other person I know who is, like, super excitedly pro DAO, had a fork in the same way. Like doesn't even say it's a necessary evil, but just like says excitedly it's great. I'm very sorry.

He's an interesting guy. I feel like you'd get along with him really well. Yeah, yeah.

I would say, in Ethereum. Yeah. And I think some I think my own, like, kind of internal mental narrative around the DAO fork had to do with, pretty similar ideas to what eventually ended up being that, blog post on convex and concave thinking that I would publish about four years later, right? Like, basically the idea being that, like, it is coherent to believe in a principle without assigning that principle literally infinite weight. And, like, it's that that I feel like, like, Bitcoin ideology or at least a lot of it almost, like, it at least pretends to explicitly oppose that. Right? Like, they even would say things like, you know, if Bitcoin ever has more than 21,000,000 units, then it is by definition not Bitcoin. And, like, that like, that's a testable prediction, and you can bet against it. And I yeah. Definitely. Yeah. I would bet at least a 10% chance that, twenty five years from now, the thing that people call Bitcoin has more than 21,000,000 units of it. But, so yeah. I mean, like, you know, definitions are not kind of, like, hard mathematical theorems. They're, like, they're strands. They're, you know, things that exist in groups of people.

I yeah. I I I just don't see how that kind of, like, category driven thinking is even going to survive the twenty first century. Like, you know, we're already talking about splitting units unit of account for medium of exchange. Right? And, you know, in the and over the next century, you know, we're gonna get the ability to radically change our own biology, and we're gonna get the, ability to, you know, have very different ways to cooperate with, with each other and have radically different social systems where, you know, even, like, the the question of what is free speech, like, that was, the the that's one that kind of has, changed in a lot of, subtle ways over the over the last two decades, basically, because we've created this new like, corporations and tech platforms have basically become this new intermediary layer. And, you know, people who kind of came up with those earlier versions of the principles almost, you know, didn't really expect that that intermediary layer would be so dominant. Right? And so, you know, you have this question of, like, well, you know, is the if the intermediary layer is opinionated, is that an exercise of its freedom or is that an infringement of, you know, the people that are stuck under its network effect? And, yeah, no, I know we're gonna have, you know, even more weird debates like that over the next century to come, and, you know, it's gonna be a fun one.

have influenced you at all? I know you mentioned David Graeber. I was about to say David Graeber. I think he is definitely kind of up there more than, you know, any other person. I mean, I thought, like, the Debt Debt the First Five Thousand Years was a fascinating book. I mean, the core thesis that, like, basically, you know, formalized the money, like, basically emerged, you know, like, even not as a natural equilibrium of trade, but basically as a response to kings demanding it to be used for payment of taxes. It's it's a fascinating thesis. It kind of echoes, seeing, like, a state in a lot of ways. Right? Like, I I, you know, even though I feel like these days, seeing, like, a state tends to be kind of considered to be, like, a little bit right libertarian coded, but, the first five thousand years is, like, more left. But, you know, the it feels like there's, you know, it's a very common strand, in there. There's also just, like, various little things. Right? Like, about ten years ago, I remember reading this document. It's called the anarchist FAQ. I, I forget who the author is or who the authors are. Right? But, I, yeah, just exactly. I mean, like but but it was like a it was a fascinating document. And I think, like, it's just it its core idea of, like, hey. Yeah. I mean, we can imagine, like, lots of different non hierarchical ways of organizing society. Like, I think, you know, even if I was, like, I was not convinced by, you know, a lot of the arguments for, like, their specific implementations, but I think the, like, the way that that document ended up kind of opening my mind was, definitely, fascinating and important.

