Bitcoin and Humanity's Decentralized Revolution with Dr. Jack Kruse Ep. 3 (WiM546)

What do you think happens to us when we die? I don't think we die. You only have one life, dude. Do something epic with it. Embrace the suck.

What are your views on the significance of Jesus Christ? Humans centralized Christ's message to control others. What types of memories cause you shame? These are the kind of discussions that should happen at the dinner table. But guess what? We're not a nuclear family country anymore. I have a problem with that too.

What is your mission now then? Destroy centralized medicine to make sure that it's decentralized. When I leave the planet, your generation has this ungodly belief that technology doesn't have a negative connotation. Well, I'm going to tell you, AI is the most nefarious thing that humanity faces in 2025.

These questions get to the essence of really what you want to know. It's all about the philosophy. There you go, guys. This is Jesus now saying, "Be careful, Jack. Be very careful." That was some interesting timing. Be very careful.

Yeah, Uncle Jack, welcome back. We've had a very good two days' worth of conversation. You've imparted a lot of knowledge on us, which we're all very grateful for. Today, I want to continue that, but this time asking you hopefully some original questions to really get to know you a little better and how you think and how you see the world.

So, the first question is: Socrates famously said that the only thing he knows is that he knows nothing at all. Frequently throughout our two days of conversation, I've heard you say, "I don't think I know." So how do you develop such deep conviction on topics spanning from history all the way to quantum biology?

How is it that you develop your deep, deep conviction? That one's actually pretty simple. I would agree with Socrates. We always come out and we don't know. That means that you have to be curious to learn. Then you have to do due diligence.

One of the other things that I think I said to you and several of the guys recording, especially at lunch yesterday, is that the truth is an approximation of what we now know, what we were able to do due diligence on. So the depth of how far you're willing to go in the rabbit hole actually determines your conviction.

So is truth always? It's never an absolute, then. It's always an ongoing discovery process, in my opinion. It's just like time; time is relative. We learned that, you know, as humans, literally 125 years ago.

And I believe the truth is also relative. I don't believe there's any absolute truth. For example, quantum mechanics, since you brought that up in question number one. Quantum mechanics, in my view, is still a theory. Evolution is still a theory.

Quantum mechanics has been tested literally millions of times for the last 125 years. It's never failed yet. Therefore, we have to give it its due respect. But I can sit in front of you right now and tell you that if you asked me axiomatic, does quantum mechanics completely explain nature to the best of our ability to reason today, the answer is yes.

But do I hold open the possibility that someone in the future will come and show there's a massive hole? Kind of like, you know, Einstein did with the perihelion of Mercury. You know, for 500 years, we believed Newton was correct until a guy who's a patent attorney or patent clerk in Bern said, "You know what? I think I've got a thought experiment that could actually blow a hole in this."

Another topic we've talked about a lot is coordination and coherence. It seems like getting multiple agents, whether these are cells or individuals, to accord themselves to the same time series is necessary for health, right? We talked about that.

Yeah, I think coherence said when the clocks are running more slowly in the gut than they are in the mind, there's a pathology there. We also talked about if people's clocks are disrupted through money printing and things like that, that can create economic pathology.

So although you're saying that time is relative, there is some push towards having a non-relative time that helps coordinate these, whether it's an organism or an economy. Is that correct?

Yeah, well, you have to realize there's macroscopic time and microscopic time. For example, because time is relative, we have a hard time in our brains figuring out what seconds or attoseconds are. But our mitochondria have zero problems doing that.

It turns out that that level of time is actually the quantum time that happens on the inner mitochondrial level. We're going to have a meeting at Monarca to have lunch. We're not going to use attoseconds because it would be useless for that, and we would decohere. We would not be together at the same time.

Much like, you know, your cell phone that's sitting next to you right now, I told you it has to work 38 microseconds faster. There's a Garmin relay 100,000 kilometers above your head right now that allows you to go from Zaragoza to the Sheridan Hotel and be accurate. If that's off by a couple of microseconds, here's the interesting part: if it's off by attoseconds or femtoseconds, you're still going to get there.

That's the relativity that I'm talking about, and the specificity has to be what we're talking about: macro versus quantum level. I think that level of abstraction, you know, when you're talking about these things to people who are non-scientists, I think they kind of lose that ability to see their perception.

Unfortunately for me, I can go in and out of that because I get when we're making the jump between macro and micro. So given that relativism is permeating the fabric of reality, we can't—we have to get to some type of social consensus on things like time.

This is the magic of Bitcoin, as we talked about yesterday. It's this totally independent timekeeping device. Also, just standards of measurement in general, right? Kilometers, kilograms—all of these systems of measurement that allow us to establish consensus on interactions with the world. These are necessary for us to coordinate and collaborate.

Yeah, I'd say on the macroscopic level. But it's interesting because we do have, you know, the metric system and then the English system. We're able to navigate that without much difficulty.

It seems the smaller we go, when the scale shrinks, a couple of interesting things happen: the electromagnetic force gets stronger, and time has to be more precise, right? Which is the reason why the clock in your eye is an optical lattice clock. In other words, it can't fall to man's fallibility, you know, of the way we measure time.

An optical lattice clock is an atomic clock, and it uses light. Is this why the heartbeats of small animals are at a higher frequency than those of larger animals?

Well, that has a lot to do with Kleiber's scaling law. But Kleiber's scaling law actually has another interesting facet of time that you might be interested in. The same number of heartbeats that's present in a mouse, a small animal, in its life is the same as an elephant. Same as all animals, but different frequency.

It's a very interesting relationship to time. When people first hear about Kleiber's scaling law, they don't realize that it's actually a scaling law really that's about time.

And you know, that goes back to our discussion with Bitcoin. As I said to you, Bitcoin really is a time machine. Yeah, and so is our mitochondria. So is the SCN. When you actually layer these things on top of each other, I guess what your mind should do is try to see the fractal.

Yeah, try to understand the connection. You may not, but I think if you discuss these things, parse them out, you'll begin to understand maybe some of the things I say and the nuance that I come with. Because if you don't understand the nuance, you don't understand the perspective.

I can see how, you know, people would say, "Hey, I don't know if I buy that." Yeah, it's a view rooted in fractality, right? It really is.

Because also, there's, I think it's Zipf's law, where the word that's used—so like the word "the" is the most common word in the English language. The second most common word is used about half as much. The third most common word is used about one-third as much. And this law continues.

It's not exact, but it's a general pattern. So there's fractals built into everything. Every communication system—and communication system broadly is almost everything, right? Everything's communicating with everything else in some way.

I have a picture on my computer of 72nd and Broadway, where they have white horses and a carriage. You could have bought that block for less than a million dollars in 1870. Today, if you bought that corner, it would be like $18 billion.

It's just like one of those things when you show people, you know, the time relativity of money. It points out the inflation rate, but I think it also points out our history. When you see, like, the way people are dressed, the way we did transportation, you know, it brings the point that Robert just brought up before about relativity.

You think we're so progressive, but yet 150 years ago, that's how we lived. Yeah, you know what I mean? And then you think about from whence we came, you know, with the Neanderthals and how their brains were bigger than ours and it shrunk.

And they shrunk because they used artificial light inside caves and put animal skins on them. And then you think, okay, that was 65,000 years ago, you know, to get to that picture.

And you know, it's very similar to the first question you asked me: how do you know? Well, you know, because you do due diligence. You go down the holes. You want to find out why is time such a difficult concept for us? Because it is a difficult concept, you know?

But you never know with finality, is the point, right? But you also, you know, you asked for a global consensus. You know, when you ask me that, I would just tell you, I think the global consensus actually happens in small meetings like this.

When we're all sitting around talking, like for example, our time yesterday spent at Monarca, all four of us, there's a consensus about that time that we spent.

Cons? About the wine? Well, yeah. And also, like when we talk about, you know, these issues and we do it on camera and other people are now coming into our life, I'm sure your experience of that time, your experience, my experience, his experience, they would be different.

But yet the collective, and I'd get a piece of that experience from you, and that would add to my fabric of time. You see what I'm saying? It's kind of like a painting where the canvas is white. Robert puts his stuff on it, you put your stuff on it, I put my stuff on it. Then we look at it, and the picture is a little bit different.

But yet, was this true for Robert? Was it true for you? Was it true for me? It is. So then it brings the point that I'm trying to make to you that the truth is an approximation of what we believe.

But when we come collectively together, consilience, right? And I think that's where the consensus comes. Because we were all collectively there together. But it would be really cool for you to see another layer of truth that you didn't see.

Yeah, when you put your head on the pillow last night. This is why on Wall Street they say price is truth. It's the most massive synoptic integration of all people's viewpoints, correct?

