Talking Bitcoin with Adam B. Levine - Software Engineering ...

The LTB Network

The LTB Network is a publishing platform built on token-controlled access (TCA) technology developed by the team at Tokenly.com and created for content providers to present the ideas and people involved with cryptocurrency
[link]

Let's Talk Bitcoin! #386 - Decentralized Identity and Pairwise Identifiers - Andreas Antonopolous, Jonathan Mohan, Adam Levine and Daniel Buchner

Let's Talk Bitcoin! #386 - Decentralized Identity and Pairwise Identifiers - Andreas Antonopolous, Jonathan Mohan, Adam Levine and Daniel Buchner submitted by fgiveme to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Purse CTO and bcoin developer JJ talking his alternative consensus conforming fullnode with Adam Levine, Stephanie, and Andreas on Lets Talk Bitcoin

Purse CTO and bcoin developer JJ talking his alternative consensus conforming fullnode with Adam Levine, Stephanie, and Andreas on Lets Talk Bitcoin submitted by SMcKie to btc [link] [comments]

Adam B. Levine of Let's Talk Bitcoin! Calls Florincoin "Underpriced" on Art of the Blockchain Podcast

Adam B. Levine of Let's Talk Bitcoin! Calls Florincoin submitted by thetrustedbuyer to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Crypto billionaires, the effectiveness of hybrid solutions, and more. An extended interview with Adam B. Levine of Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Crypto billionaires, the effectiveness of hybrid solutions, and more. An extended interview with Adam B. Levine of Let's Talk Bitcoin! submitted by cosyndicate to decentralization [link] [comments]

Adam B. Levine of Let’s Talk Bitcoin! and Tokenly - extended interview on currencies, blockchain, the past, and the future.

Adam B. Levine of Let’s Talk Bitcoin! and Tokenly - extended interview on currencies, blockchain, the past, and the future. submitted by futurethinkers to CoSyndicate [link] [comments]

Tokenly (Let's talk Bitcoin host Adam B. Levine's company) looking for Ethereum/smart contracts engineer

Tokenly.com is looking for an Ethereum expert as consultant or employee.
Adam's quote in the first few seconds of https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-331-incentives-and-illusions : "email work [at] tokenly.com for more information".
Tokenly (a token platform for content creators) was built on Counterparty, and Adam frequently discussed the pros and cons of building on top of Bitcoin in the show.
You'll find an earlier discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/4e7dy4/tokenly_discusses_integrating_ethereum_from_3500/
(I am not linked to Tokenly or LTB, just an avid podcast listener.)
submitted by cryptopascal to ethereum [link] [comments]

We have 30 seconds of advertising time on an upcoming Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast. Adam B. Levine asked for bullet points for the items we believe are top priority for Myriad.

List everything you think we should air on the advertisement.
I'm not clear how lenient Adam B. Levine will be with what is presented. He may read it verbatum, he may pick and choose what to present for our advertisement.
Regardless, I'd like the community to brainstorm with me.
I think it should be mostly what multi-PoW is and the implications it has for decentralized mining. I think we should focus the least on current projects we have going. (Reasoning: Bitcoiners are least familiar with multi-PoW and most familiar with the type of projects cryptocurrencies have going for them. What would impress them most? Multi-POW.)
EDIT: I think it's vital to include these bullet points that 8bitcoder originally had on the announcement thread regarding how Myriadcoin works:
So we have:
1) What is Myriad? It is the first multiple-proof-of-work cryptocurrency in which 5 algorithms "compete" to solve blocks on the same blockchain (SHA256d, Scrypt, Skein, Qubit, and Myriad-Groestl).
2) How does it work?
3) Implications?
4) Learn more and join the community
submitted by neuroMode to myriadcoin [link] [comments]

Let's Talk Bitcoin! John Ratcliff and Adam B Levine read articles pertinent to XT, censorship, and related burning BTC issues.

Let's Talk Bitcoin! John Ratcliff and Adam B Levine read articles pertinent to XT, censorship, and related burning BTC issues. submitted by mjkeating to bitcoinxt [link] [comments]

Purse CTO and bcoin developer JJ talking his alternative consensus conforming fullnode with Adam Levine, Stephanie, and Andreas on Lets Talk Bitcoin

Purse CTO and bcoin developer JJ talking his alternative consensus conforming fullnode with Adam Levine, Stephanie, and Andreas on Lets Talk Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Adam B. Levine (of Let's Talk Bitcoin!) on David Seaman's podcast

Adam B. Levine (of Let's Talk Bitcoin!) on David Seaman's podcast submitted by goonsack to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Let's Talk Bitcoin! John Ratcliff and Adam B Levine read articles pertinent to XT, censorship, and related burning BTC issues.