This is the the whole, anarchist, anarcho capitalist terminology debate. One of the many things that was discussed in the, you know, politics and society forum on Bitcoin talk in 2012 brings back memories. You know? Right.

potentially? So, Anshin, so here is one of kind of one of my, several, angles on this issue, and I think it's an important one. I I think the, like, I mean, you know, there was this kind of Twitter disc, debate a few days ago about, like, is there a leftist case for crypto? Right? And, you know, Jacobin basically said there isn't. And I think my view on this is that I think the strongest economically egalitarian case for crypto is actually the internationalist case. Right? It's, like like, ultimately, you know, we do live in a, kind of very deeply, kind of America centric, society, you know, on the on the Internet in, just a whole bunch of, you know, very subtle ways. Like, even in just incredibly trivial things, like how, I think in one of my tweets, I casually mentioned that I had spent more than the last month of my life living in towns with populations of less than 3,000. And people kept trying to guess where they are, and they gave a couple of locations in, like, Colorado. And I'm like, dude, none of the places, I had in mind there or even within 5,000 kilometers of Colorado. I mean, so and so exactly. I know. You know? And, the interesting thing, right, is that, I feel like the, like, the developing world has some of the most even genuine, use cases for crypto in the sense that, you know, here's community is where they're they're deriving real value from crypto even just cryptocurrency today from, you know, the ability to use it to save money because, you know, in the places where they are where they are at that time, you know, fiat currency doesn't work. Often, they're locked out of, you know, mainstream financial systems, centralized financial intermediaries, you know, either don't see enough profit in, trying to serve them, or they just kind of write off entire regions of the world as being high risk. And so, you know, there are all of these, you know, communities in in, you know, Argentina, Turkey, and Nigeria, all of these kinds of, places that are, you know, using crypto and, you know, engaging with the, crypto space more and more. I should probably add, it's it's a very special case, but, you know, obviously, worth adding Ukraine to that list. Right? So, you know, like, they, like, cryptocurrency did end up being be, being a lifeline for them in, you know, basically, the first couple of years when, you know, pretty much every everything else broke. And, you know, it it was difficult for them to do anything. And, you know, Eastern Europe in general, you know, lots of, you know, even if you branch out from there and you start, you know, going into the Balkans or wherever, you know, lots of, crypto activity and, like, lots of, really meaningful stuff. I mean, there's, you know, projects trying to do payments for refugees. Right? Like, that's one of the big topics that, you know, Ukrainians are concerned about is, remittances in general, big topic in places like Romania, and, you know, Latin America and Africa, the same thing, you know, like, fivefold. Right? So the and then the flip side of that is that I think the international angle is, one of, the biggest weaknesses of, mainstream political leftism. Right? Like, like, if I had to, you know, make, like, make fun of kind of mainstream political leftism in one sentence, I would just say, like, you know, like, its egalitarian program lacks all sense of scale. Like, the, the divide between any identifiable groups within a country is like, you know, economically speaking, maybe 1.2 x, maybe 1.5 x, maybe two or three x. Well, what's the divide between equally skilled workers in The US and Haiti? Like, it's potentially more than 10 x. Right? Or the, like, two thirds of the inequality in the world, if you like, measure by Gini coefficients is between countries and, one third is, within countries. Right? Like, if if you just, you know, look at all of the numbers or, you know, what is basically the, the form of, institutionalized, apartheid that we still consider to be a totally normal part of the world. Well, well, you know, go go to, mypassportindex.com and, like, look up where you can travel to as America as an American versus as a Chinese person versus as an Indian versus as a Nigerian. Right? And these are things that like national political systems just are not interested in, fixing. Like, both because obviously there are still votes in fixing it. You know Nigerians can't vote in US elections. And I do think that, like, unfortunately, because of geopolitical competition, we are entering an era of, like, less interest in principles and just more kind of nationalist selfishness. And at the same time, like but, you know, at the same time, the international angle, like, that is something that crypto is great at. Right? Like, if you compare crypto to just even any other tech industry. Right? So if you look at AI, for example, like, where is AI headquartered? Like, basically, you know, you're either in Beijing or Hangzhou or you're in Silicon Valley. Right? Like, when I visited the Silicon Valley, at the September, like, I basically, yeah, I managed to visit, like, half the, like, the AI space. Right? Like, you know, OpenAI was there, Anthropic was there, a couple of, people in various other projects were there. If you look at, like, biotech, you know, it's also similarly concentrated. You know, you got your Silicon Valley, you got your Boston, you got, like, maybe one or two other places, and that's it. Crypto is not like that at all. Right? Like, Ethereum's the Ethereum Foundation's biggest office is in Berlin. We, are if you the Ethereum Foundation's hub in America is in Denver. The yeah. Some of the most amazing communities that we have are in places like, you know, I mentioned Argentina. We have an excellent, one in Taiwan. You know, we have, you know, a a a great one in, Singapore. You know, there's just, just on Twitter, you can, you you know, you just always see all kinds of people from Turkey, you know, reaching out and trying to talk to us. Right? And, you know, if you look at, like, where the projects are, where the developers are, like, it is everywhere. Right? And so I think, you know, like, if we want a, more, like, egalitarian crypto space, I think, like, fully leaning into the internationalism and into the, potential to create a world that's, like, more equal, you know, not just within countries, but particularly between countries. I think that potentially, I mean, it could be the way to go. Yeah.