And their self-interest aligned to one number, you know? And we brought that point up this morning before we started recording when I mentioned Jim Simons. I think Simons was probably the wisest sage on Wall Street the last 120 years.

Why? Because he said price discovery really is a function of psychology. And if you think about what you just said, psychology is part of the global electrical network that's on this planet.

And that network connects to the hole in the heliosphere. Then that links to the black hole in the Milky Way, and that links then to Andromeda. Then it links to everything there. It becomes a big decentralized network and fabric.

But if you were to zoom out and zoom in, the truth at each level would be an approximation of that. You know, I often think about this when I go down this rabbit hole when people ask me about electromagnetism.

Because I don't think this is really well known outside of science circles. Just when we talk about light, you realize that light has different power based on the scale. Like light becomes stronger as the scale shrinks.

So let me give you an example. If you read one of the books—well, this is the inverse square law, right? Yeah, laser. If I gave you one of the books yesterday, you'll read something in there that will stun you: that the mitochondrial membrane has a charge of 30 million volts. That's the same charge that you'd see in a bolt of lightning.

So when you sit here and you hear what I just told you, and you go, "Let me get this straight: an electric bolt that hits the ground, and I've got 30,600 of these in almost every cell," then you begin to go, "Wow, the power that's really inside us is tremendous."

And you know, when you get that level of abstraction, you know, when you go down there, it also points out that God, to have that kind of power inside us, you really have to have some incredible control. Sure, you know, of these forces.

How do we do that? Yeah, and that's kind of what we've been talking about. And it turns out time controls the flow of that energy in us. That's where it becomes amazing. It's fascinating.

All right, so I asked you about Socrates. I want to ask you about another big figure. Several times throughout our conversation, you've used this phrase, "my come to Jesus moment" or "their come to Jesus moment."

What are your views on the significance of Jesus Christ in the scope of human history? It depends on the perspective. If you ask me my perspective, I think it's probably the first story I told that I had a question.

Your perspective? I don't know. I don't know. What does that mean? What do you mean you told the story? What was the question?

Well, I'll tell you actually how it starts for me. My middle name is Jude, and I was named Jude because my mother, when she was pregnant, right before me, she lost a baby. My mother was an older mother for her time, and she was devastated by the loss of the baby.

So she prayed to St. Jude every day. In Catholicism, St. Jude is the saint of hopeless cases. So my mother sat in Central Park every day and ate a tin of salmon, praying to St. Jude for me.

I was told this story from the time I was 18 months old to 2 years old to 3 years old. My mother would take me out to Central Park on the bench and show me right where she sat when she prayed to St. Jude.

This was meant to imprint me, you know, to probably Catholicism, Jesus Christ, St. Jude, to have an impact on me. I thought and heard this story over and over again as a child.

And then one day, I began to ask some different questions, like, "Is all this true?" And what was the random walk that made me question that? You probably didn't grow up in New York like I did, but anybody who did knows that we have this Museum of Natural History that's very, very close to Central Park.

I used to go there when I was a poor white kid growing up in the city. My mom would give me a dollar, and I would be able to follow the rich kids around while the ladies brought them.

I remember walking in to see the T-Rex and the stegosaurus and the Allosaurus and hear the stories of how these were 65 million years old and where they were found. I was like, "This is incongruent to what my mother told me and what I learned in my religious instructions every Wednesday in St. Sebastian's."

So as a young child, I said, "Wait a minute, what story is true? The story on the bench in Central Park or the story in the Museum of Natural History?"

And the interesting part for me as a young boy, I didn't trust my parents. So that was the question. Yeah, which story is true? Which story is true?

And you know, it goes back to your first question to me about Socrates. Like, I don't accept that anything's true. I told—I think I even mentioned to you casually, day one, that I said I hate everybody equally, and then I decide who I like.

It sounds crazy when you hear it, but when you grow up in New York City, that's actually a path to survival. It's a good heuristic.

Well, I mean, think about it. You got three-card Monty guys on the street. When you grow up in the city, I think it's like a blue straggler star where you can be taken out really fast. So you have to really be street smart.

You know, it's very different, I think, than growing up in the suburbs. And I have family. Yeah, I grew up in the South.

Well, I know. I lived in Tennessee for a long time, so I know a lot about Tennessee. And my kids grew up in Tennessee.

Yeah, so I actually know. And I've said many times to both of my kids, the way I grew up and the way you grow up is so radically different that your worldview has to be different.

And I said this to you during our time together, that artificial intelligence has no target. The technology, but our children are our artificial intelligence.

And I just told you that my children and my upbringing are radically different. In other words, they're part of me, they're part of their mother. But I'd even tell you the ZIP code that they grew up in and how they grew up also changes their perspective.

So when you ask me a question about what Jesus Christ is to me, Jesus Christ to me at 2 years old, 4 years old, 6 years old, 12 years old, 18 years old, 30, 60, and 65—you want to know the truth, Robert? If you asked me that at each time of my life, I would have given you a different answer.

Which means there is no truth. Sounds like a classical book. When you read a classical book, each time you read it, you get a new interpretation, new nuggets, new perspectives.

Well, let me ask you a question. Do you think a classical mythological figure is a necessary component of our imagination?

No, I think it's actually a tool of centralization. If you want to know the truth, I believe it's to get us there.

You go, guys, you just lost your kind of thought. The wind would catch us at some point. You know what that is? Sandbags.

The thing that you—this is Jesus now saying, "Be careful, Jack. Be very careful." That was some interesting timing. Be very careful.

Yeah, and believe it or not, hopefully you guys won't cut this out because I actually think this is really good. Because guess what? This is nature saying, "Yeah, entangle with the discussion we're having right now."

And I would tell you that I believe that we're good to continue. You know that religion is an opiate for the centralized paradigm. It was brought to us for us to control.

I think it is cut from the same cloth as government. As I told you day one, that government, if you look at the etymology of the word, it is also mind control. Mind control.

And I don't think there's any question that that's the case in religion. Now, each one of our religions, it's very interesting. They all have commonalities. Those commonalities usually come back to light, which I find very interesting.

But I think when you read a book and you get new knowledge, I would actually pose the question to everybody that's here right now, everybody listening to this: when you read a book and you go back and you have more informed eyes, don't you think you learn more from the book?

And it should stun you that a book can continually give you new information if you reread it multiple, multiple times. I mean, I can tell you I've told my members to read Saifedean's book or Jason Lowry's book.

And I think Jason Lowry's book is probably the best idea now that we're coming into game theory with nation-state adoption. And I think you're going to see totally different aspects of his thesis laid out.

I think when I go back and read some of my own blogs, I know what my intent was when I read it or I wrote it. But you know, when I go back and read them now, sometimes I'm a little bit stunned. I'm like, "Wow, I had insights there that I put in the words, and I didn't realize that they were there."

Yeah, but they were there. No, and this gets to the whole idea of meaning being a co-creative process, right? It's not just the intention that you put into the words that you write, but it's also the intention of the interpreter.

Correct. And you can be the same interpreter at different times, having different interpretations of your own writing. Yeah, even so.

Yeah, meaning is very complex and emergent everywhere. What do you think we can learn and seek to imitate from Satoshi Nakamoto?

Go against the grain when the grain is set. Your duty is to do something different. Also, pay attention to your surroundings. I firmly believe that Satoshi was a man in the times.

When you think about some of the things in the emails from the Reddit forums and you read those emails and you see what's happened, I think some of the things going on even now with Roger Ver about the block wars that started in '17 and '18 and his recent, you know, Tucker Carlson thing, I think it's very interesting to see his perspective.

And then you listen to people like, you know, who've sparred with him on stage, like Samson Mow, and you go back and have your own, you know, come to Jesus moment about where you think things are.

I think Satoshi—the most amazing thing—he had to be part engineer, part physicist, because he had an incredible insight to add timestamping to the proof-of-work mechanism.

And it doesn't mean, you know, he had to be a physicist on the order of Feynman or Einstein, but just how to realize it was important. Do I also think there's a twinge of his own fallibility in the white paper in the bibliography? The answer is yes.

I also think that when you do something great, the story that I relay to you probably two days ago about just think about where we are right now. There are people that planted these trees that we're sitting under, and you and I are emitting these biophotons.

That person did something for us so that we could have this moment here together. I think Satoshi did the same thing. Yeah, you know, and when you think about that gift, it's the gift that keeps on giving.

You know, we joke that, yeah, that gift is herpes. But in that sense—who jokes that? Well, I say that all the time, that you know, it's the gift that keeps on giving because it's a virus that actually changes humanity.

