Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Dogechain zkEVM? Discussing the DC future! Dogechain Roundtable #57
Recorded: Oct. 13, 2023 Duration: 2:06:31Space Recording
Full Transcription
Satsang with Mooji
Hey, you guys.
How are you today?
How are you on this great Friday?
Loud and clear, sounds good to me.
So the guys are just wrapping up the other spaces at All Roads Leads Polygon, so they
should be filtering in over the next few minutes.
In the meantime, Ivan, I don't know if you have any cutting-edge royalty-free music, so
we don't get sued.
Let me find something, yeah.
By the way, guys, we're not going to play DJs like we used to do because a lot of accounts
have been locked out of being able to post for, you know, broadcasting, like, copyrighted stuff.
So, like, we can do some classical music or something like that, I guess.
That could be cool.
But let me find something interesting.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
Nice choice, Eldrino.
Sounds like the flight of the Valkyries.
Is that right?
Yeah, exactly.
That's right.
Hey, Rock.
Hello, hello, friends.
Hey, Rock.
How are you doing today?
How are the other spaces?
Busy as always.
Yeah, it was good.
Wasn't as crazy as last week, I'll say that.
Last week was just wild.
I think last week we peaked at almost 1,000 live and had like 90,000 total listeners.
You know, Altcoin, Daily, and BitBoy, and Sandbox, and Animoca, and Polygon.
Last week's was just wild.
So it was hard to top that.
This week we discussed Metaverse, which is some pretty interesting conversations, some philosophical.
conversations that I actually, there was a lot of things I wanted to say, but there were so many people talking that I didn't want to jump in too much.
But maybe we could continue some of those kind of more philosophical sides here, actually.
Yeah, that could be actually great because we were actually discussing on a call with Rock the other day on organizing something like a virtual conference for Dogecoin community, Dogechain community, you know, getting something with real
And we discussed the metaphysical aspect of it as well, the fact that we, are we actually moving towards this Metaverse or is it just, you know, a fluke that was really just something like a big push during the bull market that will never come back as it was.
But yeah, a lot of things to speak about today, I think.
I guess we could probably start and just transition over since I see some, a lot of people coming over from, from that last basis.
But I guess one of the big questions I'm just curious if anyone here has an opinion on is, and if anyone from the audience wants to jump up on stage and join the conversation, feel free.
But the question is, you know, metaverses there, you know, we talked all about how old, you know, MMORPGs were like original metaverses and, you know, in, in a year of 10 years or 100 years or when Neuralink is plugged into metaverses, you know, will metaverses be positive or negative for society?
And, and will there be some positives, some negatives? Will it be net positive or net negative? That's a, it's a big question I have because like what could end up happening is like we, we, like, you know, in a dystopian kind of thinking is we become like a self-imposed matrix.
So like, okay, it's not the machines harvesting our, you know, our heat or whatever for as batteries, but it's us just, you know, for whatever reason, maybe the metaverse is just cooler than real life and, or something, you could just have dopamine injected into your brain through a Neuralink type device.
You know, do we, and you're just on UBI or something laying in a tub.
Would that be good for society, bad for society? What are the pros and cons here?
Anyone have thoughts?
Well, just, just to consider, like, if we look at like basic societal trends, right?
So we, we trend towards efficiency as a society.
That's one of the biggest trends that we have.
Everything gets more efficient overnight.
And if you think about how inefficient it is to go to a workplace every day, to conduct work in person and to meet your friends in person, like you could argue that there's other benefits, but it is very inefficient.
When you consider you could have a very real experience of that in the, in the, you know, the matrix in, in the, in the metaverse with like a kind of some sort of neural interface on like that, that to me would, because if you think about all the ways to travel, and this, this might sound horrible to a lot of people.
And it is, it is horrible considering how we all live now, but I'm just trying to think about if we look at the trend, generally the trend towards efficiency, you would think as much in the virtual world as possible is probably the most efficient way to do things.