Right? Because, like, existing political systems, you know, they do often tend to see cross border collective action as being, I mean, a quote foreign interference. But, like, see, like, see, like, whether it's something that's, you know, cooperation or collusion like it is, in the eye of the beholder and it kind of is depends a lot on, like, your perspective on, like, which mechanisms are the legitimate ones and which ones are kind of the attempted usurpers that are trying to interfere and everything. You know?

That is a

that failed because it was centralized. Right? Like, it just, completely, you know, failed to get local legitimacy and, you know, ended up not being super interesting as a result. I think, it feels like it's part of the bigger question, which is, like, what is the next application or set of, applications that's, really gonna break out and become big. Like, once, you know obviously, you know, money has, or and not, you know, by money, I'm including this whole bundle of concepts that really should be split up, like, whether it's, you know, international payments or savings or, you know, whatever it is that people, wants to do. So, you know, what like, what could come next? Right? Like, one of the things that could come next is DAOs becoming more and more successful and, people using them to, like, basically, yeah, you know, organize kind of cooperation, Flashmob style and, you know, create projects that are, like, around specific goals potentially that potentially have shorter lifetimes that, just, like, spin up much and and, get some tasks done much more quickly. It's, could be I mean, something on the, more institutional side would be, you know, government adoption you know, could be voting system, could be, like, some, kind of, just accepting it for their, you know, part of their identity infrastructure in some way. There's, like, weak versions of that that exist, already. Right? There's, like, I think, a couple of very small countries that have, you know, some e residency programs that are crypto connect or connected to blockchain tokens in some form. There's, you know, the possibility that one of these small countries is gonna, like, actually, yeah, you know, release a CBDC on chain one of these days, and we'll just, you know, learn about it, one day on Twitter just, or or potentially it'll be on Farcaster or, you know, whatever other, or Lens protocol, whatever, you know, thing, two or three years from now. I mean, it's also possible that one of these crypto social, projects itself, is going to start getting traction. And, in the process of getting traction, it'll, like, empower some community that, doesn't, really, exist yet or at least is not very strong yet, and so that's going to have some kind of political impact. So, yeah, I don't know. A lot of things could happen. Yeah. Yeah. I guess other,