Let's Talk Bitcoin! John Ratcliff and Adam B Levine read articles pertinent to XT, censorship, and related burning BTC issues. submitted by coincrazyy to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Adam B. Levine from Let’s Talk Bitcoin Was a Big Fan of PlanB.

http://youtu.be/p7ZeA6932eI?t=6m14s Bring Back PlanB
submitted by unix8 to techtalktoday [link] [comments]

Cryptocurrency, Coinpowers.com and User Created Assets - Adam Levine of Let’s Talk Bitcoin @ SF Bitcoin Meetup

Cryptocurrency, Coinpowers.com and User Created Assets - Adam Levine of Let’s Talk Bitcoin @ SF Bitcoin Meetup submitted by AdamBLevine to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Let's Talk Bitcoin! #147 CryptoVR - Podcast about the intersection of cryptocurrency, token controlled access and virtual reality with Adam B. Levine and Wendell Davis

Let's Talk Bitcoin! #147 CryptoVR - Podcast about the intersection of cryptocurrency, token controlled access and virtual reality with Adam B. Levine and Wendell Davis submitted by AdamBLevine to tokenly [link] [comments]

Video: Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Panel Featuring David Chen (Lightspeed Ventures), Chris Larsen (Ripple.com), Vinny Lingham (Gyft.com), David Johnston (BitAngels.co), J Cabou (Perkins Coie) & Adam B. Levine (Let's Talk Bitcoin!)

Video: Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Panel Featuring David Chen (Lightspeed Ventures), Chris Larsen (Ripple.com), Vinny Lingham (Gyft.com), David Johnston (BitAngels.co), J Cabou (Perkins Coie) & Adam B. Levine (Let's Talk Bitcoin!) submitted by diycoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Let's Talk Bitcoin! with Adam B. Levine. Features interview with Gyft CEO Vinny Lingham (starts at around 18:00)

Let's Talk Bitcoin! with Adam B. Levine. Features interview with Gyft CEO Vinny Lingham (starts at around 18:00) submitted by johnnyhammer to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

"Splicing is probably one of the most powerful and underappreciated features." - Andreas Antonopolous

Annotated notes from Let's Talk Bitcoin Episode 389. Taken from Professor Meow on Twitter
Andreas Antonopolous: My theory is that the way we're going to see Lightning being used is that people will have the vast majority of their funds on Lightning all the time. The only funds that are not on Lightning are the funds you keep in cold storage.
How do you make this jump between on-chain and off-chain? I need to open a channel in order to start using Lightning, but then if I want to get my Bitcoin back, I would have to close the channel. I'm going to have to do this opening and closing channel not too infrequently. Maybe I'm opening and closing channels once a week or once a month, and if everybody needs to do the same, there's not enough capacity on the Bitcoin blockchain to do that. That's the wrong way of looking at it because you're not going to be doing that.
That's where splicing comes in. What splicing allows you to do is blend the open channel, close channel and on-chain Bitcoin outputs into a single transaction.
You're going to instead create a channel every time you do a Bitcoin transaction - there's no reason to take the change and put it back into an on-chain wallet.
Instead, you fund channels every time you do a Bitcoin transaction, and you can do a Bitcoin on-chain transaction every time you rebalance, close or open a channel, and combine all of those functions. So a single transaction can have as its inputs the multi-sig of a closing channel, as its outputs the multi-sig of an opening channel, and an on-chain Bitcoin transaction.
So you can basically splice Bitcoin into a channel, splice Bitcoin from a channel out onto the Bitcoin blockchain, and simultaneously open and close channels in the same transaction.
This allows you to send Bitcoin into a Lightning channel, send Bitcoin from Lightning out onto the Bitcoin network (make an on-chain Bitcoin payment), close the channel, and open a channel. All four things in one transaction simultaneously.
Every Bitcoin transaction in which you're paying a fee becomes an opportunity to also open and close several channels and make other Bitcoin payments.
Adam B. Levine: Is the idea here just that users will be making transactions periodically and so this is a way to piggyback on existing traffic?
Andreas Antonopoulos: Bingo. Your wallet does all of this automatically. Depending on who you want to pay and whether they can be reached on-chain or off-chain to, your wallet constructs your transaction and piggybacks as many open and closed channels as it needs to. Rebalancing, other housekeeping duties, and minimize your fees by batching together. But wait, there’s more! The main reason we use Coinjoin is for obfuscation and privacy. But if you think about it, it also saves on transaction fees.
If you're going to do that transaction anyway and you get five other strangers to join you and do their transactions, you pay one transaction fee across all of you. One transaction with five times the outputs is a lot cheaper than five transactions.
This makes even more sense if you have, for example, an exchange that is doing withdrawals or deposits onto lightning, and it has a whole bunch of customer withdrawals. You know, the classic batching problem that exchanges are trying to implement in order to save on fees.
Adam B. Levine: So what you're saying here is that splicing has implications that extend beyond single people and really this is a technology that could be extended to improve privacy and obfuscation? Or do you see this being set up like Coinjoin where anyone can participate?
Andreas Antonopoulos: This isn't just for obfuscation, this is also a massive saving on channel transactions.
submitted by lobt to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