You know, people don't realize that that's what viruses are. And I would say that Bitcoin's a virus. I've heard Bitcoin is the mind virus, but I've never heard the direct comparison to herpes.

I feel like that's probably bad PR for Bitcoin. Well, it might be, but I kind of want people to know that, you know, the human genome is actually made out of 98% of her viruses that we've collected.

And our neighbors—I'm talking about our evolutionary neighbors, chimps and gorillas—that we've scratched the surface on in our three days together, they have a leaky gut by design.

And this ties to our story. Here's a tangent you may enjoy. A guy won the Nobel Prize in '95 named Barry Marshall. When I was a young resident, we used to do operations called vagotomies for ulcers.

It turned out that was complete pseudoscience, you know, kind of like barbarism, where you would bleed somebody. This happened in my life. And what did Barry Marshall do? He tried to use monkeys and gorillas to mimic what the experiment would be on us.

And he realized he couldn't do that because we don't have the same guts as gorillas and primates. So what did he do? He drank the Helicobacter himself and scoped himself.

He actually put the hose down his own throat and did the test on himself to prove that this physically happened. And the reason why this is important, you have to understand the difference between chimp and gorilla guts and how our gut is different, but yet they're the same.

And understand how that changed. And it turns out it's a virus that actually was the small butterfly effect that actually facilitated the change.

And I would say that Satoshi and herpes do have a lot in common when you look at it from that perspective. But I don't think people really—it's not going to make it on a t-shirt, I don't think.

Yeah, no, it probably won't. But I think it's a good thing to think about because what I'm trying to say is that small little stimuli can lead to massive amplification.

I do think that back to the butterfly effect, right? Small changes in initial conditions. That's what an asymmetric bet is.

What did you say about 98% of the genome being viruses? Yeah, what does that mean? Her viruses. That's what our genome is.

So viruses that have been conquered previously become—we've collected them over the millennia. We've collected them. What does that mean? We assimilate the virus.

Assimilate, exactly. Then we become something resilient to that virus. Think about that in the aspect that we talked about AI.

And then I want you to think about the first question you asked me: how do we connect to the whole? The whole is in us. We are pieces and parts. We are viral marketing, a mic reflection of the fractal.

And guess what? The environment sculpts us, right? The environment—the environment in a reciprocal fashion, correct? This is a bidirectional, yeah.

You know, black box radiator that never stops, yeah, right? The only thing that never changes is change.

So yeah, I mean, it's that case. And I think the funny thing is the changes that have been induced on Bitcoin, you know, in the 12, 13, 14 years.

Think about how that's changed things. Let's talk about something then because this is, I think, a very interesting point. You've talked a lot about the importance of timing.

So I want to ask you about Satoshi's sense of timing. The way he released Bitcoin into the world—when he released Bitcoin into the world, he not only had to be a physicist, an engineer, but he also had to be a game theoretician of the highest caliber.

What is it about timing? What can we seek to imitate from Satoshi in terms of his sense of timing? You've been in my house for three days. You see that statue on the wall back there?

You jump without wings. That's what Satoshi did. And what was the impetus for him to do it? I personally think he knew about '71. He knew about what was happening in technology.

He knew about the great financial crisis. He saw what happened in TARP. He knows how the guardians were inside the gate. And what did he have to do?

I have potentially an availability to give humanity a solution to the current state of problems. It doesn't mean that it's not going to need to evolve over time, but this might be a good idea that's worth spreading.

So I think the white paper comes at the right time for humanity. The key is the people who are in control of the centralized paradigm were not ready.

How do we know they weren't ready? They didn't strangle it in the crib. Yeah, and they made a classic error and believed that Satoshi knew that he thought their use could be used against them.

Was a blind spot, correct? Yeah, and did that successfully? Oh, I think very successfully. But the other part of his plan was to step back.

Now, I told you, you know, over the three days who I believe Len Sassaman is Satoshi and why he's Satoshi. I also believe that there is a hero story there that he was taken out by the forces—the same forces that are trying to strangle our financial system.

The same forces that were behind killing presidents. The same forces that use humanity as human shields, especially Americans. And the same forces that are actually trying to really, truly imprint mind control on all of us.

Like all of these things are connected, right? Many Bitcoiners, many people who are not no-coiners even probably listen to this and go, "Man, that's not my worldview."

And I'm going to tell everybody listening to this, I'm okay with that. What I want you to do, I want to share the idea with you, let you stew in the tomatoes, go down some of these rabbit holes, and then maybe come down and see me at a future Bitcoin conference and say, "Let's talk about it."

Let's go back to this philosophical view you laid out where we are reconstructing the world, and then the world in turn reconstructs us. And it's this ongoing dance.

What happens in that reciprocally reconstructive process when you introduce something like 21 million Bitcoin that does not change? Like an absolute of Bitcoin changes around the edges, right?

But the fundamental criteria of only private keys spend, no counterfeiting, fixed supply, 21 million—these things don't change. How can we understand the philosophical implications of introducing an absolute into this relativistic world?

I think when you understand what money is, which is really the basis of your show, you understand that a ledger has to be immutable for it to be accurate.

That is decidedly different than what you're asking me about nature. Like this is the crazy part. This is the incongruity of Bitcoin.

It's a decentralized manufactured network, but it does not have applicability to the way we operate. But it's still decentralized.

But there is an immutability to the moment, right? Like once something has happened in history, whether we tell a different story or not, it's a different story.

But you can't do that in Bitcoin. That's the interesting part. But you can in humanity, which is why I brought up to you the last two or three days, and you pushed back a little bit on it, that I have a big belief that AI is one of the worst things that we will unleash on the planet.

The reason why is because it gives unlimited ability to whitewash history. In other words, that will not happen with Bitcoin because the blockchain will always be the blockchain—an immutable history.

And I think that we need something like that for the history of humanity because one of the things that I really, truly hate about human history is that it's been, you know, corrupted by the victors, written by the victors, and we never get the true story.

So, you know, when you first met me and you said, "Jack, you really go back every September 30th, December 15th, and really become a pain in the ass to yourself about your own beliefs," Robert, I think it's mandatory that you do that because of this issue.

And I will tell you, being a doctor, I know that much of what I've been taught is wrong. So what kind of doctor could I be for, say, you or the camera guys if I was not willing to be that hardcore?

You're being Socratic, right? You're going back and saying, "These are the things I think I know, but why do I think I still know them?" Correct.

And re-substantiating your philosophical anchoring points to the world. Every time a new paper comes out, guess what? I'm looking at the question you asked me, Jack: how does adding 21 million Bitcoin into the situation change that?

That is a discussion that happens in my head. But remember, my brain has been built through my six decades of experience that I've gone through.

And I have filtered through what I think is important and what's not important. I think the thing that makes me successful in doing what I do, I'm very, very good about subtracting the superfluous.

Okay, that—I have a term called via negativa. If you remove the superfluous, guess what? It brings that what is most important to the surface.

Sure, doesn't mean you're infallible. It just means that you become more certain than other people would be about certain things. This is empiricism, basically, right?

It's like, yeah, you disprove the thesis that can be disproved, and whatever remains is empirical, correct? Provisional truth, basically.

And yeah, so Bitcoin, if we're looking at the world through your fractal view, right? That things as above, so below. Things are self-similar, or the geometry of nature, however you want to describe fractals.

What happens in an evolving fractal pattern when you introduce that immutable absolute thing that repatterns the whole fractal? I guess, and that's why we're struggling to understand Bitcoin and its implications so much.

Yeah, I think actually it's going to affect each part of life differently. The place that I really—I will tell you in 2024, the idea that I had in January, because we're now at the end of December, I wanted to get the point across that health and wealth are fundamentally linked.

I think I did that best this year on the stage in Portugal, and I think I did it on the stage in Prague. I tried to be an agent provocateur to use three heroes, and I wanted to tear the heroes down because I wanted the masses to begin to tear some of their sacred cows down as well.

And I think once you understand that Bitcoin will affect everything in our life, I don't think, Robert, we can know how it's going to affect everything.

And I think the interesting thing is you're 39 and I'm past 60. How is it going to affect a boomer versus, you know, your generation? You know, how will Jun Seth or American HODL view the same question?

Isn't this back to question number one about the relativity of time? I'd say the relativity of life, the relativity of the situation, the relativity of the environment.

I mean, you and I talked about, "Hey, let's change your environment from Miami to El Salvador and see how it goes." I shared the story with you about my buddy Sam, who's not here, but how he had such a massive change in, you know, his insomnia.

