thank you all for coming to this
wonderful community and for a
interoperability panel how is everyone
feeling this morning
[Music]
raise your hand if you're not feeling
I'm glad to see you on this dear this is
good so I guess maybe to start off how
about you know ever all of us I never
introduced ourselves and the communities
that we represent sure my name is Josh
White Hart I'm the vice president of
marine business development for Z cash
or actually for the electric coin
company which is the inventor in
supporters occasion
my name is J Kwan and I am the
co-founder of tenements and the cosmos
project I don't represent the cosmos
project I supported and Terry Culver CEO
of etherium classic class so first
question is a challenge question do we
think that it's in the long run even
possible to have enough multiple coin
communities peacefully and operating or
as the maximalists say are we destined
to be stuck in a Hobbesian war of all
coins against all until one point coin
wins and we have one single global
cryptocurrency so for me I mean
absolutely even the pluralism I think
different communities are gonna have
different coins for different needs and
that work in different contexts so I
don't believe in a winner-takes-all kind
of model but I do think that they've
collaborated with you
I also agree I think that one of the
things that we don't see yet but we'll
probably see more in the future are
things like local currency coins or
local local municipal cows and so on and
every one of those they may not all have
their own team
but there will be their own community
that is distinct from other communities
so this I think that's just as one
example that shows that shows me that
there will be many change but I agree I
don't think a winner-take-all future is
really viable you know we all live our
lives as parts of different communities
already with different values I don't
see that changing in the blockchain and
crypto space so what so one thing that
that that I've heard there is and of
talking about communities and values
right and this is not a language that
you normally hear people I never used to
talk to talk about like currencies right
like you know normally hear people
saying oh I've us and use US dollars
because I support US dollar values and
I'm going to switch to euros because
down with us and Uriel is amor I'm going
I'm going to switch to like Raymond beer
or yen or whatever other currency like
this is not something that happens right
now yet and I mean people don't even do
this with stocks right like you don't
even see that much of people saying you
know I love I love Apple so I'm gonna
buy Apple stock like you kind of
happiness but maybe not too much so it's
like I guess why do we expect this will
change I think it actually is tribal
right so we have we have our own
currencies that work in our own way in
our different context it's just that the
the tribalism historically maybe has
been physically than digital and so
maybe that dynamic is what's changed I
think we haven't had maybe the the
technology and we still don't have the
relaxed or for
a large number of people to use multiple
points and further to the competition
among points and for like people in the
United States to to support one point
which is the other certainly the
regulations don't allow it yet but I
think this will change as the industry
matures and as its adopted by the
community despite what the powers that
be my want but I don't know when hopeful
even the most three years okay so I just
kind of turning things a a bit we can
talk a bit about the technical
collaboration right so our different
communities have their own indifference
I would walk chance that they're working
on but we also end up hearing a lot of
tech right so for example here I'm at
the engineering classic share a large
portion of the of the tech stack in
etherium and Z can't Ozzie cash is based
on zk stocks and a theory I'm happily
employed sneaky snorts the cosmos shares
a lot of cryptography so do you think
we're kind of doing a good enough job of
and of coordinating on how we improve
the technologies that are shared between
us and if not what are some things you
think we can do better on I think we
could do a much better job I think you
know manage blockchains are facing the
same fundamental questions and I think
many of us are trying to reinvent the
wheel I think we can identify those
questions and work on them together one
of the things I told me and to add to
that I think one thing I learned along
this journey is that
if you can define a protocol of
communication between two components of
a text example not more like a to
consider text I prefer blockchain
there's so many components and if you
can well define the protocol or the
interface between these components then
like you can have different communities
responsible for their flavor of
implementation and so you can have
competition for a module or component
but ultimately all working towards a
whole is its pluggable so I've
experienced that once and we're trying
to also push for that in other regards
like with with a consensus antigen
tenorman what the a BCI protocol for
example but it's also obviously in
Imperium with the API and so on already
exists as well I think it's helpful to
be intentional right rather than passive
so passively you know we can borrow
technology and thing but but we can
accelerate much more when we're
intentional so you know getting like to
added a symbol and work between Z
Cashion and they like to coin company I
think is hugely important for the
allowing interoperability in the future
so you can use new cash within within
defy that's unlocking some you know some
other things and potential with with
work on my client potential immigration
list with cosmos for example but those
those interactions and those
conversations don't happen passively
they happen generally when people are in
the same room together and they're able
to kind of sit down and think and
