 Vasilis asks, will there ever be a time when BTC can be used as everyday currency, and what does it take for this to happen? Is it worth investing in such business solutions? Vasilis, I think yes, I think that BTC can be used as an everyday currency. But in order to do that, two things need to happen. One, volatility needs to be reduced to a level that allows people to plan, spend, and not be freaked out by sudden changes in the price of Bitcoin, or in the exchange rate or value of Bitcoin. For that, it takes more liquidity, more adoption, more volume of transactions. The bigger Bitcoin gets, the lower the volatility gets. The more traders, the more users, the more merchants are participating, the more volume of transactions, the more liquidity the lower the volatility gets. The second thing, of course, is very scaling solutions to make it possible to do transactions at lower fee rates. At the moment, the fees that are present in the Bitcoin network make it very difficult to use for small retail transactions, and mostly suitable to use for large value transactions. There are a number of possible solutions that are in play right now, including increasing the block size, which we saw with Bitcoin Cash, second-layer networks. The implementation of segregated witness opens the door for a lot of alternative solutions, as second-layers, sidechains, etc. Lightning network is in the final interoperability testing, and it should be a pair in wallet form, usable on the mainnet, at least for beta testing pretty soon. Is it worth investing in business solutions around retail everyday currency use of Bitcoin? Honestly, not yet. We have seen a number of companies that have tried to base their business plan on enabling small amounts of retail transactions for Bitcoin, and are struggling with that business model. In some cases, they are demanding a block size increase to make their business model work, even if that comes at the cost of decentralizing more centralization of Bitcoin nodes. At the moment, it is really not possible to do the types of small retail transactions. If you base a business around that, you will have a lot of difficulty making that work. I think there are a lot more promising opportunities in building basic infrastructure, and that means on-ramps and off-ramps, payment systems, exchanges, preferably decentralized mechanisms for buying and selling Bitcoin, and trading it with other cryptocurrencies, as well as with fiat, various grass-root-type exchanges, where you can exchange Bitcoin for cash, person-to-person, things like Bitcoin ATMs that allow people to access Bitcoin easily, better wallets that do better fee management and fee estimation, and have the capability to adjust fees with things like replaced by fee and child-paste for parents. All of these kinds of technologies, really, the boring but necessary infrastructure stuff is more important at this point than retail sales. Drew asks, in Bitcoin, in 2013, it was banking the unbanked, the other $6 billion. Now, transaction fees are much higher than the average daily wage of these people. Is this vision dead? Absolutely not. It is not dead. It will be achieved through a combination of multiple technologies, but it will take time. We are still in the very early stages of this technology, and in the very early stages, the financial conditions have not yet achieved the types of economies of scale that we expect to see over time. We are not yet in the optimization phase. We are still in the exploration phase. Think of this a bit like saying in the 1980s, I think one day, cellular telephones will change the lives of a farmer in Kenya. People would look at you like you are a crazy person, because at that point, in order to install a cellular telephone, you also needed a car, because the equipment was installed in a car because it was too heavy to carry. It took several years before it was small enough to be a suitcase-sized thing that somebody else carried. Several more years before, it was a brick that you had to hold next to your head and extend this massive antenna. At that point, the cost of a phone call was so expensive. It brought tears to my eyes every time I used a cellular telephone, which I did in 1990. It was a giant brick, and it didn't have any battery life. It cost a ridiculous amount of money to make a phone call. In fact, I hoped no one would call me because I had to pay for incoming calls, too, at a ridiculous rate. Does that mean that the vision of everyone having a cell phone was dead? Absolutely not. We saw all of the years, the economy of scale kicks in, the software gets better, the hardware gets better, the protocols get better, the scale gets better, the optimizations get better. Now you have a $5-$10 phone that can be charged off a solar panel that costs almost nothing to operate and also has other functionality. We are going to get to systems that are more efficient than today's banking system, more efficient than Visa, that can do more transactions, orders of magnitude more transactions, at a fraction of the cost. The marginal cost of a transaction will trend towards zero. We can't do that on the base blockchain, but we can do it with a combination of scaling on the base blockchain, second-layer solutions, sidechains, and various other things, maybe some of which we haven't even come up with yet. In fact, most of the innovations that are going to be required haven't yet been invented, but I wouldn't count them out. Which stage of grief are the banks at these days bargaining? They are flip-flopping from, this is stupid internet money that doesn't mean anything, to Bitcoin will destroy the planet right after it crashes the world economy, and can only be used not just by criminals, but by terrorists trying to destabilize the very foundation of our moral and effective society, bargaining, anger, somewhere between there. At the same time, they're touting blockchain, they're pointing at more benign, less offensive versions of more centralized versions, like, we hate Bitcoin because it's full of terrorists, but we love Ripple, great, that's bargaining.