Les États vont attaquer Bitcoin. Voici comment. | Avec Yorick de Mombynes

Summary

Dans cette vidéo, Yorick de Mombynes, magistrate à la Cour des comptes et passionné de Bitcoin, discute de la lutte entre Bitcoin et les monnaies numériques centralisées (MNBC). Il partage son expérience au Salvador, où l'adoption de Bitcoin n'a pas été aussi répandue qu'on pourrait le croire, et aborde les défis de la volatilité et la réglementation. Il exprime une certaine pessimisme sur l'adoption spontanée des MNBC, car il pense qu'elles seront imposées par les autorités plutôt que d'être adoptées spontanément. Il met en garde contre les tentatives des États de ralentir l'adoption de Bitcoin, en particulier en Europe, et suggère que malgré les obstacles, Bitcoin pourrait finalement prospérer en raison de sa nature résiliente et de l'incitation à l'innovation.

Takeaways

• 💬 Le débat entre Bitcoin et les CBDC (monnaie numérique centrale) est présenté comme un affrontement majeur de cette ère numérique.
• 🌐 L'adoption du Bitcoin en El Salvador n'est pas aussi répandue qu'on pourrait le croire, surtout en dehors des grandes villes et des chaînes de magasins internationales.
• 📉 La volatilité du Bitcoin a eu un impact sur son adoption, en particulier après la chute des prix qui a découragé les Salvadoriens.
• 🛡️ Malgré des défis, l'auteur estime que la situation en El Salvador est temporaire et que la Bull Run pourrait améliorer l'adoption future du Bitcoin.
• 🏦 Les autorités publiques européennes sont décrites comme étant réticents à l'égard de l'adoption de la cryptomonnaie, notamment en raison de l'ignorance, de la cécité, de l'idéologie et du conservatisme.
• 📉 L'influence des États sur la politique monétaire est soulignée, avec une dépendance croissante à l'encontre de la création de monnaie pour financer les dettes des États.
• 🚫 L'Europe est perçue comme étant en train de mettre en place des réglementations qui pourraient ralentir l'adoption de Bitcoin et d'autres cryptomonnaies.
• 🔒 Il est questionné si la traçabilité offerte par Bitcoin et d'autres cryptomonnaies pourrait finalement être utilisée par les États pour contrôler les flux financiers.
• 🛑 Des préoccupations sont exprimées quant à la possibilité d'une criminalisation de l'auto-garde des clés privées, ce qui pourrait décourager les gens de détenir leur propre Bitcoin.
• 🌐 L'idée que les États pourraient utiliser la réglementation pour freiner le développement de Bitcoin, par exemple en utilisant des arguments écologiques, est avancée.
• 💭 L'auteur exprime une certaine pessimisme à court terme pour l'adoption de Bitcoin comme monnaie, mais reste optimiste sur sa valeur à long terme.

Q & A

Pourquoi Yorick de Mombynes considère-t-il Bitcoin comme une menace pour les États?

Yorick de Mombynes considère Bitcoin comme une menace pour les États car Bitcoin offre une alternative au contrôle monétaire centralisé, rendant difficile pour les États de maintenir leur monopole sur l'émission monétaire, surtout dans le contexte de dettes publiques élevées qui nécessitent des politiques monétaires expansionnistes.

Quel est l'état actuel de l'utilisation de Bitcoin au Salvador selon Yorick de Mombynes?

Selon Yorick de Mombynes, l'utilisation de Bitcoin au Salvador est faible. En dehors des chaînes de magasins internationaux comme McDonald's, pratiquement personne n'utilise Bitcoin, même dans les magasins modernes, en raison de la complexité et de la volatilité du Bitcoin.

Quels sont les principaux obstacles à l'adoption du Bitcoin en Europe selon Yorick de Mombynes?

Les principaux obstacles à l'adoption du Bitcoin en Europe sont l'ignorance, la cécité idéologique, le conservatisme et la réticence des autorités publiques qui mettent autant de freins que possible à l'adoption des cryptomonnaies par des réglementations strictes et des taxes élevées.

Comment Yorick de Mombynes perçoit-il l'avenir des CBDC (monnaies numériques de banque centrale)?

Yorick de Mombynes perçoit les CBDC comme des outils extrêmement inquiétants pour la vie privée et les libertés individuelles. Il pense que leur adoption ne sera pas spontanée mais imposée progressivement par les autorités publiques.

Quels avantages économiques le Salvador a-t-il constaté après l'adoption du Bitcoin, malgré une adoption faible?

Le Salvador a constaté une incroyable croissance économique et une résolution des problèmes de sécurité, générant un boom économique et un dynamisme entrepreneurial avec des émigrants intéressés à investir dans leur pays.

Pourquoi Yorick de Mombynes est-il pessimiste quant à l'adoption du Bitcoin comme monnaie par le grand public en Europe?

Il est pessimiste parce que les autorités publiques continuent de freiner l'adoption par ignorance, idéologie et conservatisme, et parce que des réglementations et taxes strictes rendent l'utilisation de Bitcoin compliquée pour le grand public.

Comment les États pourraient-ils imposer l'utilisation des CBDC selon Yorick de Mombynes?

Les États pourraient imposer l'utilisation des CBDC en restreignant progressivement l'utilisation de l'argent liquide, en forçant les citoyens à payer leurs impôts en euros numériques et en imposant des portefeuilles numériques de banque centrale sur les téléphones des citoyens.

Quel est l'avis de Yorick de Mombynes sur l'indépendance des banques centrales?

Yorick de Mombynes pense que l'indépendance des banques centrales est un mythe. Il explique que les banques centrales sont en fait dépendantes des États qui les nomment et définissent leurs mandats, et qu'elles achètent des titres de dette publique pour éviter l'effondrement du système.

Quelle est la perception de Yorick de Mombynes sur la régulation des cryptomonnaies en Europe?

Il pense que la régulation en Europe n'est pas très incitative pour la créativité, l'investissement et les pratiques liées aux cryptomonnaies. Il n'a même pas pris la peine de regarder les détails de la régulation MICA car il trouve cela déprimant.

Comment Yorick de Mombynes voit-il l'impact des grandes entreprises sur la régulation de Bitcoin?

Yorick de Mombynes croit que les grandes entreprises possédant beaucoup de Bitcoin auront un pouvoir d'influence sur les États pour limiter la démonisation de Bitcoin, en raison du capitalisme de connivence où les grandes entreprises ont une grande influence sur les décisions étatiques.