they're thinking about selfishly about
their own project what they're working
on but the magic can happen and the
collisions can happen when folks get a
room mm-hmm so if we suppose that
imagine a future where communities are
collaborating more what are some
positive results that you could
imagine our hope to get out of that well
the Z cap should be embedded in more
contracts so you're able to in the
places where you need that that kind of
privacy that that's there to the extent
that like things like ZK snark sort of
the research that our departments are
doing and being able to use that with an
ethereum independency cash I think is
super cool so for me those are a couple
but I'd love to see a more intentional
organization that brings various
communities or representatives or people
from various communities to start to
have these conversations like you
mentioned a theory em is playing for the
crypto community to large stand today
maybe we can reach well how do we reach
out to all the projects what what is
that association so I'd look to see
something like that I think if there is
like kind of set the standard for that
right of bringing all of kind of these
disparate developers and projects and
things like that together it's been
phenomenal so it's kind of its kind of
the bar that had been set I think that
really how was it but I was with betting
I guess yeah now I'm not saying one
question how is it that III 'm is able
to do this whereas like other projects
don't how was the theory am able to do
collaboration whereas other projects
don't yeah like how was it Betty theorem
is better able to collaborate with
desperate like many projects hmm I mean
part of it I think might be just the
fact that etherion has had a kind of NC
maximalist ethos and it from the start
like in the case of like Bitcoin there's
definitely more of this culture of like
this is no budget point or these are the
widget coins and if you're not alleged
coin that you're a scam and the theorem
community has its own opinions about
what's alleged point and what's the scam
but I feel like it's kind of broader and
have brought broad broad enough to
allow of collaboration among technically
good projects to happen so just like
recognizing the legitimacy of different
approaches is the first steps are
cooperating with different approaches I
think the other thing would be cool is
like it if beyond kind of technology
collaboration we figured out how to do a
better job of working on things like
product market fit or things out in the
field where we're engaging together with
the community to reach populations and
to try to solve a specific use cases
where we're not really doing that today
we kind of where it doesn't feel like it
maybe we're kind of coming together and
we talk about this stuff and we engage
technically but when it comes to the
kind of actual execution on the ground
there's a little bit less of that that
kind of collaboration I think creative
collaboration speaks to the way in which
block chains have to grow up I mean you
know we don't expect to get a corporate
strategy plan that's costly and printed
and everybody follows it this is an
iterative creative process for which
there may not be any one single right
answer and so to do that you need an
increasingly diverse community with
increasingly diverse ideas and and
debate one question I have is um every
time I fly I feel guilty because of the
carbon footprint and in the cryptic
community requires a lot of flying in
order to me and like you mentioned being
in the same place is what makes the
magic happen but I feel like for us to
scale to a larger community like at some
point we're gonna have to figure out how
to make this work without flying and but
I don't know how to do that
maybe the
the thing you wouldn't need is more kind
of grassroots like I never local a lot
more of our ability like what it should
if the Auriemma Japan and cosmos Japan
be talking to each other more mmm yeah
it's like the arena for friends and
we're already in Japan should maybe
should we should we be chatting at least
those of us who are in Japan yeah same
with Korea same with like Taiwan same
with China same with anything so
regarding the kind of community aspects
of in interoperability area well
actually so one other question we have
is like we talked about there's
technology and there's a kind of
collaboration because of shared
technology and there's also this idea
that enough different coin coins of
different blockchain communities stand
for different values and like ideologist
against maybe to start off like what are
some of the key things that you would
describe each of your community
communities are standing for well I
think the theorem classic was originally
defined as a statement about governance
and it wasn't really technical at all
it's since taken on a technical agenda
and that'll become stronger over time I
think at the moment and this is
something that's evolving right I think
at the moment it feels very closely tied
to the idea of immutability even though
that's not exclusive to aetherium casa
and the idea of security so that you
could foresee a chain that focuses more
on maybe transaction finality and larger
fewer transactions
and you know the more spawn transactions
so on Twitter yesterday I think Bob
somewhere well described
ETCs being if eth technology and BTC
values I mean do you agree with that
characterization do you think it's more
complicated than that I mean I
understand the ETH Technology Park I
don't understand the values he's
referred to I would say it's different I
think the community itself is distinct
characterized by that that ability to
move in a different direction around
governance and and that's historical and
now trying to Bish's position the
community in a way that enables it to
collaborate I think I would position us
really as being in a place where we're
looking to collaborate very strongly for
cosmos maybe the key value is