PSA: Neutrino (BIP 157 block filtering protocol) VS. Neutrino (Coinbase acquired hacking team company)

There is an open PR to merge the BIP 157 aka Neutrino light client block filter protocol
tldr; Neutrino block filtering protocol will allow mobile non-custodial LN wallets to exist because it can shrink the disk space required to fully validate on-chain tx to only 3.8 GB (variable but small number < 1gb) which can sync to the tip of the blockchain in under an hour! This is means even years old mobile phones can easily handle client side verification. This is VERY GOOD.
Do not get it confused with the Neutrino Company coinbase recently acquired and the whole hacking team fiasco.
The important Neutrino to remember is BIP 157 neutrino.
edit: as dr_win pointed out the 3.8gb is actually what is required for bitcoin full nodes to support neutrino clients. Neutrino clients will actually require some variable storage space much less than 3.8gb number. The # of wallets and txs for those wallets on the device running neutrino client will impact the amount of data that needs storing.
This made it to the front page so...
Bonus Content:
Andreas Antonopoulos Discusses Neutrino on LTB
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-389-revisiting-lightning-part-1
Adam B. Levine: Andreas, have you looked into neutrino much?
Andreas Antonopoulos: Yeah, I've actually been running neutrino as well for a while. This is a really amazing development. It's a massive improvement over the old model - the model isn't really the SPV that's described in the Bitcoin whitepaper. Basically what it does is it allows you to send a compressed set that describes the transactions that are in a block, send that to a light client, so that it can request to receive any blocks that have transactions of interest to it. It can download the full block or the full transaction set only for those things that it's interested in, while not telling the nodes that it's connected to what it's interested in. That's a massive increase in privacy. This is not just for Lightning, that's important to understand. Neutrino can be used as a light client for on-chain Bitcoin transactions to massively increase the privacy of mobile wallets. Of course, it can be used so that you can have a Lightning wallet that's not necessarily connected to your own lightning node, but also doesn't break your privacy.
Adam B. Levine: The entire Bitcoin blockchain can get summarized down to 40 Megs?
Andreas Antonopoulos: Yes, that's for the initial sync. After that, it can continue to get updated summaries that are even smaller (in the kilobyte size) in order to maintain synchronization. So it's doing full validation without having a full copy of the block. Of course, all of this depends on having full nodes that are willing to publish Golomb coded sets to feed to neutrino clients. We still need a lot of people to run full nodes, but the bandwidth burden on those nodes to serve neutrino clients obviously drastically reduced. A single full node can serve a lot of neutrino clients very efficiently.
Lightning Labs Explains Neutrino: https://blog.lightning.engineering/posts/2018/10/17/neutrino.html
submitted by CONTROLurKEYS to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

"Bitcoin is not something you build companies on top of. Bitcoin is something you build economies on top of" - Andreas Antonopolous

