Hi there. I’m Kieren Chandler and today
we’re lucky enough to be taking a peek
behind the scenes of Bitcoin ABC. We are
going to be talking to some of the people
behind the technology and getting their
views on the latest developments in the industry.
Welcome to Behind Bitcoin Cash.
I’m here with Amaury and Shammah. Gents
thanks very much for joining us today.
To kick things off, perhaps for our
viewers, perhaps you could introduce a
little bit about yourselves. Just tell us
who you are and where you sort of come from.
So I am Amaury Séchet. I am the
lead developer of Bitcoin ABC.
And Bitcoin ABC is the the first node
software that was supporting Bitcoin Cash
and it still is the majority node
software but not the only one anymore.
My name is Shammah Chancellor. I’m
one of the maintainers for Bitcoin ABC.
I’ve been a software engineer for about
18 years and I’ve been interested in
economics and currency distribution for
a long time. And I think Bitcoin is an
excellent alternative to fiat currency.
Okay nice. So how about Bitcoin ABC?
Perhaps you could sort of tell us a
little bit about that.
Sort of how did you get involved in Bitcoin ABC?
Well I got involved because I created it. So that’s pretty much how it happened, right.
Bitcoin was going in not a very good direction,
not a direction I was very pleased with, and so we needed some alternative to it.
And yeah you know, there was some issue with the…
you know Bitcoin ABC was not the first
alternative node software to try to change things a bit.
But there was some issues with how things were done in the past that led to that not quite succeeding.
And yeah creating our own software was a way to,
the only way to do whatever we wanted and it ended up working.
So it was a good choice I guess. A good moment
when that happened.
So how did you get involved? Where did you come in?
So I’ve been following cryptocurrency since about 2011. Kind of from a distance.
And I had some concept errors about how Bitcoin worked. And about June of 2017
I was talking to my friend Amaury, who have
known for about five years,
and I was wondering why he was working on Bitcoin.
And I got some of my concept errors cleared up.
And then in August of 2017 I
heard that Bitcoin Cash had forked
and I started talking to him and I wanted to get involved.
Nice. And obviously Bitcoin is very exciting place to be. Its obviously an exciting field.
Media is painting it as a really glamorous picture.
But I’m sure in your sort of day-to-day lives it’s probably not quite so glamorous.
I mean what are sort of the biggest challenges you face on on a daily basis?
Like generally it’s more difficult to move things forward
in a Bitcoin related project then in other projects
because you need to get a lot of people on board.
All those people they want different stuff.
And so you need to find something that is going to
make everybody sufficiently happy.
Or at least not so unhappy that they’re
It’s always…..There is a lot of trying to get everybody on the table
and trying to have everybody agree on something to make it happen.
Which is not that much the case in other software projects.
And plus the fact that you know technical people they tend to be argumentative to begin with,
and you throw money on top of that and you get an explosive mix.
Nice! Must be be unsteadying.
So who are these key stakeholders?
Who who are these people that you are sort of communicating with on a daily basis?
So there are other implementations and then
there are people working on wallet software
or various like payment
processors, exchanges.. I mean just like,
miners as well obviously, there’s just
like a lot of different parties that form an ecosystem.
And those different parties they are interested in you know whatever business they are doing.
So the aspects of Bitcoin that interests them are going to be slightly different.
Nice! And Shammah: if we’re talking about that Bitcoin Cash ecosystem Bitcoin ABC is a part of that.
So how do you fit in? How is your working relationship with the rest of the bigger picture?
So right now I work on ..kind of….like when you send a transaction in Bitcoin you have to pay a fee,
That’s one of the primary things I’ve been working on right now.
And then also communicating ideas from other developers
and participating in different proposals.
Probably the biggest challenge there is,
like Amaury said,
is how do you communicate ideas in such a way as that it’s intelligible for everyone within the community
and that they understand why
changes are being made.
