Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Cardano over coffee ☕️ w/ Danielle Stanko - BeyondMVG
Recorded: July 24, 2026 Duration: 2:24:01Space Recording
Full Transcription
Hi, Christina. Good day, Maureen. How are you? I'm good. Good morning. Good morning,
B. Good morning, Alex. Happy Friday. We made it. Let's try it. Exactly.
What did you do today on your Friday? Uh, hold on one second.
I joined with my. My two phones, because I have two phones, guys. I'm rich. Yes, clearly. Yeah,
and I was receiving an echo, so one has to be in the other room. I don't know how you guys do
this shit. Um, usually I would do one computer, one phone. Ah, that's what it is. It's computer
and phone. Just use whatever works for you. But yeah, when you join from your other phone,
you can adjust the volume until your speaker, and then you can't turn the volume off
for some reason. No, you can't. Yeah, on the phone you can't turn off the volume. Exactly. Yeah.
You can only do it on your listener. Yeah, that's super weird. But on the computer
you can just mute, and it's good. Mhm. I can actually join from two different Chrome profiles
and just mute one of them, so I don't hear any sound unless I need to switch over real quick.
Christine, are you sticking around? I'm not going to be around too long because Chris
and I have a space at ten, so in like twenty something minutes, you'll have me until then, though.
Okay, kiss. I don't have a co-host today. No, we'll find you one. Alex could be a good co-host.
I see B here. She's she's been co-hosting and she's been doing a great job. Also, I hate her. Oh,
she's fabulous. Yeah, we love B. She's wonderful. I don't know about that. Stop distracting me!
I'm trying to do some work. Yeah. Are you playing with the app? No, not yet.
I want to finish that so that I can play with the app. I have like. I got a notification
and I started asking Chris stuff. I'm like, what does this mean? Yeah, I just opened it. I'm like,
oh my god, there are so many choices. It's cool though. Yeah, it's amazing. Maureen, we Blink Labs
has a product called Adder, and it is used to tail the blockchain, give you notifications
of the events you ask for. And we finally have a desktop app in like beta right now, and so excited.
Well, it's it works in your tray and everything. It'll like just put the notifications
where you want, and it's so much easier for people. They don't have to do it all through like
command line to set it up, because lots of people found that overwhelming.
So I've been playing with that today. That sounds cool. It is like it notifies you if you have
a transaction on your wallet, or if you're d rep votes, or something something
with your stake pool. You know, mint blocks. You pick what you want. It's cool and nerdy, but
I see Danny down there. Good morning, Danny. Nice to see you around, sir. Hola.
So I'm still trying to figure out my setup. You still trying to figure out your two phones?
Bless you. Yeah, I locked into my computer now, so it's all good. I like I like to to be in my bed,
and my computer is. It's not in my bed, so yeah. You are hysterical. You're like,
I need to host the space for my bed. Of course, I need to be comfy. I love it. I love it. Um,
for me, it's 9:30 in the morning. So if I went back to bed,
I would just have a terrible day because I wouldn't want to get up.
Hi guys, I see Danny. Hi Danny, it's been a minute. Hi Lord, my Lord. I can't say that.
That's too cringe. Hi, Alex. Hi, Ola. Thanks for joining. Get out of our coffee.
I like the fiery PFP, though. The what? Oh yeah, the husky. Lord fire.
PFP looks like it's on fire. It's always on fire. It's always burning some shit down.
So what's been going on in your world lately? I haven't talked to you in a couple weeks.
I feel like. Anything fun and exciting you're working on? Yeah, I am trying to launch my to release
my app in Android, and that's been a nightmare. So it was only on Apple, right? Yeah, currently.
Yeah. I think I finally get it. It's really hard. Yeah, it is. I get it.
That's I've seen apps that are only on iOS, and I'm like, why, guys? Why? Now I get it. Google is.
I've seen. I've seen people go one way or the other because it's just their comfort zone kind
of thing, and then they look at the other one and feel like it's way too hard.
So you are not alone in that for sure. But it seems like your app was going really well
with the Apple people. Yeah, I think maybe it has to do with the fact that I am so much
of an Apple person. I I have an I have a an iPhone, my MacBook, and you know I just built.
Although I I did I did build like React Native, so it could go either way.
But I just I feel like it's a I don't know. It's just stupid with Google. They just keep they they.
So so first thing I did is I applied for production, and I thought, okay, if they accept this,
then my app goes to production. But no, when I applied for production,
it was so that I could apply for release. I don't get it. So there's two things I need to do,
and all of them is the same, and it it just and it takes so much fucking time.
When I applied on Apple, it took me a couple of days, three days, and then everything was good.
Google takes seven days, and then I have to do it twice. I don't know. It's super annoying. Yeah.
But yeah, I have to do it because desktop apps. This is definitely easier still
because with the desktop apps, you'd have to do like the certificate signing and stuff,
or else it would warn people and be like, "This is not a secure app." Yeah, yeah, yeah.
That's what Luca said I should do, and I was like, "Do you live in Africa?
" People are paranoid about shit like that. You would just die. You would kill your app immediately.
It launches. No, you just go through the certificate, like all that security stuff.
You just set it all up. You're installing an app from a non-source. Be careful.
Maureen is trying to install a malware into your computer. What the hell? And you know,
I have people who think on Facebook, especially, they think I'm like a a big time hacker. You know,
they always like, no, I can't. No, no, you are. You just haven't proved them wrong yet. I'm like,
bro, I can't hack shit. I can't hack to save my life. That's what a hacker would probably say,
to be fair. That's true. I really do need to learn it though, because they can't keep accusing me
like that, and I don't know anything. It's it's not fair. Yeah,
so you might as well learn to be a. That's usually how hackers become hackers.
They have to prove somebody wrong. Yeah. Oh well. Well, we talked about the OpenAI hack on
Hugging Face yesterday. So you could teach your AI to hack, then you wouldn't be a hacker.
You would just be the owner of a hacker. Oh my God! I did you guys see the post from Andrew
about the? I'm sorry. I can't stop laughing. You have to share it now. Oh yeah, I'm gonna pin it.
But basically, he was like, a murderer is full of shit, and he doesn't think that they. B,
you remember what I asked? The question I asked. I know it was stupid.
I said I was not going to apologize to North Korea. Okay, that's those were my words exactly.
I said, Korean. Can you imagine having to write an apology letter to North Korea? And you said,
ha ha ha ha ha. I'm just joking. And now I'm thinking back to it like, no, that can't be the case.
That cannot be the case. I know, I know, but that tweet was so funny to me. It's like,
what the fuck, guys? Okay,
uh, let me look for the tweet so the rest of the people are not just lost. Like, what is going on?
Okay, it's been now. Okay, that's enough. Damn it! Oh, I did see that one. So, like, basically,
another wallet had the same exploit. For another app. What? Another wallet?
This is this is like similar to what happened to SecondFive. It's it's pretty much
the exact same thing. I'm gonna find it because Phil posted it earlier. Let me. It's up top.
V. It's a jumbotron. No, Phil posted the the profile who actually had the same exploit.
The groom lake. I didn't see anything from Phil. That's funny. I'm not in the loop.
I'm invested in this story. Yeah, there's this company or wallet called Zeliqua or something.
They have the exact same exploit, apparently. Ah, okay. So well, well, when I saw it,
I was I was just laughing because, um, it's a Andrew said that it's not possible
that this was related to the Lazarus Group because the bug was in
the earlier cross-chain wallet code, you know. So, yeah, it would mean. Yeah,
it would mean that they would have planted it years ago just to target Cardano at which,
which is like you know low traction, and just ignore all the other chains,
which you know it's stupid. It's only two million dollars. And I I thought that was really accurate.
It's and it's so stupid. It's just yeah, it's funny. That's all. So Phil did a post,
and I I think I know what she's talking about now. Do you remember a guy from Ledger who did this
like long detailed post on exactly what happened and explained how the hack was?
And other people were like, dude, you need to delete this. You just made it easy for other people
to do it. Do you kind of remember that? Yeah, I remember. Yeah, it had been shared,
and then Phil Phil responded was like, this is like, this is outrageous of you. Um,
it was his hardware wallet that got hacked. That guy who shared the exploit—it was his. Oh my god!
Right? Karma's a bitch. So yeah. North Korea. I'm gonna mute so I can laugh.
I will not write that apology letter. I swear, I will not write it. It's gonna happen,
V. It's gonna happen. It's gonna happen. Because I I don't know I stuff that has happened this year
and then end it with write apology letter letter to from January first
up until this point we have had some crazy ups and downs and somehow out of all those things
this is the craziest I can't you guys I absolutely cannot when does the madness end
it doesn't that see that's the point with Cardano land it just keeps going we find new things. To,
you know, get crazy about every day. It's part of the charm. Excuse me,
but I didn't sign up for this. I did not sign up for this at all. Oh my god. Yeah, I think that um,
it's um. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know why. I just had to share that because that just cracks me
up so fucking much. Oh my god, karma. Where is it? I don't see it. Um, I just shared it.
I'll pin it up top. One sec. You know, then the other thing though is, you know,
when when we started talking about this, and we were like, are people gonna use their wallet
at any point, or are they just gonna not touch it forever? And we were like,
at what point do people feel safe to interact with their wallet? And Epoch was like, "Oh,
I have to see an audit, and everything needs to check out for me." And now we are being told
there is an audit, but we can't see it. And even the Security Council from Intersect,
they don't have access to it, apparently. So, it yeah. So good luck, good luck waiting for that.
I know Epoch is not here, but yeah, I don't know. Chris is building us a new wallet,
so I'll just use his. He is wallet. There's there's a few things going on. So the YoRoy wallet,
the open source wallet, before I upgraded to the closed source second five, the YoRoy wallet.
Was okay. It was fine. There need for improvement. So Chris forked the YoRoy wallet,
and he was talking with Adam Dean, who was really excited about you know the fork.
And they each picked something about YoRoy that they really thought needed to be improved,
and they're fixing that. And then they're going to release the new improved wallet. I don't know.
Right now we're calling it YoRoy Classic because I couldn't come up with anything else on the spot.
Yeah, because YoRoy was taken. So you've got that. Blink Labs is working has a wallet that
we've been working on that integrates with works with our node and all of our other stuff.
And I know there's the Daedalus wallet.
So we've got like really cool options. You don't have to stick with Second Vi once you get out. Go.
Mm-hmm. All right. So I did share the thing up top so you can see where Phil was talking about
that Ledger CTO guy. And that shit's kind of funny. Yeah, I remember. I think,
but I don't think it was a shit post though. I think he just. I remember the post.
It wasn't a shit post. It was a super long post. Yeah, just details.
Because people didn't know anything. And he was like instructing people on how to do it in the post,
basically. Um, I don't know. I just, I just feel like maybe if the Margot people were giving people
enough information. He wouldn't feel the need to do all that, but they were being super sketchy,
like, oh yeah, oh we're there's an update, blah blah. I don't like it.
I don't like it when there's a problem. Tell people something. Just don't be political all the time.
That's how the guy thought. Okay, maybe people need to know this, and then I don't think
I don't necessarily think he was trying to be to do shit post or to be mean.
I think people wanted answers. I don't think it was either. I think he just was.
Ignorant to what he was doing, people wanted answers. Yes,
but you don't need to give a step-by-step instruction on how to recreate it when the problem
still exists, right? I mean, well, I mean, if anyone can follow what he wrote, let Bill talk on it.
