Anons as usual need to use their wrinkled brains to process news such as this!
Firstly, note that the authority in this bill is against "financial institutions", including crypto exchanges.
Secondly, note that crypto exchanges are the very antithesis to the concept of crypto. Lets take a moment to explore why.
Ownership
Crypto allows everyone to own their own assets with no intermediary. You do not need permission from anyone to access your assets, all you need is the private key.
When you have an account on a crypto exchange such as coinbase, you do not own your crypto. The crypto is stored in a wallet (custodial wallet) whose private keys are held by the exchange. If that exchange were to shutdown tomorrow, you would lose all your holdings. This happens periodically when they claim they got hacked and lost hundreds of millions of crypto.
Privacy
One of the allure of crypto is that you can make sure your transactions are private. Everyone can see the transactions on the blockchain, but it's very hard for someone to know it's yours. If a bank, for example, wants to ban someone they cant just shut off your ability to transact in crypto
However with a crypto exchange and the KYC rules (know your customer), they know exactly who each person is and with a little algorithm they can get a good idea of who is doing what. They can freeze your account or stop your transactions. They can tell the feds how much money you are spending and to which wallets its flowing.
Manipulation
Cryptos are predicated on the notion that it is distributed and not easily manipulable by a central authority. This is technically not true. Bitcoin, for instance, can be manipulated if someone takes control of 51% of the computing power, or someone has access to quantum computers that can break the encryption algorithms. Thats a different issue.
Exchanges bring in a whole new level of manipulation. Since people deposit their crypto with the exchange, they dont even need to make sure that crypto really exists. Only when you withdraw it do they have to send you real crypto. This is a lot like Goldman Sachs creating fake share certificates for shorting OR Fed printing free money. This is the kind of control banks really love.
So what do I think is happening here? 5D chess as usual.
The [DS] is thinking that they can use this bill to shutdown all exchanges who dont play ball with them, and finally bring all crypto exchanges under their trusted Banks, so that they can control crypto exactly the same way they control the current monetary system.
However the Whitehats can use this to shutdown all financial institutes, and move to a truly de-fi platform where everything is distributed, and there are no exchanges. Everyone can use the crypto thats picked as the "people's currency" with no one ever being able to control them.
I haven't used Gemini, but as far as I can tell its just another exchange just like all others, and if you have your crypto held by them then you dont own it and you can lose it anytime.
You can create a software wallet OR a purchase hardware wallet to keep your crypto secure.
Software wallet like Exodus is free and supports most blockchains. You can run it on your desktop or your mobile. I suggest running it on a device thats dedicated to holding your crypto that is not used to download a lot of stuff and that you dont carry around. Make sure to create backup and write down the pass phrase and keep it somewhere safe.
You can also use hardware wallets like Ledger and Trezr. They are expensive, but for a tech novice it is the best way to keep crypto secure.
However if you are tech savvy (even if you dont know too much about crypto), I suggest investing a little time to learn how these wallets work, and you can install a software wallet thats as secure as the hardware wallets, but not worry about these hardware wallets having some bugs preinstalled (I wont rule that out!)
You're missing one very important aspect of the hardware wallet: transactions are signed on the device and not on the computer/endpoint like a software wallet.
Your private keys never get touched, written, displayed, put on RAM/disk, etc with a hardware device.
Also, Metamask which is a popular extension for use with DeFi has the ability to integrate with hardware wallets so you get the best of both worlds.
Hardware wallets are not for 'novices' as you suggest, they are for people who are truly serious about their security.
Your private keys never get touched, written, displayed, put on RAM/disk, etc with a hardware device.
Except, you are trusting these startup companies did not do any tampering with their hardware like a backdoor for instance. If I was building a company like that, I would be very very very tempted to "accidentally" leave a small debugging backdoor for someday in future.
Personally this is what I do, which I consider to be the most secure way to save your crypto. I wrote a small script on my macbook from early 2000s that I dont use for anything else. This script generated the addresses and the corresponding BIP passphrase, and displayed the address on screen. I transferred the crypto I am hodling to these addresses. This wallet exists only on a couple pieces of paper as BIP phrase and nowhere else. Far far more secure than a hardware wallet which you dont know what is really inside it.
