CZ's Full Public Speech After Release from Prison: Still Very Bullish on the Entire Industry, Will Continue Supporting Other Builders
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
CZ's Full Public Speech After Release from Prison: Still Very Bullish on the Entire Industry, Will Continue Supporting Other Builders
The verdict is in the past, and I'm moving forward.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsCompilation: BlockBeats
The most anticipated moment of this year's Binance Blockchain Week has finally arrived. Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ), fresh out of a four-month prison stint, took the main stage and shared thoughts on his time behind bars, Binance, education initiatives, and AI. This marks CZ’s first public appearance since his release.
After paying an enormous price for freedom—$4.3 billion in fines and four months in a U.S. prison—CZ appeared remarkably relaxed, with more defined arm muscles than before. As Bitcoin climbs toward its historic high of $70,000, it’s fitting that we hear from CZ again after about a year, making for a great final day of Uptober.
Below is the full transcript:
Austin: I'm Austin from Altcoin Daily. CZ, this is your first interview since getting out. How was your experience in prison? It couldn't have been good, right?
CZ: Definitely not as fun as it is now. The entire experience was very restrictive—freedom taken away, not much to do—but it gave me a lot of time to reflect. I learned many important lessons. For example, when everything is stripped away, what do you miss the most? For me, it was human connection. I missed my kids, family, friends, colleagues, and the community. I missed other things too—food, a comfortable bed—but those weren’t nearly as impactful. This experience helped me refocus my life priorities.
Austin: Do you think the sentence was fair?
CZ: That’s a very subjective question—different people will see it differently. There was a plea agreement, and I agreed to certain terms. I don’t intend to speak negatively about it; I’ve accepted the outcome.
Regarding the sentence, I received four months in prison. Judges have a tough job, and opinions vary. Some think it’s too light, others too harsh. The crime I committed—violating the Bank Secrecy Act—is one for which no one in U.S. history had previously been sentenced for a single violation. I’m the first.
Just weeks ago, a bank was fined $1.8 billion for similar issues, yet no individuals were charged. Whether it’s fair or not isn’t something I dwell on anymore. The judge also spoke highly of me in court. While I was sentenced, compared to others, my term was indeed short. Most inmates are serving five, ten years, or more. So in that sense, I consider myself lucky. The judgment is behind me, and I’m moving forward.
Austin: Did you make any friends inside?
CZ: Yes, you need to make friends—otherwise it can be really hard. A few guards recognized me and even asked what crypto they should buy. But I had no internet access or crypto news at all.
I did make some friends and still keep in touch with them. Honestly, there are many good people in prison, many serving long sentences for very minor offenses. Most of the people I met were friendly. A few guards were a bit cold, but I didn’t suffer any physical harm. In that regard, I was very fortunate.
Before entering, I consulted with prison consultants—an actual industry—who advised me not to keep too much money in my account, just $50. But once inside, I found others had $200, so I looked like the “poor guy.” Overall, I didn’t face major issues, made some friends, and am now helping them legally pursue sentence reductions.
One friend, Michael, was imprisoned 40 years ago for marijuana possession and served 27 years—even though marijuana is now legal. During incarceration, he earned a university degree and read six books. There are truly talented people in prison, but achieving such feats under those conditions is incredibly difficult. We had limited computer access—just 15 minutes at a time before being logged out automatically. No copy-paste allowed; everything had to be typed manually. So if you wanted to edit text, you had to rewrite it. And in Michael’s time, there weren’t even computers. Despite the hardship, many still strive to learn, read, and earn degrees. There are a lot of good people in there.
Relationship with Binance and Views on Industry Trends
Austin: What’s your current relationship with Binance?
CZ: I’ve stepped down as CEO and no longer participate in day-to-day operations. My shareholder rights remain intact, so I’m still a major shareholder of Binance. I can request information, but I can’t make decisions or issue instructions. Overall, the relationship is good. Now there’s a new team working hard, and I’m essentially “forced into retirement.” The first month was tough emotionally—I’d dedicated seven years of intense effort to building this company.
But I’ve always believed a CEO shouldn’t serve more than ten years. The world changes. With AI now emerging, I hadn’t spent enough time understanding it, nor deeply explored DeFi details. Looking back, being forced to step down actually has many benefits. If I’d quit voluntarily, people might have thought I couldn’t handle the pressure. But since it was involuntary, no one blames me.
