[000:00:00;00] cinema is based on literature, even if it is original, but the script is still written, i just have to let everything pass through myself, which means my fantasy begins to play out, especially since i am a participant in the events, so i already did it there, i don’t remember four or five film adaptations, starting with pietsukha with the first short film, lemons, then lemons, then ivanov, then prilepe. and the monastery series, and yes, this is the fifth arkranization, it turns out that with whom i did not communicate among the writers, i immediately warned what i would do based on the motive, and not once there were no objections, everyone, all the writers, told me about the same thing, that the book is already good, if you make a bad film, your problems, make a good one, this is only a plus for us, writers, so i think in this

sense, i am very pleased with the film, and i immediately understood that it would be a separate independent world, but it is all the more interesting to observe those rap points that are in the novel and to see, as it were, some kind of parallel life of its heroes, or to see the film embodiment of certain moves, for example when the tsoi sing on the opposite barricades, and how the camera goes into the sky and moves from tverskaya street to ostankino pond, and now you came up with it, but you see it already embodied on the screen. by the way, this episode is very important, in principle, this is something that should bring people together, but this rapprochement is not happening. it seems to me that in some important things we agree, because thought, and books, and films, how terrible dehumanization is, how terrible it is when a split occurs among people, especially among those closest to us, and this is not made up, we know thousands of such families then and now. it's archetypal

absolutely. history yes, these heroes are not some kind of activists, these are ordinary people, it’s just that harsh reality has invaded their quite quiet ordinary life, so read separate books, watch movies, compare in favor of one or the other, but seryozha and i are kind of like each other , satisfied, yes, well, yes, well, i must say that something like this happened for me, i was sitting while watching this film next to pavel basinsky and i kept asking basinsky, pasha, and this was in the book, and this was, because i have a confession to make. i'm on i didn’t read the book at that moment, i’m to blame for you seryozha, that i read this book after i watched this film, because i suddenly became wildly interested, this is what is in the film, what is in the book, when i read it book, i realized that it is, of course, very different, very different, and it’s interesting, yes, it’s interesting how you worked with this literary material, yes, it’s interesting how such a canvas develops in this novel, such a saga,

really family, but still... returning to bassinsky, there was a lot the reviews for the film have already been mostly positive, in general, it seems to me that this is a great success, with which i can sincerely congratulate you to the entire film crew, but nevertheless, the question hovers: are you still for the whites or for the reds? it seems to me, uh, that as long as we ask ourselves this question, we will live - not very well, here you are, a former teacher of marxism-lenism, are you for the reds or for the whites? i am from private property, and so am i, but i doubt it, i want to figure it out, because i am for justice, i am for the people, we are asking this we will apparently always ask each other, meaning that white and red are completely different, not necessarily these colors, bolsheviks there and liberals there, nothing like that, yes, but as long as we ask this question, we will not achieve

happiness, happiness cannot be achieved, but is it then possible to conclude from this that such a super idea, a super task of your film is for people to stop asking this question , for them to ask some other questions, there is only one alternative, in my opinion, this is mercy, this is very banal and simple, this is mercy, sympathy, empathy, like now they say, humanity, humanity, you know, when they ask me who i am for, i am for the killed, so i want them not to be forgotten, i like the fact that alexander resurrected, left two guys alive, they were actually lovers , girl, poetess, bart, natasha petukhova, her fiancé alexei shumsky, a young engineer, they died under bullets, i want at least a symbolic monument to the murdered, in fact we need a real one, this is our common tragedy, when they ask for someone... then why can’t you be for peaceful coexistence?

