Share on social media:

Episode 1226 of Bitcoin And . . . is LIVE! 

Topics for today: 

• Bitcoin Backed Derivatives Degeneracy
• Malaysia's Stablecoin
• PNC Bank Rolls Out Spot Bitcoin
• OCC Chief Calls Out Banking Lobby 

Circle P:

 
Permanerd
 
Freeze Dried Fruits and Herbs
 Comfrey Salve
 2.1% off with BitcoinAnd
 
https://sats4snacks.com/

https://primal.net/p/nprofile1qqspqxs39j9dctnfuqqrz98lrswnddlumcrdsn28j689n824susmphcfxudsz
 

Today's Articles:

 
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/cftc-launches-bitcoin-pilot-program

https://cointelegraph.com/news/malaysia-crown-prince-stablecoin-dat-zetrix

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/12/09/pnc-bank-rolls-out-spot-bitcoin-access-for-private-clients-after-2025-reveal

https://decrypt.co/351598/occ-chief-banks-blocking-crypto-custody-is-recipe-for-irrelevance

https://bitcoinnews.com/p/balchunas-bitcoin-resilience-tulip-narratives

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/bitcoin-coalition-pushes-back-against-msci-proposal-targeting-bitcoin-heavy-companies

https://cointelegraph.com/news/michael-saylor-countries-bitcoin-backed-digital-banks

Get You're Free Comfrey Owner's Manual Here:
https://www.bitcoinandshow.com/the-comfrey-owners-manual-is-here/

Find the Bitcoin And Podcast on every podcast app here:
https://episodes.fm/1438789088

Find me on nostr
npub1vwymuey3u7mf860ndrkw3r7dz30s0srg6tqmhtjzg7umtm6rn5eq2qzugd (npub)
6389be6491e7b693e9f368ece88fcd145f07c068d2c1bbae4247b9b5ef439d32 (Hex)

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/DavidB84567

StackerNews:
stacker.news/NunyaBidness

Podcasting 2.0:
fountain.fm/show/eK5XaSb3UaLRavU3lYrI

Apple Podcasts:
tinyurl.com/unm35bjh

Mastodon:
https://noauthority.social/@NunyaBidness

Support Bitcoin And . . . on Patreon:
patreon.com/BitcoinAndPodcast

Find Lightning Network Channel partners here:
https://t.me/+bj-7w_ePsANlOGEx (Nodestrich)
https://t.me/plebnet (Plebnet)

Music by:
Flutey Funk Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

[00:00:02] David Bennett:

It is 11:07AM   Pacific Standard Time. It's the December   2025,   and this is episode twelve twenty six.   A Bitcoin and a CFTC has launched a pilot program allowing Bitcoin to be used as collateral in   derivatives markets.   Oh, joy.   What could possibly go wrong?   You're here at the Bitcoin and podcast with your host, me, David Bennett, bringing you all the news that you can use and more about Bitcoin and the rest of the macro stuff around the world,   especially where it collides, like   using   Bitcoin as collateral in derivatives markets. I'm I'm just   the the gambling needs to stop, people. It just needs to stop. But we're also gonna talk a little bit about Malaysia's crown prince and stablecoins, and then we're gonna talk about PNC Bank.  

They're getting into the Bitcoin game as well. The OCC,   the office of the comptroller of the currency chief,   is not happy   about banks possibly,   blocking crypto custody. We'll we'll get into why he thinks that.   And, seventeen year resilience   has ended the tulips narrative according to Eric Balchunas.   We'll get into what he's got to say about all that.   And then we've got a Bitcoin coalition pushing back against the whole MSCI   proposal.   Honestly, I kinda think we should just let MSCI   die into, like   well, not die. It's not gonna die. It's been here for years.   But we gave it life. We gave it a name. Now we know what MSCI is because everybody's freaking out about it. Maybe we should just stop talking about it. We didn't know about it before, and it didn't hurt us. But now that we know that it exists,   oh, oh, the pain.  

Oh, the humanity. Oh my god. So maybe we should just let that one die, but we,   well, we should, but I am gonna be talking about it. And, of course, Sailor is out there at the Abu Dhabi MENA   conference, and he's   saying other stuff to other people.   We'll end the day with that one. But first, the CFTC   and Bitcoin as collateral in derivatives markets.   Oh, joy. Micah Zimmerman,   please tell us what this is all about from Bitcoin Magazine. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission   announced the launch   of a United States digital assets pilot program that will allow Bitcoin   and Shitcoin number one, as well as the stablecoin   USDC,   to be used as collateral in regulated derivatives markets marking yet another major policy shift in how US regulators   approach   tokenized   assets.  

The   move includes guidance for tokenized   collateral,   a limited   no action framework for futures commission merchants   and the withdrawal of legacy   restrictions that the agency set are no longer relevant following passage of the Genius Act.   Acting CFTC   chair Carolyn Pham said the program is designed to expand the use of digital assets in regulated markets   while maintaining oversight and customer protections.   Quote,   Americans deserve safe US markets as an alternative to offshore platforms, FAM said in a statement. Today,   I am launching a United States digital assets pilot program   for tokenized collateral that establishes   clear guidelines to protect customer assets   and provide enhanced CFTC monitoring and reporting.  

Under the pilot,   FCMs,   which is that futures commission merchant   moniker,   will be temporarily   allowed to accept a narrow set of digital assets like Bitcoin as   customer margin according to a CFTC   announcement.   The minute they said margin, all I can think of every time somebody says margin, all I can think of is this, the movie Trading Places   with Dan Aykroyd and Eddie Murphy.   When when the Duke brothers of Duke and Duke lose their chairs on the, stock exchange on the the Chicago I think it was the Chicago stock exchange. I can't remember what it was. Because their margins had been called, and they didn't have enough, collateral or or,   cash to to cover it. So they put their seats on the exchange up for sale. It's a great movie if you haven't seen Trading Places. It's actually a long lost   Christmas movie. Right? So you might wanna watch Trading Places, Dan Aykroyd, Eddie Murphy.  