Outlines

00:00

🚀 L'adoption controversée du Bitcoin au Salvador

Le paragraphe aborde la lutte idéologique entre le Bitcoin et les devises numériques centralisées (CBDC). Il est question de la naïveté des fans de crypto-monnaies face à l'adoption potentielle imposée des CBDC. L'exemple du Salvador est cité, où l'adoption du Bitcoin n'a pas été spontanée mais plutôt traumatisante en raison de la volatilité des prix, ce qui a freiné son utilisation généralisée. On note également un contraste frappant avec l'Europe, où l'on est plus pessimiste quant à l'adoption du Bitcoin et l'industrie crypto en raison des régulations restrictives et de l'ignorance des autorités publiques.

05:07

🏦 La dépendance des États européens à l'encontre du Bitcoin

Ce paragraphe explore les motivations des institutions européennes et des États qui repose sur le monopole de l'émission monétaire. Il est avancé que les niveaux de dette des États sont tellement élevés qu'ils ont un intérêt à utiliser les outils monétaires pour les monétiser, ce qui rend le Bitcoin problématique. Les États essaieront donc de freiner le développement du Bitcoin, malgré les tentatives de réglementation strictes, car le Bitcoin reste un refuge potentiel en cas de politique monétaire ultra-Expansionniste.

10:12

🕊️ L'optimisme sur la nature humaine face au pessimisme européen

Le discours tourne vers une vision plus large de la nature humaine et de son avenir, avec une confiance en l'optimisme à long terme malgré un pessimisme plus immédiat pour l'Union européenne et la France en particulier. On discute des réglementations et des politiques qui pourraient ralentir le développement du Bitcoin, y compris la persécution de développeurs et la taxation, soulignant l'innovation et la créativité des administrations pour freiner l'industrie crypto.

15:13

🌐 La rivalité entre les États-Unis et l'Europe sur les crypto-monnaies

Le texte compare les approches américaine et européenne envers les crypto-monnaies, montrant une tendance plus accueillante et pro-crypto aux États-Unis, y compris parmi les politiciens de divers partis. En Europe, cependant, on peut craindre une stratégie électoraliste qui pourrait ne pas être bénéfique pour l'adoption des crypto-monnaies à long terme, malgré les promesses électorales.

20:15

🔑 La perte d'anonymat et les défis pour les développeurs du Bitcoin

Ce paragraphe traite de la question de l'anonymat dans le monde des crypto-monnaies, en particulier pour le Bitcoin, et comment les développeurs font face à des attaques personnelles de la part des États. On discute de l'impact de la persécution sur la communauté des développeurs et de la possibilité d'une censure au niveau du protocole, comme on l'a vu avec Tornado Cash.

25:17

🛡️ Les défis de la concurrence monétaire et les projets de CBDC

On aborde les projets de monnaie numérique centrale (MNC) et les critiques qu'ils suscitent, notamment en ce qui concerne la vie privée et la nécessité. Malgré les critiques, il est perçu que les projets de MNC progressent rapidement, avec l'entrée dans une phase d'implémentation. On anticipe une adoption imposée plutôt que spontanée, avec des mesures de restriction de l'utilisation de l'argent liquide pour favoriser l'adoption des MNC.

30:19

🌍 La compétition monétaire et les implications pour l'avenir

Le texte envisage le futur de la concurrence monétaire, y compris l'adoption potentielle de Bitcoin par certains États comme alternative à une MNC. On discute de la nature de la monnaie et de la nécessité d'une concurrence saine et non organisée par les autorités publiques, tout en reconnaissant que la concurrence organisée existe déjà dans le monde des crypto-monnaies.

35:21

⚖️ Les régulations environnementales et leur impact sur Bitcoin

Ce paragraphe aborde les défis potentiels liés aux régulations environnementales qui pourraient être utilisées pour freiner l'adoption de Bitcoin en raison de ses exigences énergétiques. On envisage des scénarios où les autorités pourraient imposer des signaux négatifs pour dissuader l'achat de Bitcoin et d'autres crypto-monnaies consommant beaucoup d'énergie.

40:25

🌿 L'optimisme sur la transition énergétique et la perception de Bitcoin

On exprime de l'optimisme quant à la façon dont les gens pourraient finir par reconnaître que Bitcoin est favorable à la transition énergétique, malgré les préjugés actuels. On souligne que les changements culturels et psychologiques prennent du temps et que la patience est nécessaire dans l'adoption et la compréhension de Bitcoin par la société.

🏛️ La gestion des finances publiques et les défis pour les bitcoiners

Ce paragraphe traite des préoccupations quant à la gestion des finances publiques par les États et la dépendance à l'égard de la monnaie fiduciaire. On anticipe des attaques accrues des États contre les bitcoiners à court et moyen terme en raison des déficits publics et des dettes hors de contrôle. On appelle à la prise de conscience des intérêts des États et à la préparation des bitcoiners face à ces défis.

📚 La diffusion des idées libérales et les obstacles institutionnels

On discute de la diffusion des idées libérales et des obstacles institutionnels qu'elles rencontrent, notamment en ce qui concerne l'influence des États sur les médias, l'éducation et la culture. On souligne que les États ont un intérêt à promouvoir des visions du monde qui soutiennent leur pouvoir et à réduire l'influence des idées critiques, ce qui peut être un défi pour les bitcoiners qui partagent des idéaux libéraux.

🤔 L'optimisme et le pessimisme sur l'avenir de Bitcoin

Le texte se termine par une réflexion sur l'optimisme et le pessimisme quant à l'avenir de Bitcoin. On estime que, bien que les perspectives à court terme soient sombres en raison des réglementations et des persécutions potentielles, on est optimiste sur l'adoption financière et économique de Bitcoin à long terme, malgré les défis pour son adoption comme monnaie de change.

💼 La confiance des milieux financiers envers Bitcoin et ses implications

On envisage les implications de la confiance des milieux financiers envers Bitcoin et comment cela pourrait influencer l'adoption par la population. On exprime des inquiétudes quant à la possibilité que les États puissent utiliser leur influence pour restreindre ou criminaliser les portefeuilles auto-gérés, ce qui pourrait décourager les gens de détenir leurs propres clés privées.

🔄 La dynamique de l'adoption de Bitcoin et ses défis

Ce paragraphe explore la dynamique potentielle de l'adoption de Bitcoin par la population et les défis qu'elle pourrait rencontrer, notamment en ce qui concerne les réglementations fiscales et la perception de Bitcoin comme un moyen de paiement. On discute également des avantages potentiels pour les États qui adoptent Bitcoin et des conséquences pour ceux qui ne le font pas.