I would have to argue with you on that. A software wallet is just not going to be as secure as a Trezor or Ledger (personally I like Trezor more because they require no identifying information for making a wallet on Trezor, Ledger asks for an email address). Even if you are tech savvy enough to program your own software wallet, you may leave vulnerabilities in your software and you you have to keep the software up to date with upgrades happening on your cryptocurrencies.
These hardware wallets have been audited several times by prominent tech companies. The only way to take someones funds on a hardware wallet is to physically take their hardware wallet and computer they use to make transactions (unless they know the hardware wallet seed words which would never be typed in on a computer in the first place).
People think of wallets as active entities. They are literally a public and private key pair and a mneumonic. Once you send your cryptos to that address, it does not have to exist anywhere digitally.
My friend uses Nano ledger and got an email that all their customer data was recently compromised. Of course it does not compromise the device itself, but does not give me the warm and fuzzy feeling such a company should be oozing.
Do I think you will lose your crypto you stored on Nano Ledger if you safeguarded the device? Highly unlikely. However, it's not a zero probability. I wont rule out the 0.1 % chance that there is a backdoor in the device.
As for Monero - I know that its one of the very few cryptos that guarantee complete anonymity. For me this raises the curiosity to understand how this works from a blockchain point of view. If the details of which address owns how much crypto is not stored in the blockchain for everyone to see, how does it work? Been too lazy to do the research.
I vaguely remember the origins of Monero connected to some Globalists - but I might be wrong. I know one of Dorsey's buddy boys (Alex Gladstein) was pushing Monero at one point, and that makes me wary as well.
Simple answer - I havent done the full research and I havent bought any Monero.
It's owned by the Winkelvoss twins (the ones Zuckerburg fucked over for making Facebook). It's been around for awhile and is very well established. However, you don't own your crypto if it's not in your own personal wallet. Get your crypto off of the exchange so you don't have to tell others down the line "yeah I lost all my crypto from an Exchange". The only time you should ever have your crypto on an exchange is if you want to make a trade right then and there. After you make the trade it should be moved off immediately.
Everyone can use the crypto thats picked as the "people's currency" with no one ever being able to control them.
Any currency that has no asset backing is not a currency, its a failed economy waiting to happen. The blockchain technology and cryptocurrency medium of exchange are only half of the fix. There must also be an infrastructure in place to exchange that currency with the real asset that backs it. Anything else causes an economy based on a currency that is based on faith.
Any currency based on faith fails when faith fails. Faith fails as soon as someone wants it to fail. It is trivial to make faith fail. If it isn't an asset, it isn't an asset.
Also, any economy that doesn't have in place market places for barter will also fail. A single standard medium of exchange (or even a few) can be horded. If the only means by which people make exchanges (perform normal economic actions) can be horded, then economies can be manipulated.
The only possible free market, as far as I can see, is one which has many assets linked to crypto. For example, all stocks can be put on crypto. Then if you need bread, and you have no "silver crypto" or "gold crypto" you can just trade 1/100th of your TMTG stock, or GME stock, or whatever, and buy some bread. Easypeasyjapanesey.
We have all the tech to create such a free market. No where in there can a non asset backed crypto fit and be a good thing.
Any currency that has no asset backing is not a currency, its a failed economy waiting to happen.
I agree for the most part, but technically you can issue currency based on productivity without causing inflation. They did this in 1930s Germany with MEFO (I might be getting the acronym wrong, but its the German name for national metal works) notes, where the metal works get an order placed and the bank issues a note covering the value of that order. This was the best proof that currency could be backed by real asset or real productivity.
The blockchain technology and cryptocurrency medium of exchange are only half of the fix.
yes, blockchain ensures the system is tamperproof and not centrally controlled. But the assets on the blockchain need to represent something of value.
Any currency based on faith fails when faith fails.
The other side of the coin is, too much faith gives too much power to those who dont deserve the faith. Like the current system. Too much faith is as bad (or worse) than too little faith.
Also, any economy that doesn't have in place market places for barter will also fail. A single standard medium of exchange (or even a few) can be horded.
I would go further and say in a perfect world you also need local crypto currencies. Every community needs to issue their own currency backed by the assets and productivity of their local community members. All these currencies must be tradable. The productivity of a community establishes the value of its currency by market pricing. This system is like what Titanic was supposed to be. Compartmentalisation of failure. Even if a bunch community currencies were taken over and manipulated, it wont bring down the whole system and market pricing will signal the currencies in distress.