He's the expert. I mean, he's a he's a security researcher. He's a CTO of Ledger.
To disclose the vulnerability, which then resulted in many, many other people abusing it
that would not have figured it out on their own, was really irresponsible. And so I messaged him.
You know he did it for Internet Cloud, and I messaged him and I said, "This is really irresponsible.
It's incredibly bad practice. Every op, every serious opsec researcher would never do this. Please,
please, I'm begging you, remove this post. You are, I guarantee, you are going to tangibly cause
users to lose money because of this. Because bad actors will see your post
and they'll throw it in their LLM and they'll go and execute the same exploit.
" And he took it down for a bit, and then the very next day he put it up again. And also,
he made it sound like it was him who. He's like, I reverse engineered this thing. I'm so smart.
Look at me, this dark hacker guy. But really, he just like asked his LLM to go.
He just asked fucking ChatGPT to go tell him what happened, and then just copy pasted
the whole answer. Um. And the funniest, most ironic thing is that you know,
if he didn't spend all this time trying to make himself look like a genius
and dunking on the this incident and the Cardano ecosystem.
And he instead just like you know figured out what happened and then said, "Hey,
maybe I should go check if if my my own product has this same fucking problem.
Then maybe he wouldn't have lost like millions of dollars." That was his arrogance.
That was his arrogance. It got him. Hey, um, I love you guys. I got a bounce.
Chris has his uh CDN SD call. So, um, I hope you have a great show, Maureen,
and I'll talk to you guys later. See ya, Christina. Thanks for joining. Well, okay,
so I obviously don't have hi Eepak. I don't have the full picture because I I only saw the one tweet
which got deleted, so I don't know. So I think if you did talk to him in the DMs,
then it was definitely a bad move from his side. Epoch, you want to talk? Talk. Ooh, GMGM.
I guess we're having a hacker-filled morning over here, talking about some dirtbags giving out
exploit details, and I'm having a bit of a morning. I woke up to a What you would call
a brand attack for one of my clients, you know, people claiming to be doing security audits
for us—they're not. And then I look into the CEO of the company, go to LinkedIn, and says, "Oh,
you both worked at this company." I go, "Huh, that's interesting, because I was in charge
of all hiring for that company, and I most certainly didn't hire this person." And you know,
it just amazes me. You know, how many fucking scammers are out here trying to extract from
communities? And build fake reputation. It's just—it's absolutely asinine.
You gotta—you gotta really be safe out here,
and it's just—it's—it's wild to me. So if you're a scammer, go fuck yourself. That's my message.
You heard it, guys. Go fuck yourself. Oh, but I would say. Wait, what was that noise?
What was that noise? How did you do that? Oh, I just. You need a class.
Sign up for my optometry class. It's only five thousand baht per hour. I I will teach you
how to do it. But yeah, I was gonna. You don't say go fog yourself, Eepol. You say go
coitot frost yourself. That's how we say it. Hey, Lucas. Hey everyone. Hope you're well.
Happy Friday. I wanted to raise attention to the thing I dropped on the chat.
We've been hosting spaces every top of the epoch because that's morning UTC. So yeah,
there's an invite there to come by this Sunday. And yeah, I'm not going to talk about
wallet security because I'm more interested, to be honest, on repercussions for ImmorGo. But yeah,
let's just let life run. See you. Did you pin it? No, I can't pin on the phone because I'm on
Android. I don't even, you know, I see the post, but I can't. I don't have the option share
to thing. So if you could open the actual invitation that I that I quoted,
I would really thank you for pinning it up because yeah, we're trying to create some space
for people to discuss and banter, UTC mornings. Can you see it? Yep, I see it,
and I have pinned it at the top. Many, many thanks. I'm curious about the guest,
but I'm probably gonna have a look at Chris's live thing on CF Dev Hours as well. So up hot.
See you in a bit. See you. Oh, see you. Um. Have y'all talked Draper yet? Not yet. Um,
I've been seeing a couple of people announcing that they are they got in. Wonderful. Marine,
why why haven't you applied yet? Go apply. Yeah, no feel. I I'm not trying to,
I'm not trying to get rejected again for a U.S. Visa. It's too much for myself. What?
I didn't know you need a U.S. Visa to get this investment. Oh, you do. You have to go to the U.S.
For It's Silicon Valley. You have to go spend like a month. Epoch. You spend a month there,
and then they give you twenty k. That's a lot. Bro, twenty k for a month. What the?
I know for an African, it's a lot, but for you guys, I guess it's like.
That won't cover your fees to live in California for one month. That won't pay for.
You could try to live in a garbage bin in California for one month, and you will not be
able to afford it. You'll be evicted to the sewers. For real? I thought I I thought
that yeah I was just discussing that with someone. I thought that was. Maybe
why they didn't get a lot of applicants, and they did like an extension, right? And it was like, oh,
we got a lot of applicants, so we're extending the deadline. I was kind of making fun of that here.
That okay, you definitely did not get a lot of applicants, but I think if the location were more,
if it was Cameroon, twenty twenty thousand, that'd be perfect. Exactly. You go there,
you spend like less than ten percent of it on a hotel or whatever. Or maybe just not, just not US,
just somewhere else. I don't know, somewhere other people can go to. But it would defeat the purpose
of getting the Silicon Valley network, right? It would be different. Would be a different pitch
at that point. But I guess maybe they could fly them over to wherever they do it.
I don't know if it would be at in Dubai, for example. I would be able to make it. I would apply.
But yeah, Epoch, what do you think? Did you get in? Oh, I we thought we joked about. Oh my god!
We said epoch. I know. I was gonna. I was gonna apply, and I applied to the wrong thing. Um,
I applied to the. So funny! It's so funny. I applied to the real phi uh accelerator instead
of the Draper accelerator. So now I'm stuck with Ben O'Hallan instead of hanging out with Esco
and McKelly, uh, in San Francisco. How did you? Did I get? How do you conflict the two epoch?
Are you stupid? I think I was very high when I applied, and that's fine. My bad.
But it's not like I have a month to go in trips around. I have like four to five clients
that take up the vast majority of my time, so I couldn't just like go and sit in California
for a month, and you know. Do whatever nonsense. I know it's also it's also it's a bit difficult.
But Phil, what you said about affording to live in California, I think they take care of that.
They take care of your flight and your where you live. Maybe they feed you. I see.
Whenever I have something like that, where it's like they're gonna pay for everything,
there's always something they don't pay for. You know, there's gonna be like a Uber to the
from the airport to the place. There's gonna be California is is so unbelievably expensive.
If you need to get like a water bottle from a vending machine, you'll be paying like
twenty five dollars. It is like the worst city in the world to live in if you're not
like an extremely wealthy individual and you just don't have any concept of money.
So like Switzerland. Yeah, it's like Switzerland on steroids. It's like Zurich on steroids.
I have a friend. He's South African, and he got like this scholarship to go to Switzerland
for a summer school program. He was there for a month, and he had to pay. He had to send.
His parents had to send him money so many times. They had to borrow money,
but everything was paid for. Everything in quotes, like Phil said, they paid for his flight
and where he lived, but then they didn't pay for his food. And then he thought, oh no,
I could just you know eat once a day. It would probably cost a couple of bucks, but it's okay.
Guess what? It was not okay. He needed money. He he almost starved. It was crazy.
And when he came back, he was like horrible. Now the fam the family was like, oh my god,
don't ever do that to us again. But Yeah, I think it's interesting these free programs.
I I hope that the this twenty k thing is like a demo, a test run or something because I don't know
it's not giving a project twenty k and then they have to fly to California and spend a month there.
Um, is not you can't do much with twenty k as a business owner. I can tell you,
like you got to pay your employees, you got to pay legal, you got to all that.
That's gonna disappear very quickly. So I don't know if I had to like go leave my business
for a month. Like all my, all my employees, all my contracts, everything would be like, you know.
But I get it's not for me; it's for newer, new businesses. But even for new businesses,
I would think that like a month of your time, like when you're a startup, time is very important.
And like if you're just like, it's even have a month of your life gone. Yeah. I I agree with you,
Phil. I think for especially in third world countries, it's a business owner just opening and going,
even if everything is paid for and. No matter the connections and the networking,
they're gonna get at in Silicon Valley. It's it's really hard. It's really fucking hard.
So the ideal the ideal customer was someone in not a first world country,
or someone in a first world country, but who is not employed. Basically,
like someone who is they have an idea and they are trying to build it,
and this is their time to kind of reiterate on the idea and get it to life, kind of.
Or somewhere in the third world country, you know, well that could work.
Twenty k would be millions in in Cameroon, so would be crazy. But yeah, yeah,
it's kind of crazy that it's that big of a time investment. I mean, twenty k is nice,
but I guess it depends on housing, really. Like you have to eat anywhere. Sure, there's a premium,
but housing is the the hard part. Like, are they throwing everyone in the same hotel
so they can IDate? Where Esco? He can tell us. Yeah, Marine just said I think they cover housing
and they cover like stuff like flight and so forth. But also they don't cover your actual house.
Like if you're not working, you have to pay. You still have to pay rent,
and you got to pay healthcare, and you got to pay your mortgage. And so if you leave for a month,
you know, I don't know. Yeah, so long. It's for someone who's like unemployed,
or they're from their bro country, and they're somehow able to go to California, and somehow,
you know, they have enough confidence that the twenty k will cover all the other incidentals
in California, which I hope it will. Oh, they have a lot of money in the bank,
in which case they wouldn't be interested. Maybe. Oh, but yeah, or they're already very wealthy
and living in California, in which case we care. We care. If you can afford to live in
in California, then twenty thousand dollars is not gonna is not gonna make or break it for you.
But look, Phil. At the end of the day, I don't think it's about the 20k.
They are promising a lot of networking, and Silicon Valley is, you know,
it's the place where you go meet big time people. So maybe it's also about that.
Maybe that's the that's what you're going for, and the 20k is just like, hey,
let's just support you with coffee or whatever, you know? Oh, am I wrong in understanding
that you have to give up equity? No. I thought it was, I thought it was an investment that.
That's what I thought as well, but because twenty k as an investment is very very
like opportunistic. Equity was giving away money. I'm sorry, equity. Okay, I have to read it again,
guys. I don't know. I don't think so. Because Draper is a VC firm, and that's what
the original governance proposal said. It said they were going to get equity in Cardano projects.
But maybe this is just a test run, and this is just like a grant or something.
Maybe it isn't that they're going to get equity, but the community would get equity in the yeah,
the the treasury will, yeah, yeah, exactly. But so this for this twenty k,
you have to give the Cardano community equity because that's not a really good deal. No,
it's not even for for a TED wallet country. Well, maybe this is maybe this is still early.
Maybe this is they haven't like pared down yet. We need to get more information, I think, before we.
Yeah, maybe this is Grant, and maybe they haven't done the equity part yet. Maybe it's separate
or something else. Maybe Jenny has the answers. Hi, Jenny. I want to know who has
a fucking month to peace out. Like, I'm trying to imagine, like, yo, I have this great company,
it's going great, and I can totally leave for a month. It's like a funny. Epo,
let me tell you a funny story. When we were doing the Cardano convention in 2024,
I had just become like a you know self-employed, and I was trying to do my own thing. I left my job,
and I had a couple of clients, and they had this. The convention was about to happen,
which was they took us in like two weeks. It was three two two weeks, I I suppose, right? And then.