times... who is now 40-odd years old there. but i thought they were going out to these barricades, there was already an idea that i was going, i was going against violating the constitution, and still not more for the white house, it turns out, well, i, i was against breaking the law, i was for civilized competition between the parties was preserved, i was in favor of simultaneous re-elections being held in 1993, for this, and it was clear to me when i was already thirteen, so you said that your worldview changed... after these events, what did you have i mean, well, i’m just like a character, i gave this to the character victor, and the main character, i also once put up leaflets with yeltsin, for

yeltsin, in 9, in the ninety-first year, yes, naturally, we all longed for this, i was lucky more than our hero, because in ninety-three i entered the higher course and simply changed my life, just there at 108. yes, here, here we present a person who longs for a new life, democracy, freedom of speech, everything, everything, everything , all this seems to come, at the same time they kill you the ground is pulled from under their feet and they say, now live as you want, and the person is not ready, and there were a lot of them, they were deceived, the reforms were carried out, apparently wrong, no one thought about the people, he speaks in a taxi, no one explained with people, and people are red and white, no one... needs, of course, drama in total intolerance, in unwillingness to take into account another person, and many believe that this is some kind of historical curse, that all this has very deep, strong roots in history. i believe that then there was

a very serious chance, a chance - difficult, but compromise, and i believe that in 1993 there was the most severe trauma for subsequent times. believe me, i still had a lot of questions. in relation to a significant part of those who were from the outside - the defenders of the white house, but i believe in diversity, i am against defamation and mythologization, in fact it is scary when both sides look at each other through the lens, everything was split, not only there are families there, but the country was actually split roughly in half, and the way out of this was through blood, but in general in in a sense, we are still in such a semantic postscript to those events, the schism did not end, the raskovs and, unfortunately, those events are about the fact that there is the right of the strong, and this was, in general, destruction, gifted by perestroika, because people stopped believing

politicians, in general, in their civilian capacity, were interested in what was happening, they realized that they could not influence anything, in this sense, after we lay under the bullets, and i realized that the tanks would pass in any way. you can’t create an idol for yourself, that’s still a commandment, that’s right, i remember the commandments are banal, i lived nearby, the glass was clinking, but they were commandments, it all resonated with pain, i must say that my dad is a priest, and we went, a few days later, he served a memorial service, i saw these endless traces, bullets, everything torn apart, a sobbing mother, i later met many parents. in general, it all became such a personal story, even in our house there were barricades that smelled of bonfires hiding, well, of course, it was right to hide it, when i arrived in paris, i was not known,

everyone told me that aren’t you afraid, because maybe, maybe i’ll expect something completely different, but i said that you need to surprise once, almost no one in our country has any idea what haute couture is, authentically, haute couture is high-quality handmade sewing, of its high class, which is placed on the level of painting , architecture. i think that he has all the qualities of a young fashion designer, i was once young myself, and what is especially attractive about him is his sense of fashion, and like a corden man, he will give you a look, it really is so, they always tell me, that that i spend a colossal amount of ideas , what i shouldn’t do, he says that you have to go a very long way, and so that you don’t... remain empty, how long does one collection last? practically she lives until the next fashion show, that is, six months. i really liked yudashkin’s show, i think its level corresponds to international fashion.

congratulations valentin. to the sixtieth anniversary of the birth of valentin yudashkin. matador, tomorrow on the first. heavy self-propelled mortar tulip of special power. capable of several accurate hits to destroy a serious enemy fortification, this is our job, we don’t call it hard, tense, yes, it’s better not to relax. i came as a volunteer out of my heart, i’ve been here for a year and a half already, i don’t want to change and leave, because my team wasn’t difficult without me, here’s the dugout, the ground, the steps, wow, a washing machine, and this is the steam room, yes, yes, yes, yes, oh, guys, this should be a prime minister for the personnel, so that they follow you and act the same way as you,

shot, that’s it, we hit, we hit, we’re working accurately, every ammunition is on target, every ammunition is expensive, here he is fries’s praised leopard, we are ready to destroy the enemy as many as he comes here, premiere, special report, not a step back, on sunday on the first, this is the podcast life: wonderful, i am its lead writer alexey varlamov, my guest is director alexander veledinsky and writer sergei shargunov, we are talking about the film 1993, i can say, i remember my feelings from that time, if we compare the ninety-first and ninety-third, yes, like these two key points in russian history, in ninety-one i was such an active citizen, because i was of course against the state committee for the communist party of ukraine, of course for yeltsin, of course, there, in ninety-three,