It's a great flick. Anyway, let's get back to this.   During the first three months of participation,   firms will be required to submit weekly reports to the CFTC   detailing the total amount of digital assets held in customer accounts,   broken out by assets and account class.   Companies must also notify regulators of any material incident involving the use of digital collateral.   The agency said the reporting requirement is intended to give staff real time insight   into operational risks while allowing firms controlled access to tokenized collateral.   Last week, the CFTC allowed federally regulated spot crypto trading in The United States for the first time with Bitnomial   set to launch its exchange next week under CFTC oversight.  

Fam said CFTC registered venues will list spot crypto products, enabling retail and institutional traders to access spot, futures, options, and perpetuals on a single regulated platform.   Alongside the pilot program,   the CFTC's   market participants division,   division of market oversight,   and the division of clearing and risk issued formal guidance on how tokenized assets   should be evaluated within existing regulatory frameworks.   The guidance emphasized   that CFTC rules are, quote, technology neutral,   and that tokenized assets should be assessed individually under existing policies rather than treated as a separate asset class.   Well, the framework applies to tokenized real world assets such as US treasuries and money market funds. It also outlines   standards   for legal enforceability and things like custody and control. The agency also issued a no action position for FCMs   that accept non securities   digital assets as margin,   including   payment stablecoins.  

The relief allows firms to incorporate qualifying digital assets into customer accounts   while clarifying how capital and segregation rules apply under the new regime.   The CFTC   formally withdrew staff advisory numbers 20 or rather number 20 dash 34, which previously restricted   how virtual currencies could be held in customer accounts. The advisory   had been in place since 2020.   But the agency said developments in digital markets and the or enactment of the Genius Act made the advisory obsolete.   Yeah. We've kinda talked about this a little bit,   before. I think I brought it to you last week, this part of that.  

But   allowing   Bitcoin to be used as margin collateral for derivatives market,   I think, is just is just testament to a couple things. One,   degenerate gambling.   Two,   the fact that degenerate gambling has just   it's it's   bolted itself so firmly into what we think of as traditional financial markets   that we can no longer separate the two.   There is a place for traditional   markets.   Price discovery.   How much do how much do it's like prediction markets. How much do how much does is something worth   as it pertains to what a whole bunch of people think it's worth?   Okay. That's sort of like a a nutshell of price discovery,   a little bit. I mean, there's more to it than that, but   derivatives   don't do that.  

People will tell me that I'm wrong, and I'm just going to not listen to them because I'm not wrong.   Derivatives   is a bolt on to traditional markets,   and they do nothing but allow people to gamble   on what the price   what they think the price is going to be given what a lot of other people think it is. They're basically betting   at one point or another   on some delivery date   what price discovery will be in the traditional markets   on some commodity or equity or something   something else.   Allowing people to stack their Bitcoin as a margin against making those bets   isn't any different than just using cash   or   what with some other marketable security or collateralizable   security.  

It's just that they're going, well, shit. People got a lot of Bitcoin, and we're seeing it as valuable, so now we're going to take it as collateral.   Well, that puts us right back into,   like, what was it, BlockFi,   The, people that were allowing   massive loans to be taken against Bitcoin, and you could get, like I don't know. They I think they got up to the point where they would give you they would loan you 80%,   I think, is what the top number was.   80% of what your Bitcoin was valued. So if you experienced a 21%   drop,   you'd get liquidated, and you'd have to come up with even more money. Right?  

So it's gonna be the same here. It's just probably gonna be on a much larger scale   depending on how many people actually take part of it, but   it's just gambling.   It's just allowing Bitcoin to be used in the gambling   part of traditional financial markets.   Let's go into the South Pacific,   Malaysia.   Malaysia's crown prince targets   ringgit stablecoin,   Zetrick's   treasury,   Helen Parks' coin telegraph.   The eldest   son   of Malaysia's billionaire king, so he's not the ruling guy. He's just the prince. Right?   Malaysia's billionaire king is launching a stablecoin pegged to the national currency targeting payments across the Asia Pacific region.   Bullish AIM, a telecom company owned by Ishmael   Ibrahim,   the son of Sultan Ibrahim   Iskandar   of the Johor royal   family on Tuesday announced the launch of RMJ   d t, a brand spanking new stablecoin backed by the Malaysian ringgit,   the country's fiat currency. The stablecoin is set to be issued on Zetrix, a layer one blockchain designed to connect governments, businesses, and individuals to the web three economy with a focus on cross border integration, particularly   in China.  

In addition to launching the stablecoin, bullish aim will also establish a digital asset treasury company with the initial treasury allocation of 500,000,000   ringgit or a $121,500,000   US   in   Zetrix tokens, the announcement said. According to the announcement, RMJDT   is launched under Malaysia's regulated sandbox framework by the Securities Commission and Bank   Nagara Malaysia aiming to test financial innovations,   including stablecoins,   launched in June.   The sandbox aims to explore digital asset use cases such as programmable payments, ring it back stablecoins, and supply chain financing.   RMJDT   is designed to strengthen the international use of the Malaysian ringgit in cross border trade settlements   and to act as a catalyst for attracting increased   foreign direct investment into Malaysia, the announcement read.  

Addressing its 121,000,000   Zetrix DAT,   a digital asset treasury, Bullish Ames said it plans to increase the treasury to $243,000,000.   Bullish said   the DAT is modeled after global precedent centers like Michael Saylor's strategy.   Yay.   You're a little late to the game there, pal. Quote, as the issuer of RMJDT,   we view the establishment of a Zetrix token treasury as a strategic necessity,   both to support operational stability and to deepen alignment with the national blockchain.   Oh, wow. National blockchain.   The national blockchain.  

That's yeah. We'll probably need to be looking out for that phrase here in the future. Bullish aim is entering the DAT sector as many companies with digital asset treasuries face struggles.   Ishmael's reported 2,700,000,000.0   Singapore land sale bid in August shows how   cash rich players continue to bet big   despite growing concerns over strategy copycats. According to Coinshares head of research, James Butterfill,   the DAT bubble may have already burst following a rally in the 2025.   Quote,   as the bubble deflates,   the market is reevaluating   which companies genuinely fit the DAT model   and which were simply riding momentum, Butterfield said in a DAT update last week.  