And that's how the majority of people live in the future, I imagine.
Well, look, the thing is that as technology allows us, augments, you know, whether it's just to, to help the disabled or just to make you more efficient as a human are something that we will eventually consider in the future as technology advances and, and becomes more widespread, cheaper to use, et cetera.
But, but the thing with the neural link and everything that, you know, meddles with the brain is that it should never be like an online function.
It should always, always, always be offline.
Although we all, we know that there's always ways to tap into that stuff.
So, uh, uh, as long as it's offline, I think that augmenting brain functions is, is, is kind of okay, I guess.
I'll disagree.
I'll disagree.
I think, look, I'm not going to be first in line to get, uh, you know, an internet connected chat GPT powered Elon Musk design Neuralink put in my brain.
I won't be the first, but I won't be the last.
Um, I like, is it dangerous fucking absolutely.
I mean, but the, the amount of like, uh, the amount of benefit you could get from that, if we can figure it out and not get our brains taken over by the government or something, um, which I think there's a high chance that'll happen or, or taken over by AI or something.
But imagine the amount of, I don't want to use the word power, but knowledge, you know, data efficiency.
Like if you can increase your thinking capacity, like still have your brain, like your feelings and your thoughts and your memories and you, the essence of you, but have the most efficient, like thought processor in the world by, you know, your computer becomes your, your brain thought process, like your CPU of your brain.
Like maybe you keep your memories as like, you know, um, a hard drive, but you have, now you have this external hard drive, which is the internet and you have this external CPU.
Uh, I mean, Jesus Christ, that could be powerful.
So, but so dangerous at the same time, you know, being connected all the time to, uh, to a neural network with others.
I mean, I, I, as I said, I, I, I'd opt for, for maybe an augment, like, uh, and that makes you better, but that stays online all the time.
I'm not so sure that I would, I would actually adopt.
Yeah.
I mean, maybe you could turn it on and off, you know, maybe there's like, you could have a physical switch that actually severs the, the, the, the tie that way.
That's what I've always thought is if I ever got neural link or like, you know, went in this direction, I would want like a fail switch.
Maybe it's like, there's like, you know, some way you can like sever the connection.
Maybe you have a special magnet in your drawer that if you put that special magnet towards a part on your head, it severs the connection, uh, between the neural link and your brain in case things are going wrong.
Um, that could be maybe an option.
To play an advocate though, to that, if, if it was inside your brain, how would you know things were going wrong?
Because somebody could, so like, imagine hacking.
Like your perception of reality could be completely old.
Yeah.
You might, you might think it's a good thing, but like in reality, you're, you're not you anymore.
Yeah.
Totally.
A thought occurred to me as well.
Um, did, did anybody, I don't know if anybody here was into the old school Star Trek.
Yeah.
Oh yeah.
Do you remember the, the Borg?
Yeah.
Which were like kind of this collective.
Was that a resistance is futile or was that a different one?
Yeah.
Yeah.
No, that was, that is them.
Yeah.
The, the Borg collective resistance is futile.
And they, basically they, basically like the, the, this AI took over a bunch of people
and then they just fly around the, fly around the, uh, the galaxy and big cubes trying to
get more people into the Borg.
It's like a giant Ponzi scheme.
And, uh, and the, like an AI Ponzi scheme.
Was it, was it that the AI took over or was it, they built the AI to be like, uh, uh, like,
Oh yeah.
Uh, what is it called?
I don't think.
Um, what's the word with the S, um, where you're, the singularity basically.
Yeah.
Possibly.
I don't think towards, I don't think it ended up as voluntary though.
I think they were definitely enslaved.
Cause there was a few instances.
Oh yeah.
Yeah.
That's true.
I mean, this is like quite deep into the lore of it, but there's a few instances for
the various Star Treks where they was, they freed a Borg person, a former Borg, like seven
of nine from Star Trek Voyager.
Oh really?
Yeah.
Well, they freed her and then she, she ended up working on the, the Voyager with, uh, Captain
Jane.