📈 Les fluctuations de confiance dans Bitcoin et leur impact

On aborde les fluctuations de confiance dans Bitcoin et comment elles peuvent influencer son adoption tant par le monde financier que par la population. On envisage des scénarios où une...

Keywords

💡Bitcoin

Bitcoin est une cryptomonnaie décentralisée créée en 2009. Dans la vidéo, il est comparé aux monnaies numériques des banques centrales (CBDC) et discuté comme une alternative potentielle à ces monnaies contrôlées par l'État. Yorick de Mombynes explique que malgré son adoption limitée dans certains endroits comme El Salvador, Bitcoin représente un refuge contre les politiques monétaires expansionnistes.

💡CBDC

CBDC signifie 'Central Bank Digital Currency' (monnaie numérique de banque centrale). Ces monnaies sont émises et contrôlées par les gouvernements, contrairement aux cryptomonnaies décentralisées comme Bitcoin. Dans la vidéo, Yorick les présente comme une menace pour la liberté financière et prédit qu'elles seront imposées aux populations.

💡État

L'État fait référence aux institutions gouvernementales et à leur pouvoir de régulation et de contrôle. Yorick de Mombynes critique la capacité des États à bien gérer l'économie et explique comment ils pourraient utiliser les CBDC pour maintenir le contrôle monétaire et freiner l'adoption de Bitcoin.

💡El Salvador

El Salvador est le premier pays à avoir adopté Bitcoin comme monnaie légale en 2021. Yorick discute de son expérience dans ce pays, notant que l'utilisation de Bitcoin n'est pas encore généralisée et que la chute de son prix a effrayé beaucoup de citoyens pauvres.

💡Régulation

La régulation se réfère aux lois et règlements mis en place pour contrôler ou influencer les marchés financiers et les cryptomonnaies. Yorick critique les régulations européennes comme freinant l'innovation et la créativité dans l'industrie des cryptomonnaies, tout en servant les intérêts des États.

💡KYC

KYC signifie 'Know Your Customer' (connaître son client). Ce sont des procédures obligatoires pour vérifier l'identité des clients afin de prévenir le blanchiment d'argent et la fraude. Yorick mentionne que ces procédures compliquent l'utilisation de Bitcoin et favorisent la surveillance étatique.

💡Monopole monétaire

Le monopole monétaire est le contrôle exclusif de la création et de la distribution de la monnaie par l'État. Yorick soutient que ce monopole est essentiel pour les États afin de monétiser leurs dettes et maintenir le contrôle économique, et que Bitcoin représente une menace à ce monopole.

💡Fiat

La monnaie Fiat est une monnaie légale émise par un gouvernement sans valeur intrinsèque, comme le dollar ou l'euro. Yorick explique que les États utilisent et dévaluent les monnaies Fiat pour gérer les dettes publiques, ce qui incite les gens à chercher refuge dans des cryptomonnaies comme Bitcoin.

💡Lightning Network

Le Lightning Network est une solution de couche 2 pour Bitcoin qui permet des transactions rapides et peu coûteuses en dehors de la blockchain principale. Yorick le présente comme une amélioration de la confidentialité des transactions Bitcoin par rapport aux transactions on-chain.

💡Sécurité

La sécurité est un thème central dans la vidéo, abordé dans le contexte des méthodes utilisées à El Salvador pour assurer la sécurité et comment cela a stimulé la croissance économique. Yorick mentionne également la sécurité des transactions Bitcoin et les préoccupations concernant la surveillance par les États.

Highlights

La bataille des siècles entre Bitcoin et les monnaies numériques centralisées (MNBC).

L'adoption du Bitcoin en El Salvador et ses difficultés, notamment la volatilité et la complexité pour les utilisateurs.

L'impact de la chute des prix de Bitcoin sur les populations pauvres et leur perception de la crypto-monnaie.

La croissance économique et l'optimisme en El Salvador malgré les défis liés au Bitcoin.

Le scepticisme sur l'adoption du Bitcoin en Europe en raison de l'ignorance et de la résistance des autorités publiques.

L'opinion que la réglementation actuelle en Europe est déprimante et n'encourage pas l'innovation dans l'industrie crypto.

La croyance que les États européens ont un intérêt objectif à freiner le développement de Bitcoin en raison du monopole de l'émission monétaire.

L'analyse des conflits d'intérêts entre les banques centrales et les États, et leur collusion potentielle.

La perspective que les États pourraient ralentir le développement de Bitcoin par des moyens légaux, fiscaux et politiques.

L'idée que les États pourraient rendre la vie impossible pour les entreprises du secteur crypto en utilisant des outils de réglementation.

L'opposition entre l'optimisme à long terme sur la nature humaine et le pessimisme à court terme sur l'Union européenne et la France.

La préoccupation que les États puissent attaquer personnellement les développeurs de Bitcoin, en particulier ceux liés à des outils de mélange de fonds.

La réflexion sur la perte d'anonymat de Bitcoin et la montée en puissance d'autres crypto-monnaies plus respectueuses de la vie privée.

L'argument que les États pourraient potentiellement utiliser Bitcoin pour une meilleure traçabilité des transactions.

L'opinion que les MNBC sont des outils inquiétants pour la vie privée et la souveraineté monétaire des États.

La crainte que les MNBC ne soient imposées aux citoyens, malgré les promesses des banques centrales de respecter la vie privée.

L'idée que les MNBC pourraient être utilisées pour ralentir la dissuasion de l'usage de l'argent liquide et imposer leur propre adoption.

La vision que la concurrence entre différentes crypto-monnaies est positive, mais qu'il est nécessaire d'avoir une monnaie principale.

L'inquiétude sur la possibilité d'une criminalisation de l'auto-garde des clés privées et son impact sur l'adoption de Bitcoin.

L'optimisme à long terme sur l'adoption de Bitcoin malgré les défis à court et moyen terme posés par les réglementations et les autorités.