to be honest, i was so tired of everything, such a lack of faith, i didn’t like either of them, i didn’t like the others, i didn’t understand what they were doing there at all, i had to survive, there was a family there, my wife was pregnant, well, i later described it all in the birth story , that’s just right, that’s all at this time - was happening, so when i watched your film now, he said, i really liked it, i really liked how the era was recreated there, i liked the interior, the details, the dialogues, the trains, it ’s all very cool, but nevertheless... ... i caught myself feeling that i was watching a film that did not quite coincide with my memories of that time, because i was busy with myself, i have the feeling that many people in russia, that is, there was some kind of... then a bunch of passionaries on one side on the other side, who are there was some kind of showdown between them, and a huge country, now it no longer believed either one or the other, a huge country, this is my feeling, alexey, about this you are now contradicting yourself in a good sense, because you...

.they just said that you lived literally like our character , it’s just, well, your character was pulled into this funnel , sucked in, but i didn’t even have any thoughts of going there, because what i will do there, i need to earn money, someone... then he dragged on, someone is missing, as stein said, that such a playwright, he looks like he’s gone mad traffic controller, if the traffic controller must separate everyone at the intersection so that everyone leaves, the playwright must push everyone, then, yes, it is clear that sergei. and in the film, when i wrote the script, there were four versions of the script, we created a situation around the hero in order to bring him to these barricades, the death of a friend and so on, about it must be said that usually in general only a few participate in dramatic events associated with upheavals percent of the population, in fact always, and even in the events of the ninety-first year, for the most part ordinary people did not participate, people lived their lives, of course, of course , he says, i want, he says to his wife at the beginning of the film,

the task is to survive in the new paradigm, but at the same time i imagine, i imagine you, alexey, at the white house, on tverskaya, if the circumstances had turned out a little differently, there was just a certain intellectual company there, conversations, i listened, read, it could have been completely, i see you there, i remember, i later became very friends with a wonderful writer, leonid bordin, whom i really really love that. times that i was sitting there for my activities, and he told me that all my friends were there at the white house, but they had red banners, i could not go under the red banners, this is a contradiction, this is white and red, the thing is, what they were going there, he told me that he brought food there, but he could n’t stand ideologically side by side with them, yes, he was very

heavy, but there were constant orthodox religious processions with icons of the new martyrs, a huge monarchist part was, in general, himself the supreme council was, by the way, non-communist, social democratic, but this is already, so to speak, a political analysis, in the same scene in the taxi the hero says a very important, important phrase, that i am the people, but i don’t like leaders, not at all, it’s as if an idea is born in him, in our eyes, and so at least zhenya was played by tsyganov, that it is not good that fights evil, but evil with evil, and people , of course, recoiled from any politics and after that, including december of ninety-three, there were all sorts of protest votes, it all showed how people were stunned and by tanks volleys and the fact that they they don’t believe anyone, but this does not mean that there were no bright participants, charismatic in their own way with their truth and so on, just get off with the words “a plague on both your

houses”, i’m not ready, i just think that there was a chance to avoid this head-on clashes, and i sincerely believe that in... in openness to diversity there are saving ways, and i think this is very important, including about this movie, it’s very easy to pit people against each other, but to actually hear and understand is after all, it’s also important, but nevertheless, look, it still turns out that for the most part, even fiction, it is rather on the side of the white house, after all , to say that some literary works were created so, let's say, relatively speaking, with a liberal tint. nothing special comes to my mind, after all, you named rather marginalized works of famous writers, but still, these books, which are not quite rumored and belong to the subculture, i want to say that they really are - except for the romantic 1993, nothing