So a couple of us Africans, when we go, when actually before before the convention,
there was like a workshop, and they took us in this five star hotel for two weeks,
and I had a couple of clients, like I was working with them, and I went away for two weeks,
and you know it was fun, and I was just, I couldn't stop thinking about them,
and all the time people were like, oh Maureen, so you're like out there, and you're enjoying life,
and you're in a five star hotel, and of course it was fun. But I kept thinking, oh my god,
my clients, oh my god, and that's how I feel about this whole situation. Like if you're,
if you have a company and it's running, and you have someone you can delegate to, that's cool.
But if you're starting and this is like someone who this this, I think this this stage is for people
who are just starting out, then it's really really bad to go away for a month because I went away
for two weeks and I came back to rent money. I came back. To everything that I had to still do,
but which I couldn't do for two weeks, and it was shit. It was crazy. Also, also,
and everything was paid for, but we had to spend money out of pocket, and they had to reimburse us.
And good luck with Intersec in reimbursing you. Takes months. It was a nightmare. So, honestly,
I hope this is different. But yeah, that was my experience with you know, like free, whatever.
Anyway, I'll I'll shut up now. Yeah, I think what you said earlier with.
The advice of this is for you if you are you don't have the the business yet, like it doesn't exist,
and you're gonna like go find the idea there. I think that's like I guess that's who it would be for
right now. Yet I don't think that's how it was advertised though. So DM Jenny. Good morning, guys.
Jenny. Jenny, I missed you. Danny, I got a scare. I got Marine messaged me, and she's at some point,
and she's like, "Can you come to this send-off thing for Jenny?" And I was like, "What the hell?
Jenny's leaving. Like, Jenny's exiting. Jenny's gonna be an Algorand girl now, or something.
" I didn't know what the hell was happening, but holy shit! I was like,
"This is the this is the death flag, man. This is we're cooked now." I have to make it scary,
you know, threaten people so they can show up. Yeah, that's how you got people to show up.
You're funny, Marine. Yeah, and she tricked me too. Feels She's like, "Oh, can we have a call?
" And I was thinking that she was she was in need. And I'm like, oh sure, I'll make time for you,
Marine. And yeah, it was it was wild, but thanks for putting that together, Marine.
And thanks for not showing up, Phil. I would have. I saw it later, and it was already over.
And I felt so bad when I read that message. I was like, no, I missed it.
Like Jenny's never ever coming to Cardano Space again. She's something must have happened.
It's over. What did you say, Mariah, Maureen? You're crazy. What did you tell people?
I told them people were literally sending me off like I was not coming back.
So it it must have been something like that. Yeah, it just said this is a send off party for Jenny,
and no other context. I was like send off to send off to. No, I think I think I look.
It's you kind of have to look and read in between the lines, but people see what they want to see.
That's all I'm gonna say. I don't know, Marine. The the The situation out there says you have to be
a little more clear. It it definitely sounded like I was funny. That's everybody saying
you're leaving us, and I'm like, dude, why is everybody sound like I'm just I'm not I'm not leaving,
guys. I mean, it was good. Uh, it was good. Um, what's it called? Marketing for that event.
Like it was like a but the best call to action ever. It was like Jenny is dying. You have to come.
You have to come if you want to get people. That's Marine knows how to do it. No, I know, but look,
um. A lot of it. All the people that showed up, they knew that it wasn't like telling her
to go away, but also they got a little bit emotional, and you know that's why Jenny probably felt
like there was, wow. B, what do you have? No, I was gonna read what you wrote to me because it was
kind of it wasn't scary or anything. It was, hi B, impromptu send off space for Jenny in two hours.
Don't tell her. Can you come up and say something short about her when I call you on, please?
You don't have to be there on the show the entire time, but I'd like for you to come at least
for five minutes. That was what I got. Okay, okay, wasn't so bad. But the send off, I guess,
people just assume that means they're leaving. Another thing that was missing is that look,
I I wanted to make a post and attach to the space, but um, I couldn't do it because if I made
a post, Jenny would see it. So I had a draft of the post, which explained like well her work,
what she's done done for Cadanova Coffee. I was even gonna make a whole thing with clips
and you know like funny things she said or smart words, you know, when she had some thoughts
or whatever. But then. Ah, I I couldn't do that part. So the message that
I originally wanted to send to people in my head was going with the post, but it wasn't.
So I think it does definitely sound like the send off for yeah. But it's okay, guys.
It's no worries. We're all here, and I came here. I was like, oh, minimal viable governance
beyond Danielle, and then Marina's hosting, and I'm like. That's not right.
Somebody has to be here to give you a hard time. So I said I'm gonna show up. See, this is why.
This is this is why I hate her. Aww. Anyway, guys. Um, I think that as agreed. Okay, Epoch.
So you're in. You're part of the Refi Accelerator thing now. Oh yeah! Very excited.
You sound excited. Oh, he does, right? Yeah, he does sound excited. Well, I'll tell you, Jenny.
I think you missed. I was telling people about this yesterday, but I got this email from Ben
with a Miro board link to get onboarded, and I go, oh shit! I got a Miro board.
I click that motherfucker. It's like gigantic. Okay, like arrows, boxes within boxes. Motherfucker's
got everything on there, and like I, I can't. Like I'm an analytical person,
but my brain sees this Miro board, and I'm just like, I fucking can't. Like I fucking can't.
So I haven't done anything yet. I did message Ben saying, "Hey, like for those of us not reading
this Miro board, what do you want me to do?" He hasn't responded. So. You know what ruined
Miro boards for me? The the workshop. Interesting workshops. Yeah, interesting.
VIP sixty ninety four. Two years because of that. Miro, this is the same vein as Dira
and all these other. They're tools to make you more productive, and they just they sap your life
away. These are like Voldemort, like I don't know Horcrux spells that will just slowly kill you.
Every time I open one of these tools, it it's just like I lose like thirty minutes of my life,
and I'm frustrated the whole time, and then I exit more sad and angry than I was before I opened.
No shit. Us Africans, we think it's like a white people's tool because why, guys? Why? I don't know,
girl. Like it's not white people's tool. I'm white. I don't use that. And um,
I know you think I'm I'm African and I'm black and all that, but so no.
What I was gonna say is like it was so hard to handle this the data. It's like such a horrible place
to capture data, and we used it for 1694 workshops. And then when I was like
when we were working with the parameters, like the governance parameters, um, team.
We had to go through that data to to it was it was a nightmare. I can't even begin to tell you.
Like we had to split that like amongst you know the team and go through the whole boards
and grab that data, copy and paste it into spreadsheets, and everything was just
like it was horrendous, guys. I I don't even know why we used that. It was so bad. So I don't know.
I guess it's cool when you're gonna brain like if you're gonna you know brainstorm
and dump your your ideas in a place. But it can't be used for things like that, so I don't know.
Just weird. I agree, and I also think that it's it's good for like small teams.
If you have a small team and you guys are just you're um you're trying to you're trying to solve
one specific problem, it's good. But if it's fifty plus people just brainstorming governance topics
on the same canvas, it's like it's it's like this endless zooming in and out,
just Trying to find where you are, and it's like, oh my god, why am I dragging?
Make it like a gigantic thing, right? That you have to like zoom in, scroll. That's crazy. Yeah,
for brain dumping, that's fine. Do like a ten, fifteen-minute brainstorm session with people,
where you just have a big canvas, dump it all in there. Let's get out of here. Like,
kind of like to find clarity. Fine, good, you know. But no, just it's crazy.
I remember in intersite sessions, they would move on from like something,
and I would still literally be there trying to drag it. That was my first encounter with the marble
in 2024, my first time. And then they would say, "Pick up a sticky and do take this color if you're
blah blah blah blah." And I'm trying to take it, and I'm like, "Oh my god, it's not grabbing itself!
" Oh, it was the worst. It was funny. Oh, but I would say that I've
since learned a lot on how to use it, but I I don't know. It's it's it's too cumbersome.
I know he's just like making fun of me because I say clarity, but um, it just
because it's like you know, like organized, and you know that's how you the reason why you journal,
you brainstorm. It doesn't have to be organized, but it helps you kind of like put it
into a different sense, right? Like not just get it out of your head, put it in a place,
and and have others see it too, and kind of like build on it. But that's the other thing,
like people don't understand the brainstorming only works. In a in short span,
like like you you can only do it for like fifteen minutes. After that, you start becoming analytical
and all kinds of shit, and it just like you're like tiring your brain,
and it totally defeats the purpose. So, it just in and out, in and out, guys.
That's how those tools are used. I completely agree. Um, we still have eight min,
seven minutes for banter. Why waiting for now? We have actually it's it's twelve minutes.
It's at ten thirty-five. So ah, twelve minutes. You can still sing a song. B can tell us a story.
Epoch can bring doomsday or give us like the weather report. Thirty. Okay. Do do do do.
Today in the weather, blood everywhere and ash. Please stay safe. All the numbers are down.
Yesterday they were up. Now they're down. Will they go down lower? Yes. Thank you.
Has anyone been reading Cashy's crash out tweet? I was Mark Safe from that. No. You were what?
Oh my God! He said he was trying so hard. Sorry, God. No, no. She was asking me what I said.
What was? Tell us about it. No, I thought it was funny as hell. He was like posting,
like I'm trying so hard not to crash out. Immediately crashes out. And he said, he said,
this is the last tweet I'm gonna make. And then he made one later, like the same day.
And I was like, brah, it's okay. I I feel him, you know. I I really do feel him.
It's a it's a sad situation. I do feel him. I think it's I think it's a very specific example
of rules for thee, rules for thou, but not for thee. What what is it? What's that saying?
It's very rules for thee, but not for me. Yeah,
rules for thee, but thank you, B. This is why I made you co-host.
I have a quick meeting in like five minutes, but I wanted to say that I pinned up at the top,
Casha's post, and I also pinned up. We had a community space yesterday for the block cross proposal,
and we answered some of the questions that we saw on the timeline. And if you're interested
in reading that and getting your answers answered, getting your questions answered. Please go ahead
and read it, and let me know if there's any questions that we didn't cover. And yeah,
I have to go to that meeting. How many minutes do you have left until the meeting? Nine.
Like three minutes. Okay, so I read the article by Block Frost, and it definitely did not answer
my question. It mentioned my question. Well, no, I didn't ask the question. Obviously,
it mentioned my question, but it said we can't disclose that, and I was like, okay, okay. Well,
then don't mention it, you know. But That was a very intentional article, I would say overall. So,
did you write it? Article is literally pulled from all the entire space yesterday. Yes,
I wrote it from from the space. So it it just instead of having to listen to an hour
and a half long space, you could just read that and then you got the gist of it.
Did I drop? I can't hear Marine. She's speaking. I can't hear her. I can hear you. I can hear you,
B. Yeah, and Jenny. I hear you both. I'm. I'm actually looking at this crash. Cash, not crash.
I'm sorry, my friend. I love you. I didn't mean to say that. Cash post,
but it says people that left, and it starts with Avatar Nick, who is to me a scammer.
And then Cardona Boss, who we know, he also like did what he did. It's like it's like a bunch
of people here that I'm like bye bye. Ape society. Yeah, I had the same reaction with this. Like,
I was like, what the? Am I supposed to feel bad for these idiots? They made like thousands
and they made hundreds of thousands of dollars from random retail people
and then left without any repercussions. Like, okay, go cry from your private mansion in your BMW.
It's a little weird that he started off with those. I mean, I I don't. I mean, it's just even Blake.
