 Next question comes from Stifler, Hey, Andreas, as a non-technical person, I'm starting to get a little worried at your concerns over privacy upgrades. Is privacy a moving target that we can get to eventually? Or are we doomed to live in 1984 forever? How do you see the privacy playing out in Bitcoin? Are we going to get to the anonymity or at least get the option to have it from those who want it? Any thoughts on how this will play out in the next 25 years The good, the bad, the ugly of it all would be appreciated. Okay, let's start 25 years in the future and then work our way backwards. So it's the year 2044. I'm sporting a mullet. I've become half cyborg, and we are all fighting an alien invasion. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is totally private. All right, enough of the joke. Let's go back and look at this from the perspective of a real analysis. The thing about privacy that you've got to understand is it doesn't happen in one place or one time. Meaning that the solutions that we have to privacy won't happen in one layer, in one system, or at one historical moment where we will solve privacy once and for all, and then it's done. Privacy is a moving target. And you never get 100% privacy. It's always a matter of trade-offs. And privacy happens in multiple layers simultaneously. It happens in the base blockchain layer. It happens in your wallet. It may happen in a second layer, like Lightning, all of the above. It will happen by a combination of technologies, practices, and protocol changes at the same time. So right now, you can choose to have fairly strong privacy if you apply all of the techniques that are available to you. So you could do transactions on the Lightning network. You could use wallets that implement very good privacy practices on the blockchain. In every transaction, they transmit by obfuscating the wallet fingerprint, by reordering the outputs, by changing the change amounts, by not correlating UTXO, by doing coin joins or other techniques for privacy protection. All of these things can be used by different wallets. No one technique is sufficient. You've got to look at all of these techniques together, and look at applying privacy at different layers. It's part of a bigger picture, because your privacy requires you to be disciplined in your security operations. Where did you get the bitcoin in the first place? If you bought it with your driver's license being given to a third party on an exchange, for example, in a regulated country, then that's probably the biggest damage you did to your privacy, and it has nothing to do with what's happening on the blockchain, that's the biggest problem. If you get all of your bitcoin with cash transactions at ATMs while wearing an anonymous mask and switching three taxis in an evasive pair, like whatever paranoid scheme you can imagine, then your privacy situation is completely different. So it's not just about what you do on the blockchain, it's also about what you do off the blockchain, or which other parties you interact with. If you go and buy something from a merchant and pay with bitcoin, and then have that something shipped to your home address in your name, well, then you did an enormous amount of damage to your own privacy, because that merchant now has information that relates the address from which the payment came to your name and address. So there's all ways you can damage your privacy. I'm very positive that we will see privacy improvements across the board in bitcoin. We already have those with Lightning Network. We already have it with a number of privacy-focused wallets, like Wasabi and Samurai and others, and we also have it with changes in the way the blockchain operates, and we also have it in protocols like CoinJoin, which have also been developed over time to get better and better. So privacy is a moving target, and we don't eventually get to it. We get better over time, and then the people who are trying to violate our privacy get better over time, and then we get better, and then they get better, and then we get better, and then they get better, and it's a constantly moving battle. But people asked, so Wasabi vs. Samurai Wallet for anonymity. Anthony asks, which wallets would you prefer for anonymous transactions? Is one wallet more secure? I think this is watching the trees and missing the forest, because if you use either of these two wallets, you are doing something to protect your privacy. And the truth is that 99% of the transactions, and I just pulled that number off the top of my head, is probably different. It's probably not 99%, but a very, very high percentage of the transactions that happen on the blockchain. They reuse addresses, they use wallets that are custodial, they use wallets that have very poor privacy practices, including, for example, putting the change transaction always last, as the last output in the transaction, constructing the transaction in such a way that it's very easy to identify which wallets constructed the transaction, which is another violation of privacy, etc., etc., etc. So, given all of these other factors, we're now talking about perfection, right? We're talking about how do you perfect the art of privacy? And if you really, really want to perfect the art of privacy, then it matters which of these two wallets you have to use, and you should do your research to find out what the various trade-offs are, because they're always trade-offs. Which wallet implements privacy protocols better, which wallet constructs transactions with fewer fingerprints, which wallet implements the greatest set of features, which wallet is most convenient for you to use, if you can only use it rarely, or if you can use it every day, because that also is a big consideration. Which one fits into your lifestyle and operating practices? Which one can you operate more easily without making mistakes? All of these are considerations. And you should definitely do the research. But the bottom line is it doesn't really matter. The bottom line is that if you use any wallet that actually makes an effort to do privacy better, you are already ahead of 99% of the people who don't care about this at all, and probably use a custodial wallet, or a wallet that has very, very poor privacy practices. So, in that case, time to upgrade your wallet to something that does privacy better. I think it's a mistake to have these battles over the minutiae of who's doing it better and who's not doing it, and instead focus on educating people on how to use these privacy practices well, and encourage more people to adopt these practices. We all lose out if, instead of adopting privacy practices, we're so busy fighting over which ones are perfect, that we miss the point that all of the people around us are not using them, which means that when we use them, we stand out like a sore thumb because we're using privacy-enhancing technologies. Privacy works best if you're part of a big herd of people who are all part of this privacy movement, herd immunity, basically. So, I think that applies to privacy. I'm more concerned about educating people, so I'm not going to tell you which of the two is best. If you can tell, then you should do the research yourself, and if you can't tell, you should just adopt whichever one a flip of a coin gives you the best answer because it's not really going to make that much of a difference. It's going to improve your privacy no matter what.