interoperability we do other things too
like like offering security and
consensus algorithm happening and making
the making sure that the hub is
permissionless but the core product that
the cosmos hub is about connecting to
other blood chains and creating
protocols for interoperability between
box chains so in Toronto in sovereignty
so giving groups their own block chains
communities their own sovereignty your
own ability to dictate they decide what
happens on that block chain yeah I mean
for us all the elites freedom moving
easy captures classified as a pricing
point but you can't have freedom without
without privacy or the option to privacy
to be able to protect which what's yours
like I've been talking about like a
friend of mine Nimmo who is a Syrian
refugee and Moe had a business had bank
accounts in Syria family family homes
and was forced to leave because he was
protesting and government locked down
everything so he no longer had self
sovereignty over his own his own money
and the government could see all of that
stuff right they can see all of it
because they control it and it's in
their context and they have access to
bank accounts and all that kind of thing
so when he moved he had to move to
Jordan he hadn't rebuild his life and
that's when he got into cryptocurrency
he's like I need I need to be able to
protect my wealth I need that freedom
and I need to be able to do it private
privately because I don't trust any of
these kind of government entities to to
have access and visibility and then the
other thing is like we talked even it's
it's a personal security but it's also
business security and it's even national
security so we've seen the impact of
data being used by a foreign actor in
Russia trying to influence another
foreign actor in the US based upon the
manipulation of the population from data
that they collected and so it's a
national security imperative that that
government's actually mandated some you
know privacy for for citizens and so
that's what we're with that's kind of
seeing the core core values in the
abacus I see an interesting disparity
between the answers here Josh's answer
is about and of Z cashes values with
respect to and of concerns that people
in the broader world would have whereas
your two answers were more about like
this is our and these are the values
that our blockchain expresses with
respects to other watches or with
respects to the blockchain space so I
guess like first of all do either if you
disagree with freedom and privacy no I
don't disagree with it
but but I think each of these are
nuanced okay so privacy for example like
how do you I think the thing that we
don't know yet and and the thing that we
should try to answer from an ethics
point of view of designing you know
answering the question what should we
design for of course we want to enable
privacy but if we enable complete
privacy of transactions and account
balances how can that be abused in such
a way that that may not be easy to use
today I think there's one arguing to say
that for example terrorist funding is
more than much easier with with us USD
cash that's what they use however if if
you make the USD cash or really easy to
transport then it just becomes that much
easier as well to to conduct private
terrorist transactions that's just one
example but the internet right the
internet made it easier for terrorism
the internet made it easy for terrorism
because they could pass past information
along peer-to-peer or whatever without
any kind of central control but there's
no argument to kind of expose or make
all of that invisible in the opposite is
true like we have now mandated basically
HTTPS Everywhere we're fed up with all
of these kind of honeypot databases
where everybody's collecting individual
social you know data that could be
hacked by China or whatever third party
so it's not like any of these tools
could be used for for terrorism true so
maybe I'm not I'm not disagreeing and
I don't know what the answer is I don't
know what the answer is I'm exploring it
but like at least with sites like I can
choose not to associate with this site
for example but when you're talking
about privacy preserving money if I
don't want to support you a currency
that is being used by terrorists as an
example I feel like I won't I wouldn't
have a choice if we designed a system
wrong so yeah I think I guess my point
is we just need to be cognizant of how
we design these systems so that we don't
get locked into a system accidentally
teri do disagree with privacy and
freedom absolutely not
I think you know they're essential for
the kind of economic independence that
we're trying to do so like in cases
where there is kind of different
emphasized values one thing that's
sometimes of worth kind of sorting out
is is it just a difference in priorities
so like for example I might imagine that
theory people are clearly not into
privacy and we even have tornado god
cash now but like when choosing between
I know like universal general
generalizability and privacy if the REM
is clearly going universal
generalizability first or as you guys
just go ahead privacy first but like
there's not a big incompatible but it
there there doesn't seem to be a big
incompatibility because like if you can
have both event eventually been great
but other times you might have a values
that are more incompatible with each
other it's so like for example in the
case of aetherium will we like group of
stake and the theory of classic people
like group of work and the Megatherium
people seem to like shortly like
sharding more and we feel like we're one
scale and what is importance where icc
people and then they feel that their
security trade-offs are too much for
that so do you think there is a kind of
many so one of the properties
of kind of trade-offs that are I have
just differences in priorities is that
if it's just a matter of differences in
priorities then in the long run we might