He also suggested   that the future of DATs will be linked to fundamentals such as disciplined treasury management,   credible business models, and realistic expectations about the role of digital assets on a corporate balance sheet.   Cointelegraph approached Bullisham for comment and not received any response at time publication. So   the prince of Malaysia,   not the king, but the prince, the eldest   son   of the billionaire king of Malaysia is launching   a stablecoin.   And they're   putting together this digital asset treasury that   is using a token   on a platform that I've never heard of before.  

And this is Malaysia. This isn't like some podunk country. This isn't isn't a third world shithole. I'm sure there are places in Malaysia that are shitholes.   There are in The United States too. Have you seen Detroit?   Just saying.   But in either event,   this   just   I I don't think this is really gonna go where the son of the billionaire king of Malaysia thinks it's going to go.   I I think we're going to forget about this in time,   and I'm pretty sure that they might actually lose their ass, but,   that's for Malaysians to worry about. Not me because   I don't live in Malaysia.  

I I just don't.   So let's talk about PNC Bank.   And they are rolling out spot Bitcoin access for private clients   after a twenty twenty five reveal.   Helen Braun is writing this one for CoinDesk. PNC Bank is now offering direct Bitcoin trading   to its private   banking clients, becoming the first major US bank to embed   Spot Bitcoin access inside its digital banking platform. The new feature, which went live on Monday,   caps off a partnership with Coinbase that's been in development since 2021   and was formally amount I'm sorry. Excuse me. Announced   in July.  

The feature is available to eligible clients of PNC Private Bank and is powered by Coinbase's crypto as a service platform.   The integration, which is limited to Bitcoin trading for now,   allows clients to access Bitcoin   directly within PNC's   digital banking platform,   removing the need to open or manage separate crypto exchange accounts. Quote, this collaboration demonstrates how traditional financial institutions   and on chain native companies can work together to expand access to digital assets in a safe and compliant way, said Brett Taj Paul, co CEO of Coinbase Institutional, quote, PNC   has taken a thoughtful,   disciplined approach, and we're pleased to support their efforts with our secure and institutional grade infrastructure trusted by institutions around the world, end quote.  

Coinbase handles custody,   trade execution, and compliance behind the scenes, giving PNC a way to offer crypto exposure without holding the asset themselves   nor registering as a crypto broker.   Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said on x, quote, exciting to see more banks embrace crypto like this. PNC private bank clients can now buy, sell, and hold Bitcoin in their existing accounts.   PNC is the first major US bank to support this type of offering.   PNC and Coinbase formally announced their partnership in July 2025 through development reportedly or though development reportedly began years earlier. Yeah. Well, there's no way to tell. At the time, PNC CEO William Dimchak   said the partnership would help meet growing demand for secure and streamlined access to digital assets on PNC's trusted platform.  

The move gives high net worth clients an easier path into Bitcoin while letting PNC test the waters without overcommitting.   For Coinbase, it extends the company's reach into traditional finance   and expands its footprint   with one of the top   10 US banks. So   yet another bank   falling in the the line of Domino's that we see   just crashing all around us. So, yeah, there you go. Makes me hungry, which is why I go to satsforsnacks.com.   That's sats,   the number four, snacks.com.   Satsforsnacks.com   has got the bit chunks that you crave. It's freeze dried pineapple, yo.   Freeze dried. It's not dehydrated.  

There's a difference. Have you ever chewed on a dehydrated   fruit?   Yeah. We were told it was good.   Not really.   There's I mean, banana chips, dehydrated,   those are okay. That's fine. But some like pineapple   and all manner of other fruits, they I mean, it's like leather. It's like you might as well be chewing on a on a fruity shoe or something like that.   Go to sats4snacks.com.   Sats4snacks.com.   Get yourself some   bit chunks   freeze dried pineapple.   You ever had freeze dried stuff? Do you ever get that that astronaut ice cream when you were a kid? That's freeze dried.   So if you haven't tried any of this freeze dried stuff that that has come on the market now that everybody and their dog seems to have their own freeze dryer,   it's different. It's definitely different than dehydrating something. It is completely different style   of getting the water out of something.  

And the way that freeze drying works   is that what it leaves behind   is, really puffy,   consistency of things. It's it's not leathery. It's basically so it's sort of like,   I don't know, it it you have to try some. You can also try freeze dried peaches because he's got just peachy. He's got freeze dried mango. He has   also oh, free and freeze dried banana. That stuff all of this stuff is really good, but if you've only ever dealt with freeze dried banana chips,   try the p peer to peel organic freeze dried bananas from sats4snacks.com.   Make damn sure   that you tell them that you heard about it here on the Bitcoin and podcast by using   the code Bitcoin and you will get   2.1%   off with that code Bitcoin and   that's 2.1%   off of your entire purchase.  

And it lets Perma Nerd, which is the owner of this whole thing,   know that I made a sale for him here in the circle p. It's where I bring plebs with goods and services just like you to plebs just like you who want to buy said goods and services with Bitcoin. Because if you're not selling it in Bitcoin,   you're not in the circle p. Go to sats4snacks.com.   The OCC   chief says banks blocking crypto custody   is a recipe for irrelevance.   This one I actually agree with because the train has left the station, people. You're either on it or you're not. Vismaya v from decryp.co   says that banks trying to block crypto custody from the federal system   are pushing a recipe for irrelevance,   the nation's top banking regulator warned on Monday.  

He defended over $2,000,000,000,000   in existing digital custodial activity that industry opponents claim violates federal law. Wow. 2,000,000,000,000 is a lot of, that's a lot of money to be violating   federal law with. Jonathan Gould, comptroller of the currency, told the Blockchain Association's   policy summit in Washington   that efforts to prevent national trust banks from engaging in crypto custody ignore decades of precedent and risk stagnating the entire   banking   system.   Well, quote, it's important   that we do not confine banks, including current national trust banks, to the technologies or businesses of the past. That's a recipe for irrelevant's   guled remark.  

