Can we get back to $10 so we can have stable Wi-Fi?
Pay your bills for Machi is crazy!
The Bordev Gazette, I know you clipped that.
The first part of this discussion you were able to hear the introductions from all of our candidates, all of the proponents here to build an ape chain.
And just resetting the room a little bit, we did as a community just decisively vote 31 million in favor of building an ape chain.
That decision ended yesterday.
We are now considering the four proponents to build that ape chain and they're here with us on stage.
The vote to decide which one of these proponents will partner with the ape queen community to build this ape chain will end on Valentine's Day.
On the 14th, 6pm PST, you have until then to get your vote in, don't wait, get your chocolates, get your flowers, get your votes in early.
And we've got Lynstro, we've got Papo, we've got Ervin here helping to co-host and co-hosting this discussion with us.
Ervin, heading out on a flight, so we do want to give him an opportunity to lead us into a little bit of this next segment.
Plenty of different implications for the chain, a lot of complex topics, we're going to pin some of the key terms up at the top.
But the other side of that discussion is if we build all of this cool stuff and nobody comes, then what?
So we're going to get both sides of the coin in this discussion, but Ervin, I want to give you the chance to open it up here.
Data availability, execution layer, can you pose a question here to our proponents?
Yeah, for sure. I'm looking forward to the more and less technical ones that we discussed.
But in all honesty, you should consider these questions both as technical and business questions, B.D., because to a certain extent,
the integration of new technology could potentially impact the benefits that the AIP coin holders have or get,
and also the users or the apps that potentially run on AIP chains.
And without going too into details, we've seen this play out with Celestia and other early adopters of particular technology.
So to keep that in mind, it's not just about the tech, but also there's a bit of B.D. behind it.
So the first question comes down to one of the latest trends or, quote unquote, paradigms that we're seeing, the concept of the modular blockchain.
It's essentially the separation of concerns in the architecture.
So the question is really, what is the context of data availability?
We've heard this quite a lot in the past few spaces.
What does it do? How is it different in your technology stack or architecture?
And most importantly, what are the considerations that is going into deciding the data availability solution which fits our community?
Or does it really matter at all for the use cases we're going for, which are related to gaming, royalty enforcement and security?
So we heard this from a few people, too, that perhaps it doesn't matter. Data availability doesn't matter.
So looking forward to you guys' take on this.
All four of these guys got great data availability or tech in that section.
They just told us how great the tech was.
I'm not sure why we want to talk about data availability.
That doesn't really pertain to the 8 chain or 8 point DAO in that sense.
I mean, these guys that we're talking to, Optimism, Arbitrum, Horizon, Polygon, or not Horizon, Polygon and ZK Sync, they got the best tech.
It's the best tech out there.
They got crazy ass fucking engineers on those teams working to push our decentralized Web 3 forward, like the data availability.
And then, of course, there's like newcomers for that way.
Celestia or Tia, I don't know.
All these other motherfuckers jumping on board with their own, like, you know, things saying it's composable.
And that's the good thing about our industry is that maybe they are composable.
I know Ethereum is pushing.
You know, we're talking about like what's more important, liquidity.
So we're like looking at the TV of each one of these chains, you know, like how they get there.
Was it because their tech was a BD?
They got a huge amount of TV on all these chains.
Because of the tech and their teams or their business or their marketing and branding.
Like, that's how they get to their size of their TV.
That might be a one way to look at it.
Then, you know, we had to make sure we take out their own their own fucking tokens.
So that doesn't count in the TV.
You know, what's the main one?
All these are run on ETH.
So we go check the ETH TV out on these chains to find out like how well they're doing or what they're doing, you know.
And I mean, those numbers don't lie.
So that kind of tells you, you know, part of it.
I think more important, I would just go individual, like we were doing like on our own as a team, like talking to these different chains.
I mean, for arbitrary, there's no doubt that tech is rough.
But why put us as a layer three instead of layer two?
That kind of that bugs me bad as an APE or APE coin holder.
So, Matt, to bring you back to the point, right, there's like even a business consideration.
If you were to tell me that your APE chain is going to use Celestia versus Avail,
like literally a business question right here.
Why would you use Dominican?
It's really a business question, right?
Because there's certain benefits that will be dropped to the APE coin holder.
So we're supposed to change.
But the other part is really that, you know, the tech does come into a bit of a play.
But again, it's both a bit of a technical and a business question, right?
And we heard this talk from CK Sync and also the optimism guys and Arbitrum in terms of how they choose a partner, right?
And it's very important that we bring this to consideration.
Not just the tech, the business side, right?
Yeah, I mean, we start with this question.
I know the whole community hates it, right?
We hate to even consider the technical side, right?
We just want to get straight to the airdrops, the native yield.
We want to get straight to the money conversation.
But all of these things underlying the discussion, these are the things that are going to impact us as users.
And so it is sort of a circular discussion that starts here.
But then it moves in to those more interesting things.
We did, Machi, you pointed at the L3 solution proposal from the Arbitrum Horizon team.
I'm happy to take that, by the way, if you'd like me to speak to that.
So we do have, of course, Spencer and Steven here from the proposal.
So I do want to hear more in particular from you guys who are, you know, the main one of these four proposals,
who is actually suggesting that we go beyond the L2.
So, yeah, let me just speak about that for a second.
Number one is, and this is the first thing that I said, and it's true about the L2, L3 and every other technical decision of the chain,
my job here is to give what I believe is my best recommendation.
But also my job here is to give the infrastructure for the APECOIN DAO to be in the driver's seat.
So ultimately, the question of L2, L3 is going to be not my decision, not Horizon's decision, but fully in the APECOIN DAO.
If you want to be an L2, you can go ahead and do that.
The Arbitrum expansion pack exists, and absolutely, they can be an L2.
I think that being an L3 is a much better choice, which is why that's what we propose.
And I'll tell you why I propose that.
But again, it's not like, you know, not to be confused of like every other parameter in our proposal.
This is in the hands of the APECOIN DAO.
But that being said, there's some sort of weird stigma.
Like if I asked, you know, if I if I turn the question back and say, like, why, why, what's wrong with an L3?
So let me just finish for a second.
Someone told you somewhere that L2 is better than L3, but L3 actually has a ton of advantages.
Number one is the cost of onboarding is significantly lower.
So if you're coming from Ethereum, for example, and you're an L2, and so your funds are on Coinbase or on Binance or some exchange,
or even on Ethereum, you're going to have to do two Ethereum transactions, or in the case of Ethereum, one.
But Ethereum transactions to get to your L2.
If you're an L3, you'll have to do two arbitrary transactions to get there.
And your cost that differential of onboarding now has gone down by 95 percent.
That's number one, a very pragmatic decision.
Number two is if you're if you have low spotty volume or on onboarding, like, you know, it just takes some time and volume is relatively spotty or the transaction is spiky.
So sometimes there's a lot more volume.
There's a minute. But sometime the chain goes relatively low use.
There's a fixed cost of posting to the layer beneath you. Right.
So the idea is that usually if there's like enough transaction, that fixed cost is amortized.
But if the transaction volume is low, there's actually a fixed, you know, and this is true for every every roll up here.
There's a fixed cost of posting to Ethereum.
And you end up with this weird trade off between finality and and, you know, how how quickly you post and cost.
Because in one hand, you want to post quickly because you want to get quick finality in Ethereum.
On the other hand, if your transaction volume is low, which is normal for any chain in its early days, it could potentially be relatively low.
And it has some bootstrapping time to get to a higher volume.
If that's going to happen, then you're going to end up in a situation where you might be incentivized not to post on chain quickly.
And the analogy here is if you build an L2, you have to go in the car in the car lane, right?
So you go through the toll yourself during the car.
If you build an L3, you go on the bus because you're going to Ethereum not by yourself.
The cost is amortized with every other arbitrary transaction and every other L3 transaction.
What that means is you can get fast finality from Ethereum secured by Ethereum, much faster finality at extremely low costs.
So, again, the decision is in the 8.0 if it is an L2 or an L3.
But I haven't heard any argument other than someone told me somewhere that I should be offended by being an L3.
And many of the best chains in orbit are launching as an L3.
So, yeah, I'd love to hear if there are particular reservations or concerns or potentially misunderstandings.
But there is a very strong case for being an L3.
But ultimately, it's the community's decision.
The community decides, hey, we think for reasons that even if Steven doesn't agree that we want to be an L2, it's your decision.
Go for it. But that's why I think being an L3 makes sense.
And I'm happy to hear the counter decisions and to dispel any misunderstandings.
So when you open it up like that, you've almost guaranteed that Machi is going to rip into you.
So it's like, you guys got to work with this up here.
I mean, if you just open it up and say, hey, Machi, mess me up, you know, just give it to me.
Tell me all the reasons it's wrong.
You know, Machi, he's going to give you all the reasons.
And Machi, I'm not going to hold you up.
So I do want to hear some of your reservations.
And I know the community does as well.
But yeah, I mean, let's take it a little.
Everywhere I went or talked to definitely had that stigma like, hey, why do you want to be a L3 instead of L2?
The valuations are lower.
You know, people are saying shit like, why do you want to be someone's bitch?
There's all this shit like that out there. Right.
Like when we looked into the technical part of it and we asked them, we said, hey, so how do you get back out of there?
And they're saying this might not be true. Right.
Which is it takes seven days to get your eath off of layer two to the layer one.
Of course, you need a bridge if you don't want to wait.