Transcripts

for me it's really the titanic fight of the century it's Bitcoin against CBDC so in

fact there is still a certain naivety of crypto fans on this subject people

say yes but CBDC ultimately their adoption will have difficulty get

set up but who is talking about spontaneous adoption that's not at all how

it's going to happen the the way it's going to happen is that this thing is going to be

imposed hello everyone and thank you for meeting us on today, Yorick de Mombynes

to the magistrate at the Court of Auditors and bitcoiner before starting this episode is

sponsored by Deblock Deblock is the first current account to integrate a real crypto wallet,

remember to subscribe to the channel if it it's not already done it's gone straight away with Yorick

hi Yorick hi claire thank you for being with us well I'll take it it's a pleasure to more especially

since you're coming back from El Salvador you were there for a few weeks it was your 3rd 2nd trip

there very so how did it go how did it go did you see any interesting things

so things have changed a little since the first time I went there in November 2021

just after the adoption of Bitcoin the use of Bitcoin in fact it's not that widespread

yeah that I had already noticed it the second time I went there a year ago so when we go

to the deep country no one uses it in the capital practically no one uses it except

in chains of stores or somewhat international restaurants like McDonald's but

on the other hand in even modern stores no one uses it anymore when we

offer to pay in Bitcoin people say no it's too complicated we got the equipment

we don't have it and above all it's too volatile OK and in fact El Salvador suffered the collapse

of the price after having adopted Bitcoin so it traumatized the people who are very poor there

who have a fairly low savings capacity and when they saw the collapse of their holdings

their assets in Bitcoin they said but what is this thing so there it is, it's not really going

in the right direction but I think it's temporary it's a bit inevitable it's logical

it will change with the Bull Run probably after that which changes in a positive way it's

still the incredible growth of the country security is a problem that is solved

with methods that everyone knows which are controversial but the advantage is that it

generates an economic boom there are really plenty of activities of the entrepreneurship the emigrants

in the United States who are very numerous he 3 million I believe out of the population of 6 or 7

million how to re-interest in their country to buy real estate to invest et cetera and there

is a kind of dynamism sells optimism an energy which is really pleasant which is

the exact opposite of what we know in Europe so the contrast is when it's striking

so you're talking about the contrast with the Europe you are therefore much more pessimistic about

Europe and its vision in any case of Bitcoin in particular or even of the crypto industry. I

am rather optimistic about human nature in the long term and quite pessimistic about the European Union

and France in particular in the medium term agree in general and

with regard to Bitcoin in particular we can clearly see that it does not catch on with the good people the population is getting

into it so that's it is positive but the public authorities continue to put as much brake as

possible on the adoption of cryptos and Bitcoin out of ignorance by blindness by ideology by

conservatism by reluctance so you think you think what you think about regulation

Mik for example here you go some bitcoiners say it's great Europe has set up a framework so

we are really proud it's great but in fact we have to see what is in the framework is

the framework serious or not rational or not constructed or or or or progressive or conservative

or there you go and well I didn't even make the effort to look in detail because it depresses me

a little but in general we see that it is not very incentive for for the practices for

the creativity the investment there and then is it not normal you see me I I

remember a few years ago the bitcoiners and even the crypto industry in general

still anticipated a sort of balance of power with the states or even an attack on the states which

were not going to let Bitcoin develop, many people said it even

outside of crypto states are never going to let this develop, is that ultimately not

what is happening, you see, having regulators and politicians

who see cryptos and who are say well ultimately we have no interest in all this

developing and so we are going to put the brakes on as much as possible yes there is in fact there is a

tangle of positive trends and worrying trends and I think that

that the worrying trends are still predominant in Europe on Bitcoin on the part of the

elites in fact I the people in question are not necessarily aware of what is happening

and of their own motivation but there is a logic of the institutions there

is an objective interest of the institutions and in particular of the state institution and

our states in Europe in particular rely largely on the monopoly of

monetary issuance even if it is delegated to commercial banks and given the completely crazy and unsustainable level

of debt of the states uh they will have an interest in monetizing

the debts using the monetary tool and therefore Bitcoin is a problem for them they cannot

let Bitcoin develop because Bitcoin will be a refuge in the event of politics ultra expansionist monetary

and it is already the case in fact it is just the beginning so they will do everything to

slow down the fate of Bitcoin and it is already the case it is already what they are doing without necessarily

mentalizing it without necessarily conceptualizing it but it is simply that instinctively they feel

that rather there is monetary control which escapes them so here are the central banks

they are aware that monetary policy escapes them they have less and

less control on economic activity despite historical disproportionate efforts

they are forced to think about new tools for transmitting monetary policy

and political power actually more or less consciously adapts

to the vision of central banks there is an incredible collusion between central banks

and states even though central banks are supposed to be independent, particularly since

the 90s, and all that is a kind of mythology, so central banks are

not independent, according to well they are independent by law but in the faet they

are not uh what makes them not independent in fact first their

leaders are appointed by the States uh and then uh their then their mandate is provided for

by political texts of treaty texts in particular and then in the

daily operation the central banks realize that they have no other choice than

to buy public date securities even indirectly since they do not have the right to

do it directly in general because if they do not do so the system literally explodes and therefore

the States have established a kind of dependence of the central banks on them but then

how finally how could it fight against Bitcoin since Bitcoin exists it is a fact it will

not disappear even if Europe regulates in an extremely strict manner and therefore if you say

that Bitcoin is a refuge in the face of that Bitcoin will always be a refuge will perhaps be less accessible

ultimately if we limit its accessibility with KYC procedures on

exchange platforms things like that uh but I have difficulty seeing how it could go further than that

and I think that they are realizing that it will be complicated to kill Bitcoin

uh that's for sure uh on the other hand there are still many ways to slow down its

comes out as much as possible from legal means tax cultural politics so do you

have any examples that come to mind of what could be done if you were at the head

of the European Union well first of all there is make life impossible for companies in this sector

so that's actually the administrations are very competent at that to make life impossible

for companies and therefore they have acquired real know-how and therefore they will be able to deploy it

to its full extent against Bitcoin start-ups or against Bitcoin developers we see the

persecution against certain developers in recent weeks al perf yeah that's it so it

can continue taxation it's a tool which is still extremely effective potentially

it can always be adapted it can be toughened so that's the same the

administrations have demonstrated their creativity uh the most counterproductive if

necessary in fact so therefore we can really trust the States to

find more and more innovative tools ok then you don't think that there would

still be a chance that Europe would ultimately welcome these subjects like any other subject

of innovation because it is a source of employment because it is a source of economic activity a

bit like what is happening in the United States, we are realizing that Donald Trump with

the Republicans but even also the Democrats are finally becoming much

more pro crypto than he was because that it brings them votes so it could also

have an electoral strategy from the moment when a significant part of the population

holds cryptos well to be more open to these subjects to collect their votes or we can

hope for that we n is not immune to a good surprise in an electoral calendar but it is

electoralism so in the United States we see that indeed there is this temptation for

candidates who have identified that there was a electoral subject to make lots of promises

but it's their job to make promises and they make opposite promises depending on the public

to which it is addressed yes and therefore we cannot trust them completely we will see what they

do once in power yes you say it is not because they make promises today

that in a year finally the rgation we see clearly that our democracies have become vast

electoralist and demagogic circus where to be elected you have to promise literally everything and its opposite

literally to each interest group and therefore once you are elected you cannot apply your

program coherently since there is everything and its opposite in the problems

and therefore it is certain that Trump will promise more regulation against speculation by addressing

certain categories to reassure them and therefore once in power if he wins what will he

do while promising pro crypto industry regulation that is what he recently did

oua ouok ok so no certainty on that and so you are ultimately quite pessimistic about