The pushback comes as the independent community bankers of America and Bank Policy Institute have urged the OCC to deny crypto charter applications,   claiming they exploit regulatory loopholes.   Now I'm gonna pause here just to remind you.   Remember, I brought this to you before. The Independent Community Bankers of America and Bank Policy Institute, both of them are lobby   institutions   for the banks.   And they were bitching about this stuff two weeks ago, and I brought it to you here on the Bitcoin and podcast.   And now they're getting some pushback here by the office   of the comptroller of the currency,   not by a lobby group, not by some kind of crypto lobby group. No. This is the actual guy   at the office of the comptroller of the currency, a federal position   that's actually pushing back against the lobby groups.  

I don't hear about this kind of thing happening too terribly often, so it's really interesting.   But   the ICBA   filed opposition letters against both Coinbase's application   and Sony Bank's   Connectia   Trust bid last month, warning the applications represent   an impermissible   reinterpretation   of federal law.   Gould refuted claims that approving crypto custody services would break with OCC precedent,   noting that national trust banks have engaged in nonfiduciary   custody   sorry, custody activity since the nineteen seventies.   Damn. That's fifty years. And in the third quarter of this year alone, National Trust Banks reported nearly $2,000,000,000,000   in nonfiduciary   custodial assets under administration,   representing a full 25%   of their total assets.  

Quote,   prohibiting national trust banks from engaging in nonfiduciary   activities   would not only threaten to undermine the dynamic   and evolving nature of the federal banking system, but would also disrupt well over $1,000,000,000,000   in traditional   activities of existing   national trust banks, Gould said.   State trust companies in New York and South Dakota already provide digital asset custody services to customers,   Gould added, saying that banks have held electronic rights to company shares in custody for decades. Quote,   there is simply   no justification   for considering digital assets differently,   end quote. The OCC   received 14 de novo charter applications this year,   nearly matching the total   from the previous   four years combined.  

That's how fast this is going, y'all. That's how fast this is moving.   Several applications involve digital asset activities   or National Trust Bank conversions reversing a fifteen year slump   in which applications   average fewer than four annually,   down from more than 100 a year in the late nineteen nineties.   He called the regulatory blockade   myopic   and said it was, quote, not legally justifiable   and contributed to a less dynamic and competitive banking industry, end quote. At the ABA convention in October,   the OCC chief   countered the banking group's concerns saying that any stablecoin driven deposit flight, quote, would not happen in unnoticed   fashion   and that stablecoins   could help community banks compete with larger institutions.  

Yeah. Well, it's the larger institutions   that this law these lobby groups are seeking to protect. So that is falling on deaf ears. I can guarantee it. But Gould said that the OCC has   supervised trust banks for decades, including a crypto native national trust bank, which is a reference to Anchorage Digital,   whose consent order over AML deficiencies was lifted in August   after the OCC concluded continued supervision was not needed   for its, quote, safety and soundness.   Crypto.com,   Circle, Ripple, Bridge, which is Stripe's stablecoin arm,   and Paxos   are the other crypto firms that have filed for National Trust charters.  

Erebor Bank received   conditional OCC approval last month, quote,   of the federal banking system's capacity to evolve   from the telegraph to the blockchain is one of its greatest strengths.   Gould said, pledging that the OCC would, quote, resist   any efforts to erode its utility   and diversity.   Dominoes are falling everywhere. And this time   this time,   the bull in the China shop that that starts the the crash of all the dominoes is the actual chief of the office of the comptroller of the currency himself, mister Gould.   I I cannot stress enough how important that it is that a federal official   has stepped in and is directly   verbally   pushing back   against lobby groups for large banks.  

This is gonna be real interesting to see where it goes. Let's run the numbers.   CNBC   futures and commodities and, whoo, boy, energy took a shellacking this morning. Brent North Sea is down a point   to sixty one ninety two. West Texas Intermediate down over a point to fifty eight twenty two. But natural gas coming off of its   steep decline yesterday   is down another 6.68%   today, and it's back   to $4.58   per thousand cubic feet. And that is expressly due   to the fact that the weather outlook for The United States   shifted again. They were wrong. I guess that means there's not a polar vortex that's going to descend   into the Midwest like was thought early or rather late last week,   which caused   natural gas to hit, like, $5.50.  

That was, like, half   of its all time high price, which was, what, like, I don't know, two or three years ago.   Or, actually, maybe even four years ago, come to think of it.   It's all it's all crashing back down, including gasoline, which is down a half point to a buck 78 a gallon. Murbon crude, everybody's favorite light sweet crude is down over a point to $63.56.   Gold and, its brethren are having a good day today. Palladium is up two full points. Gold is up a half   to $42.37   and 9 dimes.   Platinum is up 2.95%.   Silver is up woah. Holy shit. 4.8%.  

$61.22   an ounce. Copper is down two and a quarter percent.   Ag looks to be fairly mixed this morning. The biggest winner is chocolate, 3% to the upside. The biggest loser today is sugar,   1% to the downside. Meanwhile, live cattle up point 13%,   lean hogs down almost a half, and feeder cattle down point zero seven. So essentially moving sideways as is the S and P,   which is in the green,   by 0.01%.   Nasdaq is up point 18%.   Dow is down a quarter, and the S and P Mini is up a quarter.   And that's because we're why?   Because tomorrow,   we get the Fed minutes.  

And we saw after a Jolts labor report was a job or it's sorry. Well, it's a labor report, but it's the Jolts job opening report.   The numbers came in higher than expected.   There's already been an 83%   chance that we are going to get a 25   basis point cut   tomorrow by the Fed.   Because of the Jolt's job opening reports,   that percentage   probably is way higher that we're gonna get a cut because, hey. You know, we got job openings are opening up. We need to we're we're yep. Yay. It's so people are looking at this as a signal that it's gonna be even easier   for the   Fed to actually, you know, give us another rate cut. And, of course, Bitcoin   responded   profoundly to the jobs report because we, rocketed past   $89,000   to hit   94,000,   like, 112.  

