2026 Predictions: BTC & ETH Hit Record Highs, TradFi Uses Solana: Bits + Bips

You think that crypto culture is powerful to aggregate capital? Wait until 100,000 Morgan Stanley burgers are out there on the golf courses pushing these meat reversion trades for these baskets of altcoins. Here's my prediction. Altcoins will have a negative return as a space in 2026. I'm concerned that there's going to be the mother of all hacks next year. Is the Trump administration I know they're pro crypto. Are they pro DeFi? I think AI is still crypto in 2022. You have people being like, "All right, welcome everyone to another episode of Bits and Bips. This will be our last one for the year of 2025." Today I'm your host Austin Campbell, the high scholar of Zero Knowledge Consulting. I'm here with my usual co-conspirator, Chris Perkins, the golden hand of Coin Fund. And today we are joined by John Di Austinino of Coinbase. And I've got to stop here momentarily to say I am super happy to have John on specifically because we have previously had a number of connections doing research in this space presenting things in front of Congress. And if you learn nothing else from this episode, John is one of the people that actually brings data and knows what he's talking about to this debate. So, everybody should follow this guy. Now, on that note, disclaimers first. Nothing we say here is investment advice and in general, don't take investment advice solely for podcasts. Check unchanged crypto.com bits and bips for more disclosures. And we'll get to predictions right after a word from some sponsors. Mantel is launching the global hackathon 2025 to accelerate the future of realworld assets with a $150,000 prize pool backing from a $4 billion treasury and direct access to Bybit's 7 million plus users. This is the ultimate ecosystem for builders.

All right, welcome back everybody. I promised you some predictions, so let's start with those and get moving off the ground. Chris, myself, and John have not shared these with each other beforehand. So, one, there's a nonzero chance that we either predict the same thing or directly oppose things, which will be hilarious. But two, you will get our genuine reactions. We have not shared these as of yet. So, Chris, I'm going to give you the choice. Do you want to go first or do you want to pick one of us to go first?

I think we should have the guest go first. I mean, he's here. We have to give him the honors, right?

Works for me. All right. I'm gonna dive in with a juicy one for you, Austin. So a major global brand, a global its own economic system. So, we think Disney, Amazon, something like that, which powers its own kind of tightly coiled sticky economic system will announce a stable coin in 2026. So you will not be able to though it'll be option you'll be able to use fiat but you'll be strongly encouraged to use either Amazon or Disney or Netflix's or some other economic systems stable coin as value transfer within that system and we'll see how sticky their brand actually is. might be Teu not sure. That's my first one.

John, you didn't mention you didn't mention X Twitter. It's in there.

I just don't know how is the way you engage with X value transfer. I think it has to be a brand where value transfer is the core of its economic model and versus data transfer and then we'll see if people are willing to deal with the friction associated with moving into stables at large not cryptonatives to stay in that economic system or reap the benefits of it.

So, is this a frontto back like building their own infrastructure, getting their own, you know?

No, they're gonna use Coinbase.

Seriously, are they is it white or is it like they're gonna outsource it?

They're definitely out. Well, I was going to pile in to say I think legally they have to outsource it, right? Like if you read Genius, these companies are technically prohibited from launching their own stable coins if you're not a financial services company. But that doesn't say anything, John, to your point about say take Starbucks for example, right? As somebody who's dabbled in crypto in the past, they could easily go to a Coinbase like Circle or like a PayPal and simply adopt the stable coin that somebody else has like maybe put their name and brand on the front of it. But if you're not legally running the thing, like you're not managing the reserves, you're not handling the payments, then it's probably kosher under Genius because they have a very clear definition of what the issuer is.

And I like so to unravel this a little bit maybe for people who are not familiar with US payments when you currently go somewhere like the deli and you tap a card to pay there are like three to four different people taking a cut out of that thing depending on what you've done right like you have the issuing bank you have the acquiring bank and you have the card network itself all taking money out of that and I say four because sometimes they're also paying rewards back to the consumer depending upon the card. And those margins for retailers are significant. Those could be two to three percentage points easily. And look, for somebody who's selling like extremely high value legal services, like that margin is kind of irrelevant. But for somebody who's an extremely high turnover business like John I believe you referenced Amazon where their margins can be low singledigit percentage points capturing any portion of that is transformative for the business.

So if we're thinking about core economic drivers I agree with you counterpoint the like I want to throw this back to the two of you. Do you think that is actually a 2026 mine item or is this the classic case of getting a UIUX people will adopt getting everything button down getting everything implemented will push it into 27?