Transcribed by me from episode #385 of Let's Talk Bitcoin
Tweetstorm of the highlights: https://twitter.com/Sesame4Bitcoins/status/1087970527887667200
On the topic of different blockchains:
Jonathan Mohan: One of my favourite people to talk to about this is Joey from Augur because he tried to build Augur on top of Bitcoin. They [Bitcoin community] made him feel like he was the dick for even asking, that he was wasting their time. It was just a very toxic experience of trying to work with that community those developers who try to build on top of Bitcoin. He would turn to Ethereum and say, “hey, there's this bug I have that Ethereum can't handle,” and then a week later Vitalik would just update the Ethereum protocol.
Andreas Antonopolous: I think that's a perfect demonstration of not just the difference in philosophy but more importantly the difference in application space. The reason Bitcoin is, and has been, and continues to be conservatively developed is because its area of specialization is super robust, super secure, super deterministic, sound money, and operating in highly adversarial environments where you can't expect the goodwill and cooperation of anyone. Not the hardware vendors, not the miners, not world's governments, not institutions, and in that environment it serves some very important needs that don't exist in the world today.
To be truly neutral, truly sound global money, it has to do those things, and that means you can't have the kind of flexibility where one person decides let's add something to the protocol without very carefully thinking about all of the implications that has down the road - Bitcoin has specialized in that domain.
It's why even though I believe we'll have a proliferation of different currencies in the long run, none of those will be able to effectively compete for the one application of super secure robust sound money that survives adversarial environments. And for exactly that reason Ethereum, can't do that, will never do that. In fact, if it tries to do [sound money] it would actually destroy its other benefits (flexibility). Those are two different application spaces and you can't occupy both at the same time.
Sure, some developers are just dicks and that has nothing to do with with the underlying issue but some of that has to do with the fact that Bitcoin has to be more conservative in order to serve that application space. It cannot simply adopt changes without thinking very very far ahead about the implications those changes will have.
Bitcoin is not something you build companies on top of. Bitcoin is something you build economies on top of.
I never saw really Bitcoin as something that you build companies or apps on top of. The broader cryptocurrency space is playing that game out, and ironically, all of those other things/apps fail to work if you shut off the ability for them to have a sound, neutral money that can be exchanged no matter what, anywhere.
Adam B. Levine: So that kind of brings to mind another question, do you have any past strongly held convictions regarding Bitcoin or cryptocurrency where you've changed your mind?
Andreas M. Antonopolous: Back in 2015. I thought that we had to address scaling sooner rather than later, and I made some comments about that. I supported a tweet that Gavin Andresen made at the time about increasing the block size and that was a belief that I held strongly. Over the next year, I took a 180 and went in the exact opposite direction. The reason I made a 180 was really simple: from the very early stages, I believed in this idea that the protocol ossifies over time as it gets embedded in more devices. And once it's ossified, you can't make any changes. So I've always thought we have a narrowing window of things we can change in the core protocol to make improvements, the absolutely necessary improvements, before that window shuts, and then you can't make any changes.
It's like IPV4 - it's in too many devices, you can't even upgrade it anymore. I believe that's happening. When the scaling debates started I thought we had a window of about two to three years. The debate around scaling which turned into a power play demonstrated practically that that window had already closed for many controversial decisions. That we could not reach consensus, and that the power struggle and ability to make money in that power struggle was already trumping engineering. At that point I realized that in fact, that window was much narrower.
Once I realized that, I also understood that there are other more important things that need to be done first: privacy being the most important. And if we have a narrow window, privacy needs to be done in the base layer but scaling can be done in the second layer. Therefore I flipped. I've started believing that privacy was needed first and scalability could wait until later and mostly be done on the second layer quite effectively. I took a lot of flack for that, but it wasn't arbitrary. It was because the facts changed and based on new facts a strongly held opinion was worth nothing because I had to revise my understanding of the space.
Jonathan Mohan: I don't think the enemies of Bitcoin are the Rogers or the Bitcoin Cash guys. I think the real enemies are going to be the exchanges in the listing agents and what they will or will not allow to be called Bitcoin when a consumer presses “buy,” when Bitcoin ultimately does have privacy. There's no such thing as private money and I think that everyone says that. Bitcoin needs to be more like physical dollars, and I think that if you try to sell physical dollars today, you go to jail. I don't know how legal Bitcoin will be once it's made private and further I don't know to what extent any of the people we consider allies like the Coinbases of the world would in any way support a Bitcoin with privacy in it. I actually I think we're past the point of Bitcoin having privacy, and if a Bitcoin were to have privacy that it would be some marginalized fork that no one can get access to.
I think so my fear has always been: make sure you're building SSL not PGP. Cuz almost everyone uses SSL no one uses PGP. I think we're at the point now where the facts as they are, it's that if Bitcoin were to become truly private, it would be basically the PGP of Bitcoin and the one that isn't would be the SSL of Bitcoin.
Andreas Antonopolous: I really like the fact that all of the privacy developments right now, specifically things like taproot and graftroot are actually around obfuscation and plausible deniability to give the exchanges a “see no evil” out of exactly that conundrum. Meaning that if it looks like a payment to a public key and you can no longer tell the difference between that and a Coinjoin, you're done.
Stephanie Murphy: I don't know what the future is gonna look like, and nobody knows. We can speculate and think about it and it's really fun, but at the end of the day, none of us can really even imagine it fully and we're gonna have to wait and see what happens, but that’s part of the excitement. Being aware that you don't know is also exciting because you can just be surprised by what comes out and not try to control everything or plan everything.
Andreas Antonopolous: I'd like to take the opposite perspective, kind of more optimistic. Because what what you say is true and that's definitely happening but the opposite is also happening. Which is when I think that there's an intractable problem or a very hard problem that we seem stuck on, and then suddenly a brilliant solution emerges from nowhere that nobody expected. That was my experience with for example Ethereum. I had not imagined the application of smart contracts in the way Ethereum did it when it came out when I read that first whitepaper by Vitalik in 2014. I had not seen that coming. Mimble Wimble, Lightning Network, the softfork solutions in Segwit. There's all of these technologies and inventions that came out of nowhere, there was nothing really to prepare me for the idea that these were under development or that someone had thought of them, then boom, suddenly they're on the on the radar. So that's also another thing that makes this such an exciting space: can't predict anything other than it won't be boring.
submitted by lobt to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