And is there any currently a bridge between layer two and layer three so that you don't have to wait seven days to get off layer three and then seven days to get to layer one?
We are building with something called the teleporter bridge goes directly from layer one to layer three.
OK, so you are building a bridge, but currently there's no bridge to go from there.
Three back to layer one. I mean, currently the optimism doesn't have any fraud proof.
So it's not secured by Ethereum.
Your whole proposal is talking about technology to come.
So, yes, we're building a bridge.
And I would bet they'll be ready before the fraud proofs of the optimism chain.
And I agree there, too, Steve, is that all all four of these guys up on stage or the optimism arbiter horizon and ZK sync or polygon and ZK think these four technology providers are all providing the cutting edge technology.
If there's anything either one of them do not have, they are all telling me the same thing is that they're going to get there or they will have it sooner or later.
And let's give props to arbitrary ZK proof, the fraud proofs.
You guys already have it.
Everybody else has it on testnet or are on the way.
And the ZK guys are already way ahead of ZK.
And then, like arbitrary is going to have it sooner or later.
Like I've I've heard these things.
Like I'll take them at your word at it that you guys will have these things or you already have them.
So the text that's pretty good.
Now, when it comes to the layer three, too, is the feeling I got when I talked to everybody, a layer three was more like if I had a specific game, it'd be layer three.
Now, for a point down and a coin, we wanted to be like the like the currency of all the meta versus all the games out there.
So it's more like we would be the layer two gaming chain and everybody build their layer three on top of our layer two.
That's what we would like. Right.
Again, Horizon is a partner you guys picked.
I don't think they really know the community or they are really are part of our community.
And like they don't know the same vision that we have, which is we want to be number one.
I mean, the eight are number one.
We didn't come here to be number two.
And again, I would be a layer two arbitrum and have layer threes are all the different games.
Anamoka launches all the games that you go launches as layer threes on top of our layers there to arbitrum.
And I don't know if there's any other reason to be layer three and then have everybody else layer fours on top of us or whatnot.
Layer one individual games, not an ecosystem.
I have again, I have the same vision, but like and again, your vision to be very clear is much more important because I have a ton of respect for you as a member of the community.
And I don't pretend to be a long standing member of the community.
So I think your vision and when I say I want the community's vision to be represented like you are chief among there.
And I want your you know, even if arbitrary wins this and you don't win this in the proposal, you're currently backing.
I still want your input and still want your vision because your vision is one that represents, I think, a large part of the community.
So I respect that vision.
I think it's an important one.
I think it's a wonderful one.
I think that if we win, we will do everything we can to support that.
I still think, you know, I'll tell you, like anecdotally, this is very reminiscent this conversation to me of going back three, four or five years ago.
Now it's and people say layer two.
We're not going to be a layer two.
I'll never back a layer two.
We need to be a layer one.
You have the old layer one movement.
But like, you know, again, with all due respect, nothing that you said, you know, everything is there's no technical consideration.
There's no reason why you can't build chains on top of layer three.
And it starts getting the numbers start getting high and sounding weird.
But again, fundamentally, there's zero, zero reason why you can't.
There's some like stigma.
And to be very, very honest, that stigma is spread by those who have a reason that they don't want this proposal to win.
But there's no technical reason.
There's no technical reason for the stigma division.
You have a multiple chains on top of the layer three can work will work out of the box.
But hey, this is how we feel.
Then that's your your prerogative.
I'm not here to tell you that you're wrong.
I'm telling you that technically you can do everything you said as a layer three.
And there are significant benefits.
But ultimately, if you're saying I have some fuzzy feeling and think that that will, from a branding perspective, put us in the wrong place, then maybe layer two is right for you.
Again, I come from a technical perspective and say you can do everything you just said on a layer three and your onboarding costs go down.
Also, you got on the bus to Ethereum, don't have to go through the car, don't have to pay the toll as a car.
And I'm going to make that case.
I still think it's the right one.
And I know, but I'm not the community member that has the fuzzy or the not fuzzy.
I don't mean to dismiss it with the soft concerns of, well, we have some stigma associated with it.
Maybe it was spread by people who who have reasons to try to fund.
But if it is, it is what it is.
If that's the current state and you feel you want to layer two, the origin layer two is not going to be layer two.
Layer three is a recommendation.
It's not somebody that's going to stand in the way of you succeeding.
Yeah, I mean, we can build everything on a centralized database, too.
Yeah. So that's the real quick because I think we're getting like the views of like optimistic roll-offs here.
And I think that that we're not actually talking about things that, you know, polygon CDK and ZK Sync as well bring that are actually address a lot of these issues.
So we're talking about seven day withdrawal periods.
Even when you solve those seven day withdrawal periods on optimistic roll-ups, there's an economic cost to doing that.
And that is not something that exists with ZK roll-ups.
And it's not something that exists with polygon CDK.
When you want to withdraw, you can withdraw and you just wait for that proof to be posted on Ethereum.
That is a significant difference to the user experience because it's not just about onboarding.
Onboarding through a centralized exchange, they're all happy to incur the cost of onboarding a user directly to an L2 because like ultimately, like they they benefit from from that user getting onboarding there.
But what's also an important user experience, even though you could say, yeah, I want to trap all my users onto this chain, which can work pretty effectively.
That's not a good user experience.
You actually want a user experience that allows people to enter and leave chains.
And that's where kind of ZK roll-ups end up being really important because not only do you have that through the kind of awkward experience, what you also have is the fact that because you're using ZK tech, you can also drive down costs on an L2 to a nominal amount.
And that's really through proof aggregation.
And I think one point that came up, which I think is a really good point, is this technology is super nascent.
So all of us are working on things to improve the tech that we're working on.
One good example for us is proof aggregation.
Prove aggregation is going to end up meaning that we can bring different transaction proofs.
So people are transacting, transacting.
You batch those, you create a proof.
At that point, you actually have the security that you want as secure as data available to layer you're relying on.
And you can keep wrapping those proofs and then you can put them to Ethereum.
And what that means is that you can drive down costs for an L2 to an incredibly low amount by wrapping those proofs.
What you can also do with that that is very important is you can allow the APE coin community and all users of APE chain to actually have cross chain composability.
We started talking here about somebody said you've got like the modular kind of approach here.
We introduced the idea of like an aggregated blockchain.
And it's the idea that this modularity is good, but you ultimately need to bring that modularity together.
So when we talk of data availability, I do think that's actually important to talk about.
There's trade offs there that the community should consider.
There's a lot of different parts of the stack that we can consider.
Ultimately, they all need to be brought together.
And it's ZK technology that ultimately allows you to do that.
Now, you'll hear things around like shared sequencers.
And I think you do lose a lot of customizability around that in a way that you don't with the ZK tech.
So ultimately, and I don't want this to sound like I'm directly responding to what Stephen's saying.
I want to give the ZK side of this conversation because there's ZK solutions and there's optimistic rollups.
And they have very different trade offs and value propositions and understanding that you can drive value down and get really good liquidity that can be shared across many chains in the ecosystem.
You'll be able to think of when you can transact directly from Ethereum.
You can come on board or you can already be online and then you can transact across immutable ZK over X1 built by OKX, over Manta when it comes over from OP to Polygon.
When you plug all of those things together and you can transact across all of those chains due to that ZK test and propagation,
it's a completely different world than the one that you're in with optimistic rollups that allow for that kind of growth of the ecosystem without needing to start fresh and new.
The way like ApeChain is going to do, you need to build everything from scratch, all that liquidity from scratch, every application from scratch.
Everything like that is going to take years to build up a successful chain.
No matter how amazing the IP and the people are in the ApeChain community, you need somewhere where you can borrow what exists across ecosystems.
And you can do that with Polygon, CDK and Niagara are getting built in a way that I think is very difficult to do elsewhere.
Yeah, on that piece, just one thing.
So yeah, native interoperability is built into all the ZK stacks, right?
Whether it's ZK or ZK saying ZK stack.
And Mark probably a pretty good point, right?
Like, why does this actually matter?
You can have specialized chains, right?
So, for example, let's say there's a specialized game that gets built on ApeChain's layer 2 as a layer 3.
You can do cross-chain transactions in the same transaction.
So you could essentially do a loan and borrow where the liquidity is actually you're borrowing from some other chain.
And you can link those two up into a single transaction, and that's the power of ZK tech that it can bring forward.
Yeah, I think there are some.
So a lot of these discussions are mostly around interoperability, right?
And how do you actually create that interoperability between the different ecosystems within a broader ecosystem?
There are a lot of proposals out there for interoperability.
So a few things I'll say here just to present the optimistic side.
Number one is there's no, you know, if nothing there, you know, we had Arbitrum, we had off-chain labs,
and building the Arbitrum technology, are building best-in-class interop, particularly for different antitrust chains,
which the proposal is for this to be an antitrust chains, to fastly bridge back and forth to another.
That's something that's deeply in the works.
And the other two things I'll say is, like, you know, this idea of, like, seven-day liquidity being an issue,
it's like, you know, 2020 called and they want their talking points back.
Like, you know, we've seen the Arbitrum, Arbitrum 1, Arbitrum Nova leading in their industries with an ecosystem,
a very healthy ecosystem of fast bridging.
And it's just not the case that this is an impediment for anyone.
And it's an aid chain would be, you know, in our proposal, we're working with Layer 0 directly to provide that bridging.
So that's just like literally a solved issue.
It was. And in terms of, you know, bridging and interop, again, Arbitrum will have and already does have excellent bridging,
and will have, you know, great interop between orbit chains.