I honestly think we need a lot more discussion of the post awakening currency system.
Then if you need bread, and you have no "silver crypto" or "gold crypto" you can just trade 1/100th of your TMTG stock, or GME stock, or whatever, and buy some bread
I would starve but I wont part with my TMTG or GME stock lol, but yeah this is an interesting concept. Once assets (stocks included) are featured on the crypto, sky is the limit. Everything is liquid, nothing can be tampered, life is beautiful.
as units redeemable for computation on the network
The cryptos represent an amount of computation that has been "burnt" to add the entry to the ledger, but it does not represent something of value, as in an amount of computation that I can actually use.
Theta is actually an exception. Theta guarantees the availability of computational power for you to use (something of value), and not just computation that was burnt in creating that coin.
A global supercomputer accessible to anyone; that charges you fairly for resources depending on the applications you run.
I am all for a supercomputer thats available for everyone to run what they want, but will this control the world's currency? Is so, its an entirely different question.
you can issue currency based on productivity without causing inflation.
Any currency based on the future labor of people is called indenture. I suggest we don't do that. That is what we currently have. The reason we have inflation is not because its backed by our future labor, but because without injections into the system it would fail because some of it is constantly being taken out in interest.
It's a fair bit more complicated than that, and has a lot to do with what happens when money is taken out of the system (see the Great Depression). The point is, our current system is exactly this, backed by our future labor, and inflation is not based on that aspect of it.
Too much faith is as bad (or worse) than too little faith.
I suggest we need a no faith system. Assets are not faith based. There is no faith in there. You either need (or want) silver or you don't. It doesn't matter if its a medium of exchange, it has value all by itself. It is used for all sorts of things, including as a primary form of adornment for god knows how many thousands of years because it is pretty, malleable, and has numerous other qualities that are unique. It has value, all by itself. Zero faith, tons of faith, it doesn't matter.
Every community needs to issue their own currency backed by the assets and productivity of their local community members.
Sweet JESUS. You are going to give me a heart attack. I can't wait to release my report so that people can see the real history of economies. I will repeat myself. Any system that uses as a medium of exchange for barter the future labor of people is called slavery.
It also is something that doesn't exist, i.e. it's just a worthless currency, not backed by an asset. Banking on the future fails when the future doesn't live up to expectations. For an example, see the Federal Reserve Note in a few months (hopefully).
I honestly think we need a lot more discussion of the post awakening currency system.
For sure. I have a ton written up as a starting point for debate.
Everything is liquid, nothing can be tampered, life is beautiful.
Exactly. Everything is liquid, everything is solid. Its the perfect cup of ice water!
but because without injections into the system it would fail because some of it is constantly being taken out in interest.
The fact someone else is issuing currency backed by your productivity and charging interest on that - this is what makes it slavery. That doesn't mean currency backed by productivity is slavery. We can explore this further.
If I asked you to give a loaf of bread and in return I would fix your computer - thats barter.
If I gave you a piece of paper that said "I will fix your computer" and you gave be the loaf of bread, and 2 days later you gave me back the piece of paper and asked me to fix the computer, which I did - thats still barter.
There is no slavery here. I am bartering the resource I control (my productivity) for my own gains.
Janet Yellen is not bartering my productivity to do female studies in Pakistan and forcing me to pay interest on that. That is the difference between the two systems.
There is a downfall you can argue about my proposal. What if I went and issued a million people and accumulated million loafs of bread, and obviously never fixed event he fraction of their computers? Well the answer is, as I start flooding the market with my currency, its value drops and I would be lucky to get a crumb of bread after issuing, say, a 1000 pieces of paper. So the market will make sure to keep you honest.
The real problem with this system is, whenever you accept someone's currency you have to be able to write it off just in case that person, say, dies, gets disabled, goes to prison etc. That is why, instead of individuals issuing currency it has to be at community level, but there is a lot to be discussed there and risks acknowledged.
No system is risk free.
Lets take the idea of "asset backed currency". Lets say we issue currency based on gold and silver. What happens if:
A deposit of 1000 times the entire gold int he world is discovered?
Population grows so fast and the gold and silver supplies cannot keep up?
I would actually argue that "asset backed" only works if you have faith that the whole world will value those assets the same way for a long time. Its not a zero faith system.