We're settling back into $93.09   50. That's a $1,880,000,000,000   market cap. We can get 22.3   ounces   of shiny metal rocks with our one Bitcoin of which there are 19,959,651.16   of, but average fees remain low at 0.02   BTC taking in fees on a per block basis.   It's about 32   blocks carrying 59,000   unconfirmed transactions   waiting to clear at high priority rates of four sats per v byte. Low   is two sats per v byte. And   we are still in Zeta Hash territory for   network security. We have 1.05   zedahashes per second as the hash rate on the Bitcoin network, and that's more than you will ever need. From   Beals, Banks, and Bells, Yesterday's episode of Bitcoin, and I got pushed back by TK suitcoin.  

And I just did it again. I accidentally clicked on something, and now I gotta reset my page.   There we go. Tksuitcoin.exe   says.   Yeah. Remember, this was we're talking about intellectual property if you heard me talking about this last night or yesterday.   He says,   referring to the idea of you wanting someone to convince you that nobody would steal your book ideas.   It   it's an impossible task to ensure nobody could do so 100% in today's digital age.   We have ways to gatekeep digital information,   but that doesn't stop it from spreading.   Good information slash news slash books wants to be free always.  

You can only defend the physical copies of the book. He's not lying. That's actually, that's a true statement.   You could never stop someone from hacking your PC and getting your ideas if they really wanted.   Now with the ability to digitally   distribute such ideas quickly, someone trying to copy your ideas and calling it their own would be called out quickly.   I believe this is lacking in today's society, but I believe   in a world of honest money,   those wishing to steal ideas like you suppose   would be called out fast. In a hard money economy, I believe this could be settled in civil courts very easily.   But   this ability to sue anyone   who takes your characters or worlds that you create and add to or iterate upon   would go to the wayside.  

Also, when I said things,   I didn't mean just random things in general. I meant obviously   market tested ideas that survive to be profitable endeavors.   Nobody's making random shit for the sake.   I love how you put it. Nobody's making random shit for the sake of shit in a Bitcoin world.   Again,   I don't I there's several things that I don't disagree with.   Let me and and and he's right. If somebody wants to hack my computer, grab an idea for a book, great. You know, I can't do shit about that. And he's 100%   right. I can't do anything about that.   Let me put it to you this way. And, again, it's it's gonna sound like pushback, but I I wanna state it clearly.  

I was not talking about   somebody stealing my book ideas. I was talking about somebody stealing a book.   And and I'm just using a book as a placeholder for anything else. Alright? I don't have a book. I I have not written a book. Maybe one of these days, I will.   It depends.   Think about it this way.   Saifedean Ammis' book, Bitcoin Standard,   that is a published book.   I'm absolutely certain that I would be able to get a hold of a digital copy of   the of every word that's written in that book. And I was probably   in a position or I could have found myself in a position to be able to get that before that book was actually published.  

Right? So   now let's look at this way.   Safe let's say Safe's about to publish the book. I've got a digital copy copy of the of the proofed   manuscript.   That's gonna be what actually gets printed in the book. It's been proofread.   It's been vetted. Yeah. We're gonna spend the money actually putting this on pages, and we're gonna shove them into a book and a hardcover and a softcover, and we're gonna sell that shit. But I just beat them all to the punch.   And I start selling Saifedean Ammis' book under the under the author name David Bennett.   Safe if he if there's no intellectual   property rights, then there's absolutely   no way there's gonna be a court case   because I'm not stealing property.  

There is no property. If there's no intellectual   property, then there's   there's just no property here.   I can do whatever I want with it because it's mine.   Because there's nothing   guarding the intellectual   prowess,   the work that went in to actually drafting the words on the page that Saifedean Ammis took. He spent a long part   of, like, I think it was, like, over a year to write that book.   And   all of that got seeded with his years of teaching economics and were you know, I think you I can't remember where he was. It was like Princeton or Harvard or something like that before he stopped being a professor and said, fuck it. He went into Bitcoin full time.   So he spent all that time getting to a point where he had a a much of a you know, and then he spent a lot of time in Bitcoin being able to formulate a good, solid, cohesive idea, and then he had to sit down and physically start writing shit out and then doing all that work.  

Right? But I just take   it. I just take it from them.   And I just start selling copies of it. I don't handle I don't even change the name. Bitcoin Standard by David Bennett. And nobody can stop me because there's no such thing as intellectual property rights.   There's there's Saifedean could say, I can prove that I had the manuscript first. Fine. Fuck it. Prove it.   I don't give a shit. You ain't got no recourse. There's no civil suit. You can't sue me. There's nothing that tells anybody that this is yours and not mine.   And there's also nothing that says it's mine and not Saifedean Ammis. So he could actually say, well, then fine. I'll just go ahead and and print, you know, print my my copy of it as well and compete against you on the open market.  

But I've got I've beaten him to the punch. Everybody thinks it's David Bennett that that did it.   And now they start calling Saifedean Amas as a a plagiarist because they're not gonna look behind the scenes to see how he can prove that he had all that,   that he wrote that first.   Yes. It it and what is what I'm saying   a a bit hyperbolic?   Yes. I will admit that. But I'm doing it to prove a point or not even prove a point. Just to illustrate where I'm coming from when when it comes to intellectual   property.   Do I believe   that intellectual property should cover things like the happy birthday song, which is actually a song   owned by Disney?  

Yes. If you did not know that, you can that's why you've never heard anybody sing happy birthday on TV because they will get sued by the Disney corporation.   Do I think that's right? Fuck no.   That's fucking stupid.   And I also don't think that they should be able to re up all of their patents on Mickey Mouse, which has been around since the nineteen   thirties.   Right? And plus, their branding at this point, nobody's really gonna be able to do it, and that's where me and TK actually agree. It would definitely be called out on the open market.   But the happy birthday song, that one already that has always gotten to me about that is where I agree   wholeheartedly   with TK here.  

That is a bullshit claim.   Happy happy birthday   to you. I could get sued just doing that shit, except that it's under five seconds, so I could probably make an argument that I didn't actually violate the terms of   of the intellectual property owned by the Disney corporation, but you see what I'm saying.   Again, this really for me, it goes back to this this or this this description   that I was given about the Supreme Court case and the People versus Larry Flynn.   I don't know how to define pornography,   but I know what it is when I see it.   And that's   I think that that's a big issue here in intellectual property,   patent rights, that kind of stuff.  