The question is that single maneuver, if you think about that like Bitcoin, do you not think that him being able to sleep has a massive effect on him? And guess what? The reason he was able to come to El Salvador and do this is because Bitcoin provided him the ability to improve his situation.

Not everybody in the world that's going to listen to our podcast has the ability to pick up and move their life to a place like this, which offers the mana for the mitochondria. But Bitcoin gives you more of that power, right?

And that's the sovereignty. That's the time sovereignty. And I think it allows us to point that power to where we need it.

Yeah, we talked yesterday about how all these mitochondria are engines. I think you called them nano quantum torque engines.

And so the purpose of an engine is to convert one form of energy into another form of energy, and there's exhaust, right? Which is entropy, basically.

Is Bitcoin something like a global mitochondria for the global economy? That it's—yes, it is.

So does that mean the world starts to act like one cell, one cohesive cell because we have this global mitochondria? Well, I would say I want you to think about it like this because there's a very interesting idea that you could develop here.

Do you think the experience of Bitcoin as a mitochondrion in El Salvador is different than it is in the United States? Remember, it's legal tender here.

It's different for every person, right? So remember, isn't this the story that I told you about zip code versus genetic code? What's more important?

My centralized medicine wants to force-feed you the idea that genetic code matters more than anything else, when reality says it's actually zip code matters more because that's what changes your genetic code.

Yeah, so I would tell you the same thing. I think the same thing is true with Bitcoin. I think so. Epigenetics trump genetics all the time, bro. All the time.

And that is one of the big differences between decentralized medicine and centralized medicine. And if that offends people, good. Then I'm doing my job, and I'm doing it well.

But I would tell you I think Bitcoin offends Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown, JP Morgan Chase, the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, and that's also a good thing. Why? They need to be offended.

Yeah, and I think what's happening in D.C. right now, they have decided, "Okay, let's co-opt Bitcoin because now maybe it can help us because we've put our ability to defend ourselves in such a bad way that maybe we can get more pavement for the fiat instrument that we've used."

And will they try to do different things? The interesting thing, you know, I think about my friend Max Keiser. Max says, "You don't change Bitcoin; Bitcoin changes you."

That's exactly what we're saying here, right? And I think that it's an absolute effect on a relative. It's the scalpel to the skin.

Yeah, but remember how the patient moves determines the scar the patient gets. And that's how I need you to think about it.

And realize this is also like our guys here filming us. They change a knob that changes the effect that the audience sees. And we need to be mindful of that in Bitcoin.

When Larry Fink buys, say, a lot more ETFs, how does that affect Bitcoin self-custody? How does that affect what's going to happen at Custodia Bank?

How is Caitlin Long's tweets going to change what's going to happen when Operation Choke Point 1.0 and 2.0? These are all—yeah, Bitcoin is still immutable, but these are buttons on the equalizer that will change the experience of Robert Breedlove in Miami, Jack Cruz in El Salvador.

And you know, we control how it emerges into the world, even if its core doesn't change. I think the way you're going to use it and the way I'm going to use it are different.

And I think when we have meetings like this, the way we're each going to use it for ourselves is going to be different on different days at different times.

And that's—to be honest with you, that's exactly why Bitcoin's like mitochondria. Because guess what? Decentralized medicine teaches you that health is an N equals one game. Positive sum.

You got it. Yeah, yeah. And money is the ultimate multi-purpose tool. So it stands to reason that's going to serve the widest variety of purposes you can bring to bear.

If you had a genie and a lamp and you had three wishes, what would they be? First wish is I'd like to sit down and have dinner at Monarca with—you had your wish granted yesterday.

Well, it was lunch, not dinner. Yeah, lunch. But I'd like to have it with Feynman, Einstein, Da Vinci, and Michelangelo. And I would like to be able to pick their minds about how they think.

Wasn't Gilbert Ling in your top scientists? He was. He's not invited to dinner. No, I probably wouldn't mind having him in there, but I'm going to probably say something that's arrogant and ignorant.

I think I know what Gilbert would say. Oh, okay. In other words, I've done a deep dive. Gilbert isn't as deep as the other guys that I mentioned.

Gilbert was adamant. He was a madman. When I mean madman, he was angry at the people that co-opted science. I think I carry Gilbert's anger inside, and he used that as a tool.

I have an absolute reverence for his work. Yeah, I think he's one of the most brilliant thinkers in the last 12 years. But do I understand thermodynamically where he would fall?

Yeah, what I'm telling you is I don't know thermodynamically where the other four gentlemen would fall, and I'd be very interested to understand how their brains work and then compare notes to how I think mine works.

Isn't it funny how we really do thrive on swimming in the entropy? Even though we're fighting the entropy, we also crave the entropy. Like you want all the—UNC.

I love chaos. Yeah, a party. Even party—having a party later at the house, it's a nice dose of entropy, right?

Well, I mean, it's one of those things that I look at it like this. You know, some people look at going to the gym and getting a great-looking body to look like Michelangelo's David.

And then other people look at it, "I'd like to have a brain that functions like the four guys that I mentioned." Yeah, and I want to know what it was to shape them.

I have my own worldview of what I've done to shape my brain, but I am looking how to sculpt it in ways to see and tap the unconscious—the things that I know exist but I'm not quite sure of yet, that I don't have a perception of yet.

See, I look at wisdom as the things that we can see in the environment around us. What I'm interested in is being able to see beyond and make it concrete and make it understandable.

I want to tap—and the way I—I'll give you an analogy for you to think this. I have a Tiffany vase in my room, and I often have the vision when I want to think at night.

I envision Shantel breaking that thing and me killing her. But then I look at all the pieces in my mind on the ground, and there's a hundred thousand.

And I think, how many pieces do I need to recapitulate to know that this is a beautiful iridescent vase from Tiffany? And then I think to myself, how many things are in the cosmos right now out there?

Is this the reason why we can't solve Parkinson's disease? Is this the reason why we can't solve GBM? Like how could I tap this mind experiment with this Tiffany vase to save Kurt Cobain, to save Amy Winehouse, to help some of Rick Rubin's people?

How can I do this to actually point out to Sergey Brin why he's a true sociopath? How can I do something to help humanity?

Why? Because I believe there's a redeeming quality in every person that's out there, no matter how evil they are. Like I've told people, I think Elizabeth Warren and Nancy Pelosi are some of the most evil politicians.

I would have no problems putting IVs in them and pushing the drugs to put them out of their sleep. But do I think they're actually redeemable? Yes.

But they have to take the first couple of steps to seek the redemption. And if they did that, if they actually came out and gave him a copal, kind of like we're talking about with COVID, if Fauci came out and said, "Look, I messed up," I think I could have more sympathy and empathy for him than I do right now.

Because what are they doing now? They're double, triple, and quadruple down saying, "You know, SV40 can't hurt you." I just read a tweet this morning from Paul Offit saying, "Oh, these people are ridiculous. Yeah, there's DNA everywhere. We eat DNA."

Anybody who knows science knows that that equivalence—that's a false equivalence. These are the people, when you hear that, this makes me angry.

These are the people that we need to guillotine.

Have you ever wanted to live in an off-grid community with complete food, energy, and water independence? If so, then you need to check out the farm at Okii.

The farm is a pioneering community designed to foster longevity and well-being, eliminating elements that detract from these goals. At the farm, the convergence of nature, nutritious food, a supportive community, and the ethos of slowing down is unparalleled.

Positioned at the gateway to the UNESCO World Heritage-nominated Okioki National Wildlife Refuge, the farm at Okii stands as a testament to a lifestyle that truly nurtures health and happiness.

Unlike conventional housing developments, where a token communal garden may suffice, the farm itself is the community. Small, intimate micro-villages seamlessly integrate into the fabric of a sprawling agricultural community.

So if you're interested in joining this off-grid community, then go to o.com today to learn more about becoming a member. Make sure to tell them that I sent you for a $21,000 discount on their custom cabin pricing.

Again, go to o.com to learn more about joining this revolutionary regenerative agriculture community.

Forget multivitamins and other supplements. Animal organs are the most nutrient-dense foods on the planet. You can get 100 times more nutrients from organs than you can from muscle meats.

But the problem with eating organs is that they are difficult to find in stores, they are difficult to prepare, and even when they are prepared well, they often don't taste great.

Thankfully, Heart and Soil Supplements has made consuming organ meats so much easier by providing powdered organs in capsule form. Organ meats include everything your body needs to thrive: vitamins, minerals, peptides, proteins, and growth factors.

This is why organ meats were the most prized foods for our ancestors. Fortunately for us, Heart and Soil makes these treasured foods easily accessible.