has been written about this, absolutely true, but i hope that this topic will continue to resonate in literature and i think new things will appear and... what you said is also a lot, of course, worthy of a film adaptation, but why did this happen, you know why, yes, in fact, in this the spirit of the songs of yegor letov, also another barricader, who was dragged around psychiatric hospitals, mental hospitals, in soviet times, and then he raised a red flag in protest, so he, too, was very worried about the fate of the shot parliament, and just this spirit of victory for the losers , he definitely is. at all the country was imbued with pity and sympathy for those who became victims, this is also another lesson from october, and of course, writing a work from the position of being correctly hit, hit - this is somehow not at all in the spirit of russian literature,

so even tsyganov’s hero says, when they save sid and nancy, answering their question, it means their colleagues say they are victims , then the colleague says they will seize power and they will become like everyone else, he says, well, that will happen later, but now they are victims, let’s save them, let’s save them pity, victims, he called for mercy on the fallen, of course, yes, it’s also very interesting, if you compare the film and the book, yes, this is the ending, in the finale of the book the hero dies, yes, and in your case the girl he met dies, this is in the novel it happened too, she didn’t die there, they brought her into intensive care, she was wounded there, she was really bloody, and she survived. this is a big question, but nevertheless, you have one of the most heartbreaking scenes, as they say, my wife played, yes, they told me, they told me that she played perfectly played, in general the actors, i must say, this is just a separate thing, here is a word of gratitude, i must say how convincingly they play, how much you believe in them, no one with a cold nose worked in this picture,

neither the actors nor the directors, neither the cameramen, nor the make-up artists, nor the lighting technicians, nor the workers... everyone was very worried and let it go through themselves, i can say that for sure, thank you guys, thank you to the group, thank you very much to everyone. i think that both for older viewers and for younger ones, everyone will take something away from it, but the fact that the picture, although it it looks for quite a long time in one breath and you just, well, you just believe in what you see, and the camera work is absolutely amazing, the artist there

, in my opinion, is some kind of artist, all these in the book the hero really dies and it seems to me that literary this is honestly justified, yet the movie viewer is waiting for some kind of bright outcome, well, in the book there is also a bright outcome , because of course, grandson, literature is often halftones, but here, by the way, he dies in the book not from bullets, but these are the ones who will read that, but it seems to me that cinema, this is no offense to cinema, it’s just a genre that requires some more drastic decisions, still, once again... i remember that i connected the character with myself personally, skipping all this instead, i wrote four versions of the script, i wrote the script for 2 years, during this time i was born - in the third version of the script, in my opinion, exactly this ending was born

, because i survived, and i survived this time, and i found in myself, that means, some opportunities to move, although having completed higher courses in ninety-five, when we they said that there won’t be any cinema, goodbye, you studied in vain, you know , yes, well, somehow in that paradigm we tried to survive and... and those who had the patience survived, so on my part it’s simple, since i already went this way, it would be dishonest for this hero, of course, but isn’t it a pity for the girl, a pity, a very, very pity, a very pity, and a pity for jans, and jans, though in the book she also died, but ours seems to have a more developed line than in the book, i can just tell you, it’s a little funny, maybe a story will seem when i gave sasha robuk one of the script options, almost the last one, to read, i say, well, it’s time to disconnect, he’s in every film i have, well, he wasn’t in the monastery, and he says, he

read, he says , i really like the script, well, yans, so yans, i say, i’ll write you a scene, specially, in which you will reveal your shame, you will reveal the main character even more, it was a scene in a bar at night, when they are afraid, i have been afraid all my life, i've been afraid all my life, but i wrote this scene for him, and sasha said, well... thank you, now this is a role, this is a podcast, the life of the wonderful, i am its leading writer alexei varlamov, my guests are director alexander veledinsky and writer sergei shargunov, we are talking about the film 1993. by the way, i was pleased with how the book and the film were perceived from left to right, by those who still remain opponents, but those with artistic flair, they each saw their own. and this pain remains with people, and at the same time those who persist in dogmatism, of course, will not be satisfied, neither the novel