So   while me and TK   disagree about a couple of things,   I think we're we would be able to have   a nice cordial   discussion about this face to face without trying to, like, throw bottles of beer and shit at each other. But I always do appreciate   the these kinds of pushback. If you think I'm wrong,   dude,   you have every right to say, I think you're wrong, and here's why. And it makes for for a good conversation. So, TK, thank you for that and thank you for the 500 sats. Permener with two ten says, Pies?   Bueller?   Pies?  

Code with 500 says, it isn't about being pro or anti IP.   It's simply that you will not be able to enforce IP, intellectual   property.   Imagine someone in China list your book as a download and successfully markets it via sued anonymous   and then takes payment via lightning. How how do you sue them?   Now that person better able to fight off criticisms for   or of stealing   or their reputation will take a permanent hit. Oh, this is interesting.   That's how I see it going always.   I agree with sovereign individual's prediction here.   Again, it's not that I wholeheartedly disagree and I think everybody's dumb but me. That's not the point when I when I,   you know,   give pushback.  

But it also does it it does   become rather problematic in   if nobody can defend   their property rights and somebody is a creative individual and list again, go back to a book.   And wants to write a book and it just, you know, they they write three and all three of them just get ripped off by somebody with better marketing.   Let's say they don't even steal it. They just like, oh, hey. This new book came on the market. We got AI to read it. It came out it hit the shelves yesterday.   We can be on the shelves by the end by by this weekend, and they would be able to do that, by the way. There that that exists.   And just steal the book.  

And then compete on the open market, but with a shit ton better marketing.   If nobody can defend   how they make money if they are making money in a creative way, then   how does creation itself get affected?   I mean, I create this podcast. It does not make hard it makes hardly any money. Let's let's be honest. I'm just but a lot of that has to do with the fact that I haven't really approached any,   you know,   corporate kind of   of advertisers. I I just one of these days, I might. I don't know. It it doesn't matter. But right now, this is a creative endeavor for me.   I I view it as service.  

And from that standpoint,   since I'd never really entered into it expecting to get oodles of cash,   then, you know and nobody's really you know, nobody's stolen, you know, anything from me, and I I get that. But,   you know, what I'm saying is that   this particular creative endeavor for me,   I've made a judgment call on why I do it.   I might try to do something else.   And if that gets stolen,   because there's no way to guard against it at all,   What is my   do you think that I would be chomping at the bit to create something more? Let's say it was good,   and I get nothing for it. Nothing at all.  

It's just it was just a waste of my fucking time.   Am I more or less likely   to create something else?   If I'm less likely to create something else because of that   that   situation,   what does that say for all of humanity? If everybody's getting ripped off all the time,   does the overall creativity of humanity   increase,   stay the same,   or   decrease? I'm not gonna make a judgment call on that. I want you guys to answer that for me. Nick underscore dose.   117   sats says cheers. And Pies is here. Finally. Thank you, Pies. 121.   But he's got a whole bunch of emojis that I can't see, and that is the weather report.  

Welcome to part two of the news that you can use Bitcoin's   seventeen   year resilience   ends   Tulip narratives,   says Balchunas.   This is written by NEMA for Bitcoin   news.   Bitcoin has often been compared to the famous tulips bubble from the sixteen hundreds, a time when tulip prices soared and then crashed suddenly.   But according to Bloomberg ETF and analyst Eric Balchunas, this comparison no longer makes sense.   He says Bitcoin has proven itself by surviving for seventeen years   and recovering   many times, which is something tulips never did.   Balchunas   explains that tulip mania rose and collapsed in just about   three years.  

After the crash, prices   never recovered.   He believes   Bitcoin's long life alone is enough reason to stop comparing it to tulip since Bitcoin is still up, like, a 253%   for the past three years and was up a 122%   just last year.   The Dutch tulip bubble happened between 1634   and 1637.   Tulip   bulbs   became extremely valuable, and rare ones sold for more than houses.   But the boom quickly turned into a crash, and prices fell by more than 90%.   After that, tulip prices never went back up again. It was a short lived bubble that disappeared as fast as it came.   Bitcoin, on the other hand,   has gone through many ups and downs, but continues to return. Over the years, it has survived big crashes, regulatory pressures,   exchange failures, and global market fears. Despite   all of this,   it still reaches new all time highs. As analyst   Gary Krug, head of BTC strategy at Affiniteo   AG noted, quote, bubbles don't survive multiple cycles.  

Regulatory   battles,   geopolitical   stress, halvings, exchange failures, and then still return to new highs.   Some critics argue that tulips, like or Bitcoin, like tulips,   because it it doesn't produce anything.   But Balchunas   responded that many valuable assets are also nonproductive. He said, quote, yes, Bitcoin and tulips are both nonproductive assets.   But so is gold.   So is a Picasso.   So are rare stamps.   Would you consider those to tulips or compare those to tulips?   Not all assets have to, quote,   be productive   to be valuable, end quote. He added that he thinks Bitcoin is a different animal.  

Many people disagree with the claim that Bitcoin is nonproductive. They argue that it introduces   something previously unavailable,   a trustless, permissionless, and unsensible way to transfer   value   globally.   And it does so much faster than traditional banking.   This debate is not new. Some well known figures   continue to dismiss Bitcoin. Investors like the Big Shorts,   Michael Burry, once called it the tulip bulb of our time. And JPMorgan   CEO Jamie Dimon said it was worse than tulip bulbs back in 2017, but   Bitcoin's growth and long term survival make that criticism harder to support today.   Volchunas   also commented on Bitcoin's price movements. He believes that the recent price drops are not a sign of collapse, but simply a normal market correction. Quote,   if you think about Bitcoin's year, all that really happened,   at least up until this point,   is it gave up the extreme   excess   of last year, he wrote.  