You know, Blake left after he got all that money too. I'm like, he threw that gigantic,
like almost half a million dollar party, and left. I mean, there's like so many people in here.
I don't understand. Million dollar party. Excuse me. Wow. It was more like three hundred
and seventy-five thousand dollar party in New York City. I was there. He mentioned they were giftas.
Was something like that? Jenny, didn't he? He does mention they were giftas. Oh, I don't know.
I haven't finished reading it. I was just like thinking about all the people left corner
over the years. I haven't finished reading.
I'm just going through the list, and I was like, "What? What? Like, I haven't finished."
He said that most of those people got their bags, and some struggled and gave up. Yeah,
I think it was like some of them were grifters, while some were not. I don't know,
but I might have misread. But I think he did mention. Something along those lines. Okay,
now I I think I see the point. Yeah, says that he used to be able to like just ignore them
and move on. Yeah, I think I see it now. Okay, yeah, because he mentioned a bunch of grifters
and I don't know. Not everybody, but you know, he definitely. Yeah, it makes sense. Okay. All right,
yeah. Cash has been here from for so long, and he has poured so much into this ecosystem. It's crazy
how much love and and like that guy has given every ounce of himself to this ecosystem,
and it really kills me to see people voting no on his proposal or not. You know, I don't know.
It kills me. Absolutely kills me. I look at that proposal and I read and I just see everybody,
and I'm like, okay. It's just absolutely heartbreaking. Some people voting no,
they have not even done like five percent of what this guy has done for the ecosystem. Absolutely,
it's crazy. I think one of the reasons, actually, the main reason he's crashing out is that people,
yeah, like you said, Jenny, they don't read the proposal, but also they bring up stuff that are
just super weird. They ask for very specific things that they don't ask for in other proposals,
and it gets personal, right? Because if you're asking me for unrealistic things.
And you vote yes on you know give blank checks to other proposers, just
like here you can have all my money. But this guy who is asking for four million is like,
can you give me a sample of your blood? Come on. That's yeah, yeah. That's what makes him just.
It is because it's almost like you just like it's like this distrust to somebody
that has absolutely have proven the loyalty to like the core. Like this guy has put everything,
all his money, time, heart, soul for years, and it's like really heartbreaking to see
him being treated like, "Who are you?" Kind of thing. I mean, fuck, dude, it's crazy,
absolutely crazy to me. Yeah, yeah, you could say that ticketing is not viable, you know, valid.
But if you're like exactly, but when you start getting into those details, right?
That's when it's like, oh, it's more about like this trust and whatever, like kind of oh,
then that's not you know. You can say you don't like the proposal, but I exactly what you're saying,
Marine. It's it's heartbreaking. It is like he's putting his his reputation on the line,
and I'm telling you, like he takes that very seriously. It really does. Oh yeah,
it's a it's a little. I always feel bad for things like this because. I think a lot of people are so
into like if they see if they see a name and also just a disclaimer I'm not shitting on TX Pipe
in any way but some people if they see TX Pipe ZK Rollups you know a bunch of buzzwords
they don't even read the proposal they say oop yeah tick guns It's stupid. It's very, very stupid.
I have, I, I have seen some D reps just vote yes on every single proposal that has words like this,
and then you, you see a very, very well put together proposal which is marketing,
and they're just like, no, no. And you read the rationale, and it's like, Carano needs this. Uh,
we need ZK4 rollups, and you don't know what the fuck ZK4 rollup is, actually. Sorry, excuse me.
It's not even a fucking thing, you idiot. Yeah, the the problem is that the proposer's incentive
is essentially to to to pitch the most insane thing possible, and to just be like we this
we are going to give you like AI super detection zk whatever like the most
like futuristic sci-fi sounding thing ever, so that when people read it they're like
wow that sounds really really good, but you know if they actually understood it they'd be like
this is totally impossible, and it's definitely not possible for whatever amount of money is asked
for. It would take like thirty years. And all this stuff, and then people just vote,
and they're like, "Wow, yeah, oh, we get this futuristic sci-fi spaceship that can like fly at
light speed, and we only get it for two million dollars." Yeah, of course, Cardano should fund that.
It's not good. It's not good. Yeah, yeah. And then if you're like a reasonable person
and you're like, well, you know, we need like two hundred thousand, we need one million for like
all these events or whatever. And the Cardano reads that they're like, wow, well, one million for
either all these events or one million for a spaceship that can travel the galaxy.
Which of these should I fund? Oh, of course, I'm gonna pick the spaceship. You idiots! Look,
we're getting so much more value out of it. Also, the spaceship costs twenty million. Yeah. I see.
I see. And halfway through it, it's not even viable anymore. Yeah, by the end, it's like, oops,
we did a proof of concept of the spaceship, and it's like a cardboard box.
Can I get forty million more to actually prove the proof of concept? Yeah. Danny is here, our guest.
So, but I see, Orito has a standup. Orito. Round it up, real quick. Yeah,
I was just—I was actually going to segue because, given everything you guys just said about
Cash's experience, can we really say that minimum viable, viable being the key word there that
Jenny just used, governance, minimum viable governance? Did we ever actually reach
minimum viable govern—viable being the operative word? I don't think we did, to be honest.
But that's my personal opinion. You know, and this project, we are trying to go beyond the minimum
viable. So, but I don't know if we reach the. That reminds me of the movie Click. What's it? Beyond,
beyond, way beyond. Now you know, remember, this is um, Adam Sandler movie. Oh my God, Jenny,
come on! Bed bath and Beyond, way, way beyond. Danny, come up here. Yeah,
Jenny's had a request to come up. I don't know if she's seen it. We're waiting on you.
Yeah, I think that's a very important question, Orito. Have we reached a minimum viable governance?
Yeah, I can hear you. To leave and rejoin, so I don't know if you asked a question in the meantime.
No, we were just pulling you to come up. Okay. Hi, guys. Yeah, I was listening to that conversation.
I think whether or not you reached minimum viable, you know, depends on your own definition of what
you expect from minimum viable. I think the intention of it originally was the community
can legitimately vote on things. And I think from that perspective, yes, the community is making
good decisions on funding. Maybe we're not there yet. I think there's a lot to go on
the information side of things and and reasoning and decision making. That's kind of hard in
in democracies everywhere, really. But yeah, do you want me to just start in on kind of what
I was gonna talk about with the the project? Yeah, of course. Why not just get into it? I mean,
but maybe let me let's just set like a background for anyone who is joining, and you know, yeah,
yeah, yeah. Of course. So. I can set the background, and basically, I wanted to summarize for folks
the Beyond Minimum Viable Governance project, whether that was named properly or not.
If you don't think we were ever at minimum viable, I apologize. But the idea was we've been through
a year of governance out there in the wild, taking a look at the the data
and using kind of data driven decision making to make recommendations as to what should be improved.
And that that started in October, and the project concluded in end of June, so about a month ago.
And essentially, what we did is we proposed a way to measure the health of governance. We gathered
both on-chain data and sentiment-type anecdotal data from talking with people,
and we also hosted quite a few different workshops and had discussions with folks in the ecosystem
to come up with kind of both problems and proposed solutions. So we ended up
with more than a hundred. Unique ideas from folks in the community as to what they thought could fix
or improve the governance model of Cardano, and then we took and kind of filtered, themed,
prioritized those into a set of top five ideas. And we were also accountable for trying to take
the first step forward for each recommendation. So you might look at the recommendations
and kind of think some of them feel a little bit incremental and piecemeal,
but in part that's because we were accountable for making sure they move forward.
So that meant some of the things that were maybe a bit more bigger we Didn't tackle if there wasn't
kind of more immediate return, so it ended up we focused more on low cost,
big benefit relative to kind of high cost, high benefit type recommendations. And at the end,
we have generated a summary in a state of governance report and also a project playbook
that highlighted what like how we did the project, so that anybody who wants to replicate it has
the instructions to do so. So that's kind of a recap of what we did in the project.
And I can do like a two-minute highlight of what the data told us, and then I'll stop.
And then I'll take about—we can do any Q&A anyone has. And then I'll spend about ten minutes
talking through our top five recommendations. And then the remaining time,
we can just do Q&A for anybody who's got questions or comments. So, a quick highlight of the data
in terms of what were some of the big trends we saw: one, that direct power is slowly concentrating.
It's at a safe level still, in that we still actually have quite a few DREPs making each decision.
And this also captures the startup period, so we would expect to see concentration
because essentially, when the system first went live, people were essentially experimenting with
being a deer up. So we had a lot more people initially, and then over time,
there was a realization of exactly what the role meant, and people made their decisions as to
whether or not they wanted to stay in that role for a longer period of time.
So people kind of dropped out of experimentation, and we moved into a steady state.
And so we expect to see concentration during this time period, but we also still see a slow trend
that continues along that path. And so that means it requires our attention to keep that
from accelerating. We knew that when governance launched, other DAOs and ecosystems who have
stake-weighted voting see this as a trend. So that wasn't really a surprise, but it is in the data.
We have liquid democracy in Cardano, and so we measured whether or not stake is sticky,
and voting stake is stickier than SPO stake. That was a surprise to me, at least.
And so people are picking their deer up and leaving that decision alone, and. At the same time,
there were no in that first year. I would say no major like make-or-break crises going on
that might cause people to really relook at their delegation. So we can't tell from
that whether people are just happy with their de reps or whether that's apathy.
It's probably a combination of both. But we may see some sort of situation in the future
that might cause people to Really care about governance because I think a lot of people
who are delegating to a deer up, it's not something they want to pay attention to all the time.
So they're they're picking a deer up, and it's like, okay, you go represent me.
But maybe there will be a point in time where they really have something they care about,
and that will cause them to change their delegation. So we saw that voting stake is super sticky.
We saw SPOs in the beginning were voting actively, and over time, the the share of active vote.
Moved to auto abstain, so it's kind of like a trend where those two lines were meeting in the middle
of how many SPOs are actively voting yes, no, abstain versus how many selected auto abstain. So
when we lost people who are actively voting yes, no, abstain, we gained in auto abstain.
And talking with SPOs throughout the sentiment gathering, they're very frustrated with having to
and concerned with having to use their cold keys, and some of them aren't super clear on which
governance actions require their vote, and so it requires
kind of an always-on governance survey—not survey, but like watching governance all the time.
And so sometimes they're just like, "I care about my operations, I'm going to focus there.
I'll I'll know when a hard fork is coming, I'll pay attention at that point.
" And then the last trend I wanted to highlight is that. The constitutional committee was
an extremely responsible, responsive, and dependable body. In the first year, they, of course,
had some abstain, but it was very low. In that first year, we had high participation from the CC
doing their job, casting their votes before governance actions expired.
But sustainability concerns did also emerge from them. Not getting compensation,
not having very many candidates running at reelection points, and not really having tools to help
them manage their credentials very easily. So I'll pause because I've talked for a bit.
If anybody has questions on the data, I don't know, Marine, if you did yet or not.
