Thank you very much. Okay, let's dive in the sustainability of Bitcoin and let's first just take a little step back especially for the central bankers in the room Blockchain technology in general is inefficient by design That's not a bug. It's a feature So I've been seeing some news messages popping up last few days where some parties were testing blockchain technologies And they figured out this hey this technology is slow and expensive. Well, that's not so hard Because if you look at the steps to lock ahead to run a blockchain network from the original bitcoin white paper And you take out what is proof of work then you find that there is still a lot of repeated effort in Running a blockchain network regardless of what kind of consensus algorithm you put into it And Independent validation again Not a bug. It's a feature, but in general it will just slow things down and make it very expensive Now, obviously we're talking about bitcoin here and when we're talking about bitcoin We're diving into the mining the proof of work and that really amplifies bitcoin's energy consumption massively So let's look on let's look at some network statistics first The bitcoin network runs on about 10 000 nodes Which is if they were all single computers would be perfectly fine Only there are millions of mining devices hiding behind these nodes And altogether they are producing 53 quintillion hashes per second Um, we actually saw the 53 ones one time before today and we also saw a number That's at 43 quintillion So what's the correct number? Well, the 43 was based on a single day observation and 53 is based on a full week Of observations It's a statistical error. If you have more data, you get a more reliable number. So this is probably more accurate Um, and where it gets really interesting is if we look at the ratio of Hashing operations to actual use transactions So in 2018 the whole bitcoin network didn't process much more transactions than 81 million That's two and a half per second So overall we have 20 quintillion hash operations every second of the day and we have two and a half transactions No wonder it is very resource intensive Um By the way, the whole banking industry was handling About 500 billion non-cash transactions in total. So that's roughly 16 000 transactions per second Uh, if if bitcoin wants to scale up it has a long way to go in that sense So Let's talk numbers How much energy for the whole network per year? 46 theta watt hours Now I like to do comparisons because these numbers are a little bit meaningless otherwise It is pretty much the same electrical energy consumption as a country like switzerland The footprint per single transaction comes down to 463 kilowatt hours That's the same footprint as your well actually for a german household It's probably a month of electricity the americans are known to be Using a little bit more on average Um, that's a pretty big number And by the way, uh, I just here heard I can't average per transaction. Well, um, I uh I can explain metrics like carbon footprints But the whole idea is that you include direct and indirect costs And without energy consumption there wouldn't be bitcoin transactions So obviously you can attribute these costs um Oh, and this is also an interesting number 82 megawatt hours per bitcoin mine If you mine one bitcoin or sorry, that's actually 8.4 bitcoin worth of gold So even mining gold is relatively more efficient than mining bitcoin um Now those numbers are Big but what I find particularly interesting or Actually, you know shocking is the rate of change Because we went To an energy to the energy consumption of a country like switzerland in less than a year Um, this is a nice little graphic produced by the columnist They don't try to come up with a realistic energy Energy consumption number. They just show the minimum energy consumption for the network Um, and as you can see Clearly in 2018 it completely exploded where it is was Negligible in the years before Um, by the way, they also know that the energy use cat rising after the bitcoin bubble burst That's where my work comes in. So I actually predict and explain why this happened In my last year's paper titled bitcoins growing energy Consumption it was published in may of last year and the data use was from march um But coming back at the changes that happened So we were in 2017 looking at 16 terawatt hours of energy electrical energy per year In 2018 we went up 63 almost 300 increase in one year per transaction 350 percent why? Because the amount of transactions that were proposed actually went down in 2018 More energy use less transactions Um, oh, I should note uh at the start of the day someone mentioned There was a prediction that bitcoin would boil the ocean someone took Mine my work They took these percentages and then kept on extrapolating with it if you actually read my work Um, they should have realized they should have stopped At the uh at the last numbers just a side note So, okay, what does this mean in in terms of environmental impact? In order to know that we first have to figure out, okay, where is mining actually taking place because The carbon intensity depends on where you're mining what power your source you're using um, the global Cryptocurrency benchmarking study shows that in 2017 there was a majority of the network located in china And the year after that that Changed a little but not so much by the way It's really hard to establish where a miners are located ultimately Because even this map Has a few issues you can see the dot on cubaq is really large Under oath the Power company in cubaq hydro cubaq declared for the local energy board that they were only supplying 15 megawatts Worth of power two miners and they were forecasting 110 for 2019 Um, so obviously the real size of the dot should be as indicated much smaller Okay, we can get back to deck after so the point And my only key point is that the majority is closed is in china, right? So that's and the trend is still that miners are moving to china. Why? because