Looking for a knowledgable person to do a radio interview about BitCoin

[bosco]

Hello,

I'm looking for someone who would be willing to do a phone interview about how BitCoin functions and why people should use it.  The interview would take place at 8:20PM EST on any Tuesday after 1/3/11.  It would be part of a live podcast called Thinking Liberty.  We could call you, you could call us, or we can connect via Skype for the interview.  If anyone is interested, fire an email to contact@thinkingliberty.net.  Thanks,

-bosco

[MoonShadow]

Bruce Wagner has become our unofficial public relations, and has already done an interview. He is also the owner of www.bitcoinme.com.

bruce@brucewagner.com

[bosco]

Thanks for the info!  I'll contact him.

[grondilu]

Thanks for the info!  I'll contact him.

Please PM Satoshi.  That worths a try.

[MoonShadow]

Thanks for the info!  I'll contact him.

Please PM Satoshi.  That worths a try.

Not really.  Satoshi doesn't respond to PM's except for developers.  He's so reclusive, an interview is probably out of the question.

[chaord]

Out of curiosity, is Satoshi even Japanese? Or is it just a pseudonym? His english is absolutely perfect, so I'm leaning towards the latter.

[jgarzik]

Out of curiosity, is Satoshi even Japanese? Or is it just a pseudonym? His english is absolutely perfect, so I'm leaning towards the latter.

I know plenty of Japanese, Chinese and Koreans who are able to write proper and colloquial English.  Particularly in the dev community, where English is often the de facto language of programmers for a variety of historical reasons.

Let's not make biased assumptions here.

[ribuck]

Whether Satoshi is Japanese or not, it's pretty obvious that he doesn't wish to do interviews. When he's ready to step out of the invisibility cloak, I'm sure he'll make it known.

[chaord]

Let's not make biased assumptions here.

My apologies.  I see now that my post could have been seen as offensive from certain points of view.  That was certainly not my intention.  If anything, I was just saying that I'm personally very glad that Satoshi posts in English.  Otherwise I probably would have never found bitcoin .

[da2ce7]

I'll do an interview.  I think that I have the bitcoin basics down pat.

EDIT, if you don't mind a Aussie accent

[FreeMoney]

Bosco, I've been listening to the show. I enjoy it. You should put an address on the donate page, I'll be the first.

[bosco]

Thanks for the great response.  We had Bruce on Thinking Liberty last night.  You can find the podcast here: http://thinkingliberty.net/podpress_trac/web/590/0/Thinking_Liberty_-_2011-01-11.mp3  At the last minute we scheduled a guest host who was a self-described old-school cypher punk.  Bruce got asked some very tough questions and he fielded them really well.  All in all I'd say it was pretty positive for bitcoin.  Bruce comes in about 30 minutes into the show and his interview last about a half hour.  There's some more talk about cryptoanarchy following the interview if you're interested.  We're currently booking a guest for mid February to talk about a specific project that uses BitCoin.  Thanks again to Bruce for laying the groundwork.  Keep up the good work everybody.

[davout]

Nice !
Didn't listen to the show, just hope he didn't mention "world renowned cryptographers"

[Hal]

The "old-school cypherpunk" is Perry Metzger, who is (still) the moderator of the Cryptography mailing list, where Satoshi first announced Bitcoin.

[Cdecker]

The "old-school cypherpunk" is Perry Metzger, who is (still) the moderator of the Cryptography mailing list, where Satoshi first announced Bitcoin.

It's a small world isn't it?

[MoonShadow]

Nice !
Didn't listen to the show, just hope he didn't mention "world renowned cryptographers"

No, he didn't.  He tried to dumb it down further than he did in his last interview, and then the hosts ended up geeking it back up.  It was obvious that they had done their research.

[mpkomara]

Bruce does a great job in general, but i have one request for the next talk show.  This is the second time that when the host asks "So what *is* Bitcoin?", Bruce sounded exasperated before even starting the explanation.  There were lots of sighs and heavy pauses which conveyed an "oh god, this isn't going to be easy" type feeling.  I say, try a different elevator pitch!

I would recommend that rather than using the "combination of three technologies" speech, try starting from the point of view of two people in a bitcoin transaction.  that goes as follows:

I have a bitcoin-- nevermind what it is-- and i want to send it to Bruce.  The network wants to verify that I actually have a bitcoin to send to Bruce, and then record that transaction.  Normally for dollar transactions a central source provides that type of work and charges a fee, a la Paypal or Visa.  Well here it's a network of hard-working computers.  And the lucky hard-working computer who correctly verifies the transaction between me and Bruce gets awarded some bitcoins.  Who gives that hard-working computer the bitcoins?  The network does.  Where does the network get the bitcoins?  The network agrees, upon downloading the bitcoin application, that if a computer works hard enough to solve the transaction verification problem that they get a digital token as proof of their hard work.  And that's where bitcoins come from.

[MoonShadow]

I would recommend that rather than using the "combination of three technologies" speech, try starting from the point of view of two people in a bitcoin transaction.  that goes as follows:

The root problem with trying to explain Bitcoin to an uninitiated audience is that way too many people don't understand how our current monetary system actually works, and that misinformation that most people assume is correct interferes with proper understanding of how any other monetary system could function.  Every listener is going to, naturally, compare Bitcoin to what they know (or think that they know) and that would be fiat currencies.  But since most listeners don't really understand how fiat currencies work, or economics in general, Bruce doesn't really have the time to effectively make that comparison.  I could see flaws in the three tech explaination as well, but I understand why he does it.  For example, Bruce never actually brought up the proof-of-work system; the hosts did.  Most listeners of any other show would have a hard time understanding what a proof-of-work system is or why it was important; but these hosts understood that as a part of the security of the distribution of Bitcoin and of the blockchain.  I've tried to explain the blockchain as a massive, collective and persistant double entry ledger of the entire transaction history of Bitcoin; but that only works for those who understand what a double entry ledger is and what it is intended to do.

[jgarzik]

These are all good suggestions, but I think there's a common problem:  people get mixed up trying to explain bits of technology.

So, here's the challenge:  try to explain bitcoins, without explaining peer-to-peer networking.  You would come up with something like,

"bitcoins are digital cash, stored in a computer file on some website, or on your personal computer.  They can get lost or stolen just like real cash.  There is no central authority, but a network that verifies all transactions, in exchange for a tiny fee.  Currently there are 5 million bitcoins; eventually, there will be 21 million bitcoins, and that's it."

[mpkomara]

jgarzik, that is a very good introduction to bitcoin indeed, but both radio interviews have specifically asked "who creates this digital cash?" or "how is it minted?", and that's where I feel Bruce stumbles the most.  Again, I suggest approaching the answer from the point of view of two users wishing to make a transaction.