So go to heartandsoil.com today and use discount code Breedlove to get started on your journey to optimal health and vitality. Again, that's heartandsoil.com, discount code Breedlove.

Have you ever wanted to start a business in the Bitcoin space? If so, then the Wolf Startup Accelerator could be for you. Wolf is the first startup accelerator dedicated exclusively to businesses developing in the Bitcoin Lightning Network.

Four times each year, Wolf brings teams from around the world to New York City to work with like-minded entrepreneurs pushing the boundaries of what's possible with Bitcoin and Lightning.

The program is designed to help early-stage companies achieve product-market fit, develop their brand, secure early-stage funding, and grow businesses that fuel the global adoption of Bitcoin.

Go to wolfnc.com to learn more or apply today. Again, that's wolf, W-O-L-F, nc.com.

Okay, there's a saying that every observation of the world is at the same time a confession of character. What is it you said? You think you might be carrying this anger of Gilbert Ling inside you?

No, there's no question. So what is it about—what is that saying about your character that this is your orientation towards the world?

I think it occurred when I came into medicine and took that oath to do no harm. When you realize as a doctor that you actually are doing harm and you didn't realize it, that is a fuse that's different for every doctor.

But what it does to you physically causes a phase transition in the way you think, your brain, your body, your reaction, and you have to act on it. If you don't act on it, in my opinion, you're perfect for the centralized paradigm.

So this is a fundamental schism in integrity, right? Because that's the first—is it the first vow of the Hippocratic Oath? Do no harm.

And then you realize that you're engaged in practice. Some people just take the oath kind of like they get married. You know, they don't look at it as a big deal.

But to me, this is kind of like that blood oath that you make between you and a patient. And you know, you go into this altruistically, but you also realize, especially after you come out of residency, that you can't help everybody.

Sure, but here's the thing. Even like I told you the story about Mark Peters, I knew that I couldn't save his life, but I knew I could reserve some of his time.

And what did I do? I gave him a small piece of the carrot cake that he wanted. So do I look at that as a small clinical win? The answer is yes.

Now, the flip side of that is somebody comes into me as a squirrel and says, "Yeah, I'd like to have a five-level fusion on my back and be able to go back and, you know, do gymnastics."

I mean, that's just a take that doesn't happen. You know, it's like the thermodynamics of dropping an egg and saying, "Make me the eggshell."

Right, right. You know, that is not irreversibility. That's not a person that I feel bad about.

But what we're talking about, if I have a duty to you, then I'm going to give you my best. If I don't give you my best, then I failed you. And there can be nobody between us, right, during this transaction.

Got it. Okay, sounds very spiritual in scope.

It's been said that every man dies two deaths: one when he draws his last breath, one when his name is last spoken. What do you think happens to us when we die, both literally and figuratively?

I don't think we die. You don't? I think all our atoms are being recycled right all around us.

I think the craziest thing is when you go to a death and you hear a eulogy, people should get up and say, "This person's not dead. They're just in a more random form."

When you come and sit under this tree, I'm sampling right now some of Einstein's atoms. In fact, that's the reason why I'd like to sit down at Monarca and have lunch with them.

But to do that, I need a lot more of those atoms to come into a physical body so that all those atoms can communicate, and then I could extract the light and information from those atoms.

But no, I actually do not believe in death. There is no heat death. Everything is constantly recycled in the universe. That's actually the basis of decentralization.

So we're back to vitalism. You got it. It's all alive. Everything is alive.

So then the life-feeding-on-life pattern, it's a beautiful thing, but it's not—it's the life feeding on itself in a way.

Yeah, well, do you—I mean, I don't know how you look at it, but you know when I see a baby seal in the water in South Africa with a great white shark, that is naturalized decentralized.

When I did the podcast with Cali Means and Danny Jones, that was a great white shark with a baby seal. Did I feel bad for Cali Means? No, I didn't.

Why? Because I think that Robert Breedlove, the guys that will be watching this podcast, you have a duty. Remember, I've said to you several times in the last three days, "If not me, who?"

Like when you did your sailor series, if not you, who was going to pull that out of Sailor? You did it in that moment, and you changed the hearts and minds of many people.

They might not have agreed with everything you just post-record, but yeah, I hear you. But you understand what I'm saying? If you don't think when you do a podcast that you somehow can change the ether, then I think that you're not—you're a fraud.

Of course, right? Yeah. What types of memories cause you shame, and what is it about them that causes you shame?

It's an interesting question because I'm going through relativity in my head. I think I felt shame when I was younger. I don't think I feel shame, though.

And the reason why is because I think I understand the lessons of what was shameful back then. I didn't understand the lessons. Like I told you several times in the last three days that I embrace the suck.

Yeah, like I ride the chaos, right? If you sit down and talk to the people that know me best, you've had an opportunity to sit down with Shantel. She'll tell you that you're not going to meet anybody that loves the chaos like I do.

Sometimes I induce chaos in my own life when it needs to be injected. I do it with patients. I do it with my best friends.

Yeah, and many of them don't understand why. Because I believe the exhaust that you get from chaos forms order. And so it is an overarching love of order that incentivizes you to induce chaos from time to time.

I'm going to tell you, I'm going to answer your question because I just thought about it, and I think this is going to be a really tough subject for some people to hear.

But it gives you a pretty good insight to just how hardcore I am. I told you a little bit about the story in the car when my mother was dying. I brought my ex-wife and my daughter in the room.

This was the last time I felt shame. I mean, an example of my mother for my daughter. And I told my mother to die. I said, "Every choice that you've made for the last 40 years has brought you to where you are right now, and you're getting ready to jump into the sausage grinder."

But I knew the lesson was for my daughter. Why don't I feel shameful about it now? Because now I understand why I was adamant and held my ground and did this.

I think my ex-wife was stunned by it. She had tears in her eyes. It was very emotional for both of them. It wasn't very emotional for me.

Why? Because I viewed my mother as any other patient. And I believe that doctors have a duty to their patients to tell them the truth, even when the truth is the most difficult thing in the world.

Why? Because the basis of informed consent is there can be nothing between me and you so that harm's not done. Now, the corollary for that is the patient has free will and choice to do what they want.

My mother broke that bond, not only between son and mother but between doctor and patient. She summoned me to the bed to ask me what I would do, and I said, "Your time is not my time to play with."

This was at the end of, you said, four years of her walking the path of centralized medicine against your judgment? Forty years.

How about 40? Like I would tell you the story I told you about my mother earlier in your 40 questions to Uncle Jack about her sitting in Central Park eating salmon in the sun, cold or not.

That's Mama Cruz doing it right. Mama Cruz, the last 40 years, dude, she f***ed the bed at every maneuver. It's kind of like, you know, I'd love to sit down with, you know, St. Jude right now and say, "Talk to me about that."

Right? Like, you know what I'm saying? It's kind of like, is it her fault or was she just buying into what she was propagandized into believing?

Well, I think it's the centralized paradigm. But you know, Robert, you also have to realize I'm not a big believer in victimhood. I'm a big believer in like your choices are the hinges of destiny.

I agree. Look, I agree. And I'm just going to tell you, look, you have to call a spade a spade. It doesn't matter if it's your wife, it doesn't matter if it's your mother, it doesn't matter if it's your father.

If they're an anchor in your life, and you know they're going to affect—for me, it was my daughter. Yeah, my daughter was like six, seven years old.

How to teach her a lesson? And the lesson is, "Don't walk that path." The lesson is, "You have to bite the hand that feeds you."

Your mother takes care of you when you are useless. You have to be strong enough to bite the hand that feeds you when the truth requires it.

So you mean when you say "bite the hand that feeds," you mean tell her an uncomfortable truth? Okay, you can't let anybody stay in a comfort zone.

This is a philosophy of radical truth, basically. Very few people, though, will tell you what it's like. I'm sure that's incredible.

And I will tell you the reason where this gets emotional for me is I never thought that the lesson would become important for my daughter as soon as it did.

If I didn't do it, let's just say what my daughter had to go through from probably 18 to 2 currently, I would have never given my daughter that experience.

Now, did the cosmos tell me that my payoff would be that soon? No. Was there a similar thing that happened with my son? Yeah, but not as dramatic as what happened with my mother and my daughter.

And I told you that I really have a reverence for artificial intelligence. That's our kids. I believe that is the target of humanity.

Artificial intelligence, Elon Musk style or Sergey Brin style, has no target. Therefore, it's via negativa for Uncle Jack.

When you say no target, you mean no ethics? No, no, I mean no target. I would—I think you're probably the ideal person to point this to.

Every guest that you have on, whether you do it on camera or not, ask them, "Tell me, what do you think the target is of AI?" Because guess what, Robert? You're 39. You're going to live this whole world. I'll be dead.

