Stephan Livera Podcast

Prashanth Chandrashekar argues that much of Europe's debanking comes down to how banks score transfers. Money arriving from a crypto exchange's account is treated as a higher-risk third-party payment, while a transfer between two accounts in your own name passes with far fewer flags. Bringin's answer is a named virtual IBAN for each customer, which he says lowers the risk of being debanked rather than removing it.
Prashanth, who is from India, started Bringin after moving to Estonia holding Bitcoin and finding he couldn't easily spend it. He now runs the company's consumer app and its new business accounts.
They cover MiCA's licensing reset, which by his figures left only about 30% of earlier firms licensed but lets the survivors passport across the EU; accounts closed without explanation under tipping-off rules; and how named IBANs differ from the deposit IBANs exchanges hand out. On the consumer wallet, built on Spark, he is direct about the trade-offs: operators are mostly centralized and can see payments, though they cannot move funds alone.
On Bringin for Business, he describes pilot users such as mining-rig sellers paying suppliers abroad, plus stablecoin support and accounting exports. The custody model differs from the consumer app: keys sit in a hosted Turnkey enclave with spending policies, Bringin holds an extra key in multi-director setups, seed export is discouraged, and ownership changes run through Bringin's backend. Third-party euro payments were promised within days of recording, and corporate cards are not yet available.
Disclosure: Stephan is a small investor in and advisor to Bringin.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Intro
00:37 — MiCA: Costly but Passportable
03:28 — Debanking: Why Banks Block Exchange Flows
07:04 — Named vIBANs vs Exchange Deposit IBANs
11:25 — Spark Self-Custody and Its Trust Trade-offs
13:03 — Why Banks Are Harder on Businesses
15:22 — Who Joined the Business Pilot
18:08 — Beyond Debanking: Accounting Headaches
20:31 — Business Keys in Turnkey Enclaves
24:53 — Key Rotation Runs Through Bringin's Backend
26:24 — Roadmap: Third-Party Payments, No Cards Yet
30:45 — Next Customers: Stablecoins and Agents
33:31 — Regulation Outlook: DAC8 and Data Risk
34:39 — AI Agents, MCP, and Payments
Links: 
https://x.com/prashanthc123

https://x.com/bringinxyz

https://bringin.app/business

Stephan Livera links:
Follow me on X: @stephanlivera

Subscribe to the podcast

Subscribe to Substack

Setzeus argues that 90% of people will never properly use seed phrases and hardware wallets, and that services like Privy and Turnkey, which split a key behind an email or phone login, are a good-enough floor for self-custody. Stephan pushes back on what that gives up: verifiability, portability across devices, and a degree of vendor lock-in.
Setzeus (Jesus Najera) runs SetDev, a Bitcoin L2 and metaprotocol engineering and security shop whose biggest client has been Stacks. He built BitScript and founded Cofund, a cross-chain multisig web app aimed at families, fiduciaries, and founders.
The conversation opens on the recent run of hacks, including the Coldcard incident, and his view that the cryptography is not broken but AI has made attacks on everything around it cheaper. They cover Justin Drake's "bunker mode" post, why Bitcoin builders get nerd-sniped by technology over product, why multisig adoption remains small, and whether ETFs are better than nothing for people who won't self-custody.
On Cofund itself, Setzeus explains spending policies built from signer sets, thresholds, and rules on Taproot script paths. He is plain about the limits: on Bitcoin only the signer set is enforced on-chain, spend caps rely on the client without covenants, rotating a signer means moving funds to a new set, and the free tier charges a 1% transaction fee.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Intro
00:37 — From SetDev's L2 Work to Multisig
03:20 — After the Coldcard Hack: Why Self-Custody?
07:56 — Justin Drake's Bunker Mode and ECDSA
10:13 — Are Bitcoiners Bad at Building Products?
15:59 — Seed Phrases vs Privy-Style Key Sharding
20:25 — Trade-offs: Verifiability and Lock-In
25:35 — Recommending Self-Custody After Hacks
30:40 — Families, Fiduciaries, and Founders
34:25 — Spending Policies via Taproot Script Paths
37:24 — Limit: Bitcoin Spend Caps Not On-Chain
39:59 — Key Rotation Means Moving Funds
41:11 — Cofund Pricing and Fees
42:03 — Thesis: Multisig Becomes Joint Accounts
Links: 
https://x.com/getcofund