So John I want to ask before we get to that you guys just made a huge announcement about people being able to brand their own stable coins using your kit and is this what you're talking about essentially that business line taking off?

I think I think well it's it's you can argue that or you can argue that we we felt the need to announce it because we see this coming right I think I think both are true quite frankly but but also to your point you know the safe bet is that yeah it'll believe I I guess I I'll refine it by saying the announcement will happen in 2026 whether implementation can occur in 26 I'm not sure but I think I think you're right I think that'll take that'll take longer so if it's unless it's a Q1 announcement I don't think we see it go live by Q4 for, but I I'll stand by an announcement in in 2026.

I totally agree with you, John. I think it's a no-brainer. I talked about it last week. Stable coins are the new net interest income. You know, today you're not making money on those payments. And if someone's capturing that interest, if I imagine as you start issuing your stable coin, you're going to capture a share of the net interest income, it makes sense for any business model you're in. So, I totally agree. I guess the to me this is just an obvious you know next step in the industry like very very linear we all knew this was coming so I think the question is timing so like my question then is this is my first prediction how big is the stable coin market by the end of the year next year that's a question not a prediction I got my I have my number and I want to know yours offload you can't offload your prediction I I want Guess what? My number Chris is in the internal trader move of no, you make the market first. My number my number I think is a little bit weak. Um, but I'm going with 600 billion, which is about I called 500 this year. I was wrong. We ended up around 310. Austin, correct me if I'm wrong. 310 billion. I think it doubles next year. I'm just going to round it and say 600 billion. I think years after that it goes it goes vertical. But I'm being a little bit weak. I think this year saying 600 billion by the end of next year. Thoughts?

My number for the end of next year, what we would traditionally call stable coins today is probably about 500 billion. But the lurking variable within that is we don't know what's going to happen with people potentially tokenizing their own balance sheets. And that number for some of these things can be exponentially big, right? Like good example, if one of the big four banks says, "We're just moving to a 247 collateral system. It just tokenizes all the collateral in there." Stable coins, if we're defining that as like the money object, that being like T bills, tokenized deposit, could easily be over a trillion, right, with one flip of a switch just because of how people essentially run their internal ledger. So to me the problem there is a definitional one Chris of like what do we mean when we say stable coins like our tokenized bills onx or kexus or whatever JP Morgan stable coins because if so that number could be trillions.

Well I'll up you there. Is Athena a stable coin? I think we agree that it's not. It's a tokenized basis trade. So I would say fully backed obviously Genius compliant which Genius doesn't even go into effect until January 27 you know or latest I guess but like I'm thinking about like truly backstable coins like the tethers the circles and and similar folks not just genius compliant I don't think you include tokenized bank deposits in that number that's a separate product that's a as our friend Omen Makin says it is a receipt on a fractional bank which is not a stable coin so yeah I think I might counter that genius says otherwise given that bank deposits are one of the assets within genius like so this is going down the rabbit hole of why I yeah on that made on that I think banks deposits are stable that would be tokeniz bank deposits would be stable coins also you think or not well they so here's kind of the hilarious thing that I've been pointing out to some of the bank people who have been lobbying for an even harder yield ban is I'm like you guys realize that tokenized bag deposits are stable coins under genius so you're arguing to ban your own ability ility to pay your customers, right? And so, like, I didn't know the banking industry wanted to rag Q back that badly. That's news to me. Um, but yeah, like guys, tokenized bank deposits are a fully permissible asset under Genius, meaning I could have a stable coin filled with 100% tokenized bank deposit. So, if I wrap my tokenized bank deposit, put it on a blockchain, in a literal sense, that is probably a genius stable coin. So, like all you banks with tokenized deposits out there, think very hard about what you're saying as you talk about these things because if you break that and now you want to tokenize your derivatives collateral, but you can't pay the interest on it anymore, you can't use your blockchains.

All right. So, we just got we just really confused everybody. Let me let me give a let me give a super stable coin hot take. That is my first prediction if everybody's ready for that. US dollar stable coins will be completely banned in at least one major foreign nation in 2026.

Oh, come on. That's obvious as well. Is it US? I think so. Like I mean this is one of the big challenges we're already hearing. You know the BIS is concerned how many you know senior regulators particularly coming out of Europe are very nervous about dollar supremacy. Dollars are going to displace emerging markets. It's taking an a an avenue of control away from leaders that maybe shouldn't be leaders. I think this is a no-brainer and I do think you're going to see dollar stable coins bad.

