the reason I brought that up is when you see that happening, okay, well, there is very
clear, use case of rhetorical
question. I have is kind of reverse and you talk about
studying something 10,000 hours, knowing it and to back
and you've done that with Bitcoin. So the question I had was what would make you believe that your thesis on bitcoin was incorrect like it is Or something an event, like a single type of event. Where you been, okay? This is actually making me question my conviction
if I saw something better.
Okay. It's like yeah if you invent a fusion
reactor that can run a Tesla on a sugar cube for 100 years and you asked me whether I would buy that instead of the Tesla all other things being equal. I think I like the car with the fusion motor or the atomic overthruster. I just haven't seen it. Okay, that makes sense. I mean, Bitcoin in his core is more of an ideology. The ideology is, let's Implement conservation of energy in cyberspace via protocol which is fair and Equitable,
have done that, right? So can someone Implement about, you know, and every other thing that competes with it isn't a fair and Equitable protocol for implementing conservation of energy and cyber. It's something different, right? When you start inflating the supply, the tokens by 5%, or when you have a foundation or an issue, or an IC o---- or an investment contract and its proprietary, or you keep hard forking and hard forking, right? That's not conservation of energy via an open permissionless protocol in cyberspace. It's something different the things that are closest to bitcoin right where the Bitcoin Forks Bitcoin cash, Bitcoin Satoshi vision. And if you look at Bitcoin, Can cash. It has collapsed by 99.5%, right? It's now like 50 basis points of Bitcoin. So the and I would say Bitcoin cash, right? Is probably the closest thing to bitcoin. Those supposed to be an improvement. Obviously,
I. Yeah, I think that the most important Point here is
Somebody invented mathematics and
we were living without mathematics. And now, you've got mathematics base 10 and you can design planes and Trains and Automobiles and electric, electric power plans and radios and modern technology and you can fly to the moon with mathematics. Now, are you going to quibble with me over whether the mass should be base 10 or base 8? Or base for we like Isaac Newton wrote principia Mathematica, and it was pretty much all the math that 99.99% of the people will ever need or knowing their life there. It's done right? 200 years ago, it's pretty good. And now if entrepreneurs keep launching base 8 math and base, 16 math, and base format, and based 32 math and they come up with all these other, we don't want our Arabic numerals anymore. We want Roman numerals or we Like, the Cylon warrior numerals. Yeah, they're all different forms of math, but the question is, is this good enough?
And the answer is, it's good enough, if
you can create nuclear weapons with it and you can create Tesla's with it and you can create airplanes with it, it's and create Bridges with it and create skyscrapers with
What Would Cause Michael Saylor to Change His Mind About Bitcoin?
66: Michael Saylor on Bitcoins killer app, Ethereum, Web3 & inflation