Beyond that, I now have more time, and I feel lucky. My reputation has shifted, but I still value what we achieved: no fraud, no user funds lost. In that sense, my reputation remains solid. I’m not young, but not too old either—I still have energy for new ventures. Having this freedom and resources to pursue meaningful work is truly fortunate.
Austin: Is it true you’re banned for life from managing any crypto exchange? Will you continue investing in crypto projects?
CZ: Well, according to my understanding, the words “lifetime” and “ban” don’t actually appear in my agreement with the government. The agreement required me to resign as CEO, with no time limit specified. Of course, agreements can be updated, and governments change. But I have no intention of returning as CEO. The team is doing well, and I don’t feel the need to go back—even if I could, I wouldn’t want to. I think “lifetime ban” is media exaggeration. The actual agreement is public.
As for investing, yes, I’ll definitely continue. Right now, I focus on two things: Google Academy and investing. My investments center on blockchain, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology. I no longer want to lead projects myself. Instead, I want to support other entrepreneurs—with funding, advice, and resources. I’ve had great mentors, and I hope to become one for others.
Austin: What’s your outlook on cryptocurrency in 2025? Are you still bullish for the next year?
CZ: I try not to give financial advice. History doesn’t guarantee the future, and I can’t predict what’s next—but I can analyze patterns. Historically, Bitcoin follows a clear four-year cycle. 2013 was a bull run, 2017 was a bull run. Actually, 2012 was a recovery year—many forget that far back. 2016 was a recovery year, then 2017 surged. 2020 was recovery, 2021 was the bull market. This year, we’ve returned near previous highs.
So based on existing data, 2024 appears to be a recovery year. What happens next year? I don’t know. But long-term, I remain very optimistic about the industry. There’s still so much to build. As more people adopt crypto, its utility value increases. I’m still very bullish over the long haul.
Austin: Which areas of crypto excite you most? DeFi or meme coins?
CZ: I won’t pick specific sectors—predicting the next breakout is extremely hard. Back in early 2017, I couldn’t have predicted ICOs would take off, but by June the trend was obvious. It depends on which niche projects gain traction. This morning, I met founders combining AI and blockchain—some really interesting ideas. If one project blows up, the whole field expands. Hard to predict, but I’ll keep supporting builders and see what unfolds.
Views on Regulation
Austin: On legislation, what’s your take on the future of crypto regulation?
CZ: Legislation is gradually improving. In some countries, progress is fast—like here. In larger nations with complex bureaucracies, it’s slower. But overall, the trend is positive. For example, mid-April, Elizabeth Warren announced plans to crack down on crypto—just a week before my sentencing. By June, Trump publicly supported crypto. By late June, both parties backed it—even while I was still in prison. This shows that when people demand crypto, governments respond. So I believe the direction is positive.
Austin: I live in the U.S., and from my view, crypto has become a key election issue. Who do you think is more crypto-friendly—Harris or Trump?
CZ: Oh, I have zero opinion. I won’t comment on elections—I’ve already dealt enough with U.S. law. I know about election interference laws. Anything I say publicly could be taken out of context. I won’t touch this topic—I don’t even want to get close to that line. I’ll just stay away. The fact that both parties support crypto is already a good sign.
Austin: Fair enough. From a U.S. perspective, what policy or legislation matters most?
CZ: The most fundamental issue is how crypto is classified. There’s ongoing debate. In most other countries, crypto is treated as currency. El Salvador has recognized Bitcoin as legal tender, and many others classify it as digital currency. Of course, different tokens have different characteristics. But in the U.S., this remains a major point of contention. I won’t delve deeper into it.
About Giggle Academy
Austin: Suppose we meet again a year from now, on stage at Binance Blockchain Week 2025—not necessarily about price—where do you think Bitcoin or crypto will stand?
CZ: Predicting one year ahead is tough. But I believe history may repeat itself, and we’ll likely be in a reasonably strong position.
Austin: I like that forecast. CZ, what’s next for you?
CZ: Right now, I’m dedicating at least half my time to Giggle Academy. I find it fascinating and highly impactful—though it won’t be a profit-driven venture.
Austin: Can you explain what Giggle Academy is for those unfamiliar?