Anyway, this is like, I'm exposing myself as a true Trekkie.
But yeah, I mean, that's pretty crazy.
Like the, the idea of like plugging into some sort of neural network that was online.
I mean, in many respects, you know, being online is like the main reason you'd want it,
Ivan, because if you think about how powerful Google is, right?
Like everybody basically has everything that they want to access in their pocket.
Imagine if you could have access to that sort of information in your head just without
any need to deviate from your normal thought process.
Like when you just, you thought of something, you just knew the answer straight away.
Like this is like super powerful.
And the problem is, it's like this, this idea that, um, you won't, at some point you
won't have a choice because like, let's say you, you have kids, right?
And they go to school and everybody's augmented and your kids aren't augmented.
Well, like, you know, they're not going to get good grades and they're not going to
pass and they're not going to be productive.
So you either secede from society or you become, or you join the bold collective, you
know?
Yeah.
Resistance is futile in the end.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, I like, I'm a big, I'm big on pushing the boundaries of technology.
I do fear, you know, what technology, the positives and negatives of it.
And I do fear, I mean, for the first time in my life that I don't, I think this is the
first time I've ever really feared a technology and that's just AI.
Um, that's something I think is, is very, a very real concern, but, uh, I do like humans
pushing the boundaries.
Most technology is I think beneficial, but I think we could probably think of some negative
technologies also.
I mean, I would, I would argue porn is probably net negative for society.
Um, but I, you know, there's positives to it for sure too.
Uh, but in general, that's, that's one that I think could, we could argue is just net negative
for society.
Are there any other technologies that have actually been net negative for society or does anyone
disagree with my porn assessment?
Well, we actually got into metaverse and porn on the previous spaces, didn't we, with the
adult metaverse when they, they came up to speak.
So it kind of makes sense.
I think like the thing is like you meant to human relationships are meant to be difficult.
And so there's a part of it, uh, as a man, you've got to look after yourself, look after
your health, look after your business, uh, or your career.
And so then you can be a viable partner for somebody.
And that's like part of life, isn't it?
And you have to look after yourself.
You have to eat good food and then you're attractive as a person and hopefully build yourself
up to something that when you have children, they admire their, their father or their mother.
And if you, if you're a woman and, and porn gives you a shortcut to that, uh, but it
doesn't, it's not like the whole way.
So the, the worry is, as we go deep into the metaverse, it's like people stop working on
themselves and stop being productive and stuff or definitely view it as less important.
And then, you know, society like rightly or wrongly society runs on the mating game,
right?
Like people want to get further on in their career so they can have a nice car so they can
attract a lady or they want to, they want to work hard in the gym.
So they can, you know, like, and this is like a huge, this is obviously a male century
view, right?
So my man, so apologies.
Um, but that's like my, the way I see the world.
So that's, that's what I'm speaking on.
Um, but yeah, like people definitely like, um, they, they try hard in life in a lot of
ways so that they can attract a partner and eventually have a life and kids and stuff.
And if you give them a shortcut to that via the metaverse, that's quite dangerous actually
from a societal point of view, in my opinion.
For sure.
I mean, and it goes to like a wider problem, which is like just artificial dopamine, you
get artificial dopamine through drugs, through cigarettes, vaping, porn, video games, uh, you
know, notifications on your phone.
Uh, there's all kinds of ways of getting this artificial dopamine.
And then you don't seek what I call like, you know, real dopamine or, you know, more
healthy forms of dopamine, you know, if, if you, you know, are, are smoking pot and you're
just like in your bed watching TV, you feel great.
You have no need to go out into the real world and, uh, do something.
By the way, I don't have anything against pot.
I think you just got to be careful not to use it too much, but, um, yeah, if you, you
know, if you don't smoke, for example, and I see this a lot with some friends, uh, over
the years who, uh, who've smoked too much pot is like, they, I sound like an old person
smoking pot over here, but, um, they tend to like just veg out and just chill.