There's the miners are being produced in china bit miners in china and it's getting more expensive to move these machines outside of china So they were located in china and they are probably going to be in china for some time more unless China bans bitcoin or specifically bitcoin mining and they were considering that some time ago We'll see if that actually happens, but if that doesn't happen We'll see more miners moving to china and the chinese grid isn't exactly clean Well, if you're paying 25 teras, good luck with that. So anyway, I made a carbon intensity Estimate for the whole network based on the previous mentioned studies and ultimately that comes down to the carbon intensity of 455 grams Of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour Now as long as the majority of mining is taking place in china, you're going to end up with this carbon intensity I'll explain later why But what does that mean in terms of carbon footprint for the whole network So the whole network has a carbon footprint of about 30 megatons The interesting bit is The carbon footprint per bitcoin transactions 370 kilograms of carbon dioxide The same carbon footprint as 900 000 over 900 000 visa transactions or over 6000 hours of watching tv You can't make this look any prettier. You can come up with the craziest numbers You can say oh the whole network is being run on renewable energy Even still renewable energy does have some Carbon footprint left if you take one percent of my carbon intensity and apply that to the network You're left with a carbon intensity per bitcoin transactions of 3.7 kilograms still ridiculous Because there's still 9 000 visa transactions You can't put lipstick on a pig So What are these solutions getting back to renewable energy? There's a few interesting considerations when You're thinking about applying renewable energy to bitcoin mining The first thing is renewable energies are generally an intermittent energy source If you're looking at shi shuan in china During the wet season production three times higher than in the dry season That's production then you also have fluctuations in demand if you look at kebek During the wintertime they depend on electrical heating The mon goes up 65 percent The surpluses we keep hearing that bitcoin mining is done with surpluses that nobody uses those surpluses aren't around all the time Especially not when your production drops or your demand peaks bitcoin mining Increases your base load demand These machines are running 24 7 non-stop So you have to supply supply them with power at all times It's fundamentally Let's say tough to combine with renewable energy sources This figure gives a little bit more illustration on why that is So if you have a new generation of mining machines The amount of money They will earn will decrease rapidly simply because everyone wants to have the most efficient machines Everyone adds machines to the network the network hash rates goes up And a single machine performs less and less and less So each day or each second of the day that you shut off You'll miss out on a level of income that will never come back Um second problem with renewable energy. It's Ideally green, but technically it's not always green Um she's one again And uh, we just I'm like she's one because the reference that was made just a Few minutes ago was to the coin shares report that said half of the mining is done In she's one which by the way, if that is true, wouldn't be very great in terms of decentralization But we'll keep that on the side um If that is true, then still she's one doesn't really have green green energy Not even from hydropower because they struggle with well first of all the reason there's Excesses on their grid Is because they can't export it, but obviously when the production falls Yeah on the left Three times more production during the wet season When production falls they need coal based power And they can't import it because the same reason they can't export their access So what do they do? They actually construct more coal based power plants locally to act as a backup for when their renewable production falls Ouch So ultimately if you look at this she's she's from province the carbon intensity of the grid Is actually comparing comparable to using natural gas for mining That's not green at all Um last note We're talking a lot about how the hydropower um reservoirs Can be significant sources of methane Now that's still being researched But I just want to say that methane is definitely a more potent greenhouse gas Then carbon dioxide actually A factor 34 times more so Hydropower isn't the ideal source In any case Oh, yeah, and there's one more thing No matter how much green energy you put into the bitcoin network you're always going to be left with electronic waste Um, this is some footage from last year where bitcoin mining machines were being thrown out And this is often forgotten Because everyone talks about energy use, but this is specialized hardware designed with a single purpose mining bitcoin and when they're done doing that They're obsolete and you can Either bring them to the incinerator or to a landfill Um altogether the network has a electronic waste potential of 11 kilotons per year By the way, this is all from my latest paper renewable energy will not solve bitcoin sustainability problems published in march this year in jewel um And this electronic waste problem or electronic waste amount As I was saying is comparable to what a country small country like luxembourg is putting out here But it comes on top Of the electrical energy consumption as a country like switzerland. It just adds up um 135 grams per bitcoin transaction. That's the footprint Um, I made a very optimistic maximum on uh visa Uh, I assumed each of their servers weighed 100 kilos and they were being replaced every year Then still The e-waste footprint Is 30 000 times bigger for a bitcoin transaction And as I just noted most of that just goes to environmentally damaging landfills and incinerators So you'll never