that you would like to see. Yeah. It's a good question. I mean, I think,

yeah, we would be happy to hear your, like, the answer that you're mentally pre committed to, after I, after I give mine. I think mine is like I mean, first of all, you know, left wing is like a super broad term. Right? So, you know, like, for example, if we make an insurance, like, an insurance, system that's a as, you know, somehow, based on, like, small groups of vouching for each other. And this is something that just it's it's like a form factor that works really well for farmers in Kenya. Right? Like, does is that left leaning? I mean, I would argue it is. And it's, you know, it empowers, you know, low income people and gives them, access to the, to the economy. But, you know, on the other hand, you could argue that, like, hey. You know, fundamentally, like, the thing is still insurance, and, you know, it's still financial. Right. Another one might be yeah. I mean, if you start looking into DAOs. Right? Like, what could you make DAOs for? Like, you know, could a labor union be a DAO? Could you use DAOs to just, like, for various kinds of, like, collective commitment, gadgets where, you know, everyone, signs up agreeing to do something. And, but, you know, only if a particular number of other people sign up to do it at the same time. And, you know, possibly, there might even be some some kind of deposit involved to, like, encourage people to actually follow through. It could be a different forms. And, like, maybe that style of, commit, kind of just solving the coordination problem could end up, you know, out competing, existing, techniques for solving the coordination problem that's, are kind of more centralized and, you know, ends up giving a centralized actor just like a huge amount of leverage over the whole situation. Right? So, like, one example might be, you know, imagine if, like, here's how you might organize a, crypto conference. Right? So, everyone puts down a, a $100 as a ticket. And, when they they put down a ticket, they, provide a list of locations and, like, location time pairs. Right? So, like, points in space time where they would be willing to have that conference. Then you have a contract on chain that has the rule that, if any particular point in space time, you know, so, like, pair of location and, date reaches, 500 people, then it grabs up everyone's deposits. And so it's, you know, if you have people that kind of multi committed to a bunch of different, possible options that kind of withdraws their commitments from every other option, it grabs up their, their, deposits. And then it puts the thing into a DAO. And, you basically, you have a kind of ownerless, shelling points around the idea that you are going to have an event at this particular point in time. And, you know, here is this kind of democratically managed pool of money to, like, make some infrastructure happen, but, like, realistically, it's, the value is primarily and just, like, the people being to get there to meet each other. Right? So, like, a crypto conference is not inherently a left wing thing, but the facts that you're organizing a crypto conference in that way instead of organizing it in such a way that, you know, big exchanges get to advertise how awesome they are. And, you know, you have, you know, FTX sponsoring it for $25,000. And, you know, you have, like, all kinds of weird deals going on in exchange for speaking privileges and all that. Like, the fact that you've substituted for that, like, you know, you could you you could call that left leaning. Right? So yeah, like, it all depends on what your definition is. Right? Like, are we trying to, you know, create alternative ways for to do a kind of economic activity? Are we explicitly trying to, you know, have some kind of political outcome? Are we, trying to, you know, make a more efficient version of an organization that is already, generally run-in a nonprofit way today? Are we trying to do something in a nonprofit style that is being done in a for profit style today? Like, there there's a lot of different ways to think about the problem. I think it's, you know, open to people's imaginations.

because it's sort of it removes, like, those specific sectors from needing to sell. I see. So, like, for you, it's an important part of the concept is, like, basically, yeah, identify like, trying to deal with, you know, market failures that go beyond just, you know, some people, by, yeah, no faults over the road, not having enough tokens to participate in the market. So kind of explicitly saying that that's not the only problem. Basically.

no point to you now, watching or achieve.

identical to Bitcoin but then expecting it to have very different effects just because, you know, we have marketing language that says, like, hey, this coin is intended for the community of compassionate people. And, you know

See it, like, see, the like, this is what I mean by, like, you know, I mean, like, American culture having negativity, right? Like, you know, not like, it's, you know, we're just, so used to, like, you know, utopia is automatic like, the word utopia automatically being tied to the word naive. And, like, here it's like, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We're utopians. We wanna see a much better world and, like, let's, just, you know, do our best at it. I think it's lovely. Yeah. I

That kind of coordination stuff is definitely, yeah, I think, not looked at enough as far as, like, Blockchain and Smart contract applications go. Yeah.

for labor or labor. Interesting. Okay. No. No. No. No. It's, it definitely seems like a cool it seems like a cool project. Something to think about. Yeah. Definitely, yeah, look forward to stuff like this turning into something, and, you know, we'll we'll see how it goes.

