 Hi, you mentioned a sick boost, so I thought I would bring that up What do you think about the allegations against bitmain and jihun new and if true what? Implications will that have if any on the breaking the impasse between core and Bitcoin unlimited? I Don't know if the allegations are true However, we do know that Bitmain's mining chips have on board FPGAs and multi-core CPUs that would be the necessary thing to put on a chip in order to do a sick boost Their CEO said that they put the chips on their a sick Board in order to do a sick boost, but then didn't do it for the good of the network And so they spent all of this money putting these chips on the only purpose of these chips would be to do a sick boost But they only did a sick boost on testnet and Have never done it on mainnet, so you can believe that or you can't right? It depends on your perspective, but if you do believe it I have a simple answer to that which is well in that case If you didn't use it, and you won't use it then you don't mind if the entire network disables it because No matter who uses it it creates a tremendous impediment to protocol enhancements by making the header itself Immutable in its architecture. We can no longer Add modifications to the header because any modification to the header will be resisted by anyone who's running covert a sick boost Because it will reduce their profitability so at that point That's a threat to the network. It doesn't matter if the motives of running it are simply profit-driven, and that's fine That's the free market. You should do optimizations. It's not an attack. It's an optimization great So what we're going to do to fix it is not a counter attack. It's a counter optimization And since nobody's using it, it's okay, right, right, right? There's not a hundred million dollars on the table here. Nobody's using it. It's okay. Turn it off You're not using it turn it off because it is Sitting there, and it's a time bomb if nobody's using it right now if somebody starts using it in six months They're going to derail pocket protocol development for exactly the reasons that we suspect or some people suspect that protocol development might be derailed and so I Would say turn it off That way everybody's happy you can still do overt a sick boost by using the front part of the header In fact, there are some proposals to make it more efficient anyone can run that Some people object to this idea by saying but the free market is optimizing the chips and The free market includes you and I and all of the protocol developers saying We don't want that optimization. So that's also part of the free market and In another way you've got to think about It's not really a free market It's a free market Secured by a patent That provides an exclusive economic right over an invention Backed by the threat of state force. That's not a free market, right a patent is a Monopoly by definition. That's what a patent does It secures the exclusive right to the patent owner to use a technology and not let anybody else use it Under threat of state force therefore not a free market. So If it's not being used we should turn it off if it is being used we should turn it off and I don't know if that's gonna change the debate It might not change the debate at all because at this point the debate is not just about profits and technology. It's also about Bruce the egos and hurt feelings and you called me this name and I called you that name and six months ago You said and all of that. It's a bit like a divorce, right? You have this couple and they're now six months into the divorce and they've spent a quarter of a million dollars fighting over who gets custody of Moo Moo the mini dog Right and anybody who's met Moo Moo Says Why why do you who wants to know take that little dog away from me? Nobody really wants the dog. It's not about the dog It's about Someone's feelings have been hurt and they want to spend a quarter of a million dollars Hurting the other person's feelings in revenge, right? And if you focus on trying to think okay, how about we get you both cats Like you know, these are the compromise proposals we see coming out of the Bitcoin community How about we get you both cats? I wanted a dog. You promised me that I could have Moo Moo three years ago. Here's the email Right and it's not about the dog and you can't fix it with a compromise because there's hurt feelings So this is the problem with a lot of the scaling debate and especially a sick boost because now we have another Ingredient and that's ingredient is the possibility of completely undetectable covert action that confers an Advantage by the way How many of you have heard of all of this? Okay, great. So quite a few people do you understand what it means to have a 20% advantage in energy consumption So first of all most data centers that run mining are not constrained by how many mining Rigs they can buy or rack. They're constrained by how much power they can feed into the building That's always the constraint and as soon as they have more power They can easily buy all of the chips and rack them etc. And immediately get to a hundred percent of all of the power I'd say it's the gating factor the limiting factor is always the electricity that's going in if you reduce consumption by 20% That means you can install 20% more miners, which means 20% more hashing power But it gets better That doesn't mean a 20% increase in profits Oh, no because profit margins are less than 1% What happens when your profit margins are less than 1% you spend a million dollars on electricity, right? So you spend a sorry you get a million dollars in rewards from mining and you spend 990 thousand dollars on Electricity and you make a $10,000 profit if you reduce the cost of electricity by 20% You earn a million dollars in mining and now you spend $750,000 on electricity and your profit just went from 10,000 to a hundred and ninety thousand a factor of 19 or 20 This is a huge advantage This is an enormous advantage and a basic boost is really happening. It will allow one miner Which one the one that has the monopoly control over the technology backed by the state's force To completely dominate the market and knock all of their competitors out of business that is unacceptable If you're gonna do it do it with the overt version Everyone can see you're doing it and adjust their business plan accordingly the covert version damages the market It damages the protocol development and since nobody's using it. Let's turn it off That's what I think about a suppose. Thank you