Could you post the the link tree and the GitHub link for the project, or do you need
me to send those somehow? So people. I'll post it. I'll post it. Yeah. Yeah, um,
I had I had a question on what you said about recommendations. Uh, but yeah,
that one just came to mind. What you've said now, you said that uh, voting stake is being steeper
than you know spo stake, and that surprised you a lot. And then you also say you can't tell
whether that that satisfaction or it's apathy. So I think it's a it's interesting. Uh,
if it turns out to be apathy, is is liquid democracy doing what it's supposed to do? Or,
what do you think? We've just built delegation with some extra steps. I, my view is,
liquid democracy. Whether or not somebody uses it, if you have that feature,
that's better than not having it. So, to me, it's like if I'm using my own personal,
like the United States government as an example. It's annoying when you vote somebody in
and then they don't do what they promised, and you have no recourse
except really kind of waiting for that to time out. So. Only when things start going bad
do you really care. In most cases, so things are going well. You set a delegate,
like you set your representative. You're happy with them. You just let them go do their job,
and you're happy with what your government is doing. That's great. So that's
why I was kind of talking about whether there's a crisis or not, whether we would see
that liquid movement actually come into play. It's It's when you feel like your government
's really failing you that you might want to to make use of that and say, you know what,
this this rep that I picked is has gone off the rails. All of them have gone off the rails.
I need to pick somebody new and try to get the system back on track. That's when I would expect
local democracy to make sense, because I mean, fundamentally, you're picking a representative
because you want them to spend the time and be the expert rather than you doing that.
And so it's kind of meant to be something you're not doing a lot with if things are working well.
So. That's how I feel. Yeah, thank you for that. Yeah, I think it's it's a fair answer. Um,
I did have another question. Um, you so across all three of the categories that you interviewed,
the D reps concentrating, the SPOs abstaining out, and the CC that were running unpaid.
I think the pattern that is kind of obvious is that people opting out are just doing it quietly,
and there's nothing breaking. Like oh making noise about it. So, is that the actual risk
to Catalan governance? I mean, it's not like a a house tie takeover. It's just everyone just leaving
the room. Yeah, I think that's that's what we focused on with a couple of our recommendations
is keeping people around because yeah, I mean nothing crazy has to happen for us to not meet
enough constitutional committee candidates and us ending up stalling because we need to vote.
New members in because terms are ending, but nobody wants to take that role. Same with the SPOs. Not
that they've actually been a very good voting body as well. In that, if they had to vote something
through, that's when they cast their votes. So I'm not saying they're doing a bad job by any means,
but more and more of them moving to abstain. Auto abstain means they may more
or less just be focused on their operations and not looking at governance at all.
But the way the system is built, they still have to cast a vote for a hard fork.
So the concern would be if they don't engage at all at the point of a hard fork because they think
that their auto abstain will take care of it. So I see that as one of the concerns.
It's not so much the hostile takeover, but just this the slow burn of like the challenges
in participating in governance, just causing people to stop participating. Okay,
that's all the questions I have for now. So you can move on to next segment. Okay,
so I'll talk about the top five recommendations we came up with and highlight what we did
to nudge them forward. So they're grouped into kind of two categories.
One is addressing in some way, shape, or form direct power concentration,
and then the second category is aimed at ensuring smooth governance operations, which is what we.
We were just talking about marine around making sure something doesn't happen
that like people just slowly, slowly check out, and then one day the system doesn't work
because nobody's around doing all the jobs that need to be done. So, first category:
how do we intentionally put effort into nudging the power concentration trend into a stable form
so that it doesn't continue concentrating over time? So the first one
is coordinated community discussions around deer up compensation and power caps.
So deer up compensation is something that has been Discussed on and off, but we don't have
real consensus as to what we want to do about it in the next, let's even say, three years.
So people have talked about it, people have put some thought into it, but there's it's
a difficult problem. There's a lot of trade-offs, and so we haven't kind of settled on
what trade-offs we want to agree to. At the same time, I think when the governance model launched.
DREP concentration was a known risk of stake-weighted voting, but without identity that ties a DREP
to a unique entity, we also knew that we didn't have a solution for it yet, even
if we wanted to solve that problem. And so it's saying. We, we and Cardano don't have
the same stake-weighted model that a lot of other DAOs have. So we have
multiple branches to government, government, and we also have a constitution. So essentially,
maybe we can find some new ways to help solve, or maybe partially solve,
deer up power concentration with our system that others couldn't. And so opening up that exploration
for like what are the solutions to both of those, the compensation and power caps,
without waiting for identity to be part of our governance model. And coordinating
those conversations because you could solve one, and it directly negatively impacts the other. So,
making sure that whoever is trying to solve each of those problems is at least talking to the other.
So, what we did to to move that forward, we Marine
and I actually are co-authors on a candidate Cardano problem statement (CPS zero zero three three).
That talks about direct power caps as an actual and direct sorry not specifically power caps
but direct power concentration as an official quote unquote problem. And then we also help to make
some connections between IO research, the people doing game theory work on compensation,
with the incentives working group at Intersect and some of the incentives discussions
that are currently ongoing. So that one's probably a bigger harder one,
but we named it as a recommendation. Second one is better governance features
and notifications in wallets. So The data showed that it was incredibly effective as a strategy
for wallet UIs to have governance features, and specifically, like one-click delegation,
was very effective. So, the recommendation was rather than having that point people to single DREPs,
have logic behind it that points people to or or suggests DREPs that if you delegate to them,
it's not delegating to Like the top 35. So for users specifically who don't want to do research
and would like to have a recommendation of a DREP, the system can use some filtering logic
to basically recommend a DREP that is active, is doing their job, but isn't sitting in the top 35,
and so choosing them doesn't contribute to the power concentration trend. And then along with that,
governance notifications, where SPOs we're working towards putting some pull requests together
for SPO tooling to get governance notification, so SPOs don't have to always be watching;
they'll be notified when a governance action requires their vote, and same for wallets to include
governance notifications. So what we did there, we had direct conversations
with four different wallet providers, and we're working with the DataList team also
on the governance features there, improving there. In part, we've also helped progress SIP 181 to be
an official SIP, and that is also get rid of the requirement for withdrawing,
for picking a DREP to withdraw staking rewards. Basically, we see that that drives a lot of stake
to auto abstain, and that was a bootstrap feature. And in the system, if you pick auto abstain,
it's the same as taking no action. So the idea is essentially get rid of that extra overhead that
wallets have, so that they can kind of take on some of these new governance features,
so that it's not an even bigger burden on wallets. So those are the ones related to.
Avoiding power concentration, and then the last three aimed at ensuring
smooth governance operations, and we don't hit kind of stalled states.
One is social governance incident readiness, and social governance meaning it doesn't relate to
the code itself, but things like what if there were to be a D rep that has
more than 50% of the voting power at some point in the future. So the idea is identify
possible scenarios that can happen in our model, and work with intersect because they're the ones
coordinating ecosystem incident response to decide if there is a response
and what that response would be. So notably, because this is social, there may be an incident
that could really slow down governance that is intentionally decided. You don't do anything about it
because that might just be the will of the people. And so, also kind of thinking through
the more difficult scenarios of when should you take action and when should you not take action,
and let that be the will of the system. The second recommendation in this category is
SPO voting tools that don't require cold keys. And there's already a SIP that we helped to
basically get on the next hard fork shortlist, and that's SIP 151 to allow SPOs to vote without
their cold keys. That was a very consistent feedback we heard from SPOs as to
why they don't like to vote. It they're worried about the security of exposing their cold keys.
It's extra hassle to get out their cold keys to vote. So kind of
in the Minimum viable governance tooling landscape. Tools were really built for the DREPs
and the delegates, but not so much the SPOs and the constitutional committee.
And so this is trying to say, like, we need to complete that suite of tools to make it easier
for our SPOs to vote than it has been in the past. So the final recommendation then is
constitutional committee. Compensation and tooling. So again, they didn't have tools built for them.
There's a couple community tools that have been worked on to help, but they don't really have
sufficient tools to manage their credentials, which slims down the pool of potential candidates
to very, very technical folks. So we think that CC compensation should be part
of the DREP compensation conversation. That was one of the biggest feedbacks
on the CC compensation proposal that was proposed, I think, last year.
For a million ADA to compensate five of the CC members, one of the biggest critiques from D reps
on that was that if you're going to compensate the CC, you should compensate the D reps as well.
So rather than us directly trying to address CC compensation, we put together
a CC reimbursement proposal that would basically reimburse a CC member for setting up
secure credentials, any infrastructure they need for that, and then also setting up a legal entity
if they want to have legal liability shield. So it is basically the business case
for that recommendation is that it's way more expensive. For the community to have to do a revote
on the constitutional committee because of some compromised credential,
than it is to pay a small amount for a CC member to reimburse hardware to set up a secure kind
of cold storage environment. So we are looking at a way to get that funded.
It's too small to really be a treasury withdrawal, so we're investigating some other avenues.
So those are the five recommendations and some of the things we did to move them forward.
Happy to take any questions, comments, thoughts from anybody. Thanks, Danny.
That was very well put out. I see Jenny's hand is up. Hey, uh, what's up, Danny? Um, thanks, guys,
for doing this. I guess that I—I mean, I participated in this, but um, honestly,
I—I wanted to participate in a different way. I was, uh, I guess asked to participate as
an XCC member, which kind of gave me like reduced kind of scope and what I was able to, you know,
talk about, but. I mean, as a D rep pioneer, and we we basically put together the whole
like framework and and everything that that was taught to people about everything had to do with
being becoming a D rep and what it meant and whatnot, and. I also was part
of the governance parameters working group, which we were tasked with coming up
with the initial parameters for governance, and so I kind of wanted to speak on behalf of, like,
from my roles, but I was not able to. I mean, I did, I did talk to Kenarig about. I'm sorry, what?
Oh, I thought I think there's a dog barking in the background. I thought you were saying something.
So, I think that I guess so. Coming from the two perspectives, right? I'm I'm concerned
in the emphasis that we we give to although I know that compensation and all that is is important.
There's some things in there that are are very valid. I think I'm very concerned with
how we have completely taken out of the picture the the self representation when it comes down to.
You know governance in Cardano, and it has been all based on you have to pick somebody
to represent you. Which initially this is not what we were teaching people when we we put together
the Devep Pioneer program. One of the main things was to teach people about self representation
and when does it make sense to rep to to pick somebody to represent you
and why the beauty of liquid democracy. Was about you being able to delegate the power of your vote
to somebody when they when when it meant somebody else was kind of be more knowledgeable than you
about a subject, right? But we have kind of like completely forgotten about that concept,
and of course, if we do that, we're going to see concentration of power because we're
we're not empowering people to to engage themselves in governance if we
if we don't remind them that they can actually vote themselves and. And to that,
I'm gonna add that the the you know if you I don't know if I I did suggest to Ken Erik I I think
I shared the document with him where we where all the recommendations for the parameters
were put together. We explain why those parameters were chosen, and one of them was
the 500 ADA deposit to become a DRE, which was mainly just mirrored at the beginning to the
to the SPO, but we. Absolutely, thought that was going to be one of the first things that changed
because we wanted everything to become more accessible. Precisely because we want people to be
able to become D reps themselves, to to represent themselves, or become, you know, to have
more D reps representing others. Because this is about like you know being able to eloquently
like talk about issues, and not so much about how much data you have, right? So
if you represent a small community, you still want to have that community have representation. So.
We, you know, the initial parameters were set just in in a way of familiarity, right? That was like,
oh, what what are people going to be able to, you know, feel comfortable with?