Sure. So I think, so the I guess, starting off with, soulbound tokens, kind of the the core idea behind, you know, the decentralized that went into the decentralized society paper, right? The idea there is basically to ask, like, well, you know, we have these, tokens and, tokens that exist today are transferable. But if a token is transferable that, like, this is one of those, like, paradox paradoxical kind of, paradoxes of of, coordination. Right? In that, the fact that a period that a token is transferable actually, yeah, is an anti future because it or can be an anti future because it reduces the, amount of information that token carries. Right? Like, if you imagine someone sitting at the top of Mount Everest, giving a token, to everyone who climbs up, if that token is, not transferable, like, let's say it's a tattoo. Right? And, you know, it's a tattoo with a cryptographic signature on it or whatever, then, like, what do you learn about someone if you see that they have that token? Well, you learn that they climbed Mount Everest. Now what if instead it's a transferable token? What do you learn about someone who has that token? You learn that either they climbed Mount Everest or, most likely, they paid, $5,000 to someone else to do it and get the token for them. Right? So if tokens are transferable, like, it just, reduces their your ability to use them to as a way of, like, getting any kind of, like, rich, kind of context dependent, you know, community dependent information about, pretty much anyone. Right? And we see examples of this causing problems in all kinds of, places in, you know, even, the centralized world. Right? So, like, I remember reading, the sub article. I think it was from rest of world, but, or one of those. There was basically complaining about how, accounts being traded, in Africa was, like, actually, yeah, turning into a safety risk because, it was just so easy to get a verified high reputation account even if you're, like, actually a a, totally not reputable driver. Right? So, you know, like, the fact that, you know, whatever information went into being verified as a rapid, as a rapid world driver is tradable, like, that makes that token mean much less than, it otherwise would. Right? And, there is a lot of examples of, you know, applications that could exist in the crypto space, but that ends up not existing. Right? So, one example of, this that's, I think, importance to a lot of existing crypto projects is airdrops. Right? So a lot of projects, they issue a token, and, they want to distribute that token supply to the community. They want to be somewhat egalitarian and distributed in the token ownership. Like, they don't even want, you know, three VC funds to have 41 2% of the token supply. And, they want some way of distributing it to the community. But the problem is that if you just go around and distributing it to, you know, pretty much anyone who, like, interacted with your application or whatever, then, like, that's sort of thing that works the first time. And, you know, when Uniswap did it the first time, it worked, really well. But once it becomes a pattern that you get VC funds that try to, like, optimize for maximizing the probability that they get into an airdrop, And, you know, the the whole thing just kind of gets farmed and, it just stops actually, you know, being a thing that gives, you know, like, tokens to to your community. Right? And, what the so that's one of the challenges. Right? Like, you one thing that you might wanna do is you might wanna just, like, give a token to, you know, each person. But then you have this question of, like, well, it turns out you actually don't want to, give tokens to just about anyone because, like, you actually want tokens to go in the hands of people who are part of your community and who care about your project. Because, if you just give tokens to random people, well, guess what? 90% of the recipients are just gonna sell them, and, you're gonna flood the market very quickly. Your your price will crash. You're just not gonna get anything out of it. Right? So if you had, if we have an ecosystem where there's just a lot more pokes, for example. Right? So, you know, like proof of attendance protocol tokens, for various kinds of in person events, virtual events, specific actions that you do, in connection to a protocol. If we just have, like, this much richer, information that exists in some formalized fashion that could then be used as proof of, that, you know, I am in this community to enough of an extent that I deserve to, get some tokens from this airdrop, then you could approach something that's, like, a little bit more fair. Right? And, so you could imagine these, tokens, which have to be nontransferable because, I mean, if they were transferable, then, VC funds would just farm them. Right? Like, be used for airdrops, you could imagine them being used to allocate governance voting power. That's one of those things where, you know, like, I've already written many times about why, like, you don't want that to be financialized. You could use that to be, loans are another example. Loans are, you know, all about trustworthiness. You know, even something like the, yeah, you know, decentralized Ubers, like, you know, to the extent that, like, you want the reputation system. Right? Because, like, ultimately, you know, what is Uber? It's, like a, it's a search engine, a payment processor, a map application, and there are, a reputation system that are bundled together. Right? And, you know, if you're gonna make a decentralized alternative, you are gonna have some reputation components. And, you know, getting that from, some this kind of, you know, richer information involving, like, proof of, interactions with particular communities and the proofs of, positive interactions with particular people. Like, that's, something that where, you know, you could actually even get, like, better, reputations, than, we see today. And, you know, like, you get the benefits of, kind of more formalized reputation systems without something that can kind of be cooptable in, you know, the way that people criticize, social credit scores, for example. Right? And, the decentralized society term, I think, is, meant to just evoke the general question of, like, well, you know, what would a society look like if we had more of these, kinda, like, formalized, ways of, getting this much, richer information about, like, what kinds of relationships a person has with, various other people and various communities in a way that's, like, both, like, accessible to, you know, technology, but also is, you know, done in a way that it doesn't just collapse into being, you know, yet another form of currency. And, this is something that, like, hasn't been done that much before. Right? Like, you know, we have proof of humanity, and we have popes, and, we have, like, a couple of applications using them. But, like, it's something that could easily go a thousand times deeper than has, been tried so far today. And, like, obviously, you know, we have to solve privacy and we have to solve blockchain scalability and all these hard problems for it, getting anywhere close to going a thousand times deeper. But, you know, the the paper basically asked the question of, like, well, you know, if we did have that, like, you know, what are the things that we could build? Yeah.