have a green bitcoin. No way. Oh This whole story doesn't include the production process And it's just about mining. There's also an ecosystem that we're not considering and there's parties like coinbase, bitpay, whatever, uh, bitcoin adms not considered So how about the lighting network? Well, I have a question for you Let's assume that The lighting network or whatever solution is found for bitcoin scaling problem and we can Do the entire banking industry on top of big time. We don't need the banking industry anymore What's going to happen to the value of bitcoin? What do you think is it going to be the same value? Is it going to be increasing 10 times 100 times 1000 times? Or even more maybe a little show of hands who thinks it's going to be the same value 10 times increase 100 times Okay, now seeing some hands 1000 times More than a thousand times Okay, definitely no less than 100 times Cool, but what does that mean in terms of energy consumption? So my work that was published last year establishes a relationship between value and energy consumption And applying gets very strictly would result in these numbers The funny thing is even if bitcoin Would consume the same amount of energy as it's consuming currently It's still less efficient than the current system Why because the global data center energy uses around 200 terawatt hours Um And obviously visa is a very efficient example But you can estimate the Banking need to be maybe around 20 terawatt hours At a 10 times increase Bitcoin will most likely exceed The total production we're getting from solar The solar PV capacity is 600 400 and 60 terawatt hours per year. We took decades to get to that number Um at 100 times the relationship by the way the bigger this number gets the less linear this relationship will get But let me just summarize it like If it stays the same it's going to be bad if it's going to be a 10 times increase It's going to be a very serious problem At a 100 times increase it's going to be a nightmare and at the 1000 times increase or more. We're probably all dead Sorry yeah, so That's why I was actually going to say this is a bit too much of a simplification But obviously transaction fees are going to be more relevant in the future There's people predicting there will be a 100 000 transaction fee On with the lighting network which would then replace the block reward and if that happens You actually Will we probably be consuming 80 to 90 percent of the global um energy consumption Sorry, what? Well, it would be it would be nice if it was true because then we really need a Dyson sphere to make it happen Um, but by the way, you just predicted a thousand times price increase Um, if I just go back a little Uh, then you also need to Dyson sphere to make it happen because it's Almost 300 percent of a current global energy production And by the way, that's your prediction Yeah, I'm gonna wrap up So what would work? Well, for example, replacing the proof of work with a proof of stake algorithm. I'm not I'm hearing there's a lot of Fans for that idea But what it would achieve if it was done It would reduce the energy need by 99.99 percent And you would do away with the incentive to reduce to produce singular purpose specialized single purpose hardware Obviously, I'm okay with whatever alternative as long as it works And by the way Proof of work is not bitcoin people Somebody on my twitter feed pointed out nicely that Uh Proof of work is designed for a very specific goal Security immutability and censorship resistant. It is not a magic wand That turns air into bitcoins So as long as we keep the eye on the objective Then we might be able to find a better alternative than the current proof of work system So we can really replace these steps into running a blockchain network. That's all


Today is a very special day because there's been speculation about Nvidia playing around with their earning and creating fake revenue. And at the same time, this short seller firm came out of the woodwork to say that tomorrow, which is now today, they're going to be dropping their biggest short seller report of the year. So now it's time to get ready and create a game plan because if it's happening, I don't want to miss it. So we're about 20 minutes of the open and at this point, Nvidia, like I said, it's going to be my main watch. But I also do have some small cap on a watch in case, you know, we break out or something like that is definitely not going to be some E plus plays, but I think there's some money to be made today. So let's see how it goes. By the way, if you enjoyed the video, don't forget to like and subscribe. I also did link all the best tools for day trading in the description. So that includes brokers, scanner charts and news feed. So let's get back to the video. So the morning session went pretty well. I cut this really nice trade on AXLA. So stock has been watching for a while and it was just breaking out above an important level, but the breakout and it worked really well. So it's kind of unfortunate that the short seller report didn't really do much. It was one of these report that the stock goes down and kind of just retrace. I'll be breaking down a bit more of these later in this video. But so far, the sessions been going pretty well. Now I'm going to grab lunch and hopefully we get a new setup this afternoon on the same name. So AXLA. I think it's going to be the main play for my style of trading. So let's see how it goes. All right. The day is pretty much over and it was a pretty good day in term of trading. This was just easy trading the whole day. There was like no headache, no stock that I decided to fight for nothing. There was nothing I had to hold for a long period of time. So just straight up scalping. I kind of hate scalping, but sometimes there's day that that's just what it is. And you have to do with what the market gives you. So I'll take a quick break and we'll do the review and go over my best trades of the day and also some kind of not so good ones. All right. So