Europe you mentioned the case of the developer Alex persf who was who was arrested I

find that it is a very interesting example of d the attack of the states uh and in particular because

it ties in with an article from the ECB in which they had mentioned that the European Union was going to

possibly attack in a personal way the developers of the

Bitcoin developer body I believe that you had actually noted that in the column of

the ECB's ulberlu and and that's true that it's a subject that I find is quite anxiety-provoking

even for people who work in crypto because there are lots of people who

sometimes work anonymously and who say to themselves can we find me uh

because I participate in the governance of this or that protocol and and ultimately in this case I

find that it was quite symptomatic of the fact that States what scares them the most is

also anonymity and private life in the financial world and this is seen in particular with

Tornado cash but ultimately Bitcoin today is less and less anonymous I find and and I

find that Bitcoin has been gradually supplanted by other cryptocurrencies other protocols

on this on these function of anonymity uh is it that you don't think that an adoption

of Bitcoin could be almost desired by States from the moment that it promotes great

traceability of flows I why not it seems to me that we are a little far from it but then that

interests me to know you when you say you think that Bitcoin has become less and less anonymous

it is in what way it is because of all the kyy obligations imposed by the States

or it is rather because of of of of of of factor endogenous linked to the protocol both it is

Bitcoin actually is pseudonymous unlike other protocols which are much more

anonymous I am thinking of monero ZH et cetera uh but above all Bitcoin has attracted attention for years

and so today we not only have intermediaries who do this

KYC work but in addition private companies who do onchain data analysis who

now on most transactions manage to know at least who is the issuer and

or who is the receiver and so finally even if uh the names are not revealed to the general

public there are a whole number of private and I think also state actors who now know

what is happening on protocols like Bitcoin yes it is just to from this point of view things

are not evolving in a very positive way afterwards there are also positive trends

for example the Lightning network ensures a discretion a protection of

private life rather interesting I find uh in any case which seems to me superior to

on-chain transactions since there is no publication and recording of transactions on a

public register and so it's interesting because I have the impression that this persecution

of certain developers linked to the mixer in particular plays a role as a deterrent effect for

other developers in the crypto and Bitcoin industry who do not necessarily work on

mixing tools and we saw a fairly striking example of this is that A5 was withdrawn from the United States following

these persecutions on samurai if I understood correctly uh as a precaution of course but we

see we even see lots of companies I think then I am thinking in particular of what is happening on

ethereum but which today almost censors at the protocol level the transactions which are

linked to Tornado cash so we can clearly see that there is a sort of trickle-down like that of fear,

but in fact in theory we could trust developers and entrepreneurs

to create new tools to improve respect for the private life in fact it's like

that it's rather the the the meaning of the story but the states probably organize themselves unconsciously

moreover eh for for for to dissuade this work by persecuting the developers

who work on already existing tools that's really uh not reassuring but I still

try to remain optimistic about that uh I think that in this fight it's rather freedom

that will win but it will go through quite episodes uh enough difficult probably

afterwards on your idea of ​​the States which would use Bitcoin to better trace the the the the

transactions and everything I'm not sure that that's really their strategy I have the impression

that it mainly focuses on mnbcs yeah of course uh in fact the central banks and the States

in dreams are literally salivating with appetite and devouring what really while

dressing up these projects with a kind of nice popular speech reassuring modern marketing when

in fact they are extremely worrying tools I have the impression that

they are still very criticized so perhaps because I am biased in a very

cryptophilic bubble but even when I look you see summary videos of what the could be digital euro

there is still a lot of criticism either on this subject of respect for private life or

also on the mandate of the ECB would it have the right to create this digital euro

in relation to the commercial banks or quite simply critics who say but we

don't need it and what purpose and what use would it have al there there is a barrier of criticism

which comes in particular from bitcoiners and also from banks since obviously they are worried

about that they are afraid of being short-circuited but in fact my impression is that despite

these criticisms the subject mnbc is progressing at a forced pace these criticisms do not at all dissuade

the public authorities from moving forward and at the European level we see it very clearly that is to say that

we have recently entered a new phase after the preparation phase where there was tons

of expert reports from working group consultants who have produced thousands

of pages of analyzes of POC experiments uh we have entered the implementation phase and there is

now a text which is to whom is subject to the uh political decision to uh validate

the ECB project and to give it a mandate to go there and the ECB will have this mandate, I have

no doubt about that it will find the means of setting up this thing after that we say yes

but then in fact there is still a certain naivety of the crypto fans on this people

say yes but the mnbc ultimately their adoption it will have difficulty to put in place but

who is talking about spontaneous adoption that's not at all how it's going to happen the the the way

it's going to happen is that this thing is going to be imposed the public authorities are not going to wait

obediently for the population spontaneously adopts the mnbc how you impose it you force people to

download a wallet from the Central Bank in their phone well there is no problem to

impose that the the the the the Fiat currency it's something that is imposed taxes are

something that are imposed, public authorities are based on the imposition of standards and

tools, that is their reason for being, then there is a phenomenon that will take place in a

correlative way. is the increasing restriction of the use of cash which has already been underway for

years we have the sums that we have the right to use or withdraw are more and more FA

the controls are more and more finicky the surveillance more and more narrow and therefore

gradually the casing will disappear despite the promises of the central banks since the

central banks their job is to lie we must not forget that so the promise of a

central bank has absolutely no interest so the people who believe the promises of

central banks I think they have not understood what a central bank is and so about me I

am curious you see you say they are not going to ask for the agreement of citizens to actually

push this tool there I am trying to think concretely about how it could happen

would it be incentive schemes telling you a bit like what was done

somewhere in El Salvador with Bitcoin i.e. you create your portfolio you earn €30 for example

could that be that or are you thinking of something much more radical

still I think it will be radical but it will be progressive yeah that's it - to say that they cannot

impose something like this overnight, particularly because at the beginning there will be

monstrous bugs for sure and so they know very well they are these people are very intelligent they

have extremely competent teams so it's going to end in disasters that's for sure but they