And the 500 deposit came to be, and there was this concern about too many transactions
at the beginning, which we clearly saw that was not going to be the case,
and that was not going to be a problem. So now, really, all it takes is
for somebody to put a you know a governance action to change it to five
but to five ADA if we wanted to, and that and and that will empower more people to participate uh
in governance. So. Just on those two things, which are kind of like at the same time working on
the same thing, which is about self-representation or making it more, you know,
accessible for people. Why are we not focusing on that? Why are
why are we like completely kind of abandoning some of the most like pillar, like the pillars of
why the structure was put together in the first place? So I. I have quite a few different ways
of answering that. I don't know if it's been, I don't know if it's been abandoned per se.
One of the problems, in a way, is that you say DREP, and that is both, right?
So a DREP is if you represent yourself, and a DREP is if you represent others as well.
So it's not the solution, but it's part of the problem that it's the same exact term
to describe either. It was at first which I liked it, but then they started changing it
in documentations and calling it something else, which kind of created a problem, if you ask me.
Like in the like in the ledger, it is the same thing, right? And original we talked about it
as the same way to to make sure that everybody understood that they can become D reps themselves
for themselves. But then they started doing direct voter, and that was introduced later,
which was like very confusing. Uh huh. Yeah. So I don't know how much that really contributes to
the problem, but like the other sort of harsh truth is we've got two other things that kind of work
against that. So I think it's it's a big cultural and effort like shift
for people to represent more, and at the end of the day. I guess it's a good question
whether people are not representing themselves because they have barriers versus if it's
because they simply don't want to. Broadly, in like government and decision making,
the numbers of participation are just low. Like it's kind of across the board.
But we want to know if we don't have that possibility. If we were to have that, which it was,
what's going to happen in the first place? We would probably know. But right now,
it's just about we don't know. It's not accessible right now. You know. Yeah. Yeah, I think also,
and it could be just who was answering the surveys. Like the surveys when we asked,
people were participating as much as they wanted to. But of course, if you don't want to participate
or if you've already checked out, you probably wouldn't have answered the survey, so it didn't.
That's the other thing we should have tried to find people that were not participating to get into
survey and see why we're not there. Maybe that should be the next one.
Just tackle people that are not participating and find out why they're not participating. You know?
Yeah, we wanted to do that, but the the hard part was. How do you reach people that you don't know
and who aren't talking? So I hope that we'd be able to do that, but I don't think it probably wasn't
a very good sampling of those people, and I don't. I don't know how you find the people
who aren't engaged per se when we don't have identity, but that would be. Well,
we do have like a lot of emails. People that participated in the workshops,
people that participated in CIP sixteen ninety four. We have contact information for all of them,
and a lot of them disengaged throughout the process. And those will be key people to to reach out
to, in my opinion. Hmm. Yeah, I don't know. So, I want to chip in because that was
kind of my responsibility to reach out to people and. I did know a couple of people who were in
governance, you know, like the XCC members, but and which I did try to reach out to all of them,
you know, and I think in general, if you don't know the people, it's kind of.
But I do agree that maybe there was a limitation on, you know, the number or the the scope or,
you know, the kind of people to target, so. Yeah, that's definitely a good point. But I see, uh,
angry and block jog. They have their hand up. Block jog. I think you were first. Hey guys. Um.
So I do love all of the work that you guys did. First off, um, congratulations on everything.
I know it's a lot of work, and so very well done. Um, I'm curious on this particular thing
having to do with the cap. This is something that you know been brought up.
It was you know similar to like. A variety of other things that we've discussed, and typically,
what happens is, is that you know, for D reps, if you were to put a cap,
then more than likely they would split into two or three, similar to the way we've seen
stake pool operations, you know, split into multi pools. And if you were to put a D rep ID
as a mandate, one, how would you implement that? Two, it is a permissionless society,
so I think it would be an unpopular thing for some to come across, and so you you run into a lot
of opposition. But if they did, let's say we did actually make it a mandate on-chain,
D-reps in order to be able to vote on-chain on anything would have to identify themselves.
Wouldn't that then potentially push them to become groups or consortiums, things like that?
And how would you manage that? You know, so kind of curious there on that particular subject
because this is obviously something that is a point of contention within Cardano
with the consolidation of delegated data. Yeah. So first, I'll say I do a poor job of communicating
that one because I usually say power cap, but it basically means exploring solutions
to disrupt concentration without expecting identity to be part of the system. So if you read CPS 33,
That would be a better way to understand what we're saying here, and I just like shorthand
in my brain. It always routes back to this word of power caps. So I apologize for that,
but that's certainly one of the proposals that people in the ecosystem have said could be possible.
But one of the interesting things that kind of came through the discussions and the research was,
let's say. You decide to compensate D reps, and let's say in the compensation scheme,
you attempt to optimize for mid-sized D reps, so that the biggest D reps have less incentives,
the smallest D reps have incentives to get bigger and then and try to shift maybe power that way.
So let's say theoretically, some system could do that, and it's put in place.
We don't have a way for a D rep to self-limit. Either, so let's say the biggest deer up is like,
oh great, I'd like to get more incentives by being smaller. The only way they can do that right now
is retire, dump all of those delegations, and start again fresh. So, in terms of like the way
I think of an interesting application of power caps is optional power caps,
where I register as a deer up, and maybe I can set how big it gets, and then it rejects
any future delegation, and it kind of makes me like this is all the bigger I can get, because.
If I decided I really want to make sure I'm not representing a swing vote in the system,
we don't have a way to do that. So that's the way I think of power caps.
But it's really just an open question as to are there creative ways that we can solve the problem
without expecting identity to exist? Because yeah, we might not ever want identity
in our governance system, and If we expect we're never going to get it,
then maybe there is something we can do. Like, is there a way that we can make
it more expensive to split into multiple D reps, so that it's less likely? Maybe it's not foolproof,
but maybe it helps, anyways. So that's really what that is exploring. It could dissuade them
slightly, but considering if they were to get together and or have a large delegation,
I don't think they would care so much because. They're able to push the pile when it comes to
voting, and the ultimate prize is the treasury that they're going after.
So whatever it is they need to do in order to be able to do that is going to be
extraordinarily large struggle. If it wasn't something that had money attached to it,
I'd say we probably wouldn't even have the problem. But since we do, then so good luck to you on
on what you're doing there. And I know with everything that we seem to come up with as far
as the solution, there's always a equal solution from some sort of very smart developer
or you know somebody that's in our ecosystem that figures out how to game it.
And so never seen in seven years where that's not the case. And so it's it's basically
an uphill battle I see, but yeah. Thanks again for everything that you're doing,
and I'm glad we're at least having this discussion. Yeah, I don't think it's an easy one to solve,
but I think we wanted to make it at least more top of mind while we're kind of in a window of having
a safe level of d rep power concentration. So yeah, that's kind of the goal. But thanks.
So I I did I wanted to say something else before I give you the hand. Oh, angry is gone. Okay,
but when Jenny mentioned the Zureb pioneers, I think she actually actually Jenny,
you mentioned it to me when they the project had ended, and I actually did a bit of research on who
those people were. And it turns out more than eighty percent of the people on that list
I had reached out to. Now I'm not talking about the leaders. I'm talking about the people
that participated on the on the direct workshops and the people that participated on
the CIP workshops, on the CIP sixteen ninety four workshops. Like we have contact information
for everybody that attended. Those are the people I'm talking about. There's a lot of people
that attended that were very excited about governance that basically left in the middle
of the process. They got frustrated and they didn't like where we were heading.
Those are the people I'm talking about, and we actually do have contact information for everybody
that registered for those workshops. And how do you know about them leaving?
Because I was I I personally hosted three CIP workshops. For if you count the one that I did with
Hoski in Spanish. No, I I don't mean you, Jenny. I mean me. Well, then you can reach out
to the people that were um doing it. Like we had, um, it was uh Valeria was uh working with
Intersect and that part of things. So Intersect will have probably, um,
you probably can reach out to Intersect and try to find the information. Like, hey, you know,
we need the contact information. How do we reach out to those people? You know,
I don't know if it's um. Yeah, it will be intersect, or if they they can contact them themselves
for you or something like that. But they will have all that contact info because they it was needed
to register for all of that. And you mean the list of the people who registered,
but not the list of people who left. Yeah, but you can reach out to all of them and then
and do a call to action if those people left. The one you want to hear from them,
and you want to hear why they left and why they're not participating. So you will do some sort
of survey, you know, and reach out to them. You know, there's just there's a lot of people. I mean,
you have Johnny Kelly. Did you reach out Johnny Kelly? He was extremely involved,
and he's no longer involved. Why is he no longer involved? Right. So there's part of the one
of the things I was I didn't finish my sentence was that I reached out to these people,
and I think I got back maybe thirty percent response, and it's a it's just. The the way it is.
Some people are gonna respond, others are not gonna respond, and it's very it's very hard
to know uh to know like okay you see a list these are the D rep pioneers
and you reach out to all of them or most of them because that's the the people that were available.
But those are the pioneers, and some of I'm not talking about the pioneers.
I'm talking about the people that participated on the pioneers workshops. You see what I'm saying?
Okay, okay. Not the pioneers. The majority of the pioneers were still in the in in Corano.
I'm talking about the people that participated in our workshops. I did, like I said, four workshops.
Well, I did four CC94, and I did two three pioneer, uh, uh, Diva Pioneer workshops.
I did two in person, one and and online. So, you know, there's there's people
that participated there that I can tell you personally that some of them left.
They're just no longer involved. So. And there are those who left, and you reach out to them,
and you don't get a reply. That's what I'm trying to explain, Jenny. You don't get a reply.
You can't. You can't bully someone to reply to you. I don't know. And people generally reply to
people they know or people they. I don't know. They or they even participate when they want to.
So that's the general idea. But yeah, I get it. I think there was definitely some gaps on
on who should be reached out to. But angry, I'll let you go. Yeah, thanks.
Hope everyone's doing good. I'm happy it's Friday. You know, the open that Friday excitement. TGIF.
Still sipping on this coffee before I go for a run later. I just wanted to give some input from
as a UX designer, kind of a UX research mindset. I think Danny tackled it really well.
We often forget about the cultural and societal impacts of a system that we're introducing.
You know, farmers want to farm. DJs want to DJ. They don't want to become bureaucrats.
And I like what Jenny was saying when I entered, kind of bringing down that fee. You know,
how can we say we're a liquid, liquid democracy, but then have a big fee in the middle of vote
registering as a D rep? So I think bringing that fee down can make it a lot more attractive.
We can increase our D rep amounts. People with large or small amounts can jump in
and register as a D rep, so we can remove barriers to entry. So that's the one point.
The second thing is I'm hearing a lot about reaching out to people, doing polls and surveys.
And to Maureen in the space, I would say if people don't respond to you.
The the non response is the response. So if you have a bad experience at a restaurant or at retail,
why would you want to like talk to them again? You just wouldn't pick up the phone. You'd be like,
ah, f this, I don't want to pick up. And that tells you a lot.
And so what I'm basically alluding to is that when we're doing voting and polling
and stuff like that, we don't want to have bad data. If you just poll a certain amount of people,
maybe with leading questions or whatnot. And let's just say a bunch of people don't respond.
There's a lot of things you can learn from that, and you can kind of like see like, oh well,
like maybe 70% of people are not responding. Okay, why is that? Then that can tell you a lot
because if you structure polls or surveys in a way where you're just asking a certain demographic,
you won't actually get the response you're looking for. So I'll give you an example. Like,
let's say I want to make music that reaches more of the mainstream, and I ask my ten diehard fans,
do they love the music? Of course, they're going to say yes, and I'm going to think I'm
a hundred percent amazing, but I haven't really dived into the broader audience to really understand
what they're saying. And so I would really recommend to kind of broaden the scope,
really focus on the cultural societal impacts to reduce the barriers to entry, but most importantly,
observation. There's a lot that we can just learn from observation and see what
people are frustrated in doing. Even without doing a poll, if somebody, like
if a UX designer just watched people register as a D rep and saw their frustrations,
their happiness as they went from flow to flow, that could also be just so valuable.
