and you create something different, then the label capitalism itself doesn't really apply to this new model. So it's as obsolete as agrarian feudalism is in an urban environment. You can't really apply that model to the new mechanism of organization. I think it's important to make a fundamental distinction between capitalism and free markets. The reason it's so disruptive is because Bitcoin represents free markets, doesn't represent capitalism. It represents free markets at a level that has not been done before with an architecture that has never been done before, and none of the old labels apply. So trying to figure out through the political system how we rearrange the layers of the pyramid is precisely why this is so exciting, because we're saying don't try to decide who gets the top, remove the pyramid from the equation completely. That is really the proposition that has a lot of people excited. Network-centric systems are more organization than a flat. Completely change the entire political spectrum, and labels like capitalism really don't apply anymore. So I mean, if in this system Bitcoin kind of enables this massive accumulation of capital, it's really that accumulation of capital that leads to this imbalance of power. So do you think that the hierarchy might not be arranged politically, but it would be arranged through market forces? Possibly. In which case we should use another decentralized network to disrupt Bitcoin 30 years from now. I'm a disruptarian. Given 30 years once it gets corrupted, start again. One of the great things about these centralized architectures is they now give us an engine, a template, a recipe for continuously disrupting the accumulation of power. That is the primary force of these decentralized systems. Right now we're disrupting a system of power where the accumulation of wealth is based on how many thousands of people your grandfather killed. And if in 30 years we have to disrupt a system of power based on how many early blocks you mined, your grandfather mined, that's still a better system of power than what we have today. And maybe we'll need to disrupt that one too. Alright, thanks, Andreas.