Right.
They'd rather chill than go to the gym or go like, try to get some girls or go, you
know, build a new business or whatever it is.
These are like ways that you would, you would satisfy your desire, your need for dopamine,
uh, you know, in life.
Cause we all have to have dopamine.
We won't, we, you can't just sit there and not seek dopamine.
We're, we're meant, our bodies are designed to do that.
Go ahead.
That's a really great point.
So you just hit on something quite important there and I just wanted to highlight that
before you moved on.
It's so the, this idea of satisfaction in life, whether it's financial satisfaction,
um, like satisfaction in your day in life or satisfaction, um, through, through any,
anything really is.
So the idea is that that feeling of like contentment and happiness is meant to come after struggle.
So you're meant to struggle to build your business or, or struggling work and get promoted
or struggle in the gym and get a six pack.
Or whatever.
And then you end up with something positive at the end of it, which is when you sit down
at night, you feel good because things in your life are progressing in the right direction.
But modern life gives you lots of ways to get that feeling of satisfaction without the
struggle.
And that's where the problem comes in because we're, you know, basically like running on,
uh, like wiring from like, you know, caveman days still in our brain.
And so when you, when you get the opportunity to, you know, like press the button and get
dopamine over and over again, or swipe on your phone and get dopamine, it's really easy
just to keep doing that because you get, because your brain's like, okay, what I actually want
is to feel as the feeling of satisfaction.
So I could go do this thing, which is going to take six months and be really difficult.
Or I could just do this thing that takes one minute and it's really easy.
And so it's really difficult to fight that in yourself.
It's, it's, this is the reason why a lot of people are overweight.
Um, a lot of people are, you know, like not having success.
Well, to be, to be honest, it's, it's something that has existed ever since humanity actually
existed since the stone age drugs, you know, alcohol, uh, you know, shortcuts to, to happiness
and everything like that.
And let's take a look at the crypto industry, by the way, a huge majority of people that are
actually in the, in the industry are because they're there to, to take shortcuts to getting
rich quick, you know, even though it doesn't work like that.
It has worked for some people.
So, you know, it, it draws, uh, a certain type of person to, uh, to join this industry
and, uh, try their luck, like gambling, uh, like, um, you know, trading crypto, even
though we've said so many times, uh, on these spaces that trading is not something that you
do successfully after, uh, you know, uh, two hours or 10 hours or 12, 15 hours of lessons
of trading or just, uh, you know, learning a little bit of, uh, technical analysis.
It's, it's really a job that requires a lot of, uh, of, uh, you know, commitment to be
successful.
But people think that it's not like that.
And they think that just, you know, putting $1,000 in a meme coin will make them a millionaire.
So, uh, yeah, these shortcuts exist, have always existing and it takes a different, uh, there's
different types of people.
Go ahead.
Yeah.
Finish that thought.
Yeah.
There are so, so many different types of people.
Uh, some choose to, uh, do the effort and, uh, achieve something that's, uh, difficult
to achieve and that gives them the satisfaction and just some others just choose to short that
way.
It's just how humanity works.
I guess there are different types of people.
That's a good, that's a really good point.
I mean, even, you know, a thousand years ago, you could like choose to build something or
choose to go lay on the beach.
Um, and so, but now it is, I really do think it's just so much more prevalent and normalized.
Like, you know, I think porn is a really good example.
If you are, you know, jerking off the porn, you know, every day, you're going to be less
likely to want to sleep with your wife, girlfriend.
Uh, you're going to be less likely to go out and like hunt, I guess you could say, uh, looking,
looking for girls as a young person.
Uh, I, I think that's an actual problem.
Um, yeah, I think there's a lot of, a lot of things like that.
You know, uh, I've, I've caught myself in the past, you know, playing a video game when
I am, you know, stressed out or have, you know, big responsibilities.
Oh, well, you know what?
I'm just going to take a break and play a video game or, you know, watch TV or something.
Right.