It's one of the programs. In terms of some of the problems of these ZK proposals that you're hearing.
So like one of the technical problems, I don't want to get too technical of the Ag layer, for example, is a very nice idea.
I actually read through the documentation. But the problem is like it's a similar problem that the super chain has.
You have different chains that sort of tied themselves together in different ways.
So in this super chain, like, optimistic way, there's a safety issue because you have basically worst of all security.
So if you have two chains and you can fastly move back and forth and a hack happens on one chain and you can exit via the other chain, it's like a hack anywhere here.
Or, you know, a security issue on one chain affects all of them and you basically run into issues.
And that's why the optimism super chain requires you to only run the software they approve, requires you to submit to their governance.
And it actually is very hindering. In the ZK Ag layer type proposals, you have a similar problem.
You have the same safety issue because of, you know, ZK proof, which Mark presented.
We have a liveness issue because the idea of the Ag layer is to basically daisy chain these different ZK proofs.
And you have these before they're posted on chain, as Mark said, you have already these like wrapped, I think was the word he used, wrapped ZK proof.
So one chain depends on another.
The problem is if one of those chains has a liveness issue and stops posting and you sort of don't get that at that proof in time, you have to unravel this daisy chain.
You end up with a liveness issue that could lead to a deep rollback and it could lead to a or just, you know, you have to wait and pause for all these chains.
So the idea of time and security, these are great ideas and I'm sure we'll build on that. I'm sure we'll find issues.
But I just, you know, our goal in off chain labs has always been to build technology and talk about technology that exists, the pros and the cons.
And I just wanted to be clear to everyone here that like there is no silver bullet.
Everything has pros and everything has cons.
And, you know, I can I'm sure you can take you can take apart, you know, the you can you can point to the crows and cons of ours, which, you know, Mark did.
And he's again, I think that we have good solutions to that, particularly with bridging, but I can similarly point to some of the big, big open issues with some of these proposals around zk aggregation.
And ultimately, I'm excited as a community to work together to build these technologies out.
But there are, you know, we're still early on as a development as a community and there is no clear winner there.
All right. Thank you, Steven. I'm gonna be honest.
I think sometimes when we get into some of these terms, we lose people like as soon as you you say Daisy chain.
The first time you said it, I probably like 40 percent of people were like, what?
And then you kept going and then it was like slowly kept losing people.
Yeah, you got to stop. You guys have questions.
I will. I will. And if you guys pump in my bags. So that's all good.
Like, again, like, thank you. Let me let me circle us around into this next one because we're like two to three a.m. across the country right now.
So and we only got about 50 minutes or so.
And I want to give you guys an opportunity to talk about one of the other implications that you guys have presented here.
And I think it's interesting for you too much. We talked about it the other day, but we got the folks here to discuss it with us now.
One of the the terms, one of the jargon terms in this discussion is this idea of having sequencers, of having maybe a point as a validator and some of the proposals introducing this deck, this data availability committee.
All right. And there's different implications for each of the proposal.
But one of the important discussions, one of the things that I know each of you has sort of presented different ideas on is this idea is a point as a gas token.
All right. And I'm going to I'm going to leave the conversation pretty open for you guys to discuss it.
There's there are different implications for the community, whether we use Ethereum as our gas token or if we were to set what's called a custom gas token and that custom gas token being a coin to process and being able to process or as a fee to process our
transactions and underlying that ordering these transactions would be this sequencer and storing that information may be this data availability committee.
I'm hesitant. I'm curious. I'm not sure exactly who to throw it to first. I mean, Michael, are you back with us now?
Love it. Love it. All right. Well, so you and Machi, your proposals, the case thinks and the 18 proposals are the two that notably are considering or talking about introducing a new token into the ecosystem of possibly an A token or the C.K.
proposal also mentions possibly a custom or a new gas token for the Ape chain. So can you can you just open this topic up a little bit for us and give us some of your thoughts on the implications for using a point as a gas token, maybe creating a new token for this or just using good old.
Yeah, no. So it's up. Y'all rep in ZK Sync with a man Omar here who can jump in on the gas token part that we've been chatting with some of the Dow Council members, but also former Activision Blizzard where I launched five games.
So I think it ultimately comes down to when you talk about gas token, it's the shit that runs on top of a chain. Right. I think someone was saying earlier that it's the tech isn't what's going to make or break a chain.
It's the dope shit that runs on top. And so I think when you think about it like that, it's like, OK, like, what do you guys what do you guys want to build or attract? Right.
Is it kind of using Ape as IP like what you see Pudgy do with Walmart or is it opening it up to where Ape chain is the number one destination for Web three games and kind of low key ZK Sync is actually working on this kind of pulling in.
And then a lot of my friends from double AAA gaming where they see this opportunity like these these folks didn't miss out on that shift from console to mobile and they see the same shift happening with Web three games.
And y'all are also like super ahead of the curve on this. It's like it's not going to what he's not going to take over PlayStation or Xbox, but it's going to be you're talking about tens of billions.
You know, if not over one hundred billion alone in just Web three gaming time.
So I think once you figure out like what you want to build, then you kind of get back to this idea of like, OK, like how do you introduce Ape coin as as a gas token?
And maybe Omar, if you can just jump in here, you know, maybe some ideas to kind of inspire the crew here.
Yeah, I mean, that's a good point, right?
We should be working backwards in terms of what is it that we want Ape chain to be and what like what type of destination, what type of users, what type of businesses do we want to build on top and then work backwards into does it make sense for Ape coin to actually be the gas token or do we create a new token or do we just use stable or just continue with Epe?
Right. I think the main thing that we're generally seeing is just abstracting gasoline completely.
The whole concept of gas, if you really want to go after larger markets, the whole concept of gas should kind of just like go away.
It should just be a cost of doing business at the end of the day.
And when gas is already going to become so cheap, if it's going to be like significant, like fractions of a penny, it's probably behooves you to just make it go away for end users.
Right. But then how do you protect against, for example, like bots?
And so there's a couple of different models we can play around with.
The gas token or you can say, hey, how about holders of specific entities or holders of certain amounts of Ape coin?
You know, you get special privileges, for example, you can just use don't have to pay for gas. Right.
Or you get discounts. So there's a lot of different ways you can experiment with this.
And it all really just comes down to what are the types of users and the user experience that you want to build and then work backwards from there.
But luckily with ZK Sync, we have all that optionality that we want. Right.
You can essentially build any ERC 20 token as a native gas token for your chain.
Or you can just use paymasters. Right.
Since we have native accounts traction, in which case, then you create different business rules and logic that determine who pays gas, how they can pay the gas or they just don't see gas in general.
But as Michael said, it all just comes down to what is it that we want to build?
What do we want to focus on and then build a user experience that optimizes for that? And luckily, as I said, with ZK Stack, you have that option.
Yeah, I think the also the other thing is like what you know, when you talk about, you know, all four of these like dominant chains, you know, yeah, like, yeah, like there's some tech tradeoffs with each of them.
But they're all it's all super dope tech. So then it really comes down to like, what are you guys optimizing as a community? Is it taking the biggest bag?
OK, cool. But that's not like just straight up like ZK Sync is probably the lowest offer. Right.
What we bring instead is we're going to bring users. Right.
Like we're already working with the government of Argentina, where Mila is bringing all 45 million citizens on chain. Right.
He's turning that that almost like clear ID app into almost like a API for anyone, including you guys, to do business with Argentina.
And that's already spread just kind of on the down low to two other Latin American countries.
You know, you're seeing this with Pudgy, where they're able to go mainstream to Wal-Mart.
It's like you guys are our NFTs. You guys are, you know, crypto culture, like whatever Pudgy does.
My expectation is that you can 10 X that right. Like if Pudgy gets into Wal-Mart, you all can like just call 10 X.
I didn't see the Pudgy penguins price being 10 X lower than ours, homeboy.
Yeah, like you guys. Yeah, the Pudgy 10 X Pudgy's would be one hundred fifty four for us.
That sounds good to me, too. But doesn't Pudgy going to Wal-Mart predate?
You guys hanging out with Argentina sounds good, too, man. I love Manu Ginobili, dude.
I'm saying, like, look at it broadly, right? Like, you know, as you look at these, you know, it's like win loser, girl.
Like, you know, we're down for whatever you guys decide, but it's like ultimately comes out to like, you know, figure out like what you guys want.
And if it's users, that's where we're already focused. Right. Like we are.
Omar is like the giga brain behind like bringing like Argentina Pudgy, like a couple of things that we'll announce soon.
And our our central benchmark is if you're not bringing like 10 million users on chain, like we can't fuck with you.
Like it's just that's not helpful. But if that's interesting.
All right. We don't got 10 million users, homeboy. So so I guess you can't fuck with this.
I think we were talking about the APE coin used as a gas token just now.
And also like and also which AP is proposing having their own new token, like a new APE chain token.
I think that was the main point of the last question.
So so breaking that part down, it goes back to this.
I think the only proposal was was Horizon and arbitrums that said, hey, let's use APE coin as a gas token.
That thing to me is to fool all the people in APE coin that don't know better and be like, oh, yeah, they're going to burn APE coin as gas.
So they're going to now they'll add utility as a gas token.
So we should vote for this one.
But that would add like cell pressure to the to the APE coin to be used as gas.
Because you still have post that that data pay pay that to post that data.
That's the point of the point of layer three, because you don't have to post as much data back.
No, no, that's the point of that.
Not layer three. That's the point of not posting the data on Ethereum.