end up just kind of building the same
thing like one person goes north first
and then East the other person goes east
and then first and then north when you
still end up north east do you think
there's a possibility we'll just end up
building the same thing in in 10 years
time I there's a possibility but we're
so diverse as people and so opinionated
I'm not I'm not sure how you know from a
governance perspective how that happens
there may be some like backstage I'm
talking about murders or whatever but
there may be some some of that kind of
activity but in some things it just
makes sense right so some of the
separation makes sense so easy cash was
was work off the bitcoins because
Bitcoin core didn't want to add the the
cryptography on top of Bitcoin it was
too novel they were worried about it you
know disrupting the network and so this
other coin was born and this other coins
he cashed them and explore you know
different kinds of applications and
properties that that you know they
couldn't do on Bitcoin so I think it's a
healthy dynamic and whether those two
like ever come back together I don't
know but there's value in the diversity
if they do come back together do you
think point mergers are possible do you
think they're a good idea I think it's
super interesting but it for me it's
like this like two jet planes like
trying to kind of come together in the
middle and and stored a whole bunch of
stuff out and so I think when that
happen I think it will happen I think it
will be interesting as as kind of a
experiment and in the space I'm not
quite sure the mechanics of how it would
work but I feel like maybe it's more
likely to happen if
if they're working on different
directions sub stuff and they complement
each other then and if these projects
like governance or decision making
legitimate legitimate decision-making
systems such that it's clear that they
agree to do a coin merger suppose we're
talking our clarity we're talking about
at layer one coins emergency not like
two other like two years ago 20 tokens I
think it's quite likely that we don't
end up in the same place at all and I
think that's because the you know the
value is acted as expressed in
technological choices will result in
different usage mmm-hmm and I think over
time what could happen is that certain
coins and certain stacks are seen as you
know the best for certain you type in
use cases and you know you go to one
chain one type of transaction and go to
another chain for a different type of
transaction do you think G cash and
Manero have different uses I don't think
they have different uses I think with
both of them the intent is for the coin
if I understand Manero correctly we use
as a medium ultimately as a medium of
exchange to not have broad-based kind of
some program ability but not like
storing complete program ability
layer one I mean that I think the court
kind of what we're trying to accomplish
is really similar and it's actually
really interesting because like online
on Twitter if you have using Twitter it
looks very combative like these two
projects are just at each other and
that's not the reality you have certain
actors that kind of play that up but
like it adds econ one the last D cash
conference we had in Manero and remember
America conference was in in Denver but
we had like a co panel between the
between the two projects they say
there's a lot of it's that's actually
shared do you think the C cash and the
narrow communities have different values
I think some values are different yes
such as I think that the the sort of
like how for example some of the
governance and how funding decisions are
made and whether or not there's
alignment of coin holders with
developers you know the grants program
right now that the cash is funded octane
and so the question is like how much is
necessary to secure the network versus
how much should be used to fund
development is that the right kind of
model so G cash
community largely believes that that's
the right kind of model the incentives
aligned between the coin holders and the
developers were Manero doesn't share
that thing yeah one thing I've noticed
does a kind of possible general general
trend is that developers are general
like seem to be more willing to be
friendly with each other than and if
community members are and it's one
reason I feel this might be the case is
that developers often do have kind of
aligned interests in that developers see
each other as both just building cool
stuff and they want to see cool stuff
built where as point holders like if
you're at Z cash point holder you 1z got
to succeed and you ain't got no man
heroine
zero point older than they you want
Monero it's a sexy it then like some
people might have both but lots of them
you know it God knows he - and even in
the etherium community you know like
some of the more and maximalist push
that we've seen in this come here is
coming from people who aren't the
developers so are there risks that could
happen if kind of developer communities
are lines but broader communities are
not aligned
and probably the developers will get
Outkast mm-hmm
I don't see no that's possible though I
mean at the end of the day the
developers are the ones building the
change I guess the question is what's
the tolerance er of elasticity of debate
within a particular community if the
developers have a significant
disagreement with the community well
they can for them if the community has a
significant disagreement with the
developers they could buy a Bitcoin I'm
not sure where that line is and I think
it varies depending on the issue maybe
it'll get easier for a community that
disagrees with the developers to just
fork it and to create structure to wind
down just like elect people and then
kind of we have the write down system I
feel like this developer new developer
network might be able to evolve and
mature how are you defining communities
who is it it sound like it was like coin
holders developers but is the community