to be honest. Yeah. I know. I mean That you that you wrote. I think the answers, like, definitely get challenging questions involved in, like, you know, consequences that inevitably emerge out of, any kind of, formalized system. Right? Like, you know, there's the whole, like, a good hard slot thing of, like, you know, a measure ceases to become a good measure once it becomes a target. And, you know, if your viewpoint is especially if your viewpoint is like, well, okay. You know, like, that's exactly what happened with money and you're, you know, you're inventing this, thing that's gonna replace money. So, you know, is it gonna end up having the same problem? Which is, I mean, it's a good critique, and I think it's worth, thinking about. But at the same time, like, you we that's something that always has to be balanced against the need for, like, any system at all that scales beyond a 150 people. Right? Like, you know, the like, 150 people, it's like, you know, Dunbar's number, this kind of, yeah, like, those kind of stereotypical number for, you know, the number of, people that, you, you can kind of naturally, yeah, take, keep track of, manually. And, you know, the the theory being that if he wants to go beyond that and you wanna have cooperation at scales to go beyond that, then you need to have, like well, I think, people in the olden times would say you need to have hierarchy, but I think the, yeah, kind of the more optimistic version of that is you need formalized social systems. Like, you need, like, you basically need you need information that can be carried, like, just across, social context to some degree. Right? Like, you know, you want, Alice and Charlie, to be able to have an interaction and to have information with which decide whether or not to have an interaction even if Alice and Charlie have never heard of each other before, and maybe they've both heard of Bob. Or maybe Alice has heard of Bob, and Bob has heard of David, and David has heard of Charlie. Right? And so this question of, like, well, how do we navigate that trade off between just creating mechanisms that can scale, versus, you know, making sure we don't create mechanisms that scale in ways that are horrible? And I think it's one of the kind of very practical ways of, looking at this as just, like, to go back to the example. Right? Like, there's specific concrete needs that people, even in the crypto space today, are trying to solve for, like the, the the token airdrop use case. Right? Like, if you try to airdrop tokens without using, you know, some kind of, like, for, for formal mechanism to do it, then you're basically allocating tokens by hand. Right? And that's something that can, you know, very easily get huge amounts of corruption going on. Right? Like, it's, oh, you know, did you sleep with one of the cofounders? Okay. You know, here's 3.3% for you. And, I mean, I would just kinda, like, you know, casually, yeah, talk about how, you know, your importance to the community early on, but, like, can that actually be evaluated by anyone else? Well, not really. Right? And so, like, informal social systems can be very unfair. And, you know, informal social systems can especially be unfair if you if you try to scale them beyond, you know, how how hard they're meant to scale. Right? And so I, I think the, the I think the biggest misconception about the, yeah, soulbound tokens and the DSOC as a concept is that I think in its like, people are not properly, yeah, engaging with it in the way that it was intended, which is as an early stage idea. Right? And, like, it's meant to basically, yeah, say, here is a category of, stuff that we could do, and, here are some examples that show that the need for this category exists. We don't know yet which version of that which specific version of these ideas works. Right? Like, we're basically trying to, I think, open exploration into that category. And, you know, obviously, the very first iteration that somebody, thinks up of and, decides to make it forty eight hours in a hackathon is probably gonna be terrible. You know? It's probably not gonna, take you to account five obvious issues. It's probably gonna completely fail on privacy and, you know, all all of these, issues. Right? But, I think, the point is that we, as an ecosystem, like, start thinking about these, questions. Right? And, you know, start engaging with the question of, like, well, you know, to the extent that we need, richer in context information about, you know, people and, people's interactions with each other that just go goes beyond, how many tokens do they have. Like, what's the, yeah, actually best way to do that. Right? And so I think that's, you know, like, if I like, if I had to, like, answer the question of, like, what is the biggest misconception, I would say, like, that is a biggest misconception. The, like, basically, people criticizing it as a finished concept where every, individual, like, sentence, should is, like, interpreted as, you know, Vatalik and Puja and Glenn's kind of official gospel when the reality is like, well, you know, no. We're just, basically, just trying to open more, more discussion, more attempts built. Exactly. Speculation. More attempts to just open up this category and, you know, see what what happens in that category. And the I think the the the good thing is, like, you know, there's obviously a lot of people, just, like, yelling and giving various, opinions on the topic, but there's, also people trying to build. Right? And, I think, over the next couple of years, I mean, we'll see what ideas work well and, what ideas don't work well and, like, you know, we'll all be in a better place for it.