Like when I was younger, that was definitely, uh, one of my go-tos.
Um, and it's something we all struggle with in our own ways, right?
Whether that's, you're going to go watch a YouTube video or, uh, you're going to play
a game or you're going to watch some porn or whatever it is.
But, um, these things, uh, you know, they can be okay in moderation, but I don't think
we're getting them in moderation very much.
I do find myself, um, constantly seeking stimulation.
Like for me, that's, you know, like I can't even sleep without a podcast on, right.
Or an audio book, I legit can't sleep.
Uh, if, unless I'm listening to something it's, and I'm, I'm wondering, is that like
a, am I looking for that constant, like dopamine kind of stimulation?
Is that what that is?
I don't know.
I was having trouble getting my mic on, but, uh, I guess it depends on, on the person.
Uh, really, uh, it depends on your attention spans.
Not everyone is, is made the same way, you know, not everybody has the same education.
Not everybody has the same genes, uh, or IQ to, uh, to, uh, to, to make the differences
and, uh, the way the pros and cons of, of, uh, every single thing that they do in their
lives, uh, every day.
A lot of people don't understand the cons of these things, that the shortcuts that they
take.
And, uh, that's why they're so prevalent because there's demand for it, I guess.
So I wonder if humans can solve, you know, we solve the problem of seeking, uh, dopamine
by just creating infinite, you know, ways to get free or very cheap dopamine.
So I wonder if now, now the problem, it's kind of like eating food for, for most of
society, for most of history, getting enough calories was, uh, was a problem, right?
More people died from starvation than of being too fat.
Now more people are dying from being from, from obesity related diseases, then world hunger.
So now the problem shifted to being, there's not enough food to, it's too easy to get food.
And, uh, so now we got to try to find a way to solve that.
Maybe we can solve that through genetic engineering or drugs, um, or maybe people will just have
to be disciplined and not, not eat too much.
But, uh, I think we'll probably solve it through some other way like genetics or, uh, some kind
of technology that makes you either lose weight or lose appetite or who knows.
But I think society will solve that, that obesity problem at some point.
Now, similar with dopamine, if people are seeking, you know, artificial dopamine and
it's making them not live their, you know, a good life, making them not go out to build
a business or to work hard or to be a good, uh, you know, father or mother, uh, or, you
know, they're watching porn.
So they're not, you know, sleeping with their wife, maybe there's a way we can solve that
through technology.
Now it's like solve the, the problem that technology created.
Maybe we can solve that with some kind of technology, whether that's shifting your, your desires
or your, your dopamine, you know, receptors or something through neural link or some other
kind of, uh, genetic modification.
I don't know.
It'll be kind of interesting to see how it all plays out over the next hundred years.
I mean, I don't know, man, uh, it's, it's, uh, kind of, you know, in, in a weird spot
because people are freaking out about vaccines and, uh, then they're, uh, not freaking about
getting a chip in their head, uh, getting connected to the internet, which is weird because
one of the main points is that they're getting chipped with the vaccines and control.
I don't know, man.
Well, I mean, from my perspective as someone who, uh, I did not get the vaccine, uh, because
I thought it was just too rushed.
And I, I just, it just seemed, I don't know.
There was too much politicalness to it.
And I, I just wasn't comfortable rushing forward with something, especially being a young man
with, you know, a young, healthy man with a low chance of, uh, and I had had COVID a couple
of times and it was like very minor for me now for, for an adult.
Look, I told my parents they're older.
I said, Hey, you should probably get the vaccine.
I don't want you guys to die.
You're older and not, not, you know, not as healthy.
Uh, maybe it's a good idea for you guys.
But anyway, so that, that's one thing is the vaccine.
That's just my stance.
Just one personal opinion here.
But, uh, on the chip in the brain thing, look, like I said, I won't be the first, but I
won't be the last.
I, I doubt that I would touch any kind of chip touching my brain in the next 10 years.
I doubt it.
I probably would I do it?
Yeah.
Would you do it?