're going to go there gradually to get to these disasters they're going to go there in an intelligent way

so it's going to be very progressive and we're already in this progressive phase so at the beginning it's going to be

be optional and moreover even at the beginning they promised that we would not have the right to hold

digital euros beyond a certain amount to reassure the banks C to reassure

the banks so it's an extremely subtle approach since it is very reassuring for

everyone, no one can imagine that this thing can become a totalitarian tool from the

moment when we almost have no right to use it you see so it's going to be very progressive it could

take one or two generations practically uh and and so at a given moment we will arrive

at we have to pay part of our taxes in euros digital in eurodigital and then

gradually you have to pay all your taxes digitally in eurodigital okay we will have no

other choice yeah it's the strategy of the frog in hot water what is it you

raise the temperature and you wait VO that's it but I there are no other realistic scenarios finally

I don't know how you see things no but it's interesting because it really makes it

a competition for Bitcoin in the very long term ultimately it's a question of generation

and decades for it to fall into place for me it's really the titanic fight

of the century it's Bitcoin against mnbc okay the rest in fact doesn't have much interest all

the cryptos and everything that's it's it's it's it's really the foam of the phenomenon compared to that I'm

just taking a minute in the middle of this video to tell you about our sponsor of the day unlock

unlock it's the first current account ad dose to a real crypto wallet it's super practical

it's free and you can register in less than 2 minutes with the link in the

description you even automatically participate in a draw to win €10,000 we're

off again so it's it's true that for a lot of bitcoiners and even a lot of people in

crypto it seems quite forward-looking because for the moment Bitcoin has already been there for around

fifteen years while the mnbcs are not there yet and so uh that fact they are there

in certain countries yes it's true you see it's been uh it's been 6 to 7 years since we've been talking about mnbc uh

and we're still waiting for them so it's still obviously a very long time to be put in place yes

but Bitcoin a decentralized digital currency without trust but how long have

we been talking about it for 30 years that the dear punks were trying by fumbling by experimenting

by failing but they had the objective from the beginning of the 90s there was the objective of

making a currency without a shot of confidence so these things take time it's normal and so

what scenario do you see suddenly on the scale of several decades we would therefore have this fight

between bitco Bitcoin and mnbc had good j 'Imagine that there are two scenarios where each of

the currencies is the big winner but Bitcoin will not disappear as much as

an mnbc we can imagine it disappearing if at a given moment Bitcoin is very widespread Bitcoin

or another d 'elsewhere monetary alternative but Bitcoin is not going to disappear so if tomorrow we have an

mnbc which is used by 99% of the population could not Bitcoin still be

a sort of backup for people who would be activists and who and who

would still live their conviction with Bitcoin well in general I think that the mnbcs

will rather advertise for Bitcoin uh people will use mnbc as little as possible and

Bitcoin as much as possible even if it means being on the black market in the illegality then I think that

there will be very different situations from one country to another because there are certain countries

which will not even try to have an MBC which will go directly to Bitcoin like El Salvador

yes and therefore there will also be institutional competition relating to currency as has

always been the case the euro in fact is something which has tried to reduce

institutional competition in the field of currency which is not a good thing institutional competition

is it's a factor of civilization that's how civilization

has developed for millennia and the euro and and the imposition of a single model on a

set of countries in a topd way is something counterproductive from that point of view and so

there it is going to be it's going to be it's going to be interesting to see but you don't see the same

thing on cryptocurrencies that is to say you don't say CR competition between different

cryptocurrencies are a good thing too if it's a very good thing yeah ok but you

still wish that there was only one which in fact it's the nature of the currency that there is one which

wins on the others it is it is the nature of currency but it is still necessary

that there is real competition between them, healthy competition and which is not organized by

the public authorities as as what we tries to do in antitrust policies

where we organize competition from an office of a few bureaucrats but this is already the

case today there is organized competition in the sense that certain cryptocurrencies for example

are prohibited from be listed on exchange platforms yes so there are already some already

perverted by the public authorities it's true but it is not uh piloted that is to say that for

example if the public authorities one fine day say in a reflex of antitrust competition ah

it's bad that Bitcoin and 70% of the market cap of cryptos are doing something against Bitcoin well

good luck in fact it's going to be complicated for them to do something against that

then that in terms of antitrust policy they can prohibit mergers or break

pseudo monopolies when they consider that it is necessary with Bitcoin it will be more

complicated but you said it yourself there are still there are still means of action you

see I am thinking for example of the regulations which are coming in particular on ecological subjects

in fact what will probably happen is that on the cryptos which are in Professor of War so

in particular Bitcoin you will have fairly negative signals which will be obligatory on

a certain number of platforms to discourage people from buying these cryptocurrencies by

telling them that they consume too much and so on compared to others who are more

sober yeah uh no but it's true that they have the public authorities have means to slow down

Bitcoin eh in particular this one after that said on the example that you cite I agree that it will

be done perhaps in the short to medium term but in the long term I am rather optimistic on this subject because

at some point people will realize that Bitcoin is favorable to the

energy transition we are starting to have speeches which are progressing that's it already or yes after

that it's still not yet very widespread in public opinion it's true that when you I

wander in social circles which have nothing to do with cryptos as soon as I talk about

Bitcoin blockchain crypto I am told you are destroying the planet there but it will take time and

that is normal but it is rather the long term perspective on this in fact it is about

social and psychological cultural changes which take time and we as we are passionate

about technology which is a field where things are moving extremely quickly, especially in the

current era where we have exponential technologies, in fact we are always very frustrated to see the

difference in pace between technical progress and changes in mentalities but nevertheless we

must be lucid there is a difference in rhythm who who is who who is a bit inevitable

ok yeah and so you are I I am trying to know if you are optimistic or pessimistic because

I have the impression that you you tell me in Europe I am quite pessimistic about what will happen

in the short term on uh the states, freedom and so on but at the same time you remain very optimistic

about human nature in the long term so you think that we will experience what a sort

of collapse in the short term and then recover better I am rather pessimistic for the

fate of bitcoiners in the short and medium term OK and optimistic for Bitcoin in the long term you see I

will take an example is that do you remember how long

you and I have known each other uh I would say 7 years something like that 8 years OK met in June 2016 at the

acaton on the blockchain at school 42 of course I remember that's it and so im trying to see one

little what has happened over the last 8 years in fact it's dizzying ah it's incredible in June 2016 the