Okay and speaking of changes, one of the big
changes that’s recently been announced
is this “Miners Initiative” which is all
about lowering the dust limit.
And perhaps for our viewers, perhaps you
could explain that in real sort of basic layman’s terms?
What do we actually mean by this “Miners Initiative”? What is it?
Okay, So there’s a number of rules, that are consensus related, that everyone has to agree upon.
The dust limit and fees are not one of those things.
Those are configurable by the miners. So it’s great that they are,
that Coingeek is taking this initiative
to kind of get everyone to lower those fees.
There are some technical limitations around that I’m currently working on solving in order to make it possible.
And Amaury do you have anything to add?
Do you think its a good initiative? Do you think it is going to work?
Yes and no. I have like mixed feeling about it.
So I agree 100% with the goal.
This is where we need to go.
But if it’s done in a naive way
it can expose the network to some risks.
So this is what Shae is working on.
Like you want to do that in some specific way
that’s not going to open
the network to vulnerabilities.
And what do you mean by naive way?
Perhaps you can expand on how….. So if you change various configuration of the node software
to just like reduce the fee dramatically
and reduce the dust limit dramatically,
then you expose….
You create an option for someone to have a behaviour
that is very costly for the network.
And do so almost for free. So it’s going to create problems.
So we need to change the fee structure in such a way that
regular normal everyday usage patterns can become cheaper,
but patterns that are unusual
and that for the most part are going to be used by people that want to be hostile to the network
need to be made expensive enough
so that those attacks keep being expensive.
So this is a solvable problem,
but this needs to be thoughts and there is
some work to be done there.
And what sort of timeframe are you envisioning?
How long do reckon you’re you will have
to solve this problem?
Well actually Shae maybe can talk more about this.
Because he has been working on it.
But there is been good progress made on that.
So I am pretty much done with the
patches to do some of the
things that are required for that.
I expect them to be done before November.
But they obviously need to be tested on testnet
and made sure that there aren’t any
side effects to those changes.
Bitcoin being a permissionless system and being open,
its always subject to people attack trying to attack it
and so it’s important to thoroughly test changes
before the are launched on main-net.
There was also the news about the recent attack
that came into the news yesterday right? (june 2018)
Did you hear about that? In South Korea?
An attack on Bitcoin?
I think, I don’t know if we’re referring to the same stuff,
but there’s a one of the big exchanges in Korea that has been hacked?
Yeah. It’s not persee an attack on Bitcoin.
Its an attack on the exchange.
Which is like one of the reasons
people quite often recommend like:
don’t keep all your money on exchange!
You send your money to an exchange when you want to trade it.
But then get your money out of the exchange
and keep it secure on your own
Maybe use a hardware wallet or something like that.
And for that very reason.
Because the exchange gets hacked
and you can have your money stolen.
Essentially when you put money on an exchange
you trust the exchange is going to do the right thing.
Many exchanges do the right thing but not always.
And once in a while there is….
every few months or so there is one
exchange that gets hacked and lose a ton of money.
So tip number one is to keep it on some sort of hardware
and and take it off of the exchange.
Yeah a hardware wallet is probably the best option.
So there’s a lot of buzzwords floating around Bitcoin at the minute
and I think that maybe for sort of the common man
that’s probably one of the things that makes it very difficult to get sort of involved in it.
And a real buzzword that has come out recently is UTXO-commitments.
Perhaps one of you could
sort of tell us a bit more about that?
What do we mean by UTXO-commitments?
So Tomas, one of the other Bitcoin Cash
developers, has been leading that up.
And basically a UTXO-commitment is a way to
cryptographically commit to kind of
all the accounts in Bitcoin.
Who owns what money.
And so if that commitment is in each
block it would allow node software to
enter the network very quickly. Right now full node software, that exchanges and
miners run, require like six hours to
sync up with the network.
Because they have to download all the previous data.
And that will only increase in time as
Bitcoins continue to be used.