For sure.
There's like trials already been done through and everything.
And they're like, all right, cool.
Now we're releasing it out.
Would you?
I, I like, I don't know when the point where I'd be comfortable with it is, but I am very
open to the idea.
Yes.
I'm very open to getting genetic modifications.
I'm very open to getting, you know, cyborg type.
Augments.
Yeah, exactly.
But, but I'm not, but look, but I might, I might not do it for a hundred or 200 years.
And I say that because I think I will live that long.
Cause I do believe longevity is going to solve aging.
Um, but I don't know, you know, I don't know when I'll be comfortable.
I won't be comfortable for a long time though, but I, I think it's very interesting.
And I think, look, there will be people who will be comfortable.
What it'll start with the, the neural link stuff will likely start with people with, you
know, brain disorders with major brain issues.
And this is like, they're willing to take a chance on this because they, uh, you know,
they're going to either die or they have some, you know, degenerative neuro disease and
this will help fix that.
That's what it'll start with.
Then over time, as we get more comfortable with it, then we'll start using it for like
improvements or modifications.
Uh, this is how genetics was to, uh, genetics, you know, genetic engineering.
And, um, these different procedures were used, uh, gene therapy were used for, uh, like curing
disease at first.
And now we're looking at using them as like, you know, just designer upgrades to the human,
uh, just, uh, dude, that's my, that's my number one movie, number one favorite movie of
all the time.
I think it'd be actually scary because of like, you place it onto a smart person and
then you also mix it with AI.
They can kind of like, it's like two power brains together that could potentially do a
lot of harm into the ecosystem too.
Right.
Or they could do a lot of good too.
Yeah.
But, but I, I also think like, especially for the first experiments and everything, like
they're going to definitely have to go through all the trials, make sure that it's actually
good, make sure there's no side effects and everything.
And then people, I'm not just waiting for trials.
I'm waiting for like 10 or 20 years of people having it, you know, like I'll do it tomorrow.
If Elon's like, yo, we're releasing it.
I'll do it tomorrow.
I'll be the guinea pig.
Man, I wouldn't even buy a Tesla tomorrow, let alone getting an Elon implant in my home.
What a hater.
What a hater.
Connect my mind to the blockchain and it's going to mint me a Tesla.
Hold on.
Let's, let's, let's, let's get into this.
I love arguing about Elon Tesla type stuff.
Why would you say you would not get a Tesla tomorrow?
Because I wouldn't be able to use it.
First of all, there are no superchargers in this stupid country.
So, uh, if, even if I had one, you know, for free, I wouldn't be able to go, uh, on vacation
with it without like spending 10 hours extra on the, on the road, uh, just charging it on,
on, uh, you know, but if you have the chip, it's going to tell you information on how to
make sure that you create, I don't know, pull plugs out of the wall to charge it along the
way, add solar panels to it and everything.
And it's like, now you have a supercharger, you've built a supercharger yourself.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I got to say though, Teslas are the greatest cars ever made, uh, in my opinion.
And I've had a lot of cars.
I've had hundreds of cars in my life.
I used to, uh, I used to buy and sell cars when I was a kid.
Um, and I've had lots of luxury cars, lots of shitty cars.
Uh, at one point I sold all my belongings to invest in Bitcoin early on.
If people remember some, some friends on here may remember that, uh, like almost a decade
ago, actually.
Um, but, uh, yeah, Teslas are by far the best car I've ever driven.
And it's not even, it's not even a comparison.
There is no comparison.
It's literally like going from like an old, you know, phone, like a non-smartphone to
a smartphone.
It's just a totally different thing.
Do you think Tesla can actually improve with ZKVM?
Cause I think that like, especially with their data sets, right?
Cause like every, every car has like all the centuries inside the car, inside the vehicle.
They can actually make it to where it's, you know, placed onto a roll-up server and it's,
it's going to be a lot better for the data.
I don't see the need.
But why would you want to make a roll-up out of that, which costs a lot of computation
when it's just, it could be managed centrally by them.