He then explained that Bitcoin went up a 122%   last year, so a pullback is natural. In his words, quote, assets are allowed to cool off once in a while, even stocks.   People are overanalyzing   it, in my opinion.   Even with volatility, Bitcoin is still up over 250%   in the last three years. And in Balchunas'   opinion,   this kind of performance is unusual for something critics call a bubble.   True bubbles burst once. They don't recover repeatedly over nearly two decades.   Balchunas thinks Bitcoin's history   could also change how institutions   view it as more financial companies invest in Bitcoin and Bitcoin ETFs. It is becoming more accepted as a long term asset, and many experts   now see Bitcoin as a growing part of the global financial system rather than just a speculative   craze. That's the end of the article.  

So let's look at it let's let's take devil's   advocate position on this because I agree with Eric, but here here's the thing.   If you actually go look at the tulip price index   from from 1633   all the way past 1637,   the the, you know, the three to four years that this stuff, you know, was was going on,   what you see is   you see three peaks.   You see,   a peak in valuation,   and then it dips back down. And you see a bigger peak in valuation, and then it dips back down.   And then you see a huge   massive   freaking   spike,   like, literally   10 x from its first   all time high, if you look at it that way, and then   a crash to back where it was before all that shit started before. And that was, like, what, three and a half years. Let's just call it three and a half years.  

Paul Tunis is saying because it's now seventeen years for Bitcoin   that that doesn't work. So the devil's advocate in me automatically goes, how did we perceive time in the sixteen thirties   versus   2025.   I posit   that   we have   rapidly   increased the passage of time   for all manner of things, what our expectations   are, how fast it is to build a building, how fast it is to build a car, how how fast it is that all that shit I just mentioned, you know, ends up in a junkyard somehow or another.   And, you know,   I so   I think that   I would caution mister Balchunas to say, okay. Look.  

Three and a half years in 1630   might actually   be more   like seventeen years   in 2025   than we think.   We don't, you know, we don't really know how people thought about the passage of time back then.   What how much did how you know, they certainly didn't have the Internet. They didn't have instant access to god only knows how much information.   You know, they had a   bible, and it was probably hand you know, handwritten by a monk. And they had a few other things that were probably   handwritten by monks. They didn't have access to information   that we have today.  

I think   that time   moves   much quicker   in today's age than it did back in the tulips.   So pushback on that, you know, from the other part of my brain automatically says, does that matter?   Is it really just the passage of time that you're going on here?   Because if I go back and I look at this chart,   it still does not look like a Bitcoin chart.   It looks like the first three bumps of the Bitcoin chart,   but it does not look like the totality of the Bitcoin chart.   So that gives me a clue that maybe   maybe I'm over expressing   how much I think time moves faster now than it did in 1630.  

And the fun part is I won't know because   I can't go to 1630 and and live that shit. So let's move on to Bitcoin Coalition pushing back against MSCI proposal targeting Bitcoin heavy companies.   Micah Zimmerman, Bitcoin Magazine   says that Bitcoin for corporations or the BFC,   in coordination with its member companies, formally challenged   MSCI's   proposed rule   to exclude companies   from the MSCI global investable market indices   if digital assets represent 50% or more of the total assets. The rule would apply to companies whose primary business is classified as digital asset treasury activity.   BFC argues the proposal misclassifies   operating   companies by prior prioritizing   balance sheet holdings over actual business operations. Quote,   MSCI long defined companies by what they do,   not by what they hold.  

This proposal   abandons that principle for a single asset class, says George McHale,   managing director of BFC, quote, a shareholder approved treasury decision   shouldn't override that reality, end quote. Well, the coalition identified three structural issues with that proposal.   First, it redefines primary business   based on asset composition rather than the revenue generating operations.   Second, it singles out digital assets while other asset classes face no similar treatment.   And third,   it ties index   inclusion   to volatile market prices   creating unpredictable   membership   changes. I agree with all of those.  

And the first one is my favorite.   It the the proposal from MSCI to exclude companies like Strategy   redefines   the primary business of a company   as based on its balance sheet   composition   rather than how they make their money.   I think that right there is enough to put the kibosh on this whole thing. Will it? Oh, hell. I don't know. People are saying there's an 80% chance that MSCI will take a strategy out come January 15 or whenever their decision date is due. I I can't remember when. I think it's I think it's mid January.   But other than that,   what is   I've made the argument that businesses should be looking at their treasury   as something other than just their treasury, that they should be looking at it as an asset that they can leverage and not in a bad way. I don't mean, like, going three x long on Bitfinex or something like that. I'm just saying,   leverage it   to, I don't know, build other sectors of your business.  

Use it.   Use it as the weight that it that it can have.   And yet, here comes MSCI saying, oh, well, it's your balance sheet   that defines your business,   not what you sell,   not what you specialize in, not who you sell your shit to, not your customers. No. That doesn't define your business. No. It's what you have on your balance sheet. Well, that doesn't make any sense   if you look at the history of business   for the last eleven thousand years.   It's what you do,   not what you say.   Okay? Let's be clear about that. Anyway, the BFC warned that the proposal could lead to passive fund outflows,   higher capital cost,   and increased volatility for companies,   all unrelated to operational performance.  

The group urged   MSCI   to withdraw the threshold, maintain an operations based classification,   ensure an asset and class neutrality,   and   engage with market participants on a business aligned framework.   Strive Asset Management, cofounded by Vivek Ramaswamy,   also formally urged MSCI   last week to reconsider its proposal to exclude companies.   In a letter to MSCI   CEO,   Henry Fernandez,   Strive warned   that the rule could produce inconsistent results due to differing accounting standards   under US GAAP and IFRS   rules. Strive, the fourteenth largest corporate Bitcoin holder with over seven five hundred Bitcoin, argued that the 50% threshold is unjustified,   overbroad,   and frankly, unworkable, quote, end quote. Its executives   highlighted   that many Bitcoin treasury companies operate real businesses in sectors such as AI data centers,   structured finance, and cloud infrastructure. They compared the proposed treatment of Bitcoin to other assets, noting that energy companies with large oil reserves or gold miners,   they're not excluded from the indexes.  

The firm also cited   market volatility, derivatives exposure, and accounting differences as factors   that can make index inclusion unpredictable. And Strive warned that strict rules   could drive innovation abroad,   giving international firms a competitive advantage.   MSC yeah. Oh, it's January 15. MSCI plans to announce its decision January   15.   Strive's   intervention reinforces the broader industry call for operations   based clarification   or classification,   asset asset   class neutrality, and fair treatment of companies holding significant Bitcoin as part of its treasury strategy.   Perhaps the company most affected by this would be strategy.  