broader than coin holders and developers
oh sure and and hopefully in time it
becomes even much broader to really
users but I think at the moment at least
10-minute beans we have there's a kind
of almost 500 buffet where you know
there are folks who are developers and
you know and then there are folks who
are and there's that interaction between
it
so one other dynamic I've noticed is
that I sometimes get the feeling that
extrange ly enough collaboration may be
more possible when ideologies are more
incompatible and so like one example of
this is that even if you what happened
in a theory in area and documentarian
classic in the long term then in the one
term like sharding gives much greater
layer one throughput than not to in
charting and brief mistake gives a
different security model than proof of
work and there's people that are diehard
proof of work people that are not going
to do brew at stake and sharding like
legitimately make security trade-offs
capirotada can be arts are not doing
charting that some people don't want to
accept and so Weinland kind of effects
that comes out of this is that of both
communities this might even feel safer
because there's we know that there is
kind of one base that's going to use one
thing and it's not going to end it's not
willing to switch to the other thing
because the trade-offs are just
unacceptable it gets not even like
better or worse it's just like what one
side thinks is better as it is if you
from the perspective of the other side
is making things worse and so one side
is going to stay over here the other
side's gonna stay over here and that
actually but could making people feel
like collaboration is possible because
there we know that there's no risk of
one side pulley eating the other side
would you would you agree with that you
think it's more complicated no I would
agree with it certainly in the case of
the theorem classic in a theory you know
as etherium is moving
2.0 we've taken the opportunity to you
know reiterate our commitment to proof
of work and then start to figure out how
we can complement each other in that
space maybe maybe it may be a corollary
it articulates that if you if you take a
community and you segment them into
distinct ideologies and you need to find
sub communities and maybe maybe it can
accelerate being the growth of this
project do it the right way sometimes
it's so ideologically misaligned and
just can't happen right so if you have
so if there was a nation-state that
wanted to create a digital currency with
the intent of completely surveilling and
manipulating their people then that
would be in congruence with our mission
we just wouldn't do it
we just couldn't work together
independent of that okay so we know that
cryptocurrencies are going to exist as a
category and he had currencies are going
to exist out of the category but will
there be more than two points
okay different Fiats disagree so they'll
be multiple Fiats but are there like can
we come up with more examples of kind of
pairs of cryptocurrencies where it's
kind of just obvious that one direction
is different from the other direction
and they'll both continue to continue to
exist
I can't think of any others at the
moment hmm you can't no I can't be so
any others between like aetherium a
Bitcoin well I mean I guess in a macro
level but but how much you know tangible
cooperation is taking place first
cooperation taking I'd say there's
cooperation taking place kind of
implicitly even between a pyramid
Bitcoin like we're using in some case
the same sac be 256 K one libraries you
get such a thing with staking tokens if
you need distinctive validator sets and
especially for regional validator sets
but maybe you might have the validators
with different ideas of how to secure
their system so for all each of these
faking sets they would have their own
statement of it as well but it's not
clear to me what the market count ratio
would be between speaking tokens and
cryptocurrency cash doesn't I could I
could see the amount of privacy and
generality a trade-off as being a kind
of not 100 100 percent resolvable as
well privacy and privacy and generality
like you could imagine general-purpose
privacy but there's there's trade-offs
that you have to make there like one
example of this is that C cache believes
that under forcing everything to be
private whereas like we're more of a a
world at hey we're illegal block just
like you do what you want well the
gadgets of Attraction ality right so you
should have the option to be able to
disclose your novels right and then but
that you know there's all kind of
arguments as to why you need openness
whether it's things like audibility or
things that maybe please we solve with
technology
I don't know it sir is there are there
Maximus out there that believe that
privacy shouldn't happen that should be
completely people be open system
I am I was just kept presenting visiting
like Korea for a week and I got at least
five media people asking me questions of
the forum like don't you think privacy
will enable criminals people definitely
exist in the blockchain canoes hmm I'm
sure you're aware of your own coin being
delisted from a couple of exchanges I am
largely because of misunderstandings and
some banking concerns but I put up a
good fight for you guys there so
actually that brings up another play
another point which is there's a aside
from kind of tech and applications a
third frontier a find a possible
collaboration as kind of outreach to the
broader public which could include
include regulators he could include kind
of getting public legitimacy in general
do you think there's more than we could
do on that side yeah I believe there's
more that we can do on that side in some
cases like I had referenced early the
kind of the need to be out I'm in the
community and some of the stuff work
were running some pilots where we're
pulling in different projects together
to collectively educate like the pipe