Because often we try to do things in one way, but we gotta zoom out and realize there's
no average user; every user is different. And so every effort we can take to kind of broaden
the scope, reduce the barrier to entry, and make things smooth will be will be good.
But these are good conversations to have of like surveying people. And making the d rep registration
low because 500 ADA. I mean, if you look at XRP Ledger, you pay like five bucks,
and you register on a forum, and you go like, so just compare those two, right?
And if you're in a third world country, 500 ADA might be a lot, especially as it if if the price
goes up, right? Because it's a very volatile asset, so it might be not much to one user,
but it could mean a lot to somebody else. So I think the intention people have
upon this stage are good. We just have to kind of sometimes think outside the box. And also, Marina,
I just wanted to say that I took this from your own thing. Your report said I don't remember exactly
with the words. It said that you did not go after the people that were not participating.
I think it was like stated in the report, and that this is where I'm getting this from.
Not not me assuming it. So my bad if that's not the case. I took it from the report itself.
But I did get in touch with you and B and Adam and you guys. Yeah, which we are participating. Well,
I'm thinking the report said, but you guys did not poll those people. It's a reporting self-serving.
I think what the report was acknowledging is that people who don't respond,
we don't know what they would have said. I think if it was what I'm thinking about is
kind of the general disclaimer of like the data is only showing what the respondents said,
is just acknowledging the gap of, kind of what Angry was just saying, like if people don't respond
and we weren't able to observe. Why, from the on-chain data, like acknowledging that that was
an unsolved gap. So you actually actively go after people that were not participating anymore.
Is that what you're saying? Like you actually they were participating and discovered, of course.
But how would I know that they are not participating if they never participated before? Yes,
and what? How would I? I think we're not. I I don't know. But yeah, B, you have your hand up.
I wanted to say I did actually attend one of these sessions, and it was very thorough
and very very educational. I think the problem is that regardless of if you hunt down people
who hunt down who stop participating, there is there is this common problem that we have in Cardano
that people, regardless of how important the work is for them, they might not show up after all
because there might not be time or anything like that. So I know because I did help with
reaching out to some people as well, specifically for this. That regardless, it is a difficult task,
and I think we should just be happy that the ones who showed up did show up and opinion
or give their opinion because we wouldn't have had this report. But it does also make
it more important that we continue to do these reports and actually highlight that you know
the the results are based on a small group of people, not the majority
or the that we would have wanted. But if you if you still are able to To participate,
or if you know, if you could still do those questions again, would you do it?
And if people would actually attend and show up, so that we actually get the fuller dataset
or see if there's any, you know, differences between what people answered the first time
and the second time, or whatever. So, yeah, I I know how much work was put in,
and I I'm very glad that the report is is down or it's it's done. Um, I did have some comments
on the compensation part, but I think the conversation has just gone past it. So I'll just yeah,
thank you guys. Yeah, thanks B. Um, can I ask a follow up though to Jenny? On the parameter,
so you are part of the parameter setting for like that 500 ADA, and the hope was
it'll get set lower. Are there thresholds where a certain number of DREPs in the system
would cause congestion? And like, is there a maximum number of DREPs that are no? At the beginning,
they were thinking of that, but that was definitely thrown out. So that's not the case.
We don't really have a cap on DREPs in the system. No, it's it's kind of like a not a like.
It's a win-win. Yeah, shouldn't be a problem. Yeah, where it's like if you lower it
and more people join, then that's great, and you haven't really. Yeah. Exactly.
We thought at first when the first like the CIP, but that was corrected,
and that's not actually the case. And I talked to a lot of people about it,
and absolutely was told that that's not a problem. Mhm. Yeah, I think the only downside of that is
the UX side of things, and this is just from my like my opinion. Um,
where if somebody is searching to find a representative, if you now have 20,000 deer ups
in the system. If there's not good tooling to support finding which ones are kind of representatives
and which ones are there just to represent themselves, that could make it difficult to find a deer
up. To me, I feel like that's really the only trade off. But if you're like, for example,
you just mentioned something like a cap, right? Like if you think about something like that,
people could also like we could have all kinds of different ways that we can manage something
like that. Like for example, yeah, somebody that's a direct voter
that does not want to represent anybody else can probably put a cap and only have their own money
on the table. Or you know, just stuff like that, you know, and be like, hey,
and then maybe those people don't participate in the, and the, and the whole,
the the whole thing about the the rewards, right? Because one of the the other thing
we don't talk about is that D reps. Where also the job of a d rep was to attract delegation. So
if you want a d rep to become like like out there and get more delegation to participate in
the system, you want to reward that behavior, right? So, but then some people
just want to represent themselves, and they don't have to be like compensated for
representing themselves. But a d rep that's actually actively out there getting
people to participate in governance, I think that's definitely worth, you know,
something that you want to incentivize, right? So this is just something to think about.
Even on the front end, I mean, you're mentioning UX, right? And the concern is too much spam
in terms of like. D-reps with dust amounts of ADA. Well, then you just incorporate a filter
where equal to or greater than you show this, and then maybe you toggle.
So the smart default is you show D-reps that are more substantial,
and then you can optionally opt in to see the very smaller ones. So the default experience
shows kind of the more, you know, the standardized D-reps that kind of meet a certain requirement to
to avoid kind of like overwhelming a user, a front end user, by seeing too much like dusts
style wallets. And then then then you have that middle ground where you present something that's
so elegant to the user who's viewing d-reps. They can optionally opt in to see
every single granular amount amount down to that singular ADA. But then,
because of reducing that entry, you eliminate a barrier to entry and you incentivize
more d-rep participation. So we should really be focused on like that that average Joe
because think of the real world. You have 50% voter participation with pencil and paper.
So in what world were we thinking by throwing a 500 ADA you know wall continuously?
That they would just participate more, right? So, as Jenny alluded to, you know,
it was likely just a kind of a buffer as as things are going there, a placeholder.
But there's always room for improvement. It's a recursive government, so there's
those are definitely, I think, easy ways to improve it. And and the front end
of systems can easily reflect a refined experience to to not overwhelm the user what they're seeing.
And I just gave examples of that. But that's why we need actual UX designers,
like certified in what they're doing. To say, hey, look, this is a problem. This is the solution.
This is how it can work on the front end. Because I can tell you guys,
I keep hearing these terms UX, UX, and the people saying them don't actually have the certification
of what they're saying. They just like throw these terms out loosely, and it requires
a fundamental understanding of the user. Sorry for interrupting. What front end are you referring
to? Are you talking about wallet? It could be wallet. It could be gov tools. It could be whatever.
I'm talking on like a broad sense because of this concern of like D rep congestion.
Because the concern is like too many D reps being shown. No, I don't. I don't think that's
a problem. I think it's a good thing if there are many dealers. That's not a problem at all.
And there's yeah, and the way to the way to the way to fix that is a smart default, right?
When you go to a website and it knows your location, that's the smart default, right?
There's a lot of UX best principles that can be implemented to find that middle ground of
like satisfying a liquid democracy, but also making search easy and scannable
and accessible for the end user. We should not really be focused on that, like, oh damn, like, what
if? Because again, if pencil and paper turns out fifty percent. Then, like,
we should think of that real world model. Like, if you think of real world governance, they think,
how do we get more voter turnout? And I think we have some pretty obvious ways that
we can increase the voter turnout in general. I'm just speaking in general. Yeah,
and I just want to maybe summarize. Like, the reason I brought that up was that it's not actually
it's a very solvable problem, and so it's kind of a an easy win to change that setting.
You're not out anything really, and if more people come, more people come. More people don't come.
Then more people don't come, but we can easily solve for if more people do come.
So it sounded pessimistic, but I completely agree that that is something that you can solve
if we've got twenty thousand DRPs in the system. So I guess the way I said it came across as it's
a negative that should block it, but I think it's like it's not enough of a negative that should be
a problem. So I'm agreeing with Jenny that it's a cool like something that we could probably change,
and also that the UX could be solved. I I definitely don't think it's a negative thing at all.
I think for SPOs we can say okay a lot of SPOs and they are not minting any blocks or whatever.
Again, it's just. But for DREFs, I don't know. It does nothing to the chain.
It does nothing to the ledger. If we have ten thousand DREFs, they just don't count towards
decisions if they don't have anything. They're not doing anything. Why? They all count.
Every everything counts. It adds a little bit of weight to it. At the end of the day,
that's what you want. The most ADA participating, right? No, I mean the the spam that he's talking
about. Oh, spamming! Oh, I see. Yeah, I'm like in both categories. Yeah. Um. Okay, guys. So, uh,
Danny, I don't know if you've covered bases with everything. We've gone a bit of both times. Okay.
Yep, that's all I wanted to share, kind of how the project concluded, um, and what we did,
and it was good discussion. So yeah, that's it for me. I see Dave just came up. Also,
but before Dave, Lucas came up, and I want to hear if he had something to say. Hey guys, sorry.
I probably am going to repeat on ten topics that were voiced, but I wanted to underline that I think
it makes a lot of sense to reduce the deposit from 500 ADA. And I think I heard something
that's not often mentioned, which is the direct voters. I, Lucas, registered to be direct voter.
I always thought that rule. Makes a lot of sense, and that's why I advocate for reducing
the five hundred ADA deposit. And when talking with the the guy that was doing that's doing
a DREP talk recently, I mentioned that he he has DREP badges on everything,
and that maybe we could have direct voter badges. And he immediately said,
"Yet there's nothing on chain that distinguishes them." I think that was sort of like something
that was a lapse, and that could be should be addressed. But you know,
it's just a different a different position. In terms of D rep compensation,
I really think we should have something that's voluntary and optional,
and that could be as simple as a metadata code for payment transactions saying this is a donation
to my D rep, and then we can index those and see the behavior. And if we have some wallet tools,
and the same way that SPOs all have a button on their website saying "Delegate to me,
" D reps could also have a button or or some kind of automations to receive voluntary
and optional donations to D reps, and out out. Of that behavior, after having that running for
a few months, we could start getting some some behavior profiles, I would say.
So it's something that could be ridiculously simple to develop. Thank you, Lukas, for sharing. Dave.
Hey, everyone. Yeah, on the on the proposer side, where where I tend to live more instead
of the d rep side, but I talk to a lot of them. I try to put my shoes into the proposers,
but even just new people coming into Cardano, because we want to grow the pie,
we want to attract people to our chain. And so when you go look at the d reps,
I agree that a front end would be better to organize, and I think that's a solvable problem.
But then I worry about the backend data, like what what does any one d rep stand for? What policies
or principles? Do they believe in? Are they adhering to those? Are they active in voting,
or do they just vote on one thing and stay active, and then every other non-vote is a no?
Are they engaging with proposal teams, or are they just tweeting from you know afar and not engaging
and not reading the proposals? So it's kind of a grab bag to me. Like if I was someone
new walking into Cardano, I'd probably use the AI tools and say which which D rep should I go with,
or just pick the biggest D rep on the list because I say wow they have a lot of aggregated stake.