Well, let's go. Let's let's take it further. So, Austin, is would you refine it by saying is this going to be a Eurozone country?

I think I think especially the developing world I would say the Euro zone are the most likely sets of candidates because they seem super happy to get into a fight and attempt to ban technology in all forms now. So yeah probably my number my number two is China. Oh that's super right. Yeah. Again, and I also think across the developing world, like Africa, it's going to, you know, it's it's it's hard, but but it's it's I'm not sure from a currency standpoint I would classify anybody in Africa as a major player. Brazil would count. Fair enough. Yeah. But my punchline is I think somebody would call it the G12ish range is going to ban US dollar stable coins because exactly Chris as you got to these things give their citizens a way to get out of the local system and hold dollars instead which is not just important for the FX that part matters in fact it matters even more in the developing world but equally so it gives people a way to get out from like legal norms and rule of law cuz let's say I'm in Europe and I say a bunch of things that people don't like and they want to hit me with a massive fine under some of their essentially anti-free speech laws. Well, if all of my money is in a dollar stable coin, do you think a US court is going to be responsive to that under speech grounds? Probably not. And that sort of like challenge to sovereignty. I think that people are going to essentially a little bit like what's going on with speech have a reckoning with how the internet actually works. which is to say if I'm in let's pick a country Germany do I get to tell the Americans how the internet works in America just because of German Houston?

I think if the argument is protection against capital flight I think there's a higher probability of China doing it than Eurozone that's where the China prediction comes in yeah yeah I mean that's that's that's if China does that then I think the probability of them either soft or hard moving on Taiwan goes up materially in in sync with that that's a that's a total rejection of bilateral monetary ary relations and then I think the probability of it I I I was thinking about that being one of my predictions that China does a soft hard move on Taiwan in 2026. I backed off on it because I think they're going to wait until our chips manufacturing is at a point where us retaliating doesn't make economic sense. But I think I'll add to yours if they do what you just said they'll do I think they move on Taiwan and sync.

I mean certainly what's the right way to say this? My prediction is premised upon decreasing global coordination across all major nations which has now been a multi-year view basically since co that has been going yeah del globaliz well not just del globalization but also desynchronization right it's not just we're doing less with each other it's also we disagree with each other more and I think that is a point that has maybe been underpriced in markets generally and dollar dominance is terrifying to a lot of people who'd like to do that exactly as Europe's economy is hollowing out.

All right, Chris, let's start disagreeing with each other. This is too This is too We're too much to say. Come on. This one is kind of related actually, fellas. I'm concerned that there's going to be the mother of all hacks next year. It's going to be greater than $2 billion in size. it's probably going to be by our friends in North Korea and it's going to lead to a material downturn draw down and it's going to require a complete policy rethink. I'll give you some stats. This year we're going to looks like we're closing out the year with 3.4 billion. It's a 51% increase. Remember the buy bit hack kicked the year off at 1.5. So, I don't like to say it, but it's something that keeps me awake at night, and I say it because I think we all need to be thinking about it. It's the one thing that's going to derail. Like, we have so many good things coming together, except for price, but it's the one thing that like keeps me awake at night. John, I know that you guys just sorted through that $400 million issue you had. I don't know. I I hate to start with bearish themes, but that that's one thing that I'm worried about. Hack hack greater than two billion. forcing a major rethink.

So, so let me let me agree and disagree with you. So, I I agree with you that there's a high probability of a major hack occurring. You know, the LA people are really underestimating the importance of having a nation statebacked group like the Lazareth group that is able to act with impunity. I when I was reading about them recently, I called up my buddies in MIT and I was like, "Hey, are they just smarter than everyone?" And they were like, "No." They're like, "They just get to act with impunity. Like they're they're nation state back. they don't have to worry about getting arrested to worry. Obviously, we have hackers in the NSA, but but but I don't think our hackers are trying to kill specific companies and rob money. So, they're the only large scale nation statebacked hacking group that has the support of the government. Um, so I'll agree with you there. High probability of a big value money hack. I disagree with you that that a money hack will disrupt much. What I think disrupts more are hacks like the Panama Papers where information about so so if a hack includes data and information about people using crypto in nefarious ways not just loss of value then I think we have a big structural problem. If it's if it's just people lose their if people lose money we're not a sympathetic audience let's be honest.