So it doesn't create a celebration.
That's agnostic to layer two and layer three.
Yeah. And there's trade offs there.
So to me, it's like the other the other point is not there.
Like you don't have the gas.
I still not really believing in the APE coin uses gas story like me personally.
And I believe the reason why you need your own chain token like a token or AC token or ACE token.
This part is actually very key differentiator in our APs.
Why we need another token.
Optimism has their own OP token.
Arbitrum has their own ARB token.
Polygon has their own PLL poll token.
ZK Sync must have a token or they're going to do a token drop.
So everybody go, you know, like symbol attack farm that shit.
Basically, you need your own token to incentivize developers and builders games to come and launch on your thing.
You want Blizzard Activision guys?
We have an A token, right?
And we hit up all these guys where Michael used to work, where Daniel Leger used to work and tell these gamers.
Hey, look, we have this brand new APE chain.
And if you come to our chain, we'll give five percent of our tokens for your launcher.
Same thing as the way Optimism locked down to base somehow like, hey, be part of our network.
We need our own token and incentivize people to come.
It doesn't matter the big major games, those triple A games these motherfuckers are talking about.
Let's get League of Legends.
We'll give you a token or a chain token to come.
The thing is, like, you're going to have to be you're going to have to go and rock on these guys all day long to get them to come because they have all the choices in the world.
And guess who's going to be like rocking for us?
They're going to come to ZK think don't go to a chain like Optimism or Arbitrum or Polygon.
All these guys got their own chain and they're going to want League of Legends, you know, Fortnite.
All these motherfuckers are going to launch on their chain.
They're not going to be like pushing us as a chain to go.
Like, there's no reason to.
If I was ZK think, I'd become ZK think.
Why would I tell them to go to like the secondary chain that's using my tech?
But there is a huge player that's going to spin up their own gaming chain and you'll see we're driving all of our double AAA gaming trends to that chain.
That's not us then, Michael.
It's super specific to that license.
It's like still ZK think because I'm with you.
Go ahead and chill it because yeah, you got to take that bunch of games.
You got to push it to that chain.
And I got to push it to a chain because a chain didn't give you the votes.
I wouldn't give it to us either.
I mean, how many votes did we give you?
There's no reason for you to push those games to us.
So I'm not sure why you're on stage.
I, you know, except for, you know, farm that farm the engagement and get.
We went to hear the ideas.
We prefaced this at the beginning, debate the ideas, not the people.
If I have to kick anybody off, I have to kick everybody off because you're all guilty.
He's joined us from the airport to be a part of this discussion.
And thank you everybody also for tuning in and listening.
We have learned a lot of different things in between some of the bickering,
but we did bill it as a debate.
So that was bound to happen.
I've only been given these motherfuckers.
How about we frame it a different way?
How about we say, how is your proposal, right?
Provide utility to quote unquote, eight coin, right?
How does it provide utility to the eight point?
It's there's an eight chain.
You're going to get the eight token.
If you have an eight coin state, you're going to get your, your, your eight chain token.
That's, that's direct utility for this eight coin.
Is that you like to put it this way.
It's eBay and PayPal and they spun off, right?
There's two different stocks, not one.
Oh, and that's the stocks that everybody's going to be scared of.
No, this is exactly what web three is all about.
Tokens upon tokens, NFTs upon NFT drops.
That's, that's how one of our leaders maker Dow is doing it, right?
They got the new spark lending protocol coming out.
There'll be a spark token that's air dropped to all the maker maker holders.
And the similarly, the eight token, if you own the eight coin,
you got the utility that you will get an eight chain, a token drop.
Now, every other AIP is going to be locking that value inside eight coin and it's going to disappear.
That's what's going to happen.
The value is not going to show in, in your eight coin.
So from your perspective, we just farming, right?
So that's, that's plain and simple.
I mean, I'll hand that over to the rest of you.
What are you talking about?
It's a sub-doubt that distribution of governance rights and the governance tokens are all going to eight coin holders.
And to also reiterate the point that Machi said earlier, you need, you need these, these ecosystem funds.
How are you going to, you know, even if we say, okay, whatever the numbers people quote, three million, 60 million, even a hundred million,
which chain is going to give us a hundred million?
How are we going to go and compete on an ecosystem fund against any of these other chains if we don't have our own budget to do it?
And this is also why we want the A token.
And that's the point that he makes.
I think I've really needed to reiterate that point.
I think you guys have opened up a good discussion.
All right, Mark, if you want to come in, come in.
But I think you guys have opened up an interesting discussion and I know it's one that the community wants to hear.
And I know it's one that particularly the stewards here want to get into.
And it's how, how are we able to get other people to use this chain?
How are we going to establish partnerships?
How are we going to invite people in here when we, I mean, what if they were to walk in here right now?
But Mark, go ahead and please, please say what you're going to say.
And I also have a question from the audience.
And if anybody from the audience wants to come up and join us, I know it's getting late.
Like HKT time is like 2, 3 a.m. over there.
So if you want to join us, send those requests to get up on stage with us.
But Mark, go ahead, please.
So I think, look, I think first to say, look, Maki knows how to DJEN and Maki's right.
You bring in a new token.
And what happens is people want a new token.
All I got is king of DJEN.
That's like a very clear, like, that's true.
The question is, when you bring in a new token, do you extract value from somewhere else?
And there is some amount of new value creation when you create a new token, potentially.
Maybe you attract some new users who wouldn't have otherwise.
But ultimately, when you decide like where value sits, you've got to be like you.
I've always had this for like years in a crypto ecosystem.
You've got to like distribute that value in the way that you decide and decide to distribute some equity holders in addition to tokens.
Some put it all in the token.
You decide where it goes.
And ultimately, when you introduce a new token, you are diluting the value of an existing token that could capture that value.
Or in the alternative, you're destroying the value of the new token such that it will be worth nothing.
And therefore, in the long run, has no actual benefit to the ecosystem.
So I think it is a very effective mechanism for short term DJENing because that is what new tokens always do.
I don't think it is a good long term solution for driving value to a coin holders, which is why I've been so against it.
Notwithstanding recognizing that it brings it in.
What I would suggest as somebody who's spent now four years in DAOs having helped create the token for compounds and for Uniswap.
And I could go on the list of the DeFi tokens that I have worked on creating.
I will tell you that in every single one of those cases, you have to end up deciding what you want that token to capture from a value perspective.
And ultimately, as with any business, you end up needing to spend money to make money.
And the reality is that a sequencer is effectively a UI to receiving revenue for a chain.
And if you do not spend any money to generate that revenue, you're unlikely to succeed.
Now, many of these proposals are offering money or maybe all of them.
Three million, I say believe at a minimum, sounds like up to 60 million potentially.
And so what we're talking about there is a mechanism to drive value and to drive interest.
And the question is, do you want a new token that in the long run dilutes eight coin?
Or do you ultimately, if we're being realistic post year one or post year two or post year three, you look and you say, how are we going to grow?
And the eight coin Dow is going to need to decide, do we want to spend some of our funds that we can create even more revenue that will in the end up in the end create more value for ourselves?
And that's the decision needs to be made.
It's a decision that most groups of people who are trying to generate value to themselves decide, yeah, we're going to spend something so that we can make something that seems like the natural thing.
And so that's something that I think the community should really look at the long term value they're creating for the community and not so much short term, notwithstanding the effectiveness of taking that short term action.
So at the end of the day, you know, an Ape chain is being proposed to the eight coin Dow, right?
We're all members of the eight coin Dow.
You know, to me, the primary purpose here is bringing additional utility to a coin and benefiting the members of the eight coin Dow.
And, you know, that's one of the reasons that I think that, like, having gas, you know, Ape as gas on the chain, which then likely will open it up to being the coin of the realm, to being the coin that's used, you know, for all sorts of reasons, as well as opening up revenue opportunities to the Dow, things that we can do with additional Ape, et cetera,
is going to be really important for that purpose.
Right. I understand anybody can go and launch a token on top of this chain for any reason that they want to. And I hope that they do and that they will.
But, you know, I do think that it needs to be really clear that, like, it's the point down. Right.
You know, it's also why part of our proposal is to make sure that we are getting a coin out there into other ecosystems. Right.
You know, I mean, I think that one of the biggest problems with a point today is the fact that, you know, your defy options in this is not a defy chain, but your defy options are really limited.
Right. It's really hard to buy a point on chain unless you want to go to see X and bridge it over.
So, you know, I think that having an Ape chain and having Ape as a gas and, you know, from that point forward, being able to use that as a reason to connect it into things like the layer zero fabric to get it into other ecosystems so that they're builders, not just on Ape chain, but in other places so that Ape is extremely accessible is going to be hugely important for this.
And so, you know, my thought is that, like, I get why people, you know, when I get much why you want to launch another token.
But, you know, I think that at the end of the day, this is the point out and Ape coin should be at the center of any plan.
Yeah, we tried this like two years ago of porting Ape coin to Polygon and look at the usage of a point over on Polygon. Yeah, I know I've studied it.
I've studied it to all the other chains. And I think a lot of those chains are on the Omni chains. A lot of these chains are going to be ghost chains in a year or two.
And having Ape coin ported over, migrated over there is not going to provide utility or value to Ape coin. We've seen it with a huge chain at the time. Polygon was a huge fucking chain at the time.
And we ported it over there. Ape coin migrates to Polygon. Nothing happened.
Porting it is not enough. You know that. Porting it is not enough, right?