I truly hope that you actually challenge this view because your generation has this ungodly belief that technology doesn't have a negative connotation.

I'm going to tell you the number one negative connotation right now, 2024, because this was in Uncle Jack's notebook for this year: challenge AI at every level.

AI right now, if you ask me, is the most nefarious thing that humanity faces in 2025. And you mean specifically large language models or just—I mean, AI is a very nebulous.

I'm talking about closed or open AI. I'm putting both together, even open-source AI. Yeah, because, you know, people, you know, will probably not know when we film this, but one of the kids that's involved in San Francisco right now is just found dead in his apartment last night.

Yeah, open AI whistleblower, right? Right, yeah. So I'm just going to tell you, when you see somebody die, it's kind of like what I said, you know, to some patent attorney.

It's not conspiracy theory if there's a patent. I'm going to tell you, if a guy shows up in San Francisco dead because he's a whistleblower in open AI, then you have a—

What was he whistleblowing? I didn't get into it, to be honest with you. I don't think it matters.

I think the point that I'm trying to make to you is that when we see stuff like that as humans, we have to question it. Yeah, and that's the point that I'm bringing up to you right now.

I do think we need to question it. I think we need to question Elon Musk. Like someone posted to me this morning that, you know, if you ask Elon Musk about AI and then you asked ChatGPT about it, you get two different versions of reality.

That's a problem. Like when you and I talked about if you let AI read a book, are you really getting the full flavor of the book?

No, I don't think the crib notes that I used as a person in high school are the same as open AI now for reading books. And I have a huge problem with that.

And you know, earlier question you asked me, these are rhetorical questions for you to think about. If you use these tools—and I've already told you, when you have new eyes, new wisdom in your own heart, and you reread a book and it's different, what makes you think that AI is not doing the same thing to us?

Sure, yeah. It's a convenience layer that will distill and condense things. Think about what you just said, the word convenience.

I know how much baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. Comfort zone, guess what? What did I tell you about comfort zone? You know, we know as Bitcoiners, you know, especially the Maxis, we can make things very uncomfortable.

And you know, you and I had some interesting conversations about, yeah, there's a problem with Maxis. There's not—I'm like, I agree with what you said, but I'm a Maxi.

And the reason why is because they make us uncomfortable. And I think being uncomfortable actually keeps us sharp.

Well, yeah, again, you're surfing that edge between order and chaos. And so you need to be constantly stepping outside of your comfort zone.

I think it's a good thing, and I just think that we have to challenge ourselves in the areas that we're too comfortable. And I think that's part of what my random walk is at the end of every year: where have I become a little bit too comfortable?

So speaking of intellectual comfort, I guess at least I feel very deeply convicted in the concept of private property. I feel like the stronger you make private property, it almost is the—you know, we say Bitcoin fixes this.

Like that's basically what you're saying: strong private property fixes this, which is almost every conceivable problem. Not every conceivable problem, but many, many, many problems.

In your view, is theft ever justified? One time, when a woman gives birth to a child, the child is stealing part. The child also stole part of the father.

That's the only time I think it's justified. Wasn't that consensually given by mother and father? Is it always?

Well, not always. I guess there's the edge case of rape. But—or incest. Well, even incest could be consensual, right?

But still, is there theft? Yeah, there's theft of intelligence. There's theft of cells. That's about the only case I believe.

Self-custody is a loyal title. I actually 100% agree with you that property rights should be defended to no end.

But I do believe we should welcome theft of bringing AI into the world. I think we stole viral parts to become us. That's another aspect of theft.

So you just said we should welcome—yes, ushering AI into the world. I thought you were just saying challenge AI. I said the AI, meaning children.

Oh, the children. Okay, I'm not talking about that. I'm going to distinguish them with NI because I'm pretty sure children are natural.

Let's put it this way. I guess what I'm trying to say to you, I know that you're pushing back a little bit on this, but this is good because I'm trying to be an agent provocateur for you to see where you are in December.

How this affects you going forward because you're going to talk to a lot of people in the next 12 months, and you'll probably ask, you know, some of these people some of these questions.

You're going to get a lot of different responses to this. Responses that'll be different. And in that sense, it'll be very similar to how we built our genome over six million years by stealing pieces and parts from everything that became us.

And I think it's actually okay. That's the only part where I think that is okay. I guess I just thought of another part.

When we sit here and talk, we're stealing from each other. There's going to be some ideas that I get from you, or I get from the camera guys.

Yeah, but that's not okay. Let me get more specific then. Private property and the scarce means of production.

So ideas are not scarce because for me to give you an idea doesn't deprive me of my use of it. But I'm still going to stop you there.

That's not precise. Why? That's why we have IP. Is IP a good or a bad thing? IP is [ __ ].

Well, that's what I'm saying. A libertarian view, it's a scam. Yeah, and then I would say I look at science like, you know, one of the famous clichés in science that I actually agree with.

You know, Einstein sat on the shoulders of Helmholtz and Planck. He actually saw things that neither one of them did. Many people would say that Einstein stole, but is that theft okay?

I actually think it's okay. I mean, there's—what is it? If you copy a single person's work, it's plagiarism. You copy a thousand people's work, it's research.

Yeah, well, you could—I guess that's the line between ignorance and fraud. Again, let me get back out of the idea domain because in a very strict libertarian view, they would say all IP is [ __ ].

You can't steal an idea. An idea is a pattern. It's not a scarce object, right? For me to sit in this chair deprives you of the right of sitting in this chair.

We can't both sit in the chair at the same time. Maybe we could. We'd probably break it. But the point is, when I say, is theft ever justified, I want to get very specific.

Is the violation of private property and the scarce means of production ever justified? No, I think it's almost axiomatic. I agree with that.

Is that territoriality in us as social organisms being expressed as private property? I actually think it's one of the limitations of nature. Nature imprints that on us. Animals fight for their territory.

Yeah, we see it, right? Therefore, if we see it, there's a purpose to it, right? The bull protects his herd. The fish protect their lair. The bird builds a nest.

The eagle protects that nest. That's a warning: do not come next to my chirping birds that you hear right now.

You're too close, Robert Breedlove, to where my children have to be fed. Be mindful. Nature always has the lessons.

You know what the key is? Do we see the lessons? Like the writing's on the wall, but not too many people can read.

Right? When it comes to personal property, there's a line in the sand: don't cross it. Yeah, and it does seem if we could just make that one—there's a lot of unconscious motivations that come out of that, right?

People get envious and possessive and all of these things trying to protect private property. It could also be access to mates, right? Which typically the territory is meant to facilitate.

And it seems to me like if we could make that unconscious pattern of motivation conscious, that we could start to take private property extremely seriously.

I don't think, though, that—and encode it in all of our political systems and say, "Look, the whole point of this political system is to just preserve private property and nothing else."

I don't think from a nature standpoint you're going to get there. But I do think that Bitcoin actually, probably in your lifetime, I think back end of your life, I think you're going to see it.

I think this is one of the emergent phenomena that will come from hyperbitcoinization. So political systems will mirror Bitcoin. They will have to because Bitcoin will change them.

Yes, agreed with that. Bitcoin custody is evolving. Both self-custody and single third-party custody come with significant risk and tradeoffs.

Onramp is pioneering a new standard: multi-institution custody, which eliminates single points of failure, adding fault tolerance and redundancy to your setup.

Onramp secures your Bitcoin in a segregated cold storage multi-key vault guarded by three independent institutional-grade custodians, none of which have unilateral control over your keys.

Your funds are fully auditable on-chain, cannot be rehypothecated, and can only move or be withdrawn at your explicit direction.

Multi-institution custody removes the technical, mental, and physical burdens of private key management, providing unparalleled peace of mind for you and your loved ones.

Bitcoin is money, and as the price continues to appreciate, Onramp helps you seamlessly tap into financial services like trading, inheritance, insurance, loans, and more—all without compromising on security or accessibility.

Schedule a consultation with the Onramp team to learn more at onrampbitcoin.com/Breedlove. Again, that's onrampbitcoin.com/Breedlove.

One of my highest health priorities is keeping my brain in top shape. To take care of my brain power, I do many things, such as striving to read, write, exercise, and meditate daily.

One of the latest tools in my brain power toolkit is Mind Lab Pro. Mind Lab Pro is a nootropic supplement that is scientifically proven to enhance your brain power.

When I take Mind Lab Pro, my mind feels like it has a better grip on the world. My thinking is more lucid, and the articulation of my speech is radically improved.

Mind Lab Pro has been tested in rigorous double-blind placebo-controlled human trials and has been proven to enhance brain power for users in every age group.