Bicon was €400 yeah what's happened since then is absolutely incredible so there are there have

been very positive developments and there have been very negative developments a tightening

of anti-bitcoiner persecution an endorsement of totally crazy rules from kaiwi and

absurd rules which make the use of wallets and platforms more complicated even though

entrepreneurs are making superhuman efforts to improve the user experience

so now let's say that in the next 8 years things will change

twice as fast at least twice as fast as the rate at which they changed in the

last 8 years because we are in an exponential phase of adoption where so the

positive aspects will be reinforced in a way uh twice as quickly and the negative aspects

too I think so we will do a podcast again in 8 years and we will redo it CO and and that's going to be

quite exciting I think no but it's true that it's dizzying because at the time so

2016 there was there was no regulation for the moment not yet uh ethereum had just to

be born so there were there were not even the standards to create the tokens and so on so

we were in the middle of the debacle uh of the Dao the Dao affair in June 2016 it was during the ceaton

it's true it's was now that I think back it was it seems very very embryonic to me

ultimately like world and yet at the time we were also very impatient we I think we

believed that it was going to go faster perhaps in terms of development of the industry but

not necessarily in the sense which subsequently became yeah because there is

a whole generation of developers and passionate optimistic takers who came

up against state and societal inertia and and to the bureaucracy without without imagining without realizing

to what extent it could be an important obstacle in fact so it's funny for me

I think more of technical brakes you see which at the time were very strong than are less

today for example in terms of portfolio management or token management at the time

you had almost nothing so when you wanted to make an application I remember this 4 we there

were people who uh wanted to create a project for the traceability of wine for example is the

traceability of physical objects it was the great theme of the time yeah uh and in fact

all these all these subjects uh but whether monetary or non-monetary they were impossible

to put into practice work without the infrastructures that we have today of an easy-to-use portfolio

and so it's true that there were plenty of ideas uh but at the same time technical obstacles

which were colossal and which meant that we were maybe a little too early, yes, but

we were confident that these tools would be put in place quite quickly, yes, because

there was a kind of surge of optimism which is still a little present on certain

aspects elsewhere or even though we were in the we were in the nuclear winter of

cryptos in 2016 so it was it was still very very far away no listen so so in the in the

next few years you you I think that we are going to have we are going to have therefore one of the even more

marked attacks from the states I think that many bitcoiners are not too lucid about this that we

are going to we are going to have to prepare for massive attacks from the states uh the worrying signs to me seems

more uh predominant than the positive signs of the style a promise from Trump so it is

important that the bitcer is still aware of this prepare and document themselves think about what

is the state the interest of the State currency monopoly what does it mean

what does it imply why our socio-political structures are so dependent on the

States where public finances are and there it is the magistrate the Court accounts who who

speaking, that is to say that understood in the United States the deficits and public debts reach

totally unimaginable amounts out of control and therefore there is no other solution than to

monetize the debt it is impossible impossible and it is therefore necessary understand what that implies and

so you think that this is what will lead the States to attack Bitcoin or in any case try to

reduce its influence I think that this is one of the main reasons because to monetize the

States have need to depreciate Fiat currencies and therefore this will lead to flight towards

safe havens, notably cryptos and in particular Bitcoin and therefore Bitcoin will be

interpreted as a threat by States and therefore they will find all the most

fallacious arguments to condemn the nasty speculators the nasty traffickers the nasty who who

finances terrorism and so on they will do the same thing as what we see in certain

monetary crises where they manage through manipulation and propaganda to make the population believe that

people at the origin of the crises are the bad guys, the bad speculators when in fact the

people at the origin of the crises are the political leaders who have done anything in terms

of public finance management and monetary policy in fact when we look at the 20th century

and even in 2007 2008 all the major crises were triggered by aberrant management

of public finances and currencies by the leaders and so it will continue we

are heading straight towards that it is not the fault of the bitcoiners if the public deficits

and public debts reach completely crazy amounts at the moment and we feel good

about its liberal DNA for once in these in these remarks there we feel that you are you are generally

very very suspicious of the capacity of states to correctly manage the economy yes completely the

states in fact I think that the liberals those who have the most lucid and the most realistic vision

not only on human nature there I refer to the cheœuv of Ludwig V mus the action human he

speaks of human action he analyzes the way in which humans function which

contemporary economists do not do they are the most lucid on this and they are the most lucid on

what the state of nature is intrinsic of the State the State presents itself as something which is in

favor of the general interest whose reason for being is the general interest this is true in part but

we neglect too much the other dimension which is that the State is an institution which has its

own interests and which is and which is exploited by interest groups which have their own interest

and Marx was right about that Marx that was his conception of the State he believed that the State was

an entity which has its own objectives and which is exploited by interest groups which

have their own objectives simply there is a divergence between Marx and the Liberals on which are

these interest groups which exploit the State and what needs to be done uh to solve this

problem so here I am, I encourage people to be interested in this and not to listen to what

politicians and the media and their teachers at school say who himself has suffered from

anti-liberal brainwashing yes you have the impression that there is a sort of anti-liberal culture today

in France or even in Europe or in the world in general and in France in particular

imagine that you are at the head of an institution which has major power over society,

is it in your interest to let theories flourish which show why this power

is exaggerated and ineffective no of course but it turns out that your power also concerns minds

since you have power over school programs on recruitment you have the capacity

to subsidize media to subsidize artists why would you stop yourself from using

this power to filter the the the the visions of world which are expressed produced by these entities

yes so you ultimately see it as a sort of propaganda which is already at work for

to finally convince the citizens that liberalism is bad or completely you in

France you don't find Haek's book in bookstores anywhere in the

whole world you find it in the same one even in China what and so it's on the other hand you go to

any French bookstore and you come across 30 books on the excesses of capitalism

the excesses of the world of finance the excesses of globalization published by 30 small

publishing houses which are not profitable and which are stuffed with subsidies paid by

the taxpayer that's the French reality so at some point you have to be a little

lucid about that and a lot of bitcoiners are not lucid about that ah tu because

I have the impression that 'there are a lot of bitcoiners who are still rather

liberal yes there are a lot of them but but there are some there are also many who

are very few and who have not made the connection in fact between these phenomena

