snarkyboojum/gist:d8fc6f19f3126e49cf00a4d5c3942efa

## gistfile1.txt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEFHRy1mfGw

4:17 Peter asks how everyone can win. Richard compared expected Hex growth (10,000x in USD in < 2.5 years) with Bitcoin growth since it was worth 1 penny (750,000x)
Bitcoin was designed to do larger than that.

Peter goes back to "How does everyone win", and accuses Richard of interrupting when Richard points out that he doesn't claim everyone will win in crypto.

6:29 Not everyone is going to win. Lots of people are going to win. Price discovery is hard.

Peter asks what percentage of people will lose. Richard compares to other charts, e.g. Bitcoin 85% drops three times over its price history. People will overvalue it and there will be a correction.

Peter doesn't want to know how Richard has programmed it to avoid this. Peter goes back to character analysis "you debate well". Feels like ad hominem.

Richard asks Peter to explain his scams in the past. Peter avoids answering. He doesn't know.

4 million in ETH went to a single address. Peter asks who owns the keys. Comparison to Satoshi.
Every single crypto gives advantage to early adopters. Satoshi stealth mined, and owns a large share.
Richard makes a case that the same thing is true for Hex, but he's not anonymous.
This doesn't answer the question about the design where eth is being sent to

Plus token ponzi? Richard called this out (apparently)?

Richard doesn't want anyone to know. If you promise returns, you are holding a security. Then you could be regulated, and could end up in prison if you don't operate according to those regulations?
Peter says "you're definitely going to end up in jail" and that he'd be laughing. Nice guy.

Violate the Howey law, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp

Peter says people are going to lose money because of him. (What about any other security, share, crypto that causes people to lose money?). Peter keeps calling him a scammer. It's a little annoying. Richard asks him to use a thesaurus. Peter then calls him a wanker, prick, scammer, criminal.

Richard wants to talk about how scams work and help people to avoid them.

Richard Heart 9 reasons why Bitcoin will always be better than Ethereum (Google it).

Peter claims Hex is *only* designed as a pump and dump. Claims that Hex is a ponzi scheme. Peter claims that it's a scam, but can't explain why.

Peter mentions that privacy is important. But people don't think it's important enough.
	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEFHRy1mfGw

	4:17 Peter asks how everyone can win. Richard compared expected Hex growth (10,000x in USD in < 2.5 years) with Bitcoin growth since it was worth 1 penny (750,000x)
	Bitcoin was designed to do larger than that.

	Peter goes back to "How does everyone win", and accuses Richard of interrupting when Richard points out that he doesn't claim everyone will win in crypto.

	6:29 Not everyone is going to win. Lots of people are going to win. Price discovery is hard.

	Peter asks what percentage of people will lose. Richard compares to other charts, e.g. Bitcoin 85% drops three times over its price history. People will overvalue it and there will be a correction.

	Peter doesn't want to know how Richard has programmed it to avoid this. Peter goes back to character analysis "you debate well". Feels like ad hominem.

	Richard asks Peter to explain his scams in the past. Peter avoids answering. He doesn't know.

	4 million in ETH went to a single address. Peter asks who owns the keys. Comparison to Satoshi.
	Every single crypto gives advantage to early adopters. Satoshi stealth mined, and owns a large share.
	Richard makes a case that the same thing is true for Hex, but he's not anonymous.
	This doesn't answer the question about the design where eth is being sent to

	Plus token ponzi? Richard called this out (apparently)?

	Richard doesn't want anyone to know. If you promise returns, you are holding a security. Then you could be regulated, and could end up in prison if you don't operate according to those regulations?
	Peter says "you're definitely going to end up in jail" and that he'd be laughing. Nice guy.

	Violate the Howey law, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp

	Peter says people are going to lose money because of him. (What about any other security, share, crypto that causes people to lose money?). Peter keeps calling him a scammer. It's a little annoying. Richard asks him to use a thesaurus. Peter then calls him a wanker, prick, scammer, criminal.

	Richard wants to talk about how scams work and help people to avoid them.

	Richard Heart 9 reasons why Bitcoin will always be better than Ethereum (Google it).

	Peter claims Hex is only designed as a pump and dump. Claims that Hex is a ponzi scheme. Peter claims that it's a scam, but can't explain why.

	Peter mentions that privacy is important. But people don't think it's important enough.