So what are you doing to incentivize what they do or why would they do it?
What are they going to do over there? What are they going to do over there?
Like, how are you going to incentivize that? How are you going to get everybody's attention when everybody's already farming points?
Like you guys said, like, short term, what are you talking about short term?
That blast has 1.5 billion TVL right now, just using points and not even their tokens yet.
Incentivizing people to move to their chain. And they're giving 50% away of the airdrop to devs, right?
How many devs? I mean, every dev I talk to is working on something for blast right now.
So when we do our Ape chain, how's it not going to be a ghost chain if we don't have some kind of, like you said, our own token to incentivize people to come over.
Again, when you say that it's short term, Polygon used a coin matic to get everybody over there, to leave Ethereum to go and support their chain.
Like, that's the same with Optimism, Arbitrum. All you guys use the token to get the chain going.
Now, Apecoin has started and already been distributed.
The value has already been distributed.
A lot of that is Horizon has a lot of those tokens.
For just like setting up our token launch and they fucking guapped.
And now you're going to try to, like, bootstrap this. We still have a treasury.
But as you can see, our Apecoin Dow, using our treasury, we're very careful with it, which we should be.
I'm probably the most careful with our treasury. I always vote against for most of these AIPs.
So for us to say, hey, we're going to use our Apecoin and just incentivize devs or builders or games to come to our new Ape chain.
Look at our track record. I don't see that happening.
And if we have a new token, we have a chance to launch the Ape chain and be competitive against anybody out there, including these main chains up here on stage with us.
So here's my question, though, right? Because, like, this is a debate that I think is worth having.
But there's nothing that prevents, you know, if the community decides, right, and if it's something that you believe in and want to push and others, you know, there is nothing preventing an incentive token to happen, you know, if Ape is the gas token.
Right. Like, I don't I just don't understand why it would necessarily be an either or regardless.
But, you know, I think it's a conversation that that's worth continuing to have, certainly.
But, you know, I do want to put that out there. And at the end of the day, I still do think that, like, making sure that this is bringing utility, both Apecoin within this ecosystem outside of it, should be the priority.
Look, OK, I'll just take Arbitrum as an example. Arbitrum DAO has like three point five billion dollars of Treasury to go against.
Apecoin DAO can empty every last penny and not be anywhere close to that.
And if we look at the highest, highest bidding, even if we say 60 mil as anything we're going to get as a grant, that's nowhere close to I mean, I'm not saying Arbitrum is an enemy to, you know, Ape chain potentially, but I'm just saying looking at a different chain.
What is the kind of comparison? So, yeah, sure. We can go and empty all of the coffers of Apecoin DAO. Still nothing compared to the league that we need to be playing in.
You could also launch a new token and not get to those numbers and therefore you haven't. I think it's that's a faulty argument because there's no guarantee you launch a new token.
Now, boom, you have three and a half billion dollars of value.
We're definitely not going to get to anywhere close to that if we don't launch a token.
That's my point. Like, look, everybody comes and gives their distribution and said, cool, we set you up a three years runway.
We set you up for all the infrastructure you need. And then how do we incentivize people to come in here? Like that, that's the, you know, just build a product that people want to use the idea is to bootstrap.
And our DAO has done such a good job doing that already.
I mean, that's the thing. We've never been able to do that. And I think we just say, look, we're going to have these technology providers from outside of our ecosystem come in here and say, here's your best solution, guys.
We're going to talk about all the technical differences. We're going to go ahead and give you this infrastructure.
And then good luck, guys. Have fun playing with this thing when we can't even like launch. That's my problem right now, actually.
We keep talking about the technological differences, but we don't talk about what happens when these infrastructure providers come and leave us, they coined out with an A chain.
Congratulations. You have a chain now. Now what happens next? That's the part that nobody's talking about.
That's why in our case, you know, we partner with Horizon. And I know you had definitely have different views of them with them.
And I'm not here to, you know, get in between you two and your different views of the ecosystem.
But I agree with you. Like if it was just off chain labs or arbitrary addition coming, we're an outsider. We have no idea.
In fact, prerequisite for us getting involved was to having a partner like Horizon who's going to have a growth plan for the ecosystem.
That might not be your growth plan. You might not agree with my point, so I actually agree with your point.
Like if you have someone that's coming in as an outsider, just hand you technology, it's good for them and then walks away.
That doesn't serve you well. And in fact, it's probably not going to be a winning experiment.
So I think we're aligned there. And that's why we decided to work with Horizon. And listen, we'll work with everyone.
You know, if the Arbitrum Horizon proposal wins, I want to get in the room with you, I want to hear with Mashi, I want to hear everyone's ideas.
And I want to make sure that they're all represented because that's our role here.
It's provide tech, but to also make sure that we are supporting a broader vision and to understand that a broader vision goes well beyond us, and we can't do that by ourselves.
So, I mean, this debate is important for a couple of things. I mean, me as an ape community member, me as someone that didn't know how to do a chain to begin with.
The first call I got on for the ape chain was for Polygon, two calls for Polygon before I even decided, hey, maybe we need our own AIP because this doesn't sound like what the eight point Dow wants.
So going back to the main thing I think here for Spencer and Horizon, like we've had a taste of Horizon two years ago with their sticking contract that cost us $500,000 in six months to get it out there.
And why would we trust someone in that sense? And at the time we had an eight point counselor that was from Horizon.
So there was a conflict of interest, no qualms about it, took the job, paid themselves $500,000, didn't even gift it to the Dow, and a sticking contract that doesn't auto compound.
And it's just like hasn't been updated and you guys disappeared for two years and now you show up again, tell us you're going to build us the A chain? Don't believe it.
And Spencer, no knock against you personally. I look at like his Twitter account. He's got like 200 followers. He doesn't even represent his PFP.
Dude, how are you going to be VP of growth for our A chain? It doesn't make sense to me. And again, arbitrage tech is badass, but their decision making finding a partner I feel is like off.
Yeah, let's debate that. Like how are you going to grow us? How? Again, with no token too. How's that going to happen?
I thought somebody might answer that. I guess that was returned. All right. Well, we got it. We got a question from the audience here. We got a fire around. We got a fire around question. This is one for everybody.
And and I think I think we can actually just I think we could settle this with a yes or a no. I don't. Yeah, we don't need to. We don't need to know the extent any any anything other than a yes or no.
And the question is, regardless of who wins, regardless of the outcome of this proposal, will you and again, this is for everybody, will you support the winning chain?
Will you still contribute to this ecosystem? Will you still contribute to the eight point Dow, the point ecosystem and help this chain in some way to be established?
Because all of you have obviously come forward with this proposal to build the eight chain. You're committing some of you three years. Some of you may be longer.
But what is the commitment if you don't win? And again, just a yes or no. That is simple. Will you stick around? Will you support whoever the winner is? Will you contribute your unique experiences, unique insights to the eight chain that's going to be built regardless of who is building it?
Let's start with Machi. Yes or no?
You know, yes or no. I'm effort. Yes or no. Just yes or no. My fucking no. Why would I support horizon? They've drifted our dow or why would I support polygon like like like I don't see it. I don't see it, man.
All right. All right. We'll come back. We'll come back. Michael, how about for you? How about for you and for you and Omar? Yes or no.
As an individual. Hell yeah. Happy to start Omar. How about for you?
As an individual. Hell yeah. I'll see Machi. Maybe I should have come for you last. I don't know if I said that. They're all going to say yes, bitch. Why do I do that? I lost. I didn't mean to.
What do you expect them to say? No, I'm going to be pissed. I'm a petty. Our, our, our Arboretrome is too, too, like petty. No, these motherfuckers. Okay. All four of these motherfuckers are the number one tech providers in our industry. And they're here to provide that tech to a chain, right?
Well, if it's a genuine yes and you're the only no, then I have other questions. I'm going to have another question. Steven, yes or no.
I mean, if there's a role for me to play, absolutely. I'm sure Horizon, of course, I'll speak for that. I know Spencer's back here. We'll for sure. I'd love to support it. If you're using someone else's tech, my role might be limited, but you tell me what I can do.
See, that was a maybe. See Machi, now we're getting somewhere. Mark, how about for you?
Oh, I mean, the answer. Yeah, I mean, what I'll say is in the next few hours, we'll be announcing a new release that will make it clear why it is we're happy to contribute, even if polygon CDK is not picked.
Alpha. Acorn stages get you alpha every single time. That's a guarantee. All right, so it's a no from Machi.
Thank you. I needed that. That's a no from Machi. That's a maybe from Steven. That's a yes from Michael.
No, it's not a maybe for me to be clear. It's like yes, if I'm sure Horizon. Well, I think if you could re-add Spencer, I think he wants to say something on the Horizon side. But absolutely, I mean, that's the reason we chose them because we know that they're invested in the long growth of the ecosystem.
Look, I love being a host because I give you guys the opportunity to shine or you guys can bear yourselves when I ask a yes or no question. And, you know, we get more than a yes or no. That's that show something that shows something and everybody gave more than a yes or no.
I don't know if it shows passion. I don't know if it's the difficulty following directions. I don't know. But Spencer, yes or no. And then go ahead and elaborate. Everybody else did.
Yes. And and sorry that I didn't get a chance to respond to you, Machi, for having technical glitches over here. But, you know, yes, I think that like at the end of the day, we've been going through this very contentious period, right?
You know, Horizon Labs is a company that like, yeah, I think that there was a period of time where we were not as involved as we needed to be. I am here now. I have been working very hard with my team to make sure that that has not been the case over the last few months and is not the case going forward and that we are heavily involved.