No matter how you cut it, you have to trust something. By issuing currencies at community level (or individual level if it can be managed) and making it asset + productivity backed, you are spreading the risk of this "trust" over a large area. The entire civilisation has to collapse for this system to fail.
I dont know how much I trust that this is under whitehat control, boy I hope I'm wrong but we need diggers for this info definitely and the people that aren't concerned... didn't watch the video or dont understand what's happening
Anons as usual need to use their wrinkled brains to process news such as this!
Firstly, note that the authority in this bill is against "financial institutions", including crypto exchanges.
Secondly, note that crypto exchanges are the very antithesis to the concept of crypto. Lets take a moment to explore why.
Ownership
Crypto allows everyone to own their own assets with no intermediary. You do not need permission from anyone to access your assets, all you need is the private key.
When you have an account on a crypto exchange such as coinbase, you do not own your crypto. The crypto is stored in a wallet (custodial wallet) whose private keys are held by the exchange. If that exchange were to shutdown tomorrow, you would lose all your holdings. This happens periodically when they claim they got hacked and lost hundreds of millions of crypto.
Privacy
One of the allure of crypto is that you can make sure your transactions are private. Everyone can see the transactions on the blockchain, but it's very hard for someone to know it's yours. If a bank, for example, wants to ban someone they cant just shut off your ability to transact in crypto
However with a crypto exchange and the KYC rules (know your customer), they know exactly who each person is and with a little algorithm they can get a good idea of who is doing what. They can freeze your account or stop your transactions. They can tell the feds how much money you are spending and to which wallets its flowing.
Manipulation
Cryptos are predicated on the notion that it is distributed and not easily manipulable by a central authority. This is technically not true. Bitcoin, for instance, can be manipulated if someone takes control of 51% of the computing power, or someone has access to quantum computers that can break the encryption algorithms. Thats a different issue.
Exchanges bring in a whole new level of manipulation. Since people deposit their crypto with the exchange, they dont even need to make sure that crypto really exists. Only when you withdraw it do they have to send you real crypto. This is a lot like Goldman Sachs creating fake share certificates for shorting OR Fed printing free money. This is the kind of control banks really love.
So what do I think is happening here? 5D chess as usual.
The [DS] is thinking that they can use this bill to shutdown all exchanges who dont play ball with them, and finally bring all crypto exchanges under their trusted Banks, so that they can control crypto exactly the same way they control the current monetary system.
However the Whitehats can use this to shutdown all financial institutes, and move to a truly de-fi platform where everything is distributed, and there are no exchanges. Everyone can use the crypto thats picked as the "people's currency" with no one ever being able to control them.
Is Gemini safe? Or how do I get my crypto secure?
I haven't used Gemini, but as far as I can tell its just another exchange just like all others, and if you have your crypto held by them then you dont own it and you can lose it anytime.
You can create a software wallet OR a purchase hardware wallet to keep your crypto secure.
Software wallet like Exodus is free and supports most blockchains. You can run it on your desktop or your mobile. I suggest running it on a device thats dedicated to holding your crypto that is not used to download a lot of stuff and that you dont carry around. Make sure to create backup and write down the pass phrase and keep it somewhere safe.
You can also use hardware wallets like Ledger and Trezr. They are expensive, but for a tech novice it is the best way to keep crypto secure.
However if you are tech savvy (even if you dont know too much about crypto), I suggest investing a little time to learn how these wallets work, and you can install a software wallet thats as secure as the hardware wallets, but not worry about these hardware wallets having some bugs preinstalled (I wont rule that out!)
You're missing one very important aspect of the hardware wallet: transactions are signed on the device and not on the computer/endpoint like a software wallet.
Your private keys never get touched, written, displayed, put on RAM/disk, etc with a hardware device.
Also, Metamask which is a popular extension for use with DeFi has the ability to integrate with hardware wallets so you get the best of both worlds.
Hardware wallets are not for 'novices' as you suggest, they are for people who are truly serious about their security.
Except, you are trusting these startup companies did not do any tampering with their hardware like a backdoor for instance. If I was building a company like that, I would be very very very tempted to "accidentally" leave a small debugging backdoor for someday in future.
Personally this is what I do, which I consider to be the most secure way to save your crypto. I wrote a small script on my macbook from early 2000s that I dont use for anything else. This script generated the addresses and the corresponding BIP passphrase, and displayed the address on screen. I transferred the crypto I am hodling to these addresses. This wallet exists only on a couple pieces of paper as BIP phrase and nowhere else. Far far more secure than a hardware wallet which you dont know what is really inside it.