So UTXO-commitment allows you to
short-circuit that process and just download
the current state of the entire Bitcoin system.
This is excellent initiative.
I’m really happy with what Tomas is doing.
Okay nice! And is it the sort of thing that you can
see being ready for the next hard fork?
Maybe but that’s unlikely.
So there is a lot of ramification in the UTXO-commitment stuff.
Many of them in terms of performances.
and so it needs to be done very carefully.
So right now there is a prototype. Actually Tomas
has used the prototype to produce some
UTXO-commitments on the testnet.
So there is some code
that has been written that is out there,
but we need to make sure that everything is super right.
Because of the likely size of the change and the complexity of it November seems a bit short.
I mean maybe if everything goes well
but I would expect maybe more like next year.
Also the other thing is simply adding
UTXO-commitments to the blocks is not sufficient.
There needs to be a network layer protocol to actually download the UTXO-set from another node
and then check it and that portion is not done yet.
So UTXO-commitments itself might be done in November,
but the actual ability to use it wouldn’t be done yet.
So it’s sort of a longer-term thing.
So you two have been both very busy gentlemen
and at BitcoinABC you’ve recently published a
paper all about promoting a new
transaction ordering process.
Perhaps you can explain for our viewers
just a little bit more about that
and the story behind that?
Okay so this is an idea that has been floating
in the space for a long time.
This is not quite new, but we are reaching a point where we can actually execute on it
So right now there is no specific ordering
of the transactions in the block.
There are some rules about what you cannot do
but you know if you respect those few
rules then you can do pretty much whatever you want.
It causes various problems.
One of them is that you need to check those few rules about what you cannot and do
checking those rules is a process that is difficult to do in parallel.
So when you want stuff to get bigger
and bigger and bigger,
you want to be able to parallelise the workload.
So you can add more CPUs and you can do more of it.
Or even like if things get very big you can add several servers
and each server does a chunk of the work.
If you can separate stuff like that
and you can do chunks of the work in parallel,
then it’s very easy to scale.
But if you have some process that is serial,
that each step of the process depends on
the previous step, then you will end up in a
situation where you cannot add more machines
and make the process faster.
So this is one of the main reasons.
that we have this serial process in there.
So we want eliminate that to scale better.
And there is another big reason.
It’s: if we specify the order of
transactions in a way that every node, if
they have the list of the transactions
that are in the block, they can agree on the same order,
then what happens is that when you transmit the block from one node to the other,
you don’t need to transmit that order anymore.
You just need to transmit data structure that explains:
here are the transactions that are in the block
and the transactions that are not in the block.
And then when you have the set of transactions
you can reconstruct them in the same order.
And as it turns out transmitting the order is actually a
lot of data.
Like way more than you would expect.
Way more than you would expect intuitively.
Because when you have no order then there is,
so it’s a bit technical, but there is a set of techniques,
that goes under the umbrella term “set reconciliation”,
that you can use to essentially agree on a set of elements,
without agreeing on the order, that is much more efficient.
And that we can leverage to propagate work blocks faster.
And how’s this paper been received by
the industry? Has it been received well?
How has the feedback gone so far?
So I guess if we go with what I said or the two
papers we’re referring to, one is going to be
“Graphene” which is a network protocol
layer that transmits blocks that take
advantage of canonical ordering,
what we call canonical ordering, so of
the fact that if you know the set of
elements that are in the block you can
agree on the order.
And that allows almost an order of magnitude reduction
in the amount of data you need to
transmit to transmit a block.
So that is a pretty significant win.
That has been not done by us but by another group of people.
I think Brian Levine and Gavin Andresen
and a few other people.
The paper that we’ve written it is more oriented on
the performance and parallelisation aspect of it.
Yeah. Oh yeah. And It has been received?
I think for the most part positively.
There are a few people that are not happy about it
but I think when this idea was introduced
there were more people.
Now most of them they kind of agree
that it’s a good idea.
You still have a few redictable but I guess that is always going to happen.