You know, I think that there are many different there are a couple of different communities within the broader community that all need to come together here. And, you know, for the sake of a coin like I think that everybody is going to want to contribute.
And that's going to be the mission there. You know, I would like, look, you know, obviously, I disagree with Machi's assessment, you know, on things.
I think that there are very good reasons why, you know, AIP stake was built the way that it was. It has never been hacked. It has never had any sort of issues. We know that the community can be a target because, you know, there's a lot of value here.
It's an onboarding for a lot of people into Web 3. And so, you know, that was kind of the primary directive around that. You know, I want to talk about what we can do with AIP stake going forward. I want to talk about upgrading those contracts.
I want to talk about changing it. I know that there are a lot of proposals out there for it. Um, you know, but like, we're committed to things and I am personally committed to things. I do have a mutant AIP.
By the way, I know that it's not my profile right now, but I do have one. Um, you know, I'm excited, obviously, to, you know, to work together and like, I think like, look, you know, I understand that we're all battling right now.
But, you know, my mantra is there's no enemies really at the end of the day. And it's like, we all have different views of what's going to be best for the chain. But like, I think that we all want what's best for the chain and what's best for AIP point at the end of the day. And that's all I'll say about it.
Me too. Again, all these guys got their own chains. Horizons got their own Ethereum open network at like 3 million TVL. And that scares me, like as an AIP holder and as an AIP chain holder. So, you know, again, like, you know, arbitrum picked the horizon as a partner because they have that 3 million TVL on the EON network. They wanted that to their billions, you know, pretty greedy of them.
Yeah, I think overall, like, these four are the strongest technologies that are pitching AIP point out. And that's a good thing. That, remember when you vote that everybody wanted us, okay? Like, you have to remember that AIP chain, AIP coin, the Ugoverse, us apes, we are valuable.
And like, don't forget that, you know, our price does make you think that we're zero because we have gone all the way down to $1. And, but that's not true at all. Like, again, on another space I said before, we're the culture of the entire Web3 space.
Like, people that like NFTs like art, they like community, like the in real life meetups. Like, we're the part that actually are socializing. So part of the thing that I said about AIP 377 and what we want to do is like, let's play to our strengths. Aside from gaming, what else is it?
Socialfy. Like, who else is more social than the apes and the NFTs communities? Nobody. Like, the rest of these guys don't go out. They're stuck at home building the tech, working on the software so we can have like these four badass tech providers. These guys, the pale as hell, no fucking sun on their skin. I'm going to talk. I'm home all the time too.
But my point is that a lot of us do go out there to the clubs, to the meetups, eat Denver, you know, everything's on the agenda. And we bring the culture, the people that are like more friendly, more waggy, more like networking. Like, we're the ones that are going to help bring Web2 or the general public to blockchain. All these guys talk about they want 10 million users. That's going to be done through the apes and us.
And that's why all four of these major tech providers are trying to court us. And again, my point of view is that there is no wrong decision on the tech one in my point of view. And I think what it needs is a go to market strategy. It's going to need people that are going to push like market, like think for us and be bold.
Like, we're going to drop another token. Why? Like, they say short term, but each one of these guys dropped a token to make their shit take off without it without bootstrapping it. No one would know who they are. And they're like, oh, it's for DJ and farming. What the hell are you guys talking about? Like, it's not nobody on this stage is not farming all this.
I can lay here and all this bull crap or friend tech or all the things that they were farming far casters. Now, everybody on far caster and has to have farm to that's part of the Web3 culture. And if anybody on this stage doesn't do those things, they're not really part of Web3 or they don't know what they're doing here. They're not really part of our community.
So I think there's a few interesting things to pick out from there. First, Maki going to eat Denver, dude, maybe we'll meet and we'll be friends. You said you don't have enemies after your partner after your partner calling me fucking not voting for your vote, saying it's because you didn't pay me.
Darn, I guess we won't be friends. Okay, well, you could be my friend right now. Yeah, well, you guys, we need us. We need a hash. When did I ask? I got to pay me. When did I ask? I got to pay me, Mark. You weren't even on the call. You weren't even on the call. Somebody throw it. Okay. One of you guys.
What I'm going to get through is like the really interesting part is about what Maki was saying. When you look at like a few things. So first, when you look at why does Matic exist? The answer is Matic exists to secure the POS network, not to farm. That's like very clear. It literally can't exist without it. So point number one. Point number two. Existing chains are actually very beneficial to ecosystems. You know, a lot of people look at the polygon ecosystem and they're like, TV, I'll go down. TV, I'll go down. Guess I mean,
all these applications, all these chains joining polygons, they need to win. And how do we help them win? We don't say, hey, PUS needs to be the biggest. Hey, ZTVM needs to be the biggest. No, what we say is we want X1 to win. We want immutable to have with polygons, 70% of the market share in gaming. So how are we going to help in gaming? Well, we literally have dedicated people to gaming and have for years and know how to help other ecosystems grow their gaming ecosystems. So the existing
existence of polygon as one chain initially and multiple chains now is actually what gives the resources and the size to help grow that entire CDK ecosystem, which includes a chain when it joins it. And so I'm very, very pumped, honestly, for like the opportunity for us to continue to leverage that entire network to help grow a chain in a way that I think is a lot harder when you don't have the massive ecosystem and frankly, the nicest of mainstream adoption.
But the TVL and stuff, just go look at user numbers, user numbers, go look at how many people go and buy 90 swoosh NFTs that frankly have no idea about blockchains. Go look at how many people hold Starbucks NFTs that have nothing about it. Go check how many people have loyalty points from Lufthansa as NFTs on polygon, who have no idea about blockchains. Like, that's the ecosystem that exists. And that's the ecosystem that gaming ecosystems need. And that's what we can bring to a chain, which is why I'm like super
pumped, frankly, to just help grow it. Because that's what we do at Polygon. Those BD guys are all on optimism now, aren't they?
Or did I miss that? Those BD guys are all on optimism, the people that brought over the BDing.
Ryan and Herb, Ryan and Herb. Yeah, they're all on OP right now, as far as I know. The head of
growth went to OP recently. And then yeah, I don't know, Mark. Okay, back from optimism, though.
Yeah, I think I think I think we'll be fine. But but I appreciate that. I think maybe the BD
just want to set the record straight. Apes don't know, right? I'm just telling everybody. Apes got to
listen to Apes. All right, speaking of Apes. Got to listen to Apes. We're gonna lose Lynch
Joe here in a minute. It's about that time. I love the soundboard, but I could do it too.
I got vibes all day. I don't care if it's eight a.m. Six a.m. It doesn't matter. We were on stage
with the with the puke cast boys at five a.m. It doesn't matter what time it is. But it is about
two to three a.m. HKT and Lynch Joe has been so patient, so generous with this time today.
And Popple as well. I want to give you guys an opportunity just to open up the discussion a
little bit in a different direction. We haven't really gotten too much into this aspect of
partnerships, how we're going to get people interested in the ecosystem, who exactly those
other players might be, who are who are our peers in these existing ecosystems? I've heard discussion
about Ape chain should be the hero chain of this ecosystem. But what if we join an ecosystem that
already has something that's a hero and it's it's maybe somehow equal. Maybe they and somehow bring
benefit to us. Maybe we don't have to be number one if we can both sort of be on the same tier.
We're both S tier. We're both in that same sort of category. I don't know. Machi, I see you giving
me the thumbs down. This is how we open the discussion up because I just want to hear your
guys's thoughts on it. Doesn't matter what I'm saying. This isn't even necessarily my own thoughts.
But I want to hear what you guys are thinking and I want to give the mic over to Lynch and Papo.
So if you guys would please just carry us into this part of the discussion and wrapping us up here.
Thanks, Lawson. Great job hosting so far. You know, I think the last topic of discussion
really touched on it, right? We've seen many times over that, you know, it's not just the case of if
you build it, they will come. You know, coming from a marcoms and brand background or angle,
you know, I'm curious of how teams are going to be proactively, you know, growing the brand,
marketing, doing outreach, doing partnerships. I mean, a lot of the discussion today, we certainly
covered a lot of the technical details and infrastructure. And I think some of that,
if you read between the lines, you know, we've certainly talked a little bit about
how, you know, partnerships look and things like that. But and whether or not we answered
on this call or if teams can update us, you know, in the forum. But, you know, that's my main
question, right? This is all about the next wave of users, the next chapter of a coin. And it's
certainly a historic and milestone event in our history. So, you know, how do you plan to market,
grow, outreach, partnership, all that. And we got we got these up here. So who do we want to start
it off with? Who ever wants to go first? Really? Oh, you can do that. They're going to dogpile each
other. Who do you want to go first? I'll go first. I'll go over to Michael over to Michael.
Yeah, Michael. It really comes down to business model, guys. Like, unless you got like 1.5
billion, like Disney, like through to Epic, like you got to flip the business model, right? Like,
this is, you know, we'll we'll we'll announce this soon. But, you know, a very large
sports league, right? They're flipping the script and they're giving their IP away for free.
And in turn, they're charging a 30 percent tax on any revenue being made. So now you got every
like double A and one fairly large triple A studio, there's only five triple A studios,
including Activision Blizzard, that's now like fucking with this. And they're like, okay,
like we used to pay for I don't know if it's like the FIFA deal with EA Sports, that's 200 million
in licensing. If it's like a smaller like, you know, a Marvel or Disney kind of mobile game,
like you're talking like starting at 10, 20 million just for the licensing. So when you're
giving this away for free, but you're kind of making up the revenue in a different way.