nor the film, there will be haters from right to left, both me and i had no doubt about this when i started making the film and read the book, i knew, and this happened 4 years ago, our first movements towards the film began, i admire and trust alexander very much, and of course, this was created separately... an interesting work, yes, i also think so, that indeed this film is such a real event, like a long time ago , probably, but without a book, but i want, i want to make this remark, i often, uh, read reproaches, especially related to the new generation, many say , how will it be perceived by those who did not live then and did not seen, it seems to me, in some sense in the film consciously, and if not smoothed out, then brought out. political context, and this seems to me archetypally correct, because this is about eternal strife, it is very important

to show that good and sincere people could end up like this against each other, this is mysticism, magic, mystery and pain of schism, it seems to me much more important than diving into details, it’s difficult, i might even argue with this, because i’m just in the novel, no, just in the novel. i really felt it’s interesting to read when some people with their own names appeared, as they say, here is makashov, here is barkashov, here is konstantinov, yes, here they are all people whom i have already forgotten about, maybe, yes, suddenly they are resurrected like that, yes , was really like that, he said something, he did something , this was it for me, on the other hand, novodvorskaya, of course, i remember very well, in fact, this sunday evening on october 3, when gaidar calls on everyone to go to my friend calls me and the mass council and says that we have to go,

because, god forbid, these people are about to break into the remains and what will happen in the country is generally unclear, so i remember the feeling that i need to feed the children, i have other worries altogether, such a man in the street in me spoke like this not siinin, a private person who doesn’t want anything to do with all this, so this is of course interesting, in the film, by the way , it was very interesting to me, some kind of documentary pictures appeared there, yeltsin appeared here, the patriarch appeared here , here there is also rudskoy, someone, this is really very cool, this is a combination of documentary and artistic principles , here i can already reveal such a secret, in the second version of the script, in my opinion, seryozha read, these were characters who were right here participated in the film, it was necessary to look for actors, all this and it would become boring. in my opinion, it’s my big one, and i refused this zanost, because a book is a book, again, a movie is a movie, well, of course, in the movie it’s a very cool idea with

these coffins, it actually appears there this topic, yes, during the wake, it was born, the funeral business, it’s true , very, very true, i’m very glad that it was born, having already submitted the second draft of the script, i called the producers and said, my script is bad, because i haven’t developed the heroine’s line, she must still achieve her goal, that this confrontation will be with the hero, and i say, she will be engaged in this kind of business, in the third version it already appeared, and then... and she says: you have he always says there was some kind of light at the end in films, but here it’s quite dark for me ended, i won’t say how, yeah, so i very much doubted it myself, and when you doubt, over some scenes, some key things, while you are writing or filming, or editing, and then comes from the side the person says, this is where i’m screwing

you up, and you think, well, really? because you thought about it, sometimes, he’ll say, okay, you can send, say, uh, no, you just didn’t understand anything, comrade, go for a walk, but here it’s not, here it’s absolutely perfect, when you yourself doubted and you don’t even someone finger poked, thank you, and i was driving, i remember, i was riding in a taxi and i called zhenya and said that tsyganov, i say, this will be the ending, he says, that’s it, i’m filming, by the way, many people think that tsiganov has perhaps the best role, that he is somehow very... he revealed himself very much in this movie, felt-tip pens, calendars for the year ninety-four, which is just around the corner, men’s, you don’t want men, bryantsev, colleague, wanted for a long time, he played a very correct, kind and conscientious russian man, this is cool, the point is that the wife has a father i went through this, this is also

a paradoxical story, that on the one hand i copied this with a person. well, the main character already had almost one to one, well, maybe it’s not space and it doesn’t mean sewerage, but it’s very similar, all these are the same ranges, and zhenya took it as her personal and by the way, zhenya is also like a damner, like a witness came there 93% of the time, yes, yes, too, a boy, and you are the same age, that is, you are two gorosh there who could even meet at these barricades, maybe met, or maybe we met, but i must say that we met on the set, not everyone recognized me. this is a night in the cold rain and half a minute in the frame, i was asked who you want to be, maybe some kind of deputy, i said, god forbid, thank god, a punk, i’m wearing a leather jacket, when they crawl out of the hatch, like that letovsky, and young guys came up to me after the premiere of the remake, there are so many interesting actors, and did you notice there is one there that looks like yegor letov, he’s really cool, well