"Splicing is probably one of the most powerful and underappreciated features." - Andreas Antonopolous

Annotated notes from Let's Talk Bitcoin Episode 389. Taken from Professor Meow on Twitter
Andreas Antonopolous: My theory is that the way we're going to see Lightning being used is that people will have the vast majority of their funds on Lightning all the time. The only funds that are not on Lightning are the funds you keep in cold storage.
How do you make this jump between on-chain and off-chain? I need to open a channel in order to start using Lightning, but then if I want to get my Bitcoin back, I would have to close the channel. I'm going to have to do this opening and closing channel not too infrequently. Maybe I'm opening and closing channels once a week or once a month, and if everybody needs to do the same, there's not enough capacity on the Bitcoin blockchain to do that. That's the wrong way of looking at it because you're not going to be doing that.
That's where splicing comes in. What splicing allows you to do is blend the open channel, close channel and on-chain Bitcoin outputs into a single transaction.
You're going to instead create a channel every time you do a Bitcoin transaction - there's no reason to take the change and put it back into an on-chain wallet.
Instead, you fund channels every time you do a Bitcoin transaction, and you can do a Bitcoin on-chain transaction every time you rebalance, close or open a channel, and combine all of those functions. So a single transaction can have as its inputs the multi-sig of a closing channel, as its outputs the multi-sig of an opening channel, and an on-chain Bitcoin transaction.
So you can basically splice Bitcoin into a channel, splice Bitcoin from a channel out onto the Bitcoin blockchain, and simultaneously open and close channels in the same transaction.
This allows you to send Bitcoin into a Lightning channel, send Bitcoin from Lightning out onto the Bitcoin network (make an on-chain Bitcoin payment), close the channel, and open a channel. All four things in one transaction simultaneously.
Every Bitcoin transaction in which you're paying a fee becomes an opportunity to also open and close several channels and make other Bitcoin payments.
Adam B. Levine: Is the idea here just that users will be making transactions periodically and so this is a way to piggyback on existing traffic?
Andreas Antonopoulos: Bingo. Your wallet does all of this automatically. Depending on who you want to pay and whether they can be reached on-chain or off-chain to, your wallet constructs your transaction and piggybacks as many open and closed channels as it needs to. Rebalancing, other housekeeping duties, and minimize your fees by batching together. But wait, there’s more! The main reason we use Coinjoin is for obfuscation and privacy. But if you think about it, it also saves on transaction fees.
If you're going to do that transaction anyway and you get five other strangers to join you and do their transactions, you pay one transaction fee across all of you. One transaction with five times the outputs is a lot cheaper than five transactions.
This makes even more sense if you have, for example, an exchange that is doing withdrawals or deposits onto lightning, and it has a whole bunch of customer withdrawals. You know, the classic batching problem that exchanges are trying to implement in order to save on fees.
Adam B. Levine: So what you're saying here is that splicing has implications that extend beyond single people and really this is a technology that could be extended to improve privacy and obfuscation? Or do you see this being set up like Coinjoin where anyone can participate?
Andreas Antonopoulos: This isn't just for obfuscation, this is also a massive saving on channel transactions.
submitted by lobt to BitcoinDiscussion [link] [comments]