CZ: It’s a digital education platform designed for people who lack access to education. Globally, around 700 million to 800 million adults are illiterate—two-thirds of them women. Additionally, reports suggest 300 to 500 million children have no access to schooling. That’s roughly 1.2 to 1.3 billion people worldwide without educational opportunities, mostly in extremely impoverished regions.
Most educational apps and programs operate in areas where education is already accessible—supplementing existing systems. But I believe we now have the technological capability to combine game developers, graphic designers, teachers, and AI to create applications that deliver education independently of teachers.
In these regions, teachers are expensive and scarce. Sending educators takes time. But with an interactive app, we can deliver education digitally—primarily on Android, since Android devices are cheaper there.
If we can help 100 million people access education, that would be deeply meaningful to me—regardless of financial return. And I believe it won’t require massive funding.
Today, among 8 billion people globally, about 1 billion attend school daily. With average class sizes of 30–50, there are roughly 20 million teachers worldwide. But how many ways are there to teach first-grade English? We repeat similar teaching processes millions of times daily. If we can turn this into an app powered by AI to answer questions interactively, the upfront cost might be several million dollars. But once the AI engine is built, each course might cost around $1 million. Twelve grades, twelve courses, thirty subjects—totaling about $300 million. Even with large buffers, maybe $1 billion. I believe we can create content that meets today’s global education needs across 500 languages.
The U.S. government spends $100 billion annually on education. Less than 2% of that could provide education to children currently excluded—and potentially deliver better results than traditional classroom teaching. In a 30-student class, the pace is set by the slowest learner. But with a digital platform, we can dynamically adjust content, letting students advance quickly in their strengths. With enough data, we can even help students find jobs faster. An 8-year-old could do labeling tasks—a decent income source.
My nephew started managing a flight simulation gaming community with 14,000 players at age 12. A 16-year-old can do customer support, answering FAQs. Fifteen- or 16-year-olds can be game testers or coders. I want kids to enter the workforce earlier—not just wait for high school or college diplomas.
We can help employers find talent. For example, this child ranks in the top 10% in math and has completed multiple projects. Another child shows high emotional intelligence, mentoring younger peers on the platform. We can help kids find jobs early, lifting their families, siblings, and others into better educational opportunities.
Of course, digital education lacks human interaction—but it has advantages. My idea is to have older children mentor younger ones to compensate. For PE, online classes struggle, but the platform could organize 15-year-olds to lead activities for 7-year-olds. The older kids earn points or credits, making them more attractive hires later.
We can design many such interactions. But our biggest technical challenge right now is enabling AI to consistently generate stable video content. Sounds simple, but it’s hard for AI. Teachers can quickly create materials like PPTs—but those are meant for live teaching.
In a teacherless environment, the platform must deliver content autonomously. To keep kids engaged, we need highly interactive videos, animations, and cute elements—beyond what most teachers can offer. This is where AI shines. Currently, no AI model produces ideal content. I’ve discussed this with top AI experts—we’re actively solving it. I expect this hurdle to be overcome in months to a few years. Once cracked, we can deliver education digitally to hundreds of millions, even billions, of people—free of charge.
Austin: Will parts of Giggle Academy eventually integrate Web3 or blockchain? And will there be airdrops everyone can join?
CZ: Not in the short term. I don’t want to deal with launching new tokens again. We might support existing ones—Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB, etc.
We’ll build incentive mechanisms to keep the system running, but we probably won’t issue our own token. For example, if I need customer support or forum moderators, I can sponsor BNB to pay kids directly.
Another interesting thing I realized: AI companies pay large sums to obtain human-generated data from platforms. If we let kids and parents opt in to share their learning data—like pronunciation practice or math exercises—for AI training, they could earn $10 to $100. For our target users, that’s significant. This creates a “learn-to-earn” direct payment model—no token needed. AI companies become sponsors. So we don’t necessarily need a token to make this work.
Long-term, I hope to gradually incorporate Web3 economic models. This platform could follow a child from learning to speak all the way to employment—and even continue learning at 70 or 80. When they land jobs, we could gently suggest—never force—that they consider donating a portion of their income back to the platform over the next one to three years. Even if only a small fraction participates, I believe we can build a sustainable system. It’s a long-term vision—maybe ten years. But that’s fine. I’ve got time.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
BlockBeats