It sounds like you’ve got an awful lot on your plate.
At BitcoinABC at the minute there’s a lot of stuff you’re working on.
Are there any more protocol changes that you’ve been working on
that you could perhaps share with us today?
So anything else of interest?
There’s I think one new OpCode that people want to add in November.
It allows you to embed and verify data from trusted oracles.
That would allow a lot of other use cases on Bitcoin Cash.
That’s kind of being pushed by Bitcoin Unlimited.
Specifically Andrew Stone and then some other people as well.
So what are the sort of use cases that that would allow? What’s the benefit that would give?
So the root of the problem is that any information that originates from the blockchain
is very easy to use in the blockchain.
But any information that comes from the real world is not accessible to the blockchain.
So say I want to do a contract based on
who is going to be the next president of France after Emmanuel Macron.
I do not know who that person is at the time.
But when we get to the next election and that person is
going to be elected
there is no way for something that is in the blockchain
to know about this election process that is outside of the world of the blockchain.
And so there is this idea called oracle.
And an oracle is going to be someone we trust
or maybe it can be a group of people we trust
that is going to certify that
yes this person won the election
and that is going to sign a special message
that you can use in the blockchain that says who won the election.
And then you can make smart a contracts and stuff like that
in the blockchain based on that outside world information.
So I take the election obviously but
anything that is… any information that
you would want to import in the
blockchain you can use some trusted
party to do that for you and then
everything else can run in the blockchain.
It’s interesting you mentioned the election because that’s something that block chains
could be used for in the future.
That’s right isn’t it?
So is an election a good use of a blockchain?
It certainly makes voting audit-able. I think that would be a potential use case.
But I haven’t seen a whole lot of different ways that that could be done.
I think some of the the various ways that voting can be done on the blockchain I’ve read,
I haven’t actually seen the technical background to back up the methods that would be used there.
Some people are recommending threshold
signatures and some other things like that
but I haven’t actually seen how you can do threshold signatures on Bitcoin
without adding some different technology that’s not currently there.
Yeah so well there are ways. So it depends on the trade-off you want to make.
And there is a set of trade-offs
that is very difficult to reproduce with
any computer technique that we have
with paper voting,
it is that it’s very easy to ensure that everybody votes
but everybody will vote once.
We can check the people who vote.
But at the same time we can audit the whole ballot.
We can open the box and see all the papers.
It depends on the country,
but in France anybody can can go
and see that this is done properly.
you can go watch the people doing it.
But at the same time you have no idea who voted for who.
Because all those envelopes they are mixed up.
And it turns out that creating an electronic process
that has all those properties is actually fairly difficult.
Certainly using a blockchain helps with
the fact that everybody’s gonna vote once.
Because in computer terms it’s also
the Byzantine general problem.
So you want to make sure that someone is, like in the electronic version of it,
but someone shows up to one of the vote Bureaus and votes for something,
but shows up at the
other one and votes for something else
without the two Bureaus being able to agree that you know this person voted twice.
So it seems rather silly in real life
because obviously you cannot teleport yourself from one place to another.
It’s a fairly easy problem to solve in the in the real world
but it’s actually a very difficult problem to solve on computer networks.
Because I can reach one computer
but I can reach a second computer somewhere
else on the internet like pretty much at the same time
and submit two different votes.
So the blockchain is very good at
reconciliating this kind of stuff and
preventing me from voting twice.
It’s also very good at making sure that the result are not tampered with.
But the whole set of….Like how do you make sure
that you can audit elections
while keeping everybody who voted anonymous is more of a difficult problem.
Okay so let’s sort of move back to sort
of the Bitcoin side of things.
Interesting to talk about elections and stuff like that.
Probably I have to be a little bit careful what we say here
because my boss Joannes Vermorel sort of said it.
is he was talking about
subdividing the Satoshi even further.
Is this something that you guys agree
with and what do you think to that?