I would have to argue with you on that. A software wallet is just not going to be as secure as a Trezor or Ledger (personally I like Trezor more because they require no identifying information for making a wallet on Trezor, Ledger asks for an email address). Even if you are tech savvy enough to program your own software wallet, you may leave vulnerabilities in your software and you you have to keep the software up to date with upgrades happening on your cryptocurrencies.
These hardware wallets have been audited several times by prominent tech companies. The only way to take someones funds on a hardware wallet is to physically take their hardware wallet and computer they use to make transactions (unless they know the hardware wallet seed words which would never be typed in on a computer in the first place).
I hardware wallet for me
People think of wallets as active entities. They are literally a public and private key pair and a mneumonic. Once you send your cryptos to that address, it does not have to exist anywhere digitally.
https://greatawakening.win/p/141FOYBPNp/x/c/4OTNVab3FfE
I know these kind of tech companies too well and the kind of people who run them, I will never trust my savings with them.
Have you used a Nano Ledger before? and what is your opinion on XMR?
My friend uses Nano ledger and got an email that all their customer data was recently compromised. Of course it does not compromise the device itself, but does not give me the warm and fuzzy feeling such a company should be oozing.
Do I think you will lose your crypto you stored on Nano Ledger if you safeguarded the device? Highly unlikely. However, it's not a zero probability. I wont rule out the 0.1 % chance that there is a backdoor in the device.
As for Monero - I know that its one of the very few cryptos that guarantee complete anonymity. For me this raises the curiosity to understand how this works from a blockchain point of view. If the details of which address owns how much crypto is not stored in the blockchain for everyone to see, how does it work? Been too lazy to do the research.
I vaguely remember the origins of Monero connected to some Globalists - but I might be wrong. I know one of Dorsey's buddy boys (Alex Gladstein) was pushing Monero at one point, and that makes me wary as well.
Simple answer - I havent done the full research and I havent bought any Monero.
It's owned by the Winkelvoss twins (the ones Zuckerburg fucked over for making Facebook). It's been around for awhile and is very well established. However, you don't own your crypto if it's not in your own personal wallet. Get your crypto off of the exchange so you don't have to tell others down the line "yeah I lost all my crypto from an Exchange". The only time you should ever have your crypto on an exchange is if you want to make a trade right then and there. After you make the trade it should be moved off immediately.
Any currency that has no asset backing is not a currency, its a failed economy waiting to happen. The blockchain technology and cryptocurrency medium of exchange are only half of the fix. There must also be an infrastructure in place to exchange that currency with the real asset that backs it. Anything else causes an economy based on a currency that is based on faith.
Any currency based on faith fails when faith fails. Faith fails as soon as someone wants it to fail. It is trivial to make faith fail. If it isn't an asset, it isn't an asset.
Also, any economy that doesn't have in place market places for barter will also fail. A single standard medium of exchange (or even a few) can be horded. If the only means by which people make exchanges (perform normal economic actions) can be horded, then economies can be manipulated.
The only possible free market, as far as I can see, is one which has many assets linked to crypto. For example, all stocks can be put on crypto. Then if you need bread, and you have no "silver crypto" or "gold crypto" you can just trade 1/100th of your TMTG stock, or GME stock, or whatever, and buy some bread. Easypeasyjapanesey.
We have all the tech to create such a free market. No where in there can a non asset backed crypto fit and be a good thing.
I agree for the most part, but technically you can issue currency based on productivity without causing inflation. They did this in 1930s Germany with MEFO (I might be getting the acronym wrong, but its the German name for national metal works) notes, where the metal works get an order placed and the bank issues a note covering the value of that order. This was the best proof that currency could be backed by real asset or real productivity.
yes, blockchain ensures the system is tamperproof and not centrally controlled. But the assets on the blockchain need to represent something of value.
The other side of the coin is, too much faith gives too much power to those who dont deserve the faith. Like the current system. Too much faith is as bad (or worse) than too little faith.