MimbleWimble's Story

I love the Satoshi Nakamoto story and the mystery around it. There's another tale about the MimbleWimble privacy protocol, and it's just as intriguing. Source: Let's Talk Bitcoin #356 with Andreas Antonopolous and Adam Levine.
Legendary.
The math around it is very cool as well.
submitted by lobt to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Soliciting Segwit Questions and Challenges for Andreas Antonopoulos for our conversation on next weeks episode of Let's Talk Bitcoin

Update: Thanks everybody for your questions, the recording is done, we went a little over an hour and I didn't get to all of the questions but I think we covered most. This'll be out on Sunday the 2nd of July
Update 2: Episode is posted - Thanks again
Hey folks, Adam B. Levine (Proof) here from letstalkbitcoin.com.
tl;dr - If you have a strong opinion or concern about segwit you'd like Andreas Antonopoulos to answer, please post it here in the next few hours. Now to context:
In a few hours, Andreas and I will be speaking for LTB episode 336 about some of the concerns brought up in Dr. Craig Wright's recent article on Segwit. Andreas feels very strongly that Segwit is a good thing and honestly I don't have enough knowledge on the topic to have much of an opinion so I'll be playing the "listener surrogate" questioner role, trying my best to represent the viewpoints although I don't neccesarily share them.
So if you want your point of view represented in our conversation, share them here as a comment. Personal attacks or other forms of bullshit will be disregarded.
Thanks in advance!
submitted by adamltb to btc [link] [comments]

Adam B. Levine: Bitcoin Is Not Going Anywhere Despite Recent Events Rogue Coin - Interview: Adam Levine - CEO Tokenly (11/18/17) The Adam Back Interview - Let's Talk Bitcoin Episode 77 Adam B Levine: Bitcoin & Crypto Currencies Gaining Momentum Adam B. Levine: Bitcoin & Crypto Currency Market Cap Nowhere Near 1996-2000 Technology Bubble

Adam B. Levine joined CoinDesk in 2019 as editor of our new audio and podcasts division. Previously, Adam founded the long-running Let's Talk Bitcoin! talk show with co-hosts Stephanie Murphy and ... On today’s episode of Let’s Talk Bitcoin! you’re invited to join Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Adam B. Levine, Stephanie Murpy and special guest Richard Myers for an in-depth look at the past, present and future of ‘Mobile Mesh Networking’ technology and the open source LOT49 protocol built on top of lightning. Adam B. Levine joined CoinDesk in 2019 as editor of their new audio and podcasts division. Previously, Adam founded the long-running Let’s Talk Bitcoin! talk show with co-hosts Stephanie Murphy and Andreas M. Antonopoulos. Finding early success with the show, Adam transformed the podcast’s homepage into a full news desk and publishing ... Let’s Talk Bitcoin is one of the most popular podcasts about cryptocurrencies. Adam B. Levine started it after three other podcasts he started did not get the traction he had hoped for. Adam parlayed the success of Let’s Talk Bitcoin into a network of podcasts–the Let’s Talk Bitcoin Network–which also includes one of my favorite Now in its 8th year, the Original Let's Talk Bitcoin Show features Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Stephanie Murphy, Jonathan Mohan and Adam B. Levine in weekly discussions on the history, philosophy and pro. The Blockchain. 614 Tracks. 8366 Followers. Stream Tracks and Playlists from The Original Let's Talk Bitcoin Show on your desktop or mobile device.

[index] [19462] [42193] [15553] [3677] [24029] [27948] [49007] [32299] [4059] [36692]

Adam B. Levine: Bitcoin Is Not Going Anywhere Despite Recent Events

For anyone more out of touch than me, Adam Levine is a pop star. faucet.rsk.co http://letstalkbitcoin.com/e77-the-adam-back-interview Adam B. Levine is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of the long running Let's Talk Bitcoin! show and the LTB publishing network. Since the beginning, Adam has bridged the gap between journalist and ... Wall St for Main St interviewed Adam B Levine, who is the founder of Let's Talk Bitcoin http://letstalkbitcoin.com/. In this podcast, we discussed the few co... Adam sits down with Daniel Larimer, leader of the Bitshares project. They talk about the new release, the lessons learned over the last nearly three years and what comes next.

#