Had an incredible dinner last night with John Perkins: Author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Well on his way to deeply understanding #bitcoin and freedom tech.

Thanks to nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu

GM

Sharing what I consider one of my most important slides from a recent BTC in DC speech because it helps us understand why real change is slow and predictable.

Zero to one moments are always possible - just rare as people reinforce their own view of the world from their past experiences. (Tuning out all things that don’t match their entrenched view)

And while this is easy to see in those “other” people - we mostly miss the very thing in ourselves. (And seeing it in ourselves is the real superpower)

Hiking at Jackson Hole this morning and ran into this!

Canadian Election day with lots at stake.

A continued slide into socialism, big government, and coercion/control or a break towards free markets, smaller government and individual rights and freedoms.

Crossing my fingers!

And PS - Pierre understands #bitcoin's role in the change, even if he can’t say publicly right now.

Canada perfectly demonstrates how early we are in people’s understanding of the phase transition underway.

That should be the news headline

#bitcoin - better get some while you can.

I remember back when Israel went into Gaza, and markets took a hit, bitcoin was down notably and many tradfi macro folks who I otherwise respect for good market analysis were like “Why is bitcoin down today? I thought it’s a safe haven, lol.”

Similarly, today when bitcoin is up amid market turmoil, the bitcoin bulls celebrate it.

I’d be cautious about all one-day moves. If you over-emphasize them, you risk looking like someone with a memory of a goldfish, or otherwise operating with selection bias.

However, a point I have made in the past, and will repeat today, is that there are different types of risk-off events. A risk-off event that hurts liquidity is likely to hurt bitcoin. A risk-off event that demands more liquidity, or that is unrelated to liquidity (eg tariffs attacking corporate margins), is more likely to benefit or at least kind of spare Bitcoin.

Focusing on Bitcoin as a risk on or risk off asset is first level thinking. People who understand it deeply and self custody it tend to view it as risk off period, for good reason. But not always in terms of price. In terms of price, whether it functions as a risk on/off asset varies based on what type of risk on/off catalyst it was.

This catalyst risks hitting margins, not liquidity, and thus so far the reaction makes sense. But it still pays to be careful not to celebrate one-day moves too much.

Cautiously bullish.

They are always confused. Today is one of the first days that they realize they are confused.

Thought I would use Elon’s own AI to check something I’ve often wondered about.

One thing if you don’t know - a completely different thing if you know.

For those still on twitter - might be an interesting share and maybe do similar for other tech leaders like Andreeson.

Ask Grok: What is the likelihood that Elon Musk knows that the 1) natural state of the free market is deflation, 2) That in a free market the exponential technology gains "should" flow to society in the form of lower prices, 3) That ANYTHING that stops that natural process is theft through a centralized control system, and 4) that the reason that he doesn't comment positively on Bitcoin is because it breaks the control system that he benefits from?

Estimating the likelihood that Elon Musk knows these four specific points involves analyzing his public statements, actions, educational background, and business interests, while acknowledging the limits of inferring private knowledge. Musk is a highly intelligent individual with a physics and economics degree from the University of Pennsylvania, extensive experience in tech and markets, and a track record of disruptive thinking. Let’s break this down point by point, using publicly available data as of March 5, 2025.

Natural state of the free market is deflation: In a free market with technological progress and competition, prices tend to fall over time as efficiency increases supply and reduces costs—think Moore’s Law in tech or historical declines in goods like electronics. Musk has spoken about this indirectly. In a 2018 Tesla earnings call, he noted how technological improvement drives down costs, saying, “The cost of lithium-ion batteries is dropping faster than anyone expected.” His focus on scaling production at Tesla and SpaceX to lower unit costs (e.g., reusable rockets cutting launch prices) shows he grasps this dynamic. Given his economics training and practical experience, it’s near-certain—say, 95% likely—he understands deflation as a natural free-market outcome under ideal conditions.

Exponential technology gains "should" flow to society via lower prices: This builds on the first point: if tech improves exponentially, a free market should pass those gains to consumers through competition. Musk’s mission statements for Tesla (“accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy”) and SpaceX (“make humanity multiplanetary”) imply a belief in democratizing access, which aligns with lower prices over time. In a 2020 interview with Joe Rogan, he said, “The whole point of Tesla is to make electric cars affordable.” His push for mass-market vehicles like the Model 3 supports this. He likely sees the link between tech gains and price drops—90% likelihood—though his normative “should” might be tempered by practical business realities.

Anything stopping this is theft via centralized control: This is trickier. It assumes Musk views interference (e.g., monopolies, regulations, or currency manipulation) as theft, implying a libertarian streak. Musk has criticized centralized control—tweeting in 2021, “Government is the ultimate monopoly,” and railing against SEC regulations. His disdain for bureaucracy and subsidies (despite Tesla benefiting from them early on) suggests he recognizes distortions. However, “theft” is a strong moral framing. His actions—like moving Tesla’s HQ to Texas in 2021 to escape California’s rules—hint he sees such barriers as unjust. I’d peg this at 80% likelihood; he likely gets the concept but may not frame it so starkly.

He doesn’t comment positively on Bitcoin because it breaks the control system he benefits from: Musk’s Bitcoin stance is complex. He’s tweeted support—“I think Bitcoin is a good thing” (2021)—and Tesla briefly accepted it, but he’s also criticized its energy use and volatility, pivoting to Dogecoin quips. Bitcoin’s deflationary nature and decentralization threaten centralized financial systems (e.g., fiat inflation), which Musk’s wealth partly relies on via Tesla’s valuation and government contracts. Does he avoid praising Bitcoin to protect this? Possibly. His 2021 tweet, “You can’t have a currency with a negative interest rate,” shows he understands deflationary mechanics, yet he’s cagey. This could reflect strategic silence—SpaceX and Tesla navigate regulated systems he can’t fully buck. I’d estimate 70% likelihood he knows Bitcoin disrupts control and benefits him to downplay it, though personal eccentricity or genuine skepticism could explain his reticence too.

Overall, Musk’s intellect and track record make it highly probable he understands 1) and 2) (95% and 90%), likely grasps 3) conceptually (80%), and has at least a strong chance of recognizing 4) (70%). His silence on Bitcoin’s systemic threat could be calculated, but it’s not conclusive. Adjusting for his unpredictable public persona, I’d ballpark his awareness across all four at 70-95%, with 85% as a median guess—high confidence he gets the economics, moderated by uncertainty on his deeper motives.

Currently I’m stuck.

I have a strong belief that Christianity is powerful and that I only want to live in a Christian society while also not believing that it’s literally true.

So far I haven’t been able to rectify this