, he’s also wearing glasses, a leather jacket, his mane is so flashy. well, just like that characteristic, i say, yes, you know who this is, wow, yegor letov, it won’t work so that the eyes are not visible, but he will be like this, so that the eyes are visible, no, no, no, come on, like this, here, that’s just right, well, surprisingly, very important, bold, and significant. that what didn’t let us go eventually turned into a movie, this is the first feature film from those events 30 years later. well, dear friends, thank you very much for this conversation, thank you even more for this film, for this book, i urge everyone to watch it, read the novel sergei, compare, draw your own conclusions and understand

who you are for. this was a podcast about the life of the wonderful, i am with you... its host, writer alexey varlamov, my guests were the wonderful director alexander veledinsky and writer sergei shargunov, be merciful, this is an easy money podcast, i am its host mikhail khanov, today we we are dealing with such a complex topic as “digital assets, digital currencies, digital ruble, cryptocurrencies and even bitcoin. our guest today is mikhail bilyaev, candidate of economic sciences, financial analyst. hello, mikhail. hello, let's help our audience figure out what digital money is, if we take it, this is the broadest class, is it digital money, digital currency, what should we call it? now, call it what you want, you want digital money, you want digital currency - it’s all the same thing, the main thing is

to understand that this is the money that is in. sphere, that is, the sphere that is served by all kinds of electronics and other programs, and they exist only in non-cash form. how are they different from non-cash money in everything and you only know technology and equipment, but there is one very big difference, that this whole class , what is usually called crypto money or cryptocurrency, it is generally divided into two such classes, which are not mutually exclusive have nothing in common except technology, there is the so-called cbdc, that is, from the english abbreviation , central bank, that is, the digital currency of central banks, this is one thing, this is the money that the central bank issues, they are practically

no different from national money, to which people are used to, be it cash or non-cash money, but we are talking about the non-cash sphere in which the central bank begins to use new technologies, and these are not economic technologies, but technologies that are money, they are also issued with a certain, well one might say, with the same information technologies, but some separate group of people , or one person who issues this money, not a central bank, here is a radical watershed, but crypto is that, well, that’s it, what relates to such a virtual sphere, crypto, well, this is protection, secret writing , that’s all this, but there really isn’t any semantic load there, just purely this,

something that relates the virtual sphere there, well, if with such a classical cryptocurrency, well, let’s call it classical, yes, it’s more or less clear what it is, everything is built purely on trust, so to put it even more broadly, there is something being created there so that... you can use these money, a source is created there that can be used to extract it with with the help of certain algorithms, such a settlement platform is created with which we can exchange this money , we put it aside and return to the currency that we all care about , the digital ruble, let's talk specifically about the central bank of the russian federation, which is now we were puzzled by the fact that some tests are already underway, yes, on the basis of individual... banks, that is, there is a certain platform being developed under the auspices of the central bank, under the protection of the central bank, on which they will apply or with the help which digital rubles will circulate,

attention, question: why? it’s very bad for the central bank that it doesn’t give these explanations, i, as an economist , i, as an economist , don’t see the difference between these digital rubles that will be issued, and those rubles that circulate in impersonal form , they differ only in the technology of their circulation, some kind of special platform that is designed for them to move, a certain algorithm, certain programs, information ones, namely informational ones that allow all these operations to be carried out, so in my opinion there is no need to talk about any third form, that is, it turns out that the central bank, in your words, simply gets... control, watching how all the money moves, even not within the framework of commercial banks, for which he is also a regulator, but simply on a specific platform that was developed by the interbank, receives an additional

