<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cit wasn\u2019t until I wrote a Bitcoin book that I realized there were so many Bitcoin books out there.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\nOver the years, we\u2019ve been inundated with books like that. Some of great quality, like Lyn Alden\u2019s Broken Money<\/em><\/a> that I \u2014 full disclosure \u2014 edited, and others of regular trash status.
<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe writing-publishing endeavor has, as far as I can tell, cooled down a bit, with the audience more than saturated. To publish successful Bitcoin books a cycle-plus after Yakes, you gotta go big macro (Larry Lepard\u2019s The Big Print<\/a><\/em>), big beginner (Natalie Brunell<\/a>\u2019s Bitcoin is for Everyone<\/a><\/em>) or very specialized (Leon Wankum\u2019s Digital Real Estate<\/a><\/em> or Aaron van Wirdum\u2019s The Genesis Book<\/a><\/em> \u2014 both of which I also worked on).
<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe book is almost six years old now, so I wondered what Eric would have done differently today. \u201cThere\u2019s a million things I\u2019ve learned since writing the book,\u201d Eric says. His major point with The 7th Property<\/em> was to give a synopsis of money, banking, and bitcoin from an investor standpoint \u2014 the latter being the key demographic.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cThe book did much better than I would have expected at the time.\u201d He described how some books are too heavy on opinion and commentary, and others too lengthy and heavy on the raw, dry facts. You have to strike a balance between expertise and editorializing. \u201cI wanted this to be something that is engaging.\u201d
<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He received a lot of mixed feedback: some people thought The 7th Property<\/em> had \u201ca clear understanding of the problem\u201d and dealt with money and banking in a comprehensive way; others that it was too technical of a book, or too summary<\/em>. Also, \u201cthere was a lot of dentists reaching out\u2026 that surprised me.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
I read a quote to him from the book \u2014 \u201cFor Bitcoin to compete with the incumbent system, the incumbent’s financial services<\/strong> will need to be replicated in bitcoin\u201d (p. 263) \u2014 and wondered if, given the Paper Bitcoin Summer<\/a> and the last year\u2019s treasury company wave<\/a>, he stands by that line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cI 100% still think that statement is true. <\/strong>Bitcoin is something where the value proposition increases with the amount of capital that enters the system.\u201d By way of a tree analogy, Eric tells me that Bitcoin, like trees searching for sunlight, \u201cis growing toward<\/em> where the capital is<\/em>, toward financial markets and the stock market specifically.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cThe larger bitcoin becomes, the more it can stand on its own.\u201d<\/strong> But until then, building bridges to and integrating with where the capital exists today is how way we make Bitcoin bigger. A lot of people in Bitcoinland have an idealized, black-and-white view of how adoption should proceed. \u201cI don\u2019t think it works like that\u2026 we don\u2019t get to choose how adoption happens. That idealized path, it doesn\u2019t exist.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One thing that hit me on re-reading the book now, a cycle-and-a-half later, is the emphasis throughout monetary history on trading off trust for efficiency.<\/strong> The book gives two seemingly contradictory positions on the matter:
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
- \u201cDigital money will reach an inflection point at which people will need to decide if they will trade trust for efficiency once again<\/strong>. It is my goal to convince enough people that they should not.” (p. 57)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- \u201csome people do not want to spend the time to be their own custodians, and that is perfectly reasonable but potentially costly\u201d (p. 261)
<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n\n\u201cThis is where my thinking has developed the most on since writing the book.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He clarifies that he thinks that this trade-off warning is mostly intended for fiat. As we\u2019re talking, the Liquid hack\/heist has just happened, the Coldcard debacle fresh on everyone\u2019s mind, Lightning service providers getting hacked left, right, and centre. When I mention these <\/a>token wars<\/a>, and he says that within Bitcoin<\/em>, he\u2019s softened his stance there a little: \u201cwe\u2019re going through growing pains in software. As long as the tools that create security can be used for attack, we\u2019ll reach a system of far more robust software. We\u2019re going through growing pains\u2026 in the long run, I\u2019m not so concerned by it.\u201d
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cThis is one way in which owning physical gold at home is safer than owning bitcoin (at least until someone shows up at your house and robs you).\u201d He admits that he hasn\u2019t seen any victory laps from the goldbugs on this either, which is sort of surprising.
<\/p>\n\n\n\nAt the end of our talk, I ask about Helsinki and BTCHEL, as Eric will give a keynote on the first day<\/a> and also spoke at the event last year<\/a>. He says he\u2019s looking forward to heading out to Finland and that \u201cBTCHEL is a good vibes conference<\/strong>.\u201d
What he loved about last year was that there \u201cseemed to be a lot of new people,\u201d an audience that\u2019s very different from the usual crowd that attends conferences. The BTCHEL team is working at the marginal forefront of Bitcoin, expanding the circle, reaching new audiences.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\nGood vibes indeed. See you all next week<\/a>!<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
![\"BTCHEL2026](\"https:\/\/btchel.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/BTCHEL-tix-1024x256.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"