Yeah I think is that it’s absolutely
necessary if if Bitcoin Cash were to say
reach 5% adoption of all consumers in
the world for all transactions,
the price would go quite a bit from
where it is right now and in that case
the fee structure on Bitcoin cash would
be kind of problematic
because there wouldn’t be enough granularity to
determine the fees anymore.
So discussing it now before that actually becomes a
problem is really critical.
Yeah I would add on that it’s not quite a
but if we grow significantly it’s gonna be.
But doing this kind of change,
essentially the cost of doing this kind of change
directly depends on the size of the ecosystem.
Because you need to get more people on board, synchronise the change with more people,
so it’s like as the ecosystem grows bigger it’s more difficult.
So I think actually it’s
better to do this kind of change now
because by the time this change is necessary
it’s gonna be like 10 times more difficult to do it than it is now.
So we talk about this sort of timeframe.
Now is the right time to do it.
How much time have we got?
What sort of time frame are we looking at here?
I don’t know fully. As little as possible.
Because we’re gonna have as much growth as possible right? Its difficult to know.
Sorry the growth of Bitcoin Cash;
what are these sort of obstacles that
you need to overcome. What is holding
back that sort of growth at the moment?
I think a better user experience is absolutely necessary,
But there’s tons of groups outside a Bitcoin ABC
that are working on excellent wallets right now. Excellent hardware wallets.
I also think a lot of machine-to-machine payments as
more like video games and whatnot to come online.
That would be excellent for the growth.
A lot of different mobile games and whatnot have in-game payments
and I think Bitcoin Cash is an excellent platform for those to start using
And if that were the case that would really increase adoption.
Amaury we spoke earlier when we talked about elections
we sort of talked about that opacity of
seeing who’s voting for what
and and it’s sort of the same for the Bitcoin Cash right?
Is there anything that can be done to reduce the
sort of opacity of transactions
and how much you can see what other users are doing?
So there is a direct trade off.
You have some also cryptocurrencies
that are much more opaque on that front than Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash is.
Things like Monero or more recently there is this idea of Mimblewimble….
Mimblewimble? Yeah Mimblewimble.
A very made word that one.
Well because in Harry Potter this is one of the magic stuff
that they do to prevent people from speaking.
And so this is a cryptographic technique
that essentially prevents anyone from
looking at the blockchain
and making any sense out of it.
So essentially it’s like preventing the blockchain from speaking. Metaphorically.
And so those technologies they are great,
they provide a higher degree of privacy,
but they come with trade-offs.
So in the case of Monero for instance
it is significantly more difficult to scale
Monero than to scale a technology like Bitcoin.
For a technology like Mimblewimble
it makes some weaker or stronger,
like depends on how you want to look at it, but essentially it has a cryptographic
assumption that’s gonna break before
Bitcoin if they break.
Like we don’t know if they’re going to break
or not but if they break everything is toast essentially.
And so there is a degree of risk associated to do that
and there is a degree of benefit
so that’s a different trade-off.
In terms of what we can do on Bitcoin Cash
I think we should not go in the direction of what Monero or Mimblewimble s doing
because that really changes the scalability and security assumptions that are made in the system.
However what can be done is better…. So we already have a
technology like CoinJoin
that allows several people to cooperate together to create transactions
and so you don’t know whose money is going where.
And better integration of this kind of technology
in wallets and stuff would go a long way
towards making the system more anonymous
because all the coins would be mixed up
so you would not be quite sure what belongs to who.
Okay nice! So let’s sort of talk about an other sort of problem in the industry.
There’s a lot of talk about fake news at the
minute and a lot of people talking about
that sort of pump and dump.
So there’s a lot of fake media being put out there.
Can you see this propaganda issue in the industry, can you see it ending anytime soon?
Or is this a problem that we’re gonna sort see continuing evermore?
So there’s a lot of short-term incentives for people to do this,
but I think will start to go away as adoption of cryptocurrencies increases.