I would go further and say in a perfect world you also need local crypto currencies. Every community needs to issue their own currency backed by the assets and productivity of their local community members. All these currencies must be tradable. The productivity of a community establishes the value of its currency by market pricing. This system is like what Titanic was supposed to be. Compartmentalisation of failure. Even if a bunch community currencies were taken over and manipulated, it wont bring down the whole system and market pricing will signal the currencies in distress.
I honestly think we need a lot more discussion of the post awakening currency system.
I would starve but I wont part with my TMTG or GME stock lol, but yeah this is an interesting concept. Once assets (stocks included) are featured on the crypto, sky is the limit. Everything is liquid, nothing can be tampered, life is beautiful.
The cryptos represent an amount of computation that has been "burnt" to add the entry to the ledger, but it does not represent something of value, as in an amount of computation that I can actually use.
Theta is actually an exception. Theta guarantees the availability of computational power for you to use (something of value), and not just computation that was burnt in creating that coin.
I am all for a supercomputer thats available for everyone to run what they want, but will this control the world's currency? Is so, its an entirely different question.
Any currency based on the future labor of people is called indenture. I suggest we don't do that. That is what we currently have. The reason we have inflation is not because its backed by our future labor, but because without injections into the system it would fail because some of it is constantly being taken out in interest.
It's a fair bit more complicated than that, and has a lot to do with what happens when money is taken out of the system (see the Great Depression). The point is, our current system is exactly this, backed by our future labor, and inflation is not based on that aspect of it.
I suggest we need a no faith system. Assets are not faith based. There is no faith in there. You either need (or want) silver or you don't. It doesn't matter if its a medium of exchange, it has value all by itself. It is used for all sorts of things, including as a primary form of adornment for god knows how many thousands of years because it is pretty, malleable, and has numerous other qualities that are unique. It has value, all by itself. Zero faith, tons of faith, it doesn't matter.
Sweet JESUS. You are going to give me a heart attack. I can't wait to release my report so that people can see the real history of economies. I will repeat myself. Any system that uses as a medium of exchange for barter the future labor of people is called slavery.
It also is something that doesn't exist, i.e. it's just a worthless currency, not backed by an asset. Banking on the future fails when the future doesn't live up to expectations. For an example, see the Federal Reserve Note in a few months (hopefully).
For sure. I have a ton written up as a starting point for debate.
Exactly. Everything is liquid, everything is solid. Its the perfect cup of ice water!
The fact someone else is issuing currency backed by your productivity and charging interest on that - this is what makes it slavery. That doesn't mean currency backed by productivity is slavery. We can explore this further.
If I asked you to give a loaf of bread and in return I would fix your computer - thats barter.
If I gave you a piece of paper that said "I will fix your computer" and you gave be the loaf of bread, and 2 days later you gave me back the piece of paper and asked me to fix the computer, which I did - thats still barter.
There is no slavery here. I am bartering the resource I control (my productivity) for my own gains.
Janet Yellen is not bartering my productivity to do female studies in Pakistan and forcing me to pay interest on that. That is the difference between the two systems.
There is a downfall you can argue about my proposal. What if I went and issued a million people and accumulated million loafs of bread, and obviously never fixed event he fraction of their computers? Well the answer is, as I start flooding the market with my currency, its value drops and I would be lucky to get a crumb of bread after issuing, say, a 1000 pieces of paper. So the market will make sure to keep you honest.
The real problem with this system is, whenever you accept someone's currency you have to be able to write it off just in case that person, say, dies, gets disabled, goes to prison etc. That is why, instead of individuals issuing currency it has to be at community level, but there is a lot to be discussed there and risks acknowledged.
No system is risk free.
Lets take the idea of "asset backed currency". Lets say we issue currency based on gold and silver. What happens if:
A deposit of 1000 times the entire gold int he world is discovered?
Population grows so fast and the gold and silver supplies cannot keep up?
I would actually argue that "asset backed" only works if you have faith that the whole world will value those assets the same way for a long time. Its not a zero faith system.
No matter how you cut it, you have to trust something. By issuing currencies at community level (or individual level if it can be managed) and making it asset + productivity backed, you are spreading the risk of this "trust" over a large area. The entire civilisation has to collapse for this system to fail.
Cant be less faith based then taking trust out of an exchange altogether...
Thanks, it's hard sometimes.
I dont know how much I trust that this is under whitehat control, boy I hope I'm wrong but we need diggers for this info definitely and the people that aren't concerned... didn't watch the video or dont understand what's happening