contract, it seems, and they use, well, modern technologies, well, just like in its time, remember there was first cash, but from cash it turned into check circulation, check circulation turned into plastic cards for certain ones too, i must say, which are hidden in your very smartphone, and this is not separate money, it is the same money , only their turnover is served by different information algorithms, that is , there is no semantic benefit for both the banking structure and ordinary users, for you and me, our audience, the digital ruble does not bring any benefits, i think it is useful only in technology, this non-cash turnover, why is non-cash money bad? no, and these will be non-cash ones, only they will be serviced by a more progressive program , let’s say, that this program will be centralized under the central bank, not sub-commercial

banks, which each have their own automatic banking system, but under a single platform, these banks should oppose this with both hands, two feet, and so on, well, how does this deprive them of profit, that is, no, why is there no profit here, this is only about the movement of money... why are commercial banks needed, and even with such a level of state control, in fact, with commercial, commercial banks are needed in order to carry out specific operations, and we return there when we understand that we have a two-tier banking system, we have a central bank, it regulates banks as agents, these are the financial agents of the market, but specific operations on lending, settlements, deposits, and others, the platform itself will not be able to do this, why not load with these functions, a platform that will perform the functions of such a single large bank, that is, in my opinion, the central bank is completely

lowering it. here at the level of commercial banks and becomes a full-fledged player, there is no difference , no, the central bank creates this platform, well, the same way, why don’t you then protest against fast payment platforms, yes, this is the same thing, only electronic , this is a tool, this is a means, okay, this is a question, just for understanding, and one of the theses of the cdc was that even if there is no communication infrastructure, that is, there is no... access to the internet, electronic wallets of citizens, yes, that is , what is it like everyone is already familiar with, probably, a flash drive, something else, you can use this money where there is no internet, physically, this is how it happens, that is, i approach a gas station, which is located in the steppe, let’s say there is infrastructure there, it’s like a cash register equipped with access, that is, i put a flash drive in there, that is, it’s a flash drive, well, it could be a flash drive , but any medium, yes

any medium, card, flash drive, because the card is the same... and i don’t need a connection with the external world of the internet, just electronic money from my wallet specifically, if the money is written there, because it’s on a plastic card, then we’ll explain, we’ll explain, too to our listeners who don’t understand, maybe don’t see, don’t see the difference between a plastic card and a wallet, the fact is that when we pay with a plastic card, the accounts from which are from one account. another, when we transfer, they are in different banks, by inserting this card, we transfer money from one bank to another, it’s called a special card account, yes, and the wallet is exactly that account recorded on this medium and it is located on the platform developed by the central bank. absolutely true, but it’s not necessarily a crypt, it’s not necessarily a crypt, these same wallets already exist now, the fact is that crypto doesn’t solve anything, it decides, that’s where its crypto ruble is, digital? it

solves the question, rather, that there is finance and money of corporations, individuals, reports, budgets and other things, so it is believed that this is a digital ruble, it will allow these zones to be seamlessly stitched together to ensure the flow of money from one zone to another, as the central bank calls it, infernal, the rate is one to one, of course, completely identical, completely, there is no question, this is the same, let’s explain to our audience that these are the same rubles, just a different electronic form, they are as close as possible to non-cash rubles, of course, but the platform is not an automatic bank system that provides communications with other banks, this is a single platform of the central bank, on which, from which there is clarification to each bank that participates in the program, if the bank is supported, supported by this scheme, then you

can withdraw part of your money from the account. in your commercial bank, transfer to a digital account, let’s call it that now, and you can even use it, and using the media there, whether it’s a card, or a flash drive, you can use it even where there is no access to communication, everything that has there, here with how can you informationally enter this area, please, do you like this idea more than non-cash rubles, and you understand, this is scientific and technological progress, you cannot stop it, just as you understand, it is probably not very correct to ask what is better, a plastic card or this smartphone for calculations, nearfield communications, that is, communications near fields, now we’ve been talking here for a long time, it’s time to relax a little, near field connections , let me explain to the audience, this is when you bring, well, either brought a watch or a phone, at a distance of 5 cm they provided a transition, but of course first need to in your smartphone, write down that