It’ll be a lot harder to do like pump and dump schemes when the market caps are much higher.
But for the short term I think that yeah it’s gonna continue to be a big problem.
Yeah so I agree there is short term incentives to do that
but I would also say there is long term disincentives to do it.
This is the kind of stuff that you can do a few times.
But each time you do it you lose credibility.
So I think like the actors that are doing it they’re gonna disappear but new ones are gonna come.
But then you have the effect that Shae, Shammah is talking about
where as the system grows bigger it becomes more and more difficult to do this kind of stuff.
So it’s probably gonna go away naturally as the ecosystem grows.
And how about in the forum’s. I’ve heard in the news there’s people deleting posts?
Same with censorship, is that also gonna be a problem that we’re still talking about in years to come?
Probably yes. I would assume that….
So what has been happening is that this
censorship and stuff like that has been
happening over maybe the past two years
or so, it’s been fairly serious,
but at the same time over the past two years
the cryptocurrency market has gone up and up and up and up.
So whatever, like no matter what was your opinion,
if you agree you disagree or whatever,
like nobody has been punished by the market yet.
Like when the market goes like 20x over a year everybody is a brilliant trader.
Everybody knows, like you know, everybody knows everything and everybody is right.
But obviously there are some people that
understand information better
and when the market is a bit more rough than it was over the past two years
then it’s gonna make a difference. And the
people that are not well informed, many of
them are probably gonna lose their shirt.
So in that sense it is probably a self fulfilling… you know, self fixing process.
But you need to give the time for the market to do it to do its work.
So the feeling I get is that a lot of the bad press that Bitcoin is getting is down to a small minority of people.
Is there in the short term, is there anything that can be done to this small minority?
Is there any way we can identify them?
Well they are very much identified I would say.
Like people that followed that closely
know who those people are
And as I was saying like right now they have been no weeding out of anybody.
Like you know anybody could have come over the past two three years in this market and see a huge boom.
So nobody has been like…… There was no bad decision. Like no matter what, except maybe Bitconnect,
Like every single other, you know, every
single other decision was a good one.
Pretty much whatever you did. So right
now everybody is a genius right?
But obviously how surprising that would be
if everybody’s actually is a genius.
I like the sound of that: everyone is a genius.
So recently in the news Roger Ver said
the bitcoins recent failures were down
to humans rather than being technical.
Is that something that you agree with Shammah?
Yeah I think that’s absolutely true.
I think the main failure in Bitcoin was that the
developers of Bitcoin Core were
incentivised to do things that were not
an interest of the Bitcoin ecosystem
itself due to where they took investments from.
It’s not necessarily like some evil plan,
It is just a side effect of who they have to report to
and who they have to generate a profit for.
So by not being funded by miners they
don’t have an incentive to do what’s in the best interest of the people supporting the currency.
Got anything you like to add to that at all?
No pretty much what we see is that some people took the whole development of Bitcoin seriously
and those people they had different plans than most people in Bitcoin had
and because everybody else was not taking it as seriously I guess
then those people ended up having a disproportionate importance.
And that is also the market at work.
Like there are people that put their money where their mouth is more than others
that ended up creating the situation. So
in that sense I agree this is you know,
and this is a human misjudgment.
And so on that front we are careful with Bitcoin ABC where we take funding from
and we are very careful also to have a structure that allows only for donation.
Which is like you know, like literally we couldn’t give you like a mug or a t-shirt or whatever against the donation.
Because that will change our structure.
Our structure is based….is such as we cannot give you something for your money.
You cannot contract us to do anything.
Not even give you a mug.
But then it’s gonna be up to the people to decide if that is important or not.
If people behave like they did behave over the past five years with development
then we’re gonna see the same type of results reproducing.
But I hope that you know a lot of people understand what happened.
It seems that people like Roger Ver understands what happened.
Nice. Otherwise it is going to happen again.
So you mentioned BitcoinABC there.