The tech and Bitcoin focused software company famous for its bold Bitcoin reserve strategy,   strategy and chairman Michael Saylor recently pushed back against concerns that MSCI could exclude the company from major equity indices.   So there you go. That's pretty much all we really need to know about this.   So Vivek Ramaswamy   is is pushing back. You know, the we're we're finally getting   some people other than just, you know, the Bitcoin for corporations, which is kind of like a lot a little bit like a lobby group. Finally getting some people that that   are not,   you know, Michael Saylor strategy based   into the mix calling this bullshit.  

And those three reasons   are honestly, those are all impeccable   reasons.   Let's see. Redefining primary business   based on asset composition   rather than how you make your money.   Singling out digital assets while any other asset classes   face no treatment whatsoever   that looks like this, and that it's tying index inclusion   to volatile market prices,   which create unpredictable   membership changes.   And that third one,   that third one's important too. I mean, all three of these are important, but the third one and the fur the first and third are the most important, I think. I I really do.   Because that third one is like,   look, if you can't show some kind of stability in what's contained in these indexes,   then why have an index?  

It doesn't make any sense to have an index that can constantly   changes   the shape of its   changes its shape   because of volatility. And they're getting included and excluded all the time. They're you know, if if we're gonna do it that way, we should probably have a lot better structures   on   how equities or companies or assets get included into indices in the first place. So,   again, we're, you know, we're all waiting with bated breath for January 15 to see what these idiots do. Anyway,   Saylor pitches Bitcoin back to banking system to nation states.   Like I said, the the Bitcoin boys over there and and Bitcoin MENA at Abu Dhabi, so   Cointelegraph's   Nate Koster is gonna tell us more.  

Michael Saylor, executive chairman of the world's largest Bitcoin treasury holder strategy, is pushing nation states to develop   Bitcoin backed digital banking systems   that offer high yield,   low volatility accounts capable of attracting trillions of dollars in deposits. So this is part of what I mentioned yesterday.   But this is this he's he has Michael Saylor has a theme that he's brought to Bitcoin MENA, and this is part of that ongoing theme. Right? So let's get into it.   Speaking at the Bitcoin MENA event, Sailor said countries could use over collateralized   Bitcoin reserves and tokenized credit instruments to create   regulated   digital bank accounts that offer higher yields than traditional   deposits.  

Saylor noted that bank deposits in Japan, Europe, and Switzerland   offer little to no yield while euro money market funds pay roughly a 150   basis points and US money market rates are closer to 400   basis points, that's 4%,   and said this explains why investors turn to the corporate bond market,   which wouldn't exist if people weren't so disgusted with their bank accounts.   That was a direct quote.   Saylor outlined a structure in which digital credit instruments comprise roughly 80% of a fund   paired with 20% in fiat currency and another 10% reserve buffer on top of that to reduce volatility.   If such a product   were offered through a regulated bank   depositors   could send billions of dollars to institutions for higher returns on deposits and this   the account,   would be backed by digital credit with five to one ratio over collateralization   held by a treasury entity. And he's talking about himself right there.  

Come to strategy, and we will we   we will provide   provide that as the treasury entity. Anyway, according to Saylor, a country offering   such accounts could attract 20,000,000,000,000   or $50,000,000,000,000   in capital flows. And and he argued   that a nation adopting this model could become the digital banking capital of the world.   The remarks followed Sailor's revelation on x that the company purchased 10,624   BTC,   and we talked about that all yesterday.   But   we continue.   Saylor's   description of a high yield,   low volatility digital bank product echoes elements of Strategy's own offerings.   The company introduced in July t   which is a money market style   preferred   stock with a variable dividend rate of around 10%   and a structure designed to maintain its price near par   while being backed by strategy's Bitcoin linked treasury operations.  

Although the product has already grown to around 2,900,000,000.0   in market capitalization,   it has also been met with some skepticism.   Bitcoin's volatility   is one   reason that some observers question sailors' push for Bitcoin backed high yield credit instruments.   Bitcoin has delivered strong long term returns, but its short term performance remains difficult to predict.   At the time of writing, Bitcoin was trading around 90,700,   about 28% below its all time high, yada yada yada. In October,   Josh Mann, a former Salomon Brothers or Salomon Brothers, where however you pronounce it,   bond and derivatives trader called Sailor's moves folly.  

Oh, it's so folly.   Put my monocle in and call it folly and suggested STRC   could suffer a liquidity   event. He wrote, quote, the fiat banking system has been around a long time   and has figured out how to build a moat around demand deposits so that they don't break the bank.   Hiking rates on STRC   to maintain and defend a peg or price level is not going to work. When depositors want to get their money back out yeah. That goes for banks too, you moron. Did did you see what happened a few years back when we had four major banks fail   because they couldn't meet deposits?  

Actually, one of them could,   and one of them did, and they still got hosed by the FDIC.   These argumentations   being made by these these   economists are they're all getting old and stale very, very quickly.   As the dominoes continue to fall,   so will those arguments. So that was the last that I have for you today.   It is Tuesday,   so y'all go out there the day before hump day and go slaughter   everything   you see.   Get as much as you possibly can. Do do stack as many sats as necessary   for you to feel comfort in this coming new year, which   is getting getting real close.  

Getting real close to 2026.   So   I do hope   that I am able to come to you during the Christmas break.   I can't promise anything because when when we go to Christmas,   I'm in a different house.   I don't have my regular setup, and I don't have my regular schedule, and the kids aren't in school, and, you know, and all that kind of stuff. Right? So bear with me. If for whatever reason, I'm not coming to you because we're, we are gonna leave here pretty quickly, and I'll be gone for, like, two weeks.   So if you don't hear from me,   I'm not quitting the podcast.  

I would just consider it that Dave's gone on vacation, and I will see you on the other side.   This has been Bitcoin, and and I'm your host, David Bennett. I hope you enjoyed today's episode and hope to see you again real soon.   Have a great day.