Peter Todd: “I want politicians to own Bitcoin”

Traders Union
All News
Editors' Picks
Interview with Peter Todd

All news

Top Stories

Editors' Picks

Crypto News

Financial News

Currencies

Market Voices

Billionaires

Companies

Regulators News

Eugene Komchuk

14.10.2025

Peter Todd: “I want politicians to own Bitcoin” — Interview with Peter Todd for Traders Union

Peter Todd is a well-known Bitcoin developer from Canada who became world-famous a year ago after an HBO investigation. Journalists suggested that he might be the mysterious creator of the world’s first cryptocurrency — Satoshi Nakamoto — but Todd denied these claims. In an interview with Traders Union, the programmer spoke about how his life has changed since then, what he is working on today, and why he still sees Bitcoin as the ultimate tool of freedom in the modern world.

– A year ago, HBO called you Satoshi Nakamoto. Did that affect you or your life in any way?

– If we’re talking about attention, the only real change is that people started asking me more often how all this affected my life (smiles). But honestly, no — nothing major has changed. I was already quite well-known in the Bitcoin community. Maybe there are a few more people who want to take a selfie or ask for an autograph, but that’s about it. It’s not so much the circumstances that changed, but people’s expectations — many assumed that after the film, something had to be different. That’s why I decided to stop doing TV interviews; being more recognizable to the general public wouldn’t do me any good.

– What do you think about popular Bitcoin influencers like Michael Saylor, founder of Strategy, and Jack Dorsey, head of Block? Could they potentially harm Bitcoin if they changed their stance? Isn’t there a risk of centralizing public opinion around them?

– It’s similar to the conversation about centralization within Bitcoin itself. Opinions are just opinions. Suppose Jack Dorsey suddenly decides that Bitcoin is stupid — what would happen? People would listen, think about it, and most likely decide that he’s lost his mind. The same goes for Michael Saylor. Although Saylor is in a slightly different position — through his company, he indirectly controls a large amount of Bitcoin. But even if he said something strange, other members of the company would simply distance themselves from it.

The real threat to Bitcoin doesn’t come from these people but from the reasons that might make them change their views. For example, if the U.S. suddenly banned Bitcoin, that would certainly harm it. In that case, Dorsey or Saylor might change their stance, but the damage would come from circumstances, not from them.

– Let’s talk about those circumstances. During his campaign, U.S. President Donald Trump repeatedly declared his love for Bitcoin — for instance, during the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville. What do you think his real attitude toward cryptocurrency is?

– It’s hard to say since he’s a politician and tends to say a lot of things. But at the same time, I see a degree of sincerity in it — a sign of genuine feeling. So I wouldn’t call his statements about Bitcoin mere campaign talk. I think he genuinely believes Bitcoin is a good idea.

That said, he’s not a tech guy and probably doesn’t fully understand the details of decentralization. But overall, he seems to view it positively. And that’s a good thing for all of us: if he’s using cryptocurrency, it helps keep it legal. I want politicians to own Bitcoin, to issue tokens — all of that strengthens the industry. Even meme coins like TRUMP — yes, they sound silly, but what matters is that all of this remains legal.

– Several years ago, you helped run elections in Guatemala using Bitcoin’s blockchain to prevent possible manipulation during vote counting. Was that case successful?

– Yes, it was a very successful project. We didn’t conduct the election on the blockchain but helped verify its integrity. Guatemala uses a traditional paper-ballot system: people cast their votes, drop them into a box, and dip their fingers in ink to prevent double voting. After polls close, ballots are manually counted, and the results are entered into spreadsheets. That’s where digitization begins: the sheets are scanned and uploaded to a central database. We added timestamps to these scans using the OpenTimestamps protocol to record the exact moment they were created. That doesn’t prove a ballot is authentic, but it prevents manipulation.

After the election, there were allegations of fraud — reportedly from the losing party, trying to delay the process. OpenTimestamps helped prove that nearly all ballots were counted correctly.

– Let’s move on to the prospects of the main digital asset. A fully circular Bitcoin economy, where everything can be paid for with cryptocurrency — is that still a fantasy or already close to reality?

– It’s not a fantasy — it’s entirely possible. The world, or at least individual countries, could move in that direction. We just don’t yet have good examples where more than 10% of GDP flows through Bitcoin. That would already be a success, but such places don’t exist yet. Ultimately, everything depends on regulation.

– And finally, where do you think Bitcoin is heading — toward mass adoption or toward becoming just another corporate asset?

– Probably both. Yes, companies are increasingly holding Bitcoin in their portfolios, but mass adoption is already happening. Take Ukraine, for example — you can walk into a computer store and pay with USDT, or sometimes even Bitcoin. Sellers accept stablecoins because they can use them the next day to pay suppliers. I’ve seen this personally. And it’s not just one store — there are many. Even bus companies accept cryptocurrency. So, cryptocurrencies have simply become another payment method — convenient and fast.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.