Now everyone wants to have a conversation with you where you don't have to like show out,
you know, one and a half billion dollars like, you know, Disney did. So I think it really comes
down to how you guys want to use this IP to incentivize these, you know, these dope ass
studios to actually build experiences. And then you got to how do you make them profitable? And
then how do you get a piece of that and get it back to the holders that now you have this like
really interesting, like holistic model. So it always comes back to interesting business models
to incentivize these studios, unless you have, you know, just bags and bags of money to give,
because otherwise, it's like a simple, you know, mobile game, like that's going to cost you 10
mill just to start, right? Like Diablo four, like that took what 12 years, you know, well over like
100 million dollars. It's like, like, it's you can't compete at that level, right? No one can
unless you're like one of the big five. So it's like, you got to figure out clever business models
since it to kind of draw on these people. All right, Spencer, what's up? Let's hear from you.
Oh, we got Spencer got half rug. It looks like we'll get Spencer back up here. No,
Spencer's payer bills, man.
Yeah, no, listen, listen, I think I think yeah, I know, right? Um, no, you know, look, I think that
there are a couple things here. One is to bring things back to the conversation at the start about
DACs and why DACs matter, right? To kind of tie a nice bow on that. I think that the reason why
folks, you know, can gravitate towards DACs, especially at first, is the fact that it does
allow for, you know, major partners to come on board and have a stake in the chain, and to commit
to it and do things. We've done that with magic Eden, you know, we've done that with some animoca
subsidiaries like dare wise, we've done that with layer zero, right? You know, obviously ourselves
and off chain as well are part of that. So I think that's one thing. I think that you know,
this needs to be a chain that is obviously attractive to Yuga to animoca to all the big
players who want to bring games and want to do things there. It needs to be a chain where there
needs to be really consistent efforts from us, but also, you know, much from like you and you guys
as well, from anybody else who wants to contribute as well, right? It's a community engagement on
that side. I recognize that. But you know, from our side, like, it's important to make sure that
the games are in some ways going to be the easy part, what's going to be the tough part is making
sure that this is an accessible chain that has best in class, you know, onboarding account
abstraction, offboarding, you know, wallets, developer tools, developer technology, all those
things. Arbitrum technology obviously makes developing a lot easier in a lot of ways for
developers. Stylus is amazing from that perspective for bringing on games and allowing
you to do things in Rust and C and C++. But you know, yeah, it's going to take a very consistent
effort. Like, I think that we're well positioned because we do have a lot of connections, right?
We are very well plugged into the industry. And I think that we can build bring all that there.
You know, at the same time, I recognize, you know, I know that a lot of the team and they
talk about the community. And like I said before, I think that there are actually multiple
communities here. And I think that for this to be successful, this is a chance where like some of
those barriers get broken down, right? We all start to know each other a bit better. And that
Oh, he lost. We lost them right on the
statement, Spencer, you cut off right on the last part of the statement.
I think he's gonna say a chain.
Yeah, the thing I have really, I'm worried about is that, you know, you go and horizon launch a
chain together. And as we all know, you guys got firewall up, they're totally independent entity
from us. And if they don't want the SEC breathing down our back, I don't think they could build a
game on the arbitrary horizon partnership chain. That's that's another concern of mine.
When I looked at the AIP, the initial thoughts. So I don't know how Spencer then would like to
debate if there's an SEC problem that you know, horizon and you guys too close, so that they
can't even work together. I don't I don't think there's any basis for that.
Given that legal strategy sounds very consistent with the legal strategy that I created for
most of this industry, I think I'll disagree with you, whether it's horizon or whether it's
polygon. The key here is that there are key players, the entire community debating this
entire thing, who allows you go labs to step in, in a way that is a lot safer. And so I don't
think I agree with that. And I will say that I particularly appreciate Spencer's note on
the role of the community in this and bringing it together. I think it's like incredibly important
for the eight point community to be united here. And personally, I think that doing that around
the polygon technology, which does help that both on the technical front with the ag layer,
but also on the community front in the approach that's taken with CDK, as well as just an entire
ecosystem that it can plug into whether you want government. So go go look at Lugano, which has
its entire payments system on polygon. Go look at gaming, where 70% of games come to polygon.
Go look at DeFi ecosystem, one of the top ecosystem arbitrums doing fantastic there.
But people forget just how big the polygon ecosystem still is there. Go look at any
enterprise adoption use case. Where do they build? They build on polygon. So what you see is that
when you really want mainstream adoption, you want key people to come. What they look at is
the chain where others have built and others have chosen. And that's in the polygon ecosystem. And
so being able to bring that as a community together is really one of the most powerful
things that you can actually get for the eight chain community beyond, for the eight point community,
beyond simply having kind of tech sitting there and money throwing around. It's having something
more sustainable there that people feel connected to. So I was about to say, none of us are lawyers
on the call. And I remember that, of course, Mark is. So thank you, Mark, for the educated
analysis there. And the other thing I'll say, just to add anecdotally, and it was a long time ago,
but after the other assignment, you did obviously tweet in favor of launching an ape chain. So
I would say anecdotally, and obviously with deference to Mark's professional opinion,
I don't think that there's any basis to think why, no matter who the technology partner is here,
Arbitrum, Polygon, Optimism, ATEM, ZK Sync, I would imagine that I would hope that Yuga would
invest in this with their games. Obviously it's their decision, but I don't think there's any
basis to think that it would differ based on who the provider is. Yeah. Thank everybody for your
time as a representative that ape coin Dow and ape community. I think everybody's tech is badass. And
again, thank you guys for pumping my eith bag. And I got a jet because I actually am having a
meeting with Yuga right now. And yeah, to sum it up, I think AIP 377 is definitely a community,
ape-driven AIP, in my opinion, the other AIPs. Good luck with all that. Hodler
asked me if I would support or not. And I said no. And part of the no is like, you know,
I've been discussing with the ATEM if we would do this, regardless of what the voting outcome is,
if we should push forward for all the love that we were getting from the apes. I think a lot of
NFT community people, people that recognize that, you know, the AIP 375, ATEM people really,
really care for the community in a different way than these tech providers, which I believe,
again, their tech is awesome. But are they part of our community? Not yet. Do they have their
conflicts of interest? In my opinion, yes, they have their own chains that they need to manage.
And they have their own ecosystem plays, which all look great. Everybody from orbit to the polygon
CDK or, you know, like, like optimism super chain, ZK sync, I'm sure has their own kind of network of,
you know, shared liquidity strategy coming out. Like these guys are all the major players in our
in our business or in our in our space. And I don't think any of these are going to be the wrong
choice, no matter what you vote for. I think in the end, it's going to help, you know, I as a
community member of putting up AIP 33077 is there because I felt like the respect for our Dow and
the amount of like being valued wasn't there when when it was initially proposed. And, you know,
we're here to make sure that, you know, we get what's best for our community. And with that,
I'm out, man. And thanks, everybody on the stage for being here. And maybe I'll see you guys to
eat Denver. We probably will have a suite at the Denver Nuggets game, because that's how the apes
roll and pace. Love it. We'll get those answers for as much as you let it get get get an answer
for. He's out here. I don't mind being asked the question. All right. Well, let's show Papa,
thank you for for again, for being so patient and generous with your time here. Papa, did you
did you have any thoughts, any ideas, any encouragement, maybe concerns that you wanted
to express any questions that you wanted to pose for the other speakers, the remaining speakers,
we also still have Lumberick here. So Machi is gone, but the team is still here. So we still
have the the full roster. So if you wanted to maybe pose a different question or can elaborate
more into this partnership, business development, we haven't really talked about any of the ecosystem
funds that are being proposed by each of these different proponents either. So please probably
take it away. From some ACON marketing communications, and I really looking forward to how
you going to be look, I'm looking for the teams are how you going to be
cooperation with the community and also how you engaging with the ecosystem. So I really agree
what Lynch or happy imagine, but I also see like having a lot of opportunity on the game five
developments, for example, CDOM's game, they really try to encourage more users and onboard
online users to get into the ACON ecosystem. They have an ACON to pay with the game, with the season
game. So this is quite interesting, but also I'm really concentrating on keywords like how you're
going to be cooperation with us as a mark on because at the end of the day, no matter which
a change we choosing, we have to be a same team to cooperation together to promote a change. And I
could like to see what's your idea, what's each team the idea like, what you're offering to how
you're going to want to cooperation with us as a mark on to promote aging and also ongoing more
user. And I just want to say I'm sorry for interrupting, I need to hop off running late
for something, but I do want to thank everyone for having popped, just letting me pop in and
listening and to everyone else who has a proposal out there. Thanks for the great discussion.