the initial public Maryann was was in
the South Bronx to pick but let me
educate students and what we learned
about the use of of cryptocurrency the
South Bronx is per capita the least
unbanked population in the u.s. the
reality is is like what once we got a
teenage there all of us came away
completely blown away by the insight of
the students that we were kind of
engaging with and they flipped the
script on us but that was the project
that you know brought together like Casa
who like doesn't support easy cash for
example Jim and I flex a number
Masari a number of projects kind of came
together on these kind of efforts and I
would love to be able to you know see
more of that kind of active
collaboration what one thing that was
interesting in terms of regulators and
sometimes it's really it's really
difficult
his okx like opx had said that they were
going to do lists in cash and then
yesterday I got a message from them
saying we decided to put this on hold
and we're putting this on hold while we
do further further investigation it had
to do with doubt of travel requirements
but it was both d'caché and - but we
didn't collaborate but we went in
separately and had separate kinds of
conversations but I think it would have
actually been even though there's some
ideological disagreement between the
cash and - I think there it would have
been beneficial for us to kind of
collectively game plan on how we work
together to provide you know additional
information to new information to
regulators that can make better
decisions one aspect of community
outreach that some of us are exploring
is for example working with people who
are a community of people who are
interested in like ethical software or
how to make sure that we design for our
ethical systems and I think broadly in
general maybe the questioner should be
asking or I feel like the question that
I should be asking is like you know what
kind of monetary system should we design
into the future and I think that comes
with so many questions and communities
that have different opinions already
to do there so there's a need to reach
out to those communities and not
necessarily like indoctrinate them with
blockchain but like understand all these
nuances so that we can better design our
future yeah I think there's a lot more
outreach we can do and really in two
ways one to the general public I think
there's still a lot of misconceptions in
the general public about what blockchain
is what it can do what people do with it
and the second is you know really
engaging certain participants in the
ecosystem who don't typically you know
participates in a forum like this we
spend a lot of time engaging with
regulators with exchanges with
custodians because they actually can
have a significant impact on the ability
of the technology to see what our
adoption and there's a lot more
education that I think needs to be done
there about what strengths and
weaknesses of the technology are what
the roadmap is I just wanted to bring up
a tangent you know so we have different
ideologies of communities representing
different ideologies I feel like what we
will not just pass but the world is to
get better at is allowing these
communities with opposing views to have
discourse together and I haven't really
seen good software or interfaces to
allow this to happen but it's like what
did it great if you can have
a long-running discussion where the end
result is like almost a conversation
between representatives of two
communities such that then anyone from
both sides can read and understand all
the nuances like that with maybe help us
transcend a lot of critique and at the
end of the day though like I'm sure
there is there's the one inside like
what we will end up agreeing on and
that's good like that's why multiple
platforms exist yeah so you know it's
nervous I guess if there is kind of one
and if one simple thing that we can
start doing more of just to get the
benefits of coop of kind of
collaborating reduce the harms of anti
collaborating over the net over the next
few months that we expect between our
community is like is there any kind of
one simple a example of something we can
do that Papa that pops out in your head
which I'd like to see more kind of
working groups again like I think it
there in in this kind of community is is
fantastic and welcoming and warm and
there's a kind of all this opportunity
for collisions but I think if we're more
intentional like for like for us and
that there in foundation for example to
be able to have regular times where the
core like photography developers
engineers could come together kind of
work through ideas and plans inviting
other folks like you know a Matt was in
here earlier for thesis or other people
in the community and kind of lay these
kind of ideas out there and then also
look and in collectively work on funding
mechanisms to allow for some of these
other kind of potential contributors
that can provide something a little
between between
squiddy's I think that would be great
well I guess one is enabling communities
to have a voice in the likeness of what
I just mentioned like having discourse
so maybe there are other things that can
happen by enabling voice for a community
the other thing I asked myself often is
we need to physically meet in order for
this kind of no dialogue to happen but
how do we scale it so that we don't
necessarily have to travel if we can
crack that I feel like we would have a
much more rapid iteration rate of
discovery I agree with that and I would
simply had stopped trying to debate
complex topics on Twitter
stop can we debate complex topics I'll
read it like it's better but it's still
centralized what about memos on cash
memos on cash yeah it's like this make
worry just like dump call bets on the
Bitcoin cache blocks yeah that it's okay
because they have 32 megabytes or
something great clever
okay well thank you very much thank you
thank you thank you
you