I did find it strange that it appeared Saylor could not understand the concept or the utility of savings without yield. Your savings don't have to yield anything on a sound money standard, isn't that literally the main point of bitcoin for many people? People who don't want to invest, who aren't interested in yield but intead just want to keep what they've got (without risks that come with investments) plus potentially becoming the beneficiary of innovation/invention-driven price reductions. Isn't the whole point that the need for yield disappears in many cases because the only reason people need yields is because the money continually inflates. When that problem is solved then a whole classes of yield-bearing investment instruments become unnecessary namely those that are used as an alternative for saving because saving money doesn't work if the money is broken.

Another thing which I found very strange happened during the part where they were talking about whether credit will still exist deep into a free market on a bitcoin standard. I tend to agree with Saylor that there will exist a supply and a demand for credit in a free market on a bitcoin standard. I think Saylor made some good points. But then Saylor went on to claim that Saif wants to ban credit seconds after Saif said literally the opposite. And multiple times before that Saif repeated that he was not making any claims about what ought to happen, but instead about what he thinks will happen as a natural result of the economic logic / the incentive structure. Saylor should have kept arguing on that same level instead of inventing straw men to attack. That was disappointing.

Still I like Saylor alot and one of the big reasons for this is his focus on remaining constructive but that quality sadly could have been on better display this episode.