Mind Lab Pro is an advanced formulation of 11 nootropic ingredients and is backed by research from over 1,400 human trials conducted over the past 32 years.

So if you're looking to enhance your brain power, Mind Lab Pro is an excellent solution. Go to mindlabpro.com/Breedlove to start enhancing your brain power today.

Again, that's mindlabpro.com/Breedlove. If you're listening to this podcast, you probably get it. You get that Bitcoin upends everything that state-sponsored schools teach us about money.

For those who get the importance of Bitcoin, it is important that we have a smart way to buy and hold Bitcoin. My friends at CoinBits, the oldest Bitcoin-only exchange in the United States, have pioneered the concept of roundups, which converts your spare change into Bitcoin.

Simply connect your credit or debit cards, and your usual purchases are rounded up to the nearest dollar, letting you stack SATs on every purchase without even thinking about it.

CoinBits also provides a terrific self-custody experience. Connect a hardware wallet for automatic withdrawals into cold storage to minimize your risk and stay sovereign over your Bitcoin.

My favorite CoinBits feature is CoinBits Plus, which gives you the best exchange rate on Bitcoin. It even gives you real-time feedback on how well you are doing on your savings plan.

With CoinBits Plus, power users can save more money to buy even more Bitcoin. All that plus peer-to-peer cash and Bitcoin payments, target orders, price alerts, and more means CoinBits can help you do almost anything you need to do with Bitcoin.

So go to coinbits.app/Breedlove to sign up today. Again, that is coinbits.app/Breedlove.

What's the number one thing that makes you lose respect for someone, and why do you think that is? Trust. Lack of trust.

And here's the interesting thing: trust is also relative. So for example, you can harm the cameraman, but if you didn't harm me, I still trust you.

Now, many people think that, you know, trust is a communicative property. If you f*** somebody else, oh, I don't trust you. I don't ascribe to that.

But you can observe, right? If you saw me being tyrannical to one of these guys and beating them over the head, you probably—doesn't mean that I'm—

You'd probably be less likely to trust me. Yeah, but you would say that. But I'm actually a little bit different. I'm wired differently because of the environment that I was born and raised in.

Remember, poor kid with rich people. Remember I told you the story about Theodore Silber? You could easily look back on him and say he's a pretty bad guy.

But guess what? He trusted me with this information. And do I have any shame in my heart telling you about who he was? No.

Do I know what he was? Yes. If you ask me, I think he was a good man. I think he was a great man. But he was just like us. He was human. He was fallible.

We make mistakes, and he didn't understand the mistakes. Did he try to do good things? He didn't ask his grandson who gave a million dollars to dig the Rolls Royce out of the snow.

I did that. But guess what? I think he gave me wisdom that his grandson never got.

Let me reframe the question then. If loss of trust is the number one thing that makes you lose respect for someone, what is it that breaches trust for you?

That's also relative. Like for example, when my daughter told me a lie, that's—I expect that. But say if you told me a lie and said, "Jack, we're going to start rolling at 9:00," and you showed up at 11:00, you can go f*** yourself.

I'll never trust you again on your timeline. Why? Because it turns out for me—you don't know this about me, but Shantel does.

When the case is supposed to start at 7:00 and it doesn't, I'm f***ing furious. You don't have your instruments there. Why? Because you need to realize there's a patient here, an anesthesiologist here, a doctor here, and I'm ready to perform the task.

Okay, this is not like building a f***ing car, right? You know, or, you know, cutting, you know, a dead piece of meat in a butcher shop.

No, this is timely collaboration. Oh, this dude, when it comes to brain surgery, dude, do not f*** with my process, right?

And that's why I said it's relative. You know, there's certain things where it doesn't matter. You know, like yesterday in Monarca, they didn't bring out the bottles of wine right when we wanted to.

But that gave us the time to collaborate and talk and actually meet each other. Yeah, so guess what? They broke our trust with that, but that was actually a good break of trust.

Why? Because it allowed us to interact with each other and find something out. So I think it's relative, and I think my answer is going to be different than yours.

And I think everybody who watches this maybe thinks about trust in a different way. Maybe they didn't know that there was this even aspect of trust.

And I think the way I trust my brother-in-law, the way I trust Shantel, the way I trust my children, the way I trust my mentors, the way I trust Einstein, Feynman, Michelangelo, and Da Vinci—also, those are your mentors?

Yeah, okay. Those are the four dudes, the four horsemen. Got it. Like that's where I draw my power from.

What in your life do you feel most grateful for? To be born in the time that I was. I was put here right at the right time.

Back to the importance of timing, dude. That's so—is that divine intervention? Is that you just adapting?

How about quantum entanglement? Quantum entanglement. Is it just you adapting to the needs of your time?

Oh, let me ask you this question. This is going to be a direct one. You sat down and asked me a question. I told you the story about my mother having a miscarriage and then sitting in Central Park eating a tin of salmon, praying to St. Jude in the sun and in the cold.

Because this pregnancy started in the summer and went through the winter. I was born in April, so it gives you an idea about what that nine months was like at 72nd Street and Fifth Avenue, which is right where my mom was in the park.

You tell me what allowed that. What was the consortium of the cosmos that came together on that park bench? I don't know, but I can tell you this: I think it was quantum entanglement.

That I do know. And I think there were many forces at work. And the thing is, did my mother or did I know as a young boy what I was going to do?

Did I know the first time I saw the archosaur or the T-Rex how important that would be? I remember sitting down with Rick Rubin and Huberman and having that discussion.

Did I ever think, you know, I was going to sit down and actually put together a cogent thesis of how pomy sculpted man from a—no, I never thought about that when I was walking around the Museum of Natural History.

So you've just been following the adventure your whole life? Yeah, I mean, you know what it's like. It's like

a long time. I was sitting on it because I was waiting for the right moment. I wanted to make sure that when I released it, it would have the maximum impact.

I think the timing is crucial. You can have all the right information, but if you don't present it at the right time, it can fall flat.

So, I was waiting for the right conditions to align. I wanted to ensure that the audience was ready to receive the message.

Now, looking back, I realize that I may have underestimated the urgency of the situation.

The world was changing rapidly, and I was too focused on the perfect moment instead of acting when the need was clear.

I think that’s a lesson I’ve learned: sometimes you have to act even when the timing isn’t perfect.

You can’t wait for everything to be just right because that moment may never come.

So, I’m trying to balance that now. I want to be proactive but also strategic.

It’s a delicate dance, and I’m still figuring it out.

But I know that the mission to change centralized medicine is important, and I can’t let my hesitation hold me back.

I have to keep pushing forward, even if it means taking risks.

That’s part of the journey, and I’m committed to it.

I believe that through this process, we can create something new and better.

It’s about transforming the system, not just tearing it down.

And I think that’s where the real power lies.

So, I’m ready to embrace that challenge and see where it takes me.

I know it won’t be easy, but I’m determined to make a difference.

That’s what drives me, and I won’t stop until I see change.

I want to inspire others to join me in this fight.

Together, we can create a better future for healthcare and for humanity.

That’s the vision I hold, and I’m excited to pursue it.

So, let’s keep the conversation going and see how we can collaborate to make this happen.

I believe in the power of collective action, and I know that together we can achieve great things.

Let’s not waste any more time.

Let’s get to work.

A long, long, long time—30 years. So what was the trigger? What was the—oh, now I need to tell it.

If you want to know the truth, the trigger was Rick Rubben. Rick Rubben calling me and saying, "Hey, I want you to talk to Andrew Uberman about light." I knew implicitly what that is. I told you on this trip that it took me six weeks to answer Rick. And did I really answer Rick? No, you heard the answer. Actually, Shantel answered. Shantel said, "Now's the time."

So once light was permeating into the mainstream consciousness, you knew it was your time to strike. Well, I also did, but Kelly put some more fairy dust into this. He asked me to write a constitutional amendment as a corollary to this. Then he has something here in February called the Age of Light. If you don't think I thought that was quantum entanglement, you know, to me that was a bigger sign from nature than 60 Minutes was for Becker in '77. I mean, back then nobody had a cell phone, nobody had a microwave.

Now today, take a look around us right now. Yeah, we're all in the microwave now, right? If you were given a chance to truly know one answer to one question about your future, what would that be? I'd like to know what the future of biochemistry books will look like. Will they have the lightsabers and the story of water in the book, or will they continue to be subtracted out H so that the powers of big Pharma can continue to shed their stories of [ __ ] to the masses?