https://x.com/setzeus

https://getcofund.com/

Stephan Livera links:
Follow me on X: @stephanlivera

Subscribe to the podcast

Subscribe to Substack

Andrew Webley walks through Smarter Web's capital structure—ordinary shares as growth equity, a repaid short convert, Coinbase credit, and MORE as the income preferred.
Webley is CEO of The Smarter Web Company (LSE: SWC), the UK's largest publicly traded Bitcoin treasury. He traces the path from Hargreaves Lansdown to listing on Aquis, then the LSE Main Market, while building toward roughly 2,747 BTC on the balance sheet.
The conversation covers ordinary shares versus preferred equity, why SWC repaid its short convert, how the Coinbase credit facility fits a "buy leverage when cheap" playbook, and the launch of MORE—an income preferred designed alongside SWC growth equity. Webley contrasts treasury companies with ETFs and spot Bitcoin, stressing Bitcoin-per-share growth, liquidity for institutions, and GBP denomination without US dividend withholding.
He also flags the downsides: treasury structures amplify Bitcoin volatility, management can mess up capital allocation, and in a drawdown there is no guarantee that equity, credit, or preferreds will be available.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Intro
00:25 — Hargreaves Lansdown to Smarter Web
02:09 — Saylor Pivot Was His Bitcoin Moment
04:00 — Listing the UK Treasury Play
08:44 — Clean Balance Sheet Structure
11:25 — Coinbase Credit at the Bottom
14:32 — Debt vs NAV Reporting
19:45 — Bitcoin-per-Share vs Total Return
21:32 — How Institutions Actually Buy
25:02 — Treasury Co vs ETF vs Bitcoin
28:12 — MORE Preferred Equity Explained
30:17 — Amplification Cap at 35%
33:11 — Sterling Preferred Advantage
37:49 — Downside Risks: Volatility and Execution
40:27 — Drawdowns and Uncertain Capital Access
Links: 
https://x.com/asjwebley

https://x.com/smarterwebuk

https://www.smarterwebcompany.co.uk/

Stephan Livera links:
Follow me on X: @stephanlivera

Subscribe to the podcast

Subscribe to Substack

Bitcoiners built L402 for a Lightning-native web. Crypto built x402 for agents — and early volume is mostly stables. Ben Carman helped get Lightning into the x402 standard, and argues the pragmatic move is to meet that stack in the middle rather than wait for L402 alone.
Ben Carman of Spiral rejoin me to unpack HTTP 402 Payment Required, facilitators versus Coinbase Commerce, why agentic payments are still near zero today, and why AI agents may adopt Bitcoin faster than humans — because models already know sats, invoices, and QR codes.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Intro
00:50 — L402, x402, and MPP
01:09 — What HTTP 402 Actually Is
02:41 — Meet x402 in the Middle
03:44 — Facilitators and Coinbase Default
06:06 — x402 Standard vs Coinbase Commerce
07:26 — Stables Dominate Early Volume
08:03 — Agentic Payments Still Near Zero
08:55 — Agents Already Know Bitcoin
12:05 — Personal Agents vs B2B Agents
13:03 — Pay-Per-Query Agent Wallets
16:14 — Businesses on Bitcoin Are Easier
16:39 — AI Climb and Builder Craft
22:29 — Won't Fund OpenAI — Still Uses Them
25:38 — Cost Deflation = Human Freedom
28:57 — Best AI tools as of Oct 2
31:16 — Terminal Bench and Real Evals
32:25 — Bench Maxing vs Real Feel
34:59 — Four Years From ChatGPT
36:56 — Quantization Without the LARPs
39:51 — Mesh Alliance and Mesh LLM
42:37 — Goose, LDK, Think Big
Links: 
https://x.com/benthecarman

https://x.com/spiral_xyz

Stephan Livera links:
Follow me on X: @stephanlivera

Subscribe to the podcast

Subscribe to Substack

Bitkey ditched seed phrases for a recovery-focused 2-of-3 design: an app key, hardware key, and Block server key that use phones, hardware, and cloud access to help people retain control of their funds.
Clay Garrett, Bitkey lead at Block, joins Stephan Livera to explain the design trade-offs: safety as security plus recoverability, cloud backup that needs your hardware to decrypt, and why Bitkey does not treat vendor lock-in as its ethos.
They dig into recovery paths, multi-vendor trade-offs, transfer-without-hardware limits, Recovery Contacts and inheritance, a working FROST prototype, what covenants could move on-chain, chain code delegation, and privacy-conscious Electrum options.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Intro
00:19 — Clay Garrett Joins — Bitkey at Block
00:56 — Bitkey V2 and the 2-of-3 Model
03:03 — Safety Means Access and Recoverability
04:11 — App+Hardware Spends Without Block
07:09 — Cloud Backup and Instant Phone Swap
09:27 — Lost Hardware and the 7-Day Delay
12:14 — Vendor Lock Is Temporary, Not Ethos
15:44 — Multi-Vendor After Coldcard
21:20 — Which Wallet Fits Your Threat Model?
26:49 — $5 Wrench and Transfer Without Hardware
30:04 — Recovery Contacts and Inheritance
36:06 — FROST Prototype Already in the Repo
38:04 — On-Chain Looks Like Single-Sig
39:34 — Covenants Could Move Policy On-Chain
42:09 — Chain Code Delegation — BIP 89
46:10 — Electrum, Mempool, and Custom Servers
52:08 — Industry After Coldcard Changed
55:21 — Wallet Plus Free-for-Life Co-Signing
Links: 
https://x.com/clay_garrett

https://bitkey.world/

Stephan Livera links:
Follow me on X: @stephanlivera

Subscribe to the podcast

Subscribe to Substack