On multiple occasions, Saylor refers to the non-fiat gold standard of the 1800s, or 200 years ago, etc.  Then, at one point, Saif frames the conversation as "In a world in which you only have 21 million, and you don't have a lender of last resort, I don't see how this model survives." to which Saylor responds by again referencing the gold standard of the past - this time with the emphasis of "before fiat" - followed (eventually) by "the idea that I would get interest on a sound money asset, I don't think is unreasonable in the future because it wasn't unreasonable in the past."

To me, this can only be interpreted as analogizing Bitcoin's eventual fiat-less future to gold's fiat-less past.  This, btw, does not contradict the notion that Bitcoin is not currently competing against the USD nor will it for the foreseeable future.