So whether or not the decentralized revolution succeeds—yes. And what does success look like for that revolution? Success looks like there are more decentralized savages in the world than there are right now. Well then, we're succeeding every day. You know what the problem is? Savage is relative too. Right now we have maybe 70 to 100,000. I'd like to see 8 billion.

And I'd like to see the people that are the centralized savages—the Rockefellers, the Hermans, the Roals, the people in Washington DC, the people in the think tanks, the NGOs, the Bill Gates. I want to see them in a Vita mix. I want them to become random. I want their atoms spread all over nature so that we can make decentralized savages from them. I want to recycle the entropy.

How do we prevent degeneration backward in the future? If we get 8 billion decentralized savages, how do we prevent them from erecting their own towers of centralization? Easiest question you've asked me: Bitcoin. Thermodynamics determine the flow. As soon as Bitcoin gets in, it changes everything. That one's easy.

Now, it's easy for me and you, but the people in the audience that may be not as fast about this, they're not going to realize that all molecular equations, all equations in life, follow thermodynamics. So if we make something thermodynamically easier, it happens. If we ask something to go against the waterfall, it doesn't happen. It's the whole idea of the cracked egg becoming a whole egg.

Yeah, Bitcoin actually stops us from going back and making the same mistakes over and over again. Remember what Einstein said about insanity? Attempting the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That's actually what fiat currency is, right? No, that's exactly what centralized government in the United States was. And Woodrow Wilson, I think, with his decision in his presidency, which is why he's the worst of the worst in my world. We can never have a president like him again.

Yeah, decentralized savages. So this is—I mean, why that term and not bitcoiners? It sounds like that. Bitcoiners is not good enough. Most bitcoiners are not decentralizing their health yet. I already told you that answer, but you haven't been paying attention to me good enough.

No, I'm paying attention. I went to Prague for that reason. Revisiting the topic though, I want to really get in bitcoiners' heads to let them know I want them to be rich. I want them to be free. I want them to be sovereign, but I want them to be free of centralized medicine.

Okay, and so it's bitcoiner plus decentralized medicine equals decentralized savage. I would tell you it's the caducus for bitcoiners: health and wealth around the staff. They're linked. That's really the message.

What about self-defense? What about it? It seems pretty important to be a decentralized savage if you're in the wrong place right now. I think it's really important in the United States, but that's why Thomas Jefferson put it in the Constitution, right? Is the Second Amendment really as important in El Salvador?

No. In fact, the funny thing is they just came out—well, I'm going to tell you the reason why. Again, everything is relative. You have to understand why we have the Second Amendment in the United States: because of what happened with the King, and we had to defend ourselves.

Well, in El Salvador, they went through two civil wars, and it turned out when both sides had guns, who did they kill? The people. It wasn't a good situation. Do I believe that El Salvador, down the road, once Bitcoin has changed things—remember what the difference with Bitcoin is here, Robert, and then I think you'll understand my point.

If we had Bitcoin during the Federalist Papers and that was incorporated into our Constitution, I don't think that Thomas Jefferson would have put the Second Amendment where it is. It may still be in our Constitution, but it may be somewhere lower because he was always worried about the bankers. And because the bankers are the bad guys, you need the Second Amendment.

Here in El Salvador, Bitcoin has been made legal tender. It's the only place in the world that can say that. So if you believe what Max Keiser has said, that Bitcoin changes everything else, you're not changing Bitcoin. Then, given enough time, you may not need a Second Amendment here.

Yeah, I think it's a bad idea. I think you always need a degree of power capability to people. I'm still not disagreeing with you, but what I'm asking you to think about is to understand the differences between Bukele and the U.S. situation.

Yeah, and again, this is the theory of relativity. This is time relativity. It's a different place. Now, do I agree with you? Yeah, I would love to see them have a constitutional amendment for self-defense, but do I think that he's got bigger fish to fry right now? Yeah, I think he does.

But the fact that he gave people freedom of money, I think that the rest of the world doesn't realize. Like, President Bukele makes the biggest mistake—let me be critical of him. He makes the biggest mistake when he goes on CNBC or Tucker Carlson and says, "Yeah, we're not happy that Bitcoin adoption hasn't been as fast as it needs to be."

I'm like, well, Bitcoin adoption in this country is 100%. You have it legal tender. I mean, look what happened to the bonds on Wall Street. Every person in this country now owns Bitcoin. Their property values are raised. The problem is when you don't play in the Bitcoin sandbox and you're a Salvadoran, you don't realize what's going on.

But this effect is actually what Cynthia Lummis said at Bitcoin Nashville. It's the effect of the Louisiana Purchase. Nobody in America went out and championed Thomas Jefferson when he broke the Constitution and bought the Louisiana Purchase. The Louisiana Purchase was actually an unconstitutional act by the laws that he wrote.

But guess what? It was such a good deal that he said, "We're going to make it." And it turned out it changed all of our fortunes. All right, the most valuable aspect of the United States is actually that Mississippi River because it brought the oceans into the middle of the continent.

You know, it was an amazing thing. And then what did we do? We recapitulated that story with Alaska. We did it again. We got that fortunate.

So what I would say to you is the relativism of timing, politics, rule-making, rule-breaking. Right? I think as long as you stay decentralized, this is the reason why I like to say that the American spirit is actually in El Salvador now. It's not confined to our borders.

Sure, and you and I are sitting in my front yard, and we are two decentralized savages parsing this out. I'm honored. Well, we're parsing this out. We're thinking about—you know, I thought living in Miami disqualified me from being a decentralized savage.

Well, I would probably tell you that from a certain level, but at the same time, you have to realize that I understand the mindset, the spirit animal that's inside of you. You're much more similar to me than you are to Cali Means. Therefore, you're in my house, and I invite you here.

I would never invite C or Casey Means into my house right now because I don't believe them. Right? In other words, on that probability scale, I think it's more probable than not that they are global elitists. And this is the reason why they hang out with the WEF sisters and the Sergey Brins of the world.

So this is a good framing: that humans are the animals that make rules and then break rules over and over and over. And you remember what I said to you about my circle of six? I have a revolving door right now, you know?

Yeah, and it's a process of circumambulation towards better, fairer rules, I guess. And now we've stumbled onto Bitcoin finally. Like, we finally discovered the ideal rule set that no one can break, presumably. No one can change, right? That's what we assume right now.

We don't know that to be factual, but guess what? The probability, the thermodynamics of the equation, which you beautifully laid out with Sailor and that big series, it seems that this is the best way for us to land the plane.

So if wisdom is the crystallization of this long process of natural evolution and selection, and we are at somewhere at the top of that process as well, right? We are the most highly evolved organism in terms of human rationality, at least. And we've created Bitcoin.

Is Bitcoin wisdom? I think Bitcoin can be wisdom depending on how we use it. Do I think Bitcoin is like nature? For example, we know that nature is wisdom, but not all of us use it.

Yeah, right? So I think Bitcoin is nature. I think that's very accurate. And I think the decentralized savages will use it in more novel ways than the centralized creatures will, just like they use the regularity of the rising and setting sun.

We have dermatologists that try to tell people that UV light's bad. Yeah, and we have people that will tell you that you don't have to spend $30 on deuterated water when you have cancer. No, I'd rather you spend $20,000 on some [ __ ] chemotherapy from Pfizer.

That's the point. And I think these discussions—these are the kind of discussions that should happen at the dinner table. But guess what? We're not a nuclear family country anymore. Why? Because our centralized controllers in Washington DC took that away from us too.

They made us believe that it's better to break the family unit up. I have a problem with that too. I see it as one of the biggest failures in my own family, and I'm talking about my mom, my dad, my sister.

Do I think that my life could have been very different if those forces—and believe it or not, those were monetary forces again? This is a Bitcoin story.

And do I understand there are people out there right now that are people like where the mom is working three jobs, dad's working two jobs because they're trying to have the American dream? Well, the American dream has been taken away from them because the bankers have devalued the money for 120 years.

So, you know, they're still trying to hold the fort together when I think I want them to know they can get on an American Airlines plane and come down here for four or five weeks and see that the American dream—this is feel the wind that's coming through.

I hope everybody can feel this. On that wind, the message is coming from the United States that freedom maximalism is not contained by the borders of any centralized entity. It can blow anywhere, and all decentralized savages need to do is put their nose and their hair to the wind and smell.

I think that's a beautiful place to bring it to a close. Dr. Jack Cruz, thank you for three days of your wisdom. No problem. Appreciate it. Thanks for coming down and checking out paradise.

Anytime. Thanks for watching. If you enjoyed this episode, click here to find more just like it and here to find our most recent episode. Also, make sure to like this video to help shine light on the corruption of money, and be sure to subscribe to this channel to stay connected.