it's finally time for the review. Yesterday I was really excited about doing that review, but it was still really nice outside. So I wanted to enjoy and do it today instead because I do have time before the open. So as usual, this is not going to be financial advice. This is for educational purpose only and let's get into it. So the first trade we're going to be talking about is going to be on PDD and this one was the one with the news. So I'm going to pull out the news and we have it over here. And I'm not going to go over all of it because it's a report. So it's kind of long, but overall wonders are short reports. So these are companies that do like a deep dive on a company that they think is shady because they got a lead from someone and they go find everything was wrong with this company that they're not saying to the public and they publish a report and normally it makes the stock crash like 30, 50% and stuff like that. So the last one we had one that was decent on some kind of mid cap, large cap, it was on DLO and you guys can see that the stock went from 2150 to 1030 in one day. So almost and this was in like a few hours, like very quick price action. So when I was looking at PDD and there was this short report or I knew this short report was coming out, I just felt that this could be an opportunity to you know, first start to go 50% or you know, down 50%. But I think there was confusion because some people thought the report was going to be on NVIDIA and ended up being on something else. So the reaction or my reaction was just like, Oh, well, I don't even care about this other company. I really want it to be on NVIDIA because it would have been like the biggest trade opportunity of the year. And it's a day that you would want to risk like everything you can if it's true, because it would have just tank like 30% in a day because firms are like funds or big institution are all like involved in this stock. So if, you know, it would have been on NVIDIA, all these funds now have like a decision to make and make it really quickly, because if they just sit there and say, I'll wait, then the stock drops 30%, then now they have to sell because they're getting liquidated and all of that stuff. So on PDD, the stock did gap down and the news came out about like around, I would say here like 10, 20, but it just felt like somebody already knew about the news because we were gapping down. And, you know, we saw a bit of price action. I got short over here. So this is the execution, right? The stock, you know, made a bounce, went lower bouncing to VWAP gets tied to the lows, you know, I showed it a bit versus this like 96.50 and then added more on the break. And we're not really seeing the aggression, I thought we would, because this is a short report. So I'm expecting this that if we kind of break low, this should like tank like volume would should really come in and this should go so much down. So when we're not really going down, I'm covering most of my position just saying like, this is odd, like this doesn't feel right.  So I just covered when there's these guys, a report like short report, you have to have a feel of like, do people care about the news? And it just felt like it didn't end. It just retraced all the way back to almost like the highs. So like, nobody gives a f*** about that report. So moving to the next trade, I had one that was just like a textbook breakout. It broke out yesterday in the afternoon. I wasn't involved in that. But today we had like a previous day high breakout. So that was the level. So I got along pretty close to the open and we did started to, you know, break this little pivot. I got along somewhere over here anticipating the break. And what I did that was funny is I got along and then I try to put a stop and I put the stop at the wrong price. So it just sold my position and I just had to re-buy it back.  But it was still annoying. And we can see here, I just got along and put a stop which just sold my position. And the second green thing is just my new position that I put on with like the proper stop at the 38 low. And I sold most of it on the first push and it did ended up, you know, having a second leg. I just didn't really trust it, just the fact that it's like such a shitty company, you know, so you just take the quick move and you move on.  I didn't do anything else after that. There was probably another setup over here, but as I said, it's not a great company. So it pops, it fades back, you know, in the after hours.  If I was taking the same setup on something that's more like a real company, like a mid cap, large cap, there's no chance that I would have got flat over here. I would have looked for multiple days of price action, but on a small cap, just like, you know, the quick move and that was it. And after it gets so choppy that there's more chance that you lose money trying to, you know, to get involved here, it just goes off.  So didn't want to feel that way. Didn't want to think about it when I was doing other things. So that was the only trade on it. So moving on to the last trade. And this one was on Roku. And I felt like it could have give more action to where this is the previous day low. And I was just shorting anticipating that, you know, we would get tight, but I was just shorting way before the level was really important. So it was just a bad trade. I tried it once over here with like a super tight, tight stop, because I knew I was wrong. So I wanted, I didn't want to wait for, you know, to lose money with anything on the trade. I just knew I was like, this is a bad trade. So I took it out. But after that, when we came back, I showed it again versus like a random level, just, just bad trading. And if we bring the chart, we can see that, you know, this was the level that I was looking for. So I was getting short right over here. And I tried it back. It was right over here. There's somewhere like right over here.  So that's going to be it for today. Hope you guys enjoy. If you do like and subscribe, peace.