So to round things off
I’d like to sort hear from both of you.
How do you see the future for Bitcoin ABC both in the short and medium term
and also in the long term?
Shammah if we start with you?
I’d like to see, you know, as people provide donations for Bitcoin ABC,
I would like to see more
professional engineers come on board
and provide a lot of testing and quality assurance on the products so that….
Because we’re actually targeting 100% uptime for the Bitcoin Cash Network.
It’s really unacceptable if like all payments in the world went down right?
And we’re targeting all payments in the world.
So having all the adequate checks
and balances in place
to make sure that we’re putting a quality product out is it’s really important.
And that takes a lot of time and resources. So that’s my concern for the future of Bitcoin ABC.
You know Amaury is more engaged in scaling
and making sure that there’s capacity for all those
transactions that we want to see happening.
Yeah pretty much. But those two
challenges they are fairly difficult engineering wise.
They are you know, they have been solved.
Like you don’t see Google going down that often for instance.
And they are obviously very big.
Obviously they are…..You would say they are centralised in the sense that
there is like a Larry Page, or whoever is
the CEO at the time, that makes decision for Google,
but the infra like you know the actual hardware infrastructure is actually extremely distributed.
So if you have any you know any single machine that fails, everything works.
So those kind of problem on the engineering aspect of it,
There are solutions.
But we need also to get the engineers that have experience with these kinds of systems
and that means we’re gonna need to attract engineers that work at Google or Facebook or Amazon
or this kind of company that I’ve experience running these kinds of systems.
So it’s a bit of a challenge
because you know those are those are attractive places to work for as an engineer.
So we need to have some convincing to do.
So how can we help bitcoin ABC in a final word?
I think Amaury might be the best one to answer that question although you guys are looking at me.
There are various ways. Like it depends….
Well it depends on who you are, like a person or a company,
and what is your skill set or you know what are the means that you have.
If you… like someone that is a developer can obviously help developing some stuff.
If this is a company looking toward building something in the ecosystem
then they need that the infrastructure part of the ecosystem works well.
Like imagine you have a shop or you have a
factory or something, you want the road
like between your factory and
and whoever you’re selling to be
good so you can send trucks on them.
You know what I mean?
And in the case of roads
usually it’s taken care of by the government
but in the case of Bitcoin we need to build the infrastructure our selves.
So for people that have businesses that rely on infrastructure working well
I think it makes good business sense for them to invest in the infrastructure.
And then for other people
like there is a ton of work that is not especially that technical that needs to be done.
There’s stuff like if people have some design skill
may be helping with the website would be a good idea,
or if people have some you know writing skill….
May be academics they can help you know do the review of the different ideas
and write papers about them.
I mean like even if you know a language like if you know English and some other language
you can help translate some stuff. I mean there’s
is a ton of ways that someone can help.
That being said, to make sure that it’s actually not more of a burden on the project
and you know it needs to add more value then….
We need people that can be like you know
that can be sufficiently self driven.
right so if you say you’re a person that is from Turkey so you use you speak Turkish obviously
and you also speak English and you’re interested in Bitcoin.
so you’re gonna say okay we can do translation in Turkish for instance,
we need to be able to trust
you that it’s gonna happen
and we don’t need to go against you again and again.
Yeah like being consistent or reliable on a thing that you choose to do is huge.
Yeah. Doesn’t need to be like a huge stuff really that the more important stuff
because if if this is not consistent…. it doesn’t need to be big but it needs to be consistent!
Because if it’s not consistent then it’s gonna have
a lot of overhead
in terms of managing what happened in that area.
And right now we are not that big that we can handle this kind of overhead.
Okay well thanks for a really interesting discussion
and for taking the time out to talk to us today.
It’s been really really interesting.
So thanks for tuning in today if you’ve got
any questions or any comments we’d love
to hear from you.
If you could leave a comment in the box below.
So that’s all for today and we’ll see you again next time.