I'll probably just go with them. And so I don't know if we're really giving people informed choices,
and I believe in the front end, but the back end and people stepping up
and telling me who who I you know what they believe in, so I know who I'm delegating to.
I don't think we're doing a great job on that. Some are, but where's that? Where can I find that?
You know what I mean? Blockjock's doing it. Phil's doing it. Many others are doing it,
but the rest is just kind of like at the whims of one person and face.
I don't really know what that means as a new person coming here.
Yeah, I think that's also no, that's a very well said. So I was actually gonna comment a little bit
because Dave just picked up on what I was actually thinking about, and here's the other part
of this: is is that there are in the top ten, there's Eversteak, there's there's a few others, Jazz,
there's a few of them there that are nameless in a lot of ways. They also never do a rationale,
and they're either large companies that just have a large amount of delegated data,
and they're making sure their voice is heard, especially on things that impact them
and their business model. But it, but they don't participate in any way outside of that, you know.
And maybe it's because they don't really need to. One, two, they don't have the time necessary,
or dedicate one particular person, or to be able to be engaged or involved. But you know,
I would suggest that you know it probably should be an important thing, you know.
But how do you actually, you know, incentivize that or mandate that? I'm not sure you can do that
either, you know. So there are those who are single D reps that don't leave a rationale.
Don't have anything listed. Don't have a picture of themselves. Nothing, and that's fine.
You're gonna be an anon. There's actual anon d reps. There's one very large one,
that's an anon d rep. But you know, it's one of those things to where if we start to set the culture
in a different way, you know, and start pushing in that direction, then the rest of the community
starts to then say, "Hey, I would like that." And then slowly but surely,
those with large delegated data that are not doing those things start to see a reduction
in their current, you know, d rep delegation in Ada, right? Their power. So this could happen,
but how do you actually do that? How do you? Is there an incentivization model to do that,
or is it just directly trying to generate a new narrative, direct the community a different way,
and then in essence get them to say, "Hey, I need to switch," and then they switch. You know,
but I think not sure exactly how you do that. The the liquid model will not work if it's
they need to switch out of their own action. There's not enough. Reason for delegates to care,
right? The the reason that blockchain systems work is economic incentives tied to intended outcomes.
That's the whole security model and foundation of blockchain technology.
It's not that people are going to be nice, and you know that's why the blockchain works.
It's that economic incentives are such that if you behave badly, you lose money.
If you follow the behavior of the chain, you earn rewards, right? That's how block production works.
That's why slashing exists on all the other chains. That's why you know you get paid for
minting blocks and so forth. And so it's not like a social thing of yeah,
let's expect people to do the right thing. It's there are economic incentives for doing
the right thing, and so a rational actor, and we assume the majority of people are rational,
which is a fair assumption to make, will do the the right thing, right?
Because there's an economic incentive for them to do so, and there's an economic punishments
for not doing the right thing. Cardano, we don't really have this. We have we have it for consensus,
but we have no economic incentives for govern governance, right? And so,
when you have no economic incentives, you just get apathy. Why should people do this?
It doesn't matter who they delegate to, it doesn't matter who they switch to.
This needs to be fixed, right? It needs to use the same model that the blockchain consensus model
uses, right? Where there is economic incentives for the intended outcome,
which in this case is people actually being liquid and actually paying attention.
The second thing is, I agree with what you said entirely about the culture,
right? This is like the definition of the intended outcome, right? Of
must be getting a call. Oh, I'm like, I missed. Oh, I thought I was rocking. Yeah,
you probably got a call. You got it. You got paid the 508 of the the resume. So I put
more dimes in the exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The big man, but nobody knows what those even are.
I wanted to call on our guest if she has a call to action for everyone, kind of like last words,
because we are heading quite out of time. Danny, do you have any call to action
for everyone listening right now? For for me, it's really just to follow up on these things.
So the the challenge is most of these things don't get funded in our current
like ecosystem environment with the treasure withdrawals, and so in the meantime,
like those of us who are Committed in spending our time to these things.
It's an important time to do it, and if we have a way of, you know, a window at some point
to get funding for this stuff, I think that'll help to keep it moving.
But just to keep these things moving. So, like what we just talked about,
those 500 ADA deposit for DREPs, like that is a pretty easy change that could be proposed.
Maybe now is not the right moment with so many different on-chain governance actions,
but just keeping these things moving. I don't, I don't know. I guess that's it. Yeah,
and everyone who hasn't read the State of Governance report yet, I pinned it at the top.
It's also sorry, guys. Um, there's also the link tree, which contains a host of other documents
that pertains to the project. Thank you, Danny, for coming. This was a wonderful conversation.
Definitely enjoyed it. Um, yeah, yeah. Thanks for you guys' conversation and time. So, thanks, guys.
I I don't have a lot of time. Sorry, go on, Jenny. I just said thank you, Danny.
I I don't have a lot of time left. I have to do real adult shit, but um, I just want to say,
middle of like a very passionate speech of something I care greatly about,
and then fucking Twitter just rug. No, I didn't get a call. I didn't get anything.
Just Twitter app just blue screened and then closed. Very cool. You had like
a like a first comp moment. That's all I have to say about that. Now I can't hear anyone.
People are talking. Oh my god! We can hear. Can people hear me? I expect they can. Yeah,
we can hear you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Of course, people can. Nobody can tell Phil that.
Really fun Twitter. Good job, Elon. I hear you, Phil. Fuck you, you motherfucker! Feel.
Can you hear that? Oh my God! Okay, so guys, before everyone rocks, uh, by everyone I mean myself,
because I want to rock you guys. I know, Blob Talk. It's your birthday today. Oh, I know. My gosh!
I know. Oh, oh my God! It's your birthday. It's my brother's birthday too, Blob Talk. It it is. Yes,
we both are Leos, and this is the 22nd anniversary of my 39th. Hey Phil, what's up, man? This Joe.
I left. Can you hear us now? Yeah, and I joined back. When I joined back, it went back in time.
So like I, you know, like it lags when you're a listener. So I could hear what other people
were saying, and I could hear myself talking when I joined back. And the only thing I hear
is Marine saying, "Fuck you, Phil." Something, something, something. That's true. This is comical,
but it's typical Marine. And absolutely loved it. They just taking advantage of the situation.
Why don't you finish out your thoughts? Of course. Twitter shows it to me.
Marine wants to lead the charge for the one of the most enjoyable yet chaotic birthday songs ever
in the history, I think, of the world. Honestly, I want to lead it. This is my twenty second.
You're leading it. Yeah, no, no, no, absolutely. But I'd love to let Phil just finish his thought.
You know, which would be helpful because he was like right half. Oh yeah,
my thought was I agree 100 with what you said around like the intended outcome being we want
people to be liquid and we want people to be the the people with delegation to be known
and for their delegates to understand. How how that person is voting, what their general
like platform is, the the things that are important to them, and and to genuinely believe
that that person is, you know, a good representative of their delegation.
But the the one thing I would say is that there is a big difference between an anonymous one person
D rep. And a ever stake, which is just like the same thing, but an enterprise,
and it's using user funds to go vote on Cardano. It's essentially like if Coinbase was voting on
Cardano governance proposals on who should receive money. To me, the ever stake problem is not.
Like being tackled enough, or even considered at all by the community, it's just
like we have this massive, extremely big enterprise with billions of dollars that is using the funds
that they are custodying on behalf of users. Like it's a platform where you know,
big you as a company, you store your funds through Everstake to vote on governance proposals,
which is pretty insane behavior. They're like voting on how Cardano should spend their money.
Blockdame is another one using people's ADA that didn't even delegate to them. Yeah,
and Blockdame as well. Yeah, yeah. And it's raising awareness for that. Yeah, so. Yeah,
and you got to think, what is the incentive for these companies to participate this way? Like,
what is the financial incentive for them to do this? Right, it takes time
and effort for them to research proposals, for them to make an informed decision. And so, given
that you don't get paid for doing this work, you know, the only incentives are, you know,
let's just say under the counter, right? And so this, to me, is just very dangerous.
And something not including a rationale is another issue as well, because they're
under-blocked game, and there's literally not one rationale for the entire time.
So who is it that's doing it? Who's voting? It's some rando, you know. We don't even know. You know,
it's just it's such an interesting dynamic, right? But yeah, agree. Okay, guys. Block John.
Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday dear John. Happy birthday to you.
Happy birthday to you. And many more. Yes, that was me, guys. I knew it was.
And my wife is here listening as well, and we want to say we love you guys. And even
though it takes a lot of my time in doing this, and she's extraordinarily patient with me,
and it gives me all this leeway to be able to do the things that I love to do.
And part of that is not just working here, but creating relationships that are long-lasting.
And when I see people live and in person, which hopefully I do at Rare Evo, I get to see them,
give them a hug, give them a smile, and let them know just how much I am grateful for their presence
in my life. And so I hope we see more and more and more of that, and it's what we ultimately need in
order to really just keep ourselves fucking sane here, because a lot of times it's really difficult
to do that. So I want to say thank you to everybody. Extraordinarily grateful. Thank you.
I love you, Black Rock. The way the way this was gonna go is I was gonna ask everyone to say what
they like about you, and then you would do your whole speech. But of course, you ruined it. Yeah,
I definitely ruined it. Where's the cricket sound? Nope, that's not it. Where is it? Okay.
I want to say what I love about Block Jock, and this one is the most recent. He is very.
How do you say? He has. He has a very. He has a way of doing things that just gets you like,
oh my God! He has no care in the world. He's very, he's a very free being, and he does,
he just does something if he wants to do it. He just, you know, goes for it. And sometimes I'm like,
oh, Black Jack, I love him. Look at what he's doing now. I think he discovered the latest feature
he discovered was reacting to to like tweets. You know, where oh my God, yes. I swear,
I I think someone looking at that would be like, who is this guy? And he does it consistently.
And each time I open Twitter, there's Blockjog. He released a new video again,
and he's talking in the block. And I think that's what makes you block, right?
So I I love how you are with life, and you don't take everything too seriously. And even
though yeah, you have a serious business, and Kadano is for serious business. But anyways, uh,
I love you, Blockjog. I think you're awesome, and I think Kadano is very lucky to have you.
We are lucky to have you. Thank you, Marie. So happy birthday! Appreciate that. We do love you,
Black Jack. He knows. He knows. He's annoying sometimes. Sometimes I just want to kick him,
but yeah. No, he's he's amazing. I I absolutely love you, man. I hope you have a beautiful birthday.
May we get many more years of shenanigans and in-person time and All the things that we do.
So I love you. Happy, happy, happy birthday to you, my friend. Thanks, Jen. Don't cry, Block Jock.
No, there is a tear in my eye. You know that. You know I am. I'm an emotional being.
There's no question. Okay, guys, I'm gonna rock now. Um, I have life, unlike some of you people. Uh,
so. And we love Jenny's brother too. Okay. Yes, we do. Happy birthday to Jenny's brother.
That's absolutely amazing. We have the same birthday of the same. That's awesome. No question.
Bring him to Karana. Jenny, or he doesn't exist to me. And also, I'll tell you another fun fact.
That is also the birthday of the liberator of um a lot of countries in Latin America, Simón Bolívar.
So he liberated Venezuela once, and he also helped with the whole liberation efforts here in
the United States. So, yeah. Wow, that's freaking awesome! I'm in great company.
Oh my gosh, very nice. Love it. Yeah, that's awesome. Okay, bye guys.