Nobody nobody cares if crypto We also have trillions coming on chain and that's the difference you know as you have the wrong so I agree if it's if it's moms and pops and dentists and doctors who are touching crypto for the first time then it's problem if it's a hack that information of nefarious activity is revealed then it's problem if it's just a bunch of crypton natives having their bitcoin stolen nobody cares nobody cares but I think that's the problem yeah it would have to be one of two kinds of hacks for this prediction to be true one is for instance one of the big ETFs right like if everything gets stolen from like IBIT or FBTC. That is an existential event. Dentist, I agree. The and the other one would be somebody actually compromises the smart contract keys for one of the major stable coin issuers because like if I hijack Tether and can just mint three trillion of Tether and go buy everything, right, like you have a very big problem. In fact, back to Omid, he and I had this debate on bank list at one point where I was saying, I do not think the current crypto market infrastructure works for tokenized real assets because we've created a huge single point of failure on issuer security, right? Because like I I want to be clear, I think they have very good security, but if somebody compromises Tether's smart contract, keys now what? Yeah. Right.

All right. That's my last merit that's my last bearish one of the day.

Well, so I want to what's the right way to say this? Take that in the opposite direction. To throw one out that we'll go back to John. Part of what many of these discussions reveal is that these issues are vastly more complex than people realize. And as you start, call it descending down the stairs, it's like, oh, I'm in the basement and then basement level two and then basement level three and then basement. How many basements are there? So, one of my predictions for 2026 is clarity will not pass in the United States. And I think it will not pass because as Congress continues to educate itself here, this stuff is just way too complicated. John.

I think if it doesn't pass, it will not be I'm trying to disagree, but Austin I'll Austin I'll Austin I'll Austin I'll Austin I'll Austin I'll Austin know better than me but but I I do think this I think that if it doesn't pass it's not because it's too complex because I think they pass things they don't understand all the time. I think I'm if I were to agree with Austin it not passing about it not passing I think it's because the Democrats have momentum right now and I think serious momentum and in fact I was I was interviewed about two three weeks ago and I was asked about the price action in crypto and I said the only thing I see that's different between now and two three months ago is growing confidence in Democratic momentum down in DC. So, I I'll say I tentatively, I I won't disagree with Austin because I just don't know the political scene as well. I hope that's not true, but if it is true, I think it's going to be because of, shifting political momentum, not necessarily because for the first time ever, politicians have decided they need to be thoughtful and understand policy before they enact.

Yeah, I I think that's becoming consensus, Austin, on clarity that it probably won't like pretty we're pretty much assured it's not going to get passed before midterms. Question is, does it get passed after midterms? I don't know, man. I I I agree with you having been in DC in and around DC long enough. It's just a super complex bill, John. Not because of the like the policyy's not complex. the power is complex because you're moving power from one from from a to banking banking to a it just makes it a lot harder. And we saw how hard genius was. So I I tend to agree. I think the question that I would come back to you with professor would be modular right instead of getting one big beautiful clarity act are we going to get pieces of it? Are we going to get you know is it are we going to break it up? We asked Patrick on that, Patrick Whit at the White House, and he said, you know, we're not considering that yet. There's probably going to be a time when they pivot to modularity. Do you think that's possible? And like if so, is a taxonomy that we focus on?

I would say one, I will remind everybody that the White House said that we're not separating market structure from genius until they realized, well, we could definitely get genius and if we attach it to market structure, it's not going anywhere. And that that was when you make that deal. So, I do think there's a chance you do that. I would tell you I think the least controversial part of clarity is actually the taxonomy. I know a lot of people in crypto have views about it, but there's something in there that is good enough that Congress could get to that I think we don't have a problem with. I think the parts where there's going to be like really severe heartburn and the political dynamics get exceptionally gnarly are around how do we define DeFi? like what is that? What is control? Where do we draw the boundaries? And I would tell you I don't think there's consensus there and part of my complexity one is you know you had people propose some things that facially were like oh we think this works and it's simple and then you get things coming in horizontally to the debate that you didn't even expect. Like what do you do when a web browser company suddenly shows up and goes wait why the do you think we're a money transmitter? And they're like well we didn't mean that at all. And they're like that is what you wrote down. and then the whole debate the wheels just come off.