Yeah. No. Absolutely. And, you know, I think, if we just look at some of the problems that like actually happen in, you know, DeFi governance, I mean, situations, for example, like that issue is pretty much exactly, you know, the source of where the problems end up coming from.

I'm a fan of both concepts, but community recovery was the one that was in that paper. Right. So, like, usually I think a big critique and a fairly,

We thought that was an interesting idea. Yeah. Community recovery. Yeah. It's basically taking the social recovery idea, like, one step further except, you know, instead of, saying, you know, you manually choose who your guardians are. It's basically saying, like, hey. Yeah. Let's observe your if the, information that's, kind of already comes out through the, just your existing interactions with other people. And, you know, we, like, we know a lot about, like, you know, who you interact with and who you trust. And, like, let's just take you back off of that information. And, you know, you get this, a kind of much more diverse recovery set, basically for free and, you know, just take advantage of that. So, you know, you get the benefits of recovery and you get the benefits of, you know, being able to, like, just have some kind of path to getting things back if something goes wrong. But we do all of this without, centralizing power and, like, specific centralized authorities. Right? Because

always a solo player. I, I no. I was just not not very social, growing up. And so I, I know I never really got into the whole, like, talking to other people thing, and I just kind of, you know, went off to the forest and killed forest by myself.

slight inspiration for kind of the things that you're talking about. I definitely remember following the, DKB stuff on, just, like, Wow forums and other places. It was fascinating. I mean, I think in general, like, video games are definitely an underrated, source of knowledge for, political science. Right? Because, like, there's some pretty sophisticated organizations that happen inside of, these, things. There's some pretty sophisticated behaviors that happened inside of them. You know, pretty sophisticated markets, pretty sophisticated political organizations. And, even in the pre, crypto days, but there were there were pretty significant amounts of money at stake. Right? Like, I, yeah, remember back in, you know, the 2005 to 2010 era reading about EVE Online and how there are these grand battles happening in EVE Online and their individual ships getting destroyed that were worth $25,000. And, you know, at the time, just thinking that a purely virtual item could be worth $25,000 was just mind blowing. And, you know, of course, today, we're like, what your virtual item's worth? Like, only $25,000? Like, what are you? I do. Like, you you know, the like, you know, there's monkeys that have sold for, like, as well more than, like, millions at this point. But,