He's got an MS and MSc, a PhD. And as a student in the Harvard Graduate Program in Nanotechnology, he's a board member of Johns Hopkins Institute for Basic Biomedical Sciences, board member of Keystone College, a founding about board member of the Lyme Navigator Foundation, an advisory board member of the Rutgers Institute for Emergency Preparedness and Homeland Security, and a board member of MoMath. He is currently studying the applications of nanotechnology to the problem of brain activity, measurement, and recording. And he's a great guy. David Tarak. Are these guys great or what? Yeah! Woo! I've been introduced for a lot of things before, but I gotta say nobody ever did it that well or it had that much fun with it, including me. Let me set this up. So is everybody having fun? Yeah? All right. You can't hear me. Can you hear me now? Yeah, okay. Okay, there we go. Okay, we're welcome. Pew Research tells us that math students in the United States rank an unimpressive 30th out of the 35 countries of the OECD. 30th. Macau, Estonia, Norway, Slovenia, Iceland, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Slovenia, and yes, the Russians are all beating the pants off of us in math. This is, as you might expect, seriously bad news for our country. The National Bureau of Economic Research finds that unconscious biases of grade school teachers frequently sideline mathematically talented young women before they ever reach high school. And according to a recent study by the American Educational Research Association, 12 years, 12 years after programs were started, to eliminate gender bias and encourage young women into STEM disciplines, we have made scant little progress, particularly in our rural areas. If that isn't bad enough, if you study the cartoons and the media aimed at our young, and all too common theme, is that it's cool to be stupid, right? Yes, you heard that right. That math and science people or geeks and nerds and the cool people are the degenerate, non-contributive, narcissistic, arrogant, rude people, right?  Seriously, study some of the cartoons and things that are out there and some of the things that are in social media. It can be a bit shocking. If you put the pieces of this puzzle together and you have a perfect storm for a national catastrophe, the Russians and the Chinese don't need to and won't need to invade our shores, they're overtaking us through our own culture and social media, as we've seen in the news lately, right? Things that we invented, things that we invented. Their youth have taken over our, overtaken ours, excuse me, in mathematics and their gaining ground in science and technology and engineering. So the next war isn't likely to be fought with conventional weapons, could be, but it's not likely. The next war will be fought on an economic battleground and it'll be one with mathematics and science and innovation, right? So clearly we need to do something to stem the rising tide, excuse the pun, before it's too late. The National Museum of Mathematics, Mo Math, is a key part of that solution, key part. So in 2009, my foundation was studying ways to arrest the spread of terrorism. And education was at the time and still is a principal focus of ours. So you can imagine my delight when I first met Glenn Whitney and Cindy Lawrence in October of 2009. Glenn and Cindy were the perfect combination of visionary and implementer. Priggs Myers would probably tag him and INFP to her ESTJ, right? Perfect complementarity of dynamic duo out to save the world. And they told me their story that night we first met and what they intended to accomplish and they said their mission was to make math cool for everyone. To bring back basically the excitement for stem disciplines and things that our country experienced in the 1960s with the space race and all the rest, right? And also to expand the national talent pool to include minorities and women. Well first I didn't believe it. It sounded too good to be true and you know how those things usually turn out, right? Things that sound too good to be true usually are. So the following week in my insistence, we flew out to Allentown, Pennsylvania to see what they'd put together so far, which at the time was a traveling, kind of mini museum of exhibits that they would pack up in a truck and they'd roll it out to a school or a local civic center or something like that and it would move about from town to town. That was as far as it had gone at that point. And once there, I saw kids swarming the exhibits. It's the best description. They were like bees just all over it, right? Just swarming the exhibits, interacting with them, playing loudly and boisterously and learning. Yeah, they were learning, they were learning. This was not what I expected. It was not a museum with a picture of Leibniz on the wall and a dry description of why calculus was important to medicine or science or something like that. It was a living connection between math and the real world. The world that we all live in that we touch and we breathe every day. Well, I got it, I got it. I could see it right there. My team got it, the people I'd brought with me to tour this got it. It was clear that this was worth supporting in a big way. Then was the challenge, well, okay, so how do we scale this up? And the challenge was on, right?  