So I think DeFi is going to be really hard because step one is what do you think you mean when you say DeFi is a very complicated process. Two, the AML KYC debate is broken. Right? And I say that because you have the banking faction who wants everybody to have to KYC everything, not because they think it's the right policy, but because that's the best way to protect their current walled garden is force other people to like hammer into that shape so that you can't do new things that they're not intermediating. You have a bunch of I'm going to call it crypton natives who don't want KYC at all and are strongly opposed to all of these things. And then I would say you have a bunch of like tech and intelligence people who are like actually we like blockchains for open- source intelligence reasons and maybe we should KYC less things but have more information transparency and all three of those groups disagree with each other and none of them I would say have a majority opinion right and so that makes it very hard to move that bill because we can't set an AML KYC standard for interacting with things on chain right like that just becomes an absolute blocker so if you're thinking of modularity. The token standards I think are pretty doable and any requirements you're going to attract attract or like attach to call it centralized entities like Coinbase the exchange for instance or like crypto custodians probably more in the realm of doable.

Yeah, the MLK I agree with you. It's becoming increasingly intractable. There's a wide disconnect I see. It's funny. I I flew to Dubai a couple weeks ago and for the first time ever I didn't take my passport out of my luggage. The entire trip I did I did bio biometrics in the US. I've been doing it for years in the UAE but for the first time ever came through US went through global entry on route back pure biometrics. So I I I was shocked at the market jump in modernization of TSA AML KYC know your know your citizen at least and it seems like and Austin you're the first person to put it this way. I was wondering why sort of the traditional financial sectors had stayed so analog remained so analog around it. By the way, it's not just the US. I I sit on Cayman boards. I have to go to notaries a couple times a month. It's an unbelievably arduous process. And you're the first person, Austin, to come point out the obvious, which is that that's a feature, not a bug, of of protecting that moat. So that we're it seems like we're a long way off just just philosophically from being comfortable with it. And then the technology has to catch up. So I I I I tend to agree that we're not going to cross the AML KYC hurdle here in the US for for a very long time.

I think and Chris, I would be super curious about your opinion on this, but I'll say it this way. I actually think the divide that will eventually break that log jam is not between the crypto people and the banking industry. It is between the national security people and the banking industry. where enoughnat people are going to get annoyed at how analog this is and how hard it is to see things while they see things like Lazarus happening. That it's one thing for you to be a bank executive in Washington arguing, well those crypto people are untrustworthy. Look at all those scammers. Like why would you let them set the standards? Fine. very different argument to have like oh I don't know senior folks from the intelligence agencies on the other side of the table saying actually you guys are damaging US national security by not doing a good job of this information. Those are two very different problems.

Yeah, I I I tend to agree. I think DeFi is going to be really hard to get done. So they're going to probably have to carve it out. You know the other issue that we didn't talk about two other issues that are stopping it from going we talked about in the past. Uh they just hate Trump and they don't want to give him anything. And you know, ethically they want to address address ethics, big problem. And then stablecoin interest. So yeah, I'm with you on that that prediction.

Is the Trump administration I know they're pro crypto. Are they pro DeFi specifically? Is that is that do they is that nuance teased out in your in your understanding?

I don't think there's coherent I guess focus on DeFi. There's a lot of agendas, you know, in and around how that policy should work. I think if you talk to the the executive office and like the Patrick Ricks of the world, they get it. They want to make it work in a thoughtful way, but I think there's a lot of agendas, both Republican and Democrat. I would also say, if I want to steal the Democratic view on that, for the informed ones, their objection really is more around things like world liberty than specifically CFI or DeFi. Like if you want to read into the Democratic thinking of the informed people, go read the text of what Representative Torres proposed for an anti-corruption amendment, which is basically essentially if you're a federal legislator, executive branch, senior employee, or anybody in the judiciary, you just can't be involved with this stuff. Period. Full stop. And then there's also an attachment to family members, which I'll be transparent. I've given them feedback that's way too over broad, but you could definitely put a thing in there about like acting in concert or delivering benefit, too. You can't just capture all family members because like if a senator has a brother who hates it, but that guy gets elected to the Senate, you can't ban that guy's activities.

think it seems like we'll have kind of clarity around how we how we expect our politicians to engage with crypto faster than we'll have clarity around how we expect our politicians to engage with the stock or credit markets. Like that's that's kind of funny, right? I I mean because my understanding is there are not clear rules, right? Which is why the Republicans accuse the Democrats of front running markets sends in the Pelosi indicator and all this. And I'm I I'm I know there's shenanigans that go on, but I'm sympathetic because it just it doesn't appear that as a society we have codified rules around how we expect our government officials to engage with capital markets. So, it's funny that we're going to lean with crypto. That's that that that's what we've been telling him. You know, yeah, you got an ethics issue, but it's not a crypto issue. It's an ethics issue. Address it across products. And another good reason to maybe modularize modularize things. I'm I mean I I'll tell you right now, I think it would be a hugely positive thing for the United States to just have a generic like federal and congressional sort of ethics bill around all of this stuff because it shouldn't be the case that somebody can launch the Nancy Pelosi ETF and massively peak the market, right? Like something is wrong there when that's happening.