I mean, I'm sure things will happen. I mean, there obviously have been lots of, tokenized video games in the last two years, but I think, like, the main Yeah. I think error that most of them made is that they forgot that they have to be fun games even outside of the financial speculation aspect. Right? And so but that's why I think some of them ended up, I mean, I know being, having a a lot of really amazing results for a while. And then as soon as the bear hit, you know, everyone just kind of left. I think, if someone cracks that, like, if someone makes a game that's both actually fun and where, you know, there are meaningful, like, extra things that actually, are useful, like, come out of, you know, soul bound tokens or any other kind of token, then, like, that would definitely be an application of, like, a blockchain application that's, like, actually, yeah, really useful and valuable. But, you know, we'll see if it happens. Yeah. And I was wondering, have you have you read David Graeber's most recent book? I've read part of it. So, I think maybe the the the first few chapters. I mean, I thought the, the the the first chapter that I was kind of the exposition that was basically saying that, like, hey, look. This this idea that liberalism is a white people thing, like, is, actually very misleading and, like, actually in the seventeenth century. You know, Europe was a very, yeah, hostile and illiberal place. And, you know, by the way, a lot of the liberal, ideas and even free market thinking, you know, came from Arabs in the tenth, you know, five hundred years earlier. I think that was even in debt the first five thousand years. And then that's the, a big part of why the, kind of liberal enlightenment happened was because it incorporated critiques from Native Americans, about, the, kind of restrictive European social order of the seventeenth century. I mean, it's really fascinating argument, and it definitely makes you think, like, you know, what kinds of other kind of social, like, connections and intellectual

I think, to me a, successful, Ethereum ecosystem includes, Vim. So first of all, you know, much, broader variety of, applications, right? So like I would love to see just all of the, you know, the various strands that we talked about today. Just, you know, all of the various even strands that people have been thinking about and have kind of been, you know, the white papers and the literature already since, 2014, kind of properly, develop. And, hopefully, it would just, you know, get a much bigger diversity of stuff being built. So, like, hopefully, yeah, we get to the point where there is something else that is, at least as big as DeFi and that people get excited about as much as people get excited about DeFi. You know, whether that's called DSOC or whether that's called, you know, distributed identity and reputation or whether that's called, you know, web three or or what whatever it it ends up being. Like, just, having something else other than a DeFi that's, as big as DeFi. Like, that's, I think a milestone that would definitely be, really, really important and big. Another aspects to a successful ecosystem, I think, is just who has the ability to contribute. Right? So, no. I just want to see, you know, more and better efforts to, like, just, even help the ecosystem understand its, the various, people that already exist, within the, the different corners of the Ethereum world and, to kind of better, you know, connect, people with, all kinds of ideas with the opportunity to, kind of actually develop those ideas and bring them out into action. Right? Like it's, it would be interesting to see like four different spins on, you know, the concept of DeSoc or the concept of DAOs that are just that just come out of, you know, different groups of people. Or possibly, yeah, there are people with different political leanings, possibly, yeah, people coming out of, you know, different countries and and different continents. And, to just have these different ideas that are interacting with each other. I think another thing that matters, to me in a healthy ecosystem is, kind of good, high, high quality, intellectual ecosystem. Like, one of the things that I love about, Ethereum and I think this was very true in early Ethereum, and I think it's diluted a bit since then. But it's, the and I think some of that dilution is just inevitable due to scale, but I think it's something that, like, with a lot of, intentional effort can easily be, yeah, be repaired is that, like, the Ethereum ecosystem was just a place where, you know, people who had interesting ideas could come and talk about interesting ideas. And, it was a place where all of these different visions about what what a better world would look like were, like, actually interacting with each other and creating more spaces like that. And, like, even, you know, helping the Ethereum ecosystem, gonna do a better job of being that kind of space is something that I would want to see a lot more of and I think it's something that would be helpful to the ecosystem's ability to, like, generate more and, like, actually interesting applications. I think, you know, of course, there is kind of the the negative goals. So, you know, what traps to not fall into? The biggest one is, you know, to not become maximalist in this in the way that Bitcoin has become maximalist. So I think, you know, we've done an okay job at that so far, but that's just, like, the, yeah, the circling the wagons mindset is just, like, such a natural one for people that it's, something that just requires, I think, a lot of constant vigilance to make sure that that, you don't fall into. Yeah. No. It's like, you know, if we have, all of those things and, you know, we have, obviously, also an ongoing just, like, amazing technical ecosystem that can actually, you know, build out all the technology. So all these applications, you know, actually can happen and we don't and, you know, the fees don't have to be $5. They can be less than 1¢, and, we can have privacy and you can have better user experiences and all of these things. Like, you know, with all of that together, I think we're gonna have a great ecosystem. Nice.