Tim's design, for those of you who don't know, Tim's designed all kinds of exhibits in his career, even led some of the renovations at the American Museum of Natural History. If you stop by the museum any day and you'll see Tim sort of everywhere interacting with visitors and figuring things out, or if you attend a math festival, you're likely to find Tim sort of sitting across the leg in the corner with some people, figuring out how to make compelling exhibits and make the whole thing more interesting to them. Tim works tirelessly to make new exhibits and experiences to captivate the masses. I really can't say enough about how much and how critical Tim has been to our success and how much we appreciate him on the team. Tim, wherever you are, take a bow. He's also humble as the day is long, so he's probably off somewhere. Let's see, so Cindy also assumed her current role as executive director in 2015. And for the past three years, we've watched as she has taken momath from a popular regional attraction to a world-recognized leader in math outreach. She's recruited a technology team that's second to none, forged partnerships with science centers and other museums around the country, established collaborations with researchers and mathematicians from top universities, and places all around the world. Cindy's creativity, inspiration, mathematical sensibility, they've all been a driving force behind the museum's ongoing success. So, Cindy, thank you, Tim, thank you. We'll celebrate our fifth anniversary, December 12th of this year. Glenn Whitney's vision of a permanent National Mathematics Museum is a reality. We're North America's only cultural institution devoted to mathematics, and we're Manhattan's only hands-on science center. So if you haven't visited yet, please do. It is truly a wondrous place. I sneak in there from time to time, don't tell anybody I'm a board member and just go sit in the corner and start playing with things and working with kids and things. It's wonderful. It's truly a wondrous place. So what have we accomplished? Well, first, if you visit the museum on any weekday, you'll see wide-eyed, deeply engaged kids. They'll tell you that the place is cool, that the math behind it is cooler, and that they're cool because they get this stuff. Had a young kid tell me that last time we were there. I'm cool because I get this stuff, right? All right, so for the adults in the room, what have we accomplished in numeric terms? If you include the main museum, our remote exhibits, the evening programs, and the other things that we do with adults, over two million people have participated in one or more of our program offerings. Two million people. We've revealed the wonders of mathematics to more than 8,000 students from underserved schools who visit the museum each year. MoMath has been named the number one great thing to do this weekend, and the most fascinating museum in New York State worth driving to go see, worth traveling for. In 2016 alone, MoMath was named in various reviews and publications as one of the best in each museums in New York City, one of the seven hidden gem museums of New York City, one of the 10 best museums in New York City you've never heard of. We aim to change that, and this one's my favorite, one of the most quirky offbeat museums in the United States. Driven by Glenn's vision and Cindy's incredible energy and creativity and enthusiasm, and a team of really amazing and dedicated and talented staff, we've had a success for one of these first five years. But here comes the pitch, folks, our work is not done. We need your support to keep going, to expand our horizons, to reach more people, particularly women and minorities, and to turn the tides on the negative themes in our society. And so I welcome all of you here tonight, and I hope you have a great time. But I also want to personally ask every person in this room to dig deep and contribute to our cause. Something, anything that you can afford, please. It's an investment in our youth, it's an investment in our society, it's an investment in our country's future. Thank you and have a good night. Thank you.