It is kind of weird. I mean, every company I've ever worked for has pretty clear personal trading rules. Like it's not like there's not enormous precedent around this. just, you know, go go grab whatever Goldman Sachs is doing and and and just implement it for Congress and Senate. But, uh, yeah, but crypto, so crypto will lead the way. That's wonderful. Yeah. Clarity for equity and credit visav crypto.

All right, let's John, let's do one more prediction of yours and then we're going to have to do one more roll of ads before we keep arguing.

I have an I have an anti-prediction, meaning I'm going against Twitter Twitter conspiracy consensus and I will say none of these three things will occur in 2026. It's a prediction because everyone seems to think they will. So none of these things will happen. We will not achieve AI general intelligence. Quantum computing will not be a scalable viable threat to crypto or any form of shot to any form of of substantive crypto cyber security and alien life will not be confirmed. Those are my three countercultural predictions from at least the the Twitter algorithm. I'm not you, but my algorithm is full of people claiming this is absolutely certain. None of it's going to happen. Deal with it.

All right. Well, I am on the record as being a pretty deep AGI skeptic saying I think people are misunderstanding how these models work. So, I am definitely on board with that one. Right. Like the I think the problem we have with the AI debate right now actually is a little bit like the problem we were having with the crypto debate in 2022. Which is to say you have people making fantastical claims that this thing will reinvent every single thing in the world and replace everything forever always. And other people saying it's a flaming tire fire that will destroy humanity and with nobody in the middle or with a nuanced view other than like tens of people at the time. And I I actually think a lot of that is washed out in crypto and we're starting to have more granular discussions which is good but it took us like fourish years to get there. I think AI is still crypto in 2022. You have people being like AI will run everything. Agents will do everything. There will be no jobs. Like it's all over. And then you have people on the other side being like essentially the Paul Kugman like I don't see how this is better than the fax machine type critique. And the truth is somewhere in the middle which is like if you understand the functional process of an LLM there are certain kinds of brute force tasks that are not super accuracy demanding where they are incredibly powerful like incredibly powerful. They will have transformative effects in those spaces. They are very good at sub levels of heruristics. They're very good at being approximately right and they're very good at doing that at scale and finding connections between data sets that might not have otherwise been found. But the idea that you can take that which is essentially call it a scaled sort of like super librarian if you will and generate totally new forms of intelligence from it like citation needed. That's the old math gag of like first this happens then a miracle happens then this happens. It's like citation needed for this step guys, right? And I I'll just say if people want to send it to me, great. But I have seen no evidence so far that any of the LLMs are falsifying the prediction of it gets harder to get gains as they get better. And while they're very good at finding links between data sets, they are not good at generating wholly new data or new items. And you need that for AGI. They're not creative.

Yep. I am excited about quantum. I'll be honest with you, I've been starting to dig into it a bit and I think when you bring AI together with quantum, you're going to be able to accelerate. You know, you you know, people have been studying quantum for a long time. I think I was looking at Columbia the other day. They started in like 1909. They've had a Columbia program focused on quantum, but I think we're now starting to see some acceleration. And I don't think that, you know, ubiquitous quantum capabilities are going to be online in the next year or so. But I think you know as we get towards you know few years from now five years out it's good to start thinking about it now. Like other technologies it's not going to be good or bad. It's going to be unleash amazing compute incredible iterative modeling. You're going to see a lot of diseases being being cured that we didn't think were curable. And there's going to be some bad bad parts to it too. But but I do think it's starting to accelerate. Not next year.

I mean, I think the other question with quantum, you know, sort of back to John's maybe original point earlier about the hacks is like, is Bitcoin really the thing we're worried about, right? Like if we can break encryption as we currently use, but there are much more valuable targets than Bitcoin. Like it this is sort of being like, I have created a device to become completely invisible and I'm going to use it