yeah because you have bitcoiners who are not there for actually economic questions

but who are there for love of technology or for financial interest so

that's no problem but I'm talking about those who are in the Bitcoin because they are also interested

in the idealistic side of Bitcoin so they often have a vision of Bitcoin as belonging to the world

of the commons and that is what appeals to them and among them there are many who are not

very lucid on the nature of the State in my opinion or who has a perhaps somewhat angelic vision

of anarchism in general so sometimes they have a reluctance towards the State or with a small

anarchist background yeah but their how to say their distrust of the State is equivalent to

their distrust of capitalism but they did not clearly identify that between the two

there was still a huge difference and that the ' of the two they were much more favorable to

themselves in fact you that makes me I have the impression that you are talking about left-wing bitcoiners when you

say that you barely agree but a little all the same I I understood the criticism but

then you tell me how you see things on these issues are you rather optimistic

or pessimistic about Bitcoin in the next 10 years so when I see what has

happened in the last few months uh I am rather I am rather pessimistic in fact when when when when

I look in particular at what we were talking about earlier the arrest of certain developers and

the extremely virulent remarks of the authorities I am then I am rather pessimistic for Bitcoin

in its philosophy in revenge for the adoption of Bitcoin in the financial economic sense of the term that

I am quite optimistic because we see it with the ETFs in the United States we see even with the

trend increase in prices I think that there is a lot of people who are going to buy Bitcoin

on exchange platforms uh on the other hand for the adoption of Bitcoin as a currency

uh on this I am not very optimistic and there is a subject that we have not talked about elsewhere but

it is the potential attacks from regulators uh especially the self-custody tools and and that

for me is an essential point because we see that it still comes up in

amendments sometimes in the European Parliament this temptation to prohibit or slow down as much as possible

transfers to the so-called self-hosted or non-hosted wallets even uh that shows to

what extent the standard is to be hosted and ultimately the fact of not being hosted is

a special status and that for once I find that very worrying and and I am not

very optimistic about that h you see a future or a possible criminalization of self

custody which could completely dissuade people from holding their own private key

yes so without then it could go as far as criminalization but I think that in the short term it

will rather be like encrypted messaging you see h we see today in stops finally

when you are going to use tgram or signal or encrypted messaging you have a kind of presumption

of guilt is that the authorities think that you have something to hide because you

are on these messaging services even though you are simply trying to protect your privacy and I think

that we are going to move a bit on the same principle for the portfolios in C that but I

am quite convinced by your analysis it is one of the things which is worrying in the short

term yeah then there is something which intrigues me in what you said so good first

before getting there there is another fear of bitcoiners is that ETFs and the fact that

huge companies like microstrategy own enormous quantities of Bitcoin could

also become a vector of attack by regulators against Bitcoin, there are some pretty interesting debates

about it, I'm a little less worried about it, particularly because I trust

crony capitalism, that is to say the misguided, perverted version of capitalism in which

we are which means that the large companies have a great power of influence on the States but if

big BOs of big companies have a lot of Bitcoin they will have a power of influence on the

States to limit the demonization of Bitcoin by the States I confide on that it's true but

we shouldn't really fool ourselves about the balance of power between companies and states,

often when you have very large companies the state may ask them for something,

they won't comply to as much and we see it particularly clearly with the

banks moreover that it is not because the State asks them to open accounts in crypto banks

that it is carried out in the financial sector is the sector where crony capitalism

plays the biggest role and so that's why I always laugh a lot when I see

criticism of the so-called excessive deregulation of the financial sector, it's really

missing the point, I who thinks but who who makes these criticisms well everyone thinks that

the financial sector is excessively deregulated and that and that we have gone much too far in

the liberalization of finance everyone is convinced of that but then I come back

to what you said because it intrigues me from what I understood you said that you

are rather confident about the adoption by the financial world of the Bitcoin tool but rather

worried about the adoption by the population of Bitcoin as a currency yes but then I

don't know how in the long term this is possible because it seems to me that the adoption

of Bitcoin by finance presupposes a confidence of the financial world in the fact that Bitcoin will

become a generally accepted and commonly used means of exchange so in the very

long term yes it's true but that's not why it happens you see we see it for example with

stock prices of certain companies which are completely delusional and which rely on

the hope that these companies will succeed in being profitable you see for example Twitter had

absolutely incredible prices during certain periods when they were not profitable but

I mean that would have very well could never never happen yes but if we see at that moment

if at a given moment the world of finance eh to summarize loses confidence in the capacity

of Bitcoin to become a very long-term currency at that moment -there the world of finance

will withdraw from Bitcoin will abandon Bitcoin and or that and that will make the adoption of Bitcoin uh by populations as a currency

even more complicated and and I have the impression that the phenomenon

works in the opposite direction that is to say that the more finance is interested in Bitcoin, the more

it raises the price and the more the population, individuals throughout the world have an interest

in being interested in Bitcoin, trying to own it and that pass this implies in particular that small

traders in El Salvador in Asia in Africa and elsewhere will do everything to obtain Bitcoin and

be paid in Bitcoin employees will do everything to be paid in Bitcoin and gradually the

exponential increase in prices will allow Bitcoin to become a currency of exchange yes it creates a

sort of virtuous circle for you ultimately so I I I know I agree it's possible

but I still see a lot of possible state brakes you talk about taxation

typically today Bitcoin is considered an asset uh if you want to use Bitcoin

as currency today finally good luck with your tax declarations it's hell so

here we come back to the short brakes and medium term but but but if we are a little optimistic in the

long term we can hope that Bitcoin will overcome its ends in the long term yeah modulo the modulo

actually the policies of the States and their acceptance of these tools there knowing that

there are states who will prosper very quickly by adopting Bitcoin and that others will go

bankrupt and and and will take monumental messes and then change their minds

seeing how the other countries will have succeeded, listen, we hope so, thank you very much, it's a

nice conclusion to you thank you for coming with us where can we follow you on Twitter

on other networks where are you present so I have an army of fake accounts on that 'we

can follow you on Twitter who promise to subscribe to things with inro returns

I don't even get a commission it shows how generous I am incredible you have

you have companies like that who imitate your account and who will harass people

yeah so obviously don't follow these accounts report them but we will put the few

links to follow you to your real accounts in the description thank you Yoric thank you to you

hi thank you for following us until the end if You liked this video you can

watch our video bank 1 crypto Z0 with Alexandre stachenko it should be

displayed right here and I will see you next week