Appreciate it. I can, you know, just to pile on. Sorry, unfortunately, I need to run to an hour
and eight minutes late for something else, but thank you all. Really excited to be here today
and to talk to you about the proposal for Arbiter Horizon. If I could leave with one thought,
it said again, just about everything in our proposal is a recommendation. And it's my best
recommendation. But ultimately, the community knows what they want. And the community will be
in the driver's seat in this proposal. And that's, I think, the differentiating factor. So excited to
really support the community in their vision, building out the age. And we'll be there every
step of the way. We'll be there with recommendations. We'll be there with ideas. But ultimately,
we are not the decider. And our proposal is very clear about that. And that's the structure we want
to set up. So thank you, everyone. Love it. Thank you, Steven. And we will have an opportunity to
speak with all of the proposals, all the different proponents, all the different authors over the next
couple of weeks. We already had our discussion with a team in Machi, but we will get to come back to
more of these questions and deep dive more into each of these proposals with each of the different
authors over the next couple of weeks. Now, it's just the next week and a half here. But Michael
Lumber, if you guys were just able to maybe just pop this question there, and then we'll wrap up
the stage. And we'll see you guys over the next week and a half. Yeah, I think we basically real
quick on the A-Team side, I think we're apes. We've been on these in these spaces. We communicate the
way that apes comms do. We show up the spaces in my weeds, mostly Machi, but I show up on someone
as well. I think, quite simply, we want to make sure that the the Apecoin DAO brand and the apes
and IPs are well represented and that we communicate continually with the community in the same way,
the same manner, which we've demonstrated we have before already. So I think that's probably the
most direct answer. Short, sweet. We love it. And Michael, how about you just wrapping it up in summary
and addressing Papo's question there? I'll flip it and I'll just give you one last thought for
the community to kind of think about in that infrastructure doesn't matter, right? We want
to see dope ass like AAA quality games come into Web 3. Like when I'm playing Call of Duty, like
I don't know what game engine it runs on. I don't know what infrastructure, cloud infrastructure,
it runs on. I guarantee you that the developers of Call of Duty or any Activision Blizzard franchise
don't even know what game engine that they're running on, whether it's like bespoke, unity,
or unreal. And then again, it's like they have no idea what cloud infrastructure that they're
pointing to. And it really depends on where the players are in the world, whether they're in the
US or China. So I think, again, a couple of folks have, you know, big brains have mentioned this,
but it's like, one, like, think about the shit that you want to build on top. And once you do,
it is so hard to get AA and AAA studios to build dope shit. And then even if they do, man,
getting users, like when we launched Overwatch 2, that was 35 million users opening weekend.
Like just because you have a dope ass game doesn't mean that you're going to get 35 million users on
opening weekend. Like that's a completely separate problem. So the opportunity is huge. If any one of
these chains, especially ApeChain can bring that like an Overwatch 2 kind of quality game with that
number of users, like it automatically becomes the most used crypto app, like in history. So
the opportunity is there. And I encourage all of you to like really try to figure out like,
how do you get that outcome? How do you roll that outcome onto ApeChain? And then everything else
takes care of itself. I love it. I love it. I'm looking forward to hearing more about your
proposal over the next week as well. So looking forward to hearing from you and the team also.
Did you have more? Did you want to say something else? Yeah. Okay. I thought you had something
more. But no, I'm looking forward to the discussions and looking forward to deepen
more into your proposal, deeper into your proposal and more about the implications of potentially
launching another token as a gas token. Like I said, at the towards the beginning,
interestingly enough, yours and the A team are the only ones that had sort of implied it.
And this discussion about the sequencer or the DAC, how our gas fees are going to be sort of
processed is an interesting discussion with different implications for our community. So
thank you for introducing those ideas. And I'm going to turn it over to Papo again. So we're
going to look at wrapping it up. We got Coco and Thiti up here too, but we do want to look at
closing it down. But thanks for being up here with us, guys. You're always welcome.
Thanks. So what, are we going to, are we going to bring a bunch of meme coins to the A team?
No, are you Papo? Thanks, Papo. Papo, please.
Oh, good. Oh, good. Yeah. Can Daniel please continue?
No, no, I think we're done here. I think we're going to wrap it up. We've got,
we've reached the top of the hour. All of the proponents have had to go and do their meetings.
That's, that's going to, that's going to conclude for us. So yeah, just in summary, anything that
you wanted to address the community with or any, even anything that you're working on, and then
yeah, we're going to, we're going to listen to some music and vibe it out.
I'll just say, I want to say thank you for hosting this space and thank you everyone.
Everyone's joined today's space as well. And just you guys doing an amazing job. I'm here
to listening and learning and I wish I see you guys in the space soon. Thank you.
Love it. Love it. And Alicia, how about for you? Thank you for the patience and for
joining us and spending your time here with us from across the world, from the future.
No, thank you, Lars. Doing a great job. It's an honor to be here with everyone
for such a historical moment. So appreciate everyone's time.
Love it. Love it. Thank you. We, we let them up here. We may as well let them say something
from the community side too, right? I know Lindstrom and Papa were poking me in the back end.
We got to find someone from the community gap. Community, you guys have been listening the whole
time. Where's the request? Where's the request? You guys just want to hear from Coco and Fiddy?
Come on. I've been out here just as long as you guys want to just hear from Coco and Fiddy all
there. Coco, what were you thinking? What were you thinking about?
You know what? It seems like there's a lot of guys that have a lot of good things to say from
the different chains, you know, but I made a post down in the comments there is like,
I'm going with Machi because he's the guy that's been in the trenches with us.
I'm going with what he's going with because he's been here the whole time. Like a lot of
the guys that came up, they don't even, like you come in court, the whole eight coin community,
but you don't even have an eight, like a Yuga PFP. So like, that's, that's what I'm looking at.
Like, and plus two, he made a good point, like the interest, bro. Like these guys are all over
the place. They're trying to onboard projects from all over the place, all over every chain, right?
And we want people, I firmly believe in building from within and growing out. It's not like we
don't have the resources. So that's what I'm, that's what I'm looking at. Plus, I want a lot of meme
coins on APT. I know you do. I know you do. Short and sweet. I love the response. And I mean,
if you guys have opposing opinions, different thoughts, I mean, you guys have had the open
stage the whole time, but we're gonna end it with Fiddy. Fiddy, what were you thinking?
So first of all, I wanted to say hello. Thank you guys for letting me up. Great conversation today.
And I wanted to thank Machi for buying me Franklin's board because I'm about to endorse
him for this. Good Lord, you can't take you guys anywhere. You can't pull up anywhere with these
apes. Now, listen, I'll joke it aside, all this bullshit aside. I agree with a lot of what people
are saying. There's some really smart people up here and I've been following a lot of the guys
that are up here talking about tech and they all sound good. But which one of them has done
something that we can say, Hey, we did this and it worked. I don't know. They all sound terrific.
They all sound amazing. They all sound like they're going to do this for us. But there's no reason
for ape coin to be sitting at $1 30 or $1 40. There's no reason to have cock on avalanche do
better than ape coin. Like we need something to really get going. So I mean, we've got some
incredibly smart people. We got Daniel, we got Spencer. So I think we've, you guys have to
internally talk about what would make the best sense for this right now. I don't know. I'll be
honest with you. I don't know. I do like what Machi's saying, but again, it's a lot of conversation.
I've got a lot of token. I've never sold my ape coin. I'll vote. I'll vote wherever I think is
the best way to go. But I'm bullish on ape coin. I think it's an incredible vehicle. I think
there's no reason why apes need to have a token and people look at it, go a point. We need to rise
above that. That's kind of how I want to end it. Have a great week and I hope we can come to
something awesome. And next year, about this time, let's, let's see this thing at $15, $20.
Smoking apes are legendary. Yeah, go ahead, everybody. Two things. You got to have the
fundamentals and the pumpamentals. You can't have either. You got one, you're fucked. So you're
going to have both. So which one's got the fundamentals and the pumpamentals? Let's go
get a roll. Pumpamentals. I'm waiting for Cocoa chain too. I'm waiting for Cocoa chain too. What
happened to Cocoa chain? Oh, good lord. I literally can't take you guys. But it also has to be,
it also has to be simple. Like a lot of this stuff is so complex. We don't need it to be so complex.
That's the cool thing about like how the apes came out. We don't have a million different complex
things. So we need to make this super easy and a way to onboard new people, bringing people in here
and not just focus on gaming. There's a lot of things above gaming and beyond gaming we should
be looking at. Love it. I got to be honest after this talk, I feel like I want to launch my own
L2 stack in this fucking a lot. I don't want to build gate chains. Oh my god. Why, why, why, why
Ervin, that did not sound simple. I thought we all just agreed simple was easy. All right, everybody.
I appreciate everybody's time. Thank you guys for tuning into the discussion. We will have
more discussions one on ones with all arbitrary optimism and polygon coming up leading into the
end of voting. Voting ends on Valentine's Day. You heard the discussions, you can go to the forum,
you can go to apecoin.com, click discussion up at the top. That'll take you over to our forum. You
can go to the live AIPs category. You can view all of these different proposals and you can click
vote just up at the top of the forum and that'll take you to the snapshot space where you can cast
your votes and do it before on Valentine's Day and get those chocolates, get those flowers,
get whatever you got to do ready before that day. Do not wait. Do not procrastinate. Don't
559. I can't decide. I can't. Oh, 6 p.m. missed it. That's how snapshot works. We can't extend it.
So you haven't tell Valentine's Day 6 p.m. to get those votes in. We've also got three AIPs that are
live sitting next to the ape chain proposals. So please do consider those. We're talking about the
builders. We've already got them here. We're almost at AIP 400. We're coming up on AIP 420.
Soon ASAP in the ape coined out. We've got plenty of people with lots of ideas. These are the
discussions we need to be able to support them to develop whichever of these ape chains that we're
going to build. Maybe we're going to get multiples. Maybe we're going to get one. I don't know. You're
going to have to tune in to these discussions over the next couple of weeks. Again, thanks for joining
us and we've got some vibes.
They say you don't got to go home, but you can't stay here.
And no, I just want to be as home for the world out there.