Is there a reason?
Like not that data point gets access, right?
Then you have it to where you can actually target where, oh, so I can actually see your
driving point if I, if I target you in a hack, right?
So I can see where rock's going.
It's a very big data protection.
Yeah.
That, that would be a benefit of, of using roll-ups for that.
But I don't know.
I guess maybe I'm not, I probably should be, I probably should be worried about Tesla
stuff getting hacked, but I'm not so worried.
Yeah.
Like all, all, all that stuff has GPS everywhere and it actually tracks your, your movement
and everything because they use it for reports for internal, right?
Nothing to say that Tesla's, I'm pretty sure Tesla security is like over the top notch,
right?
This is like very, very, uh, you know, it's very secure and everything, but I'm just saying.
Yeah.
But everybody gets hacked.
Everybody gets, every centralized database gets hacked.
Right.
Pretty much.
So how do you, yeah, eventually saying that, I mean, ZKVM actually pushes into a roll-up
server, which is easier, which is harder to get hacked.
It's a lot of data, man.
Even for ZK roll-ups, like the amount of data Teslas are pushing to their AI chips is
like insane.
And you would, you basically doing a roll-up, it costs way more to do a roll-up, even with,
you know, how far Polygon is along with that.
Um, like just blockchains in general, it's not even just ZK roll-ups, but just in blockchains
in general are not, uh, not, they're very costly to, to compute data, to store data because
you're, instead of just computing it in one central location once you have to compute it
a hundred times or thousands of times across nodes and verify that all of you computed
the same thing.
Blockchains are crazy inefficient databases, but they're the most secure databases in the
world and allow for all kinds of other benefits.
But they're like the worst, they're the least efficient databases in the entire world, for
sure.
The better the security, the better it's going to be for everybody.
Yeah.
I mean, security definitely is a big, important part.
Yeah.
So wait, Michael, are you serious?
You really are that, that open to getting a chip that early?
I am down to be the guinea pig.
The reason why I'm down to be the guinea pig is I want to see what it actually can do.
Um, and I know that anything happens to me and my family is taken care of.
So true, true degen boy.
Right.
Cause I really want to have it to where, okay, if I import, if, if I'm able to import my mind
onto the blockchain, it's going to live there forever either way.
So technically I would never die, uh, that's theoretically stuff, but if you mix it with
AI, you mix it with the chip, I will clone myself somehow.
Um, whether it's through my, through my child, Michael Jr.
That's coming up or whether it's going to be through, uh, through the blockchain to live
forever.
Um, man, you're wild.
I, you know, it's funny because it's like going to Mars, right?
I wouldn't, I wouldn't be the first one to go.
I probably wouldn't go at all because it just doesn't sound appealing to me, but, um, there's
definitely a bunch of like more hardcore than me, Elon fanboys that I'm sure will be like,
they'll be the first to Mars and they'll be getting their neural link on the way in the
starship, you know, um, that's kind of wild to me, but Hey, more power to you.
We need, we need those, uh, trailblazers to be the Guinea pigs, I suppose.
So I salute you.
If you get, if you actually get neural link, I salute you, man.
You should apply for the clinical trials.
They're coming up.
I volunteer as tribute.
I do think it can be really powerful for humanity though, to have that kind of like,
the thing is though, maybe is it, is it like, is it going to be like porn in a way where
everybody it's kind of like, okay, another example in professional sports, there was a
time where, you know, people were using steroids and it wasn't tested for, um,
and like, if you were using steroids, you were just so much superior to everyone else
that now started forcing other people to use steroids because if they didn't, they
couldn't keep up.
Right.
So could, uh, could this enhancement be something like that where people, you know, may not want
to get it.
And maybe it did deteriorates the human experience.
Maybe it makes you not feel like a human anymore.
Maybe you feel you're so smart, you know, everything you, your, your, your emotions start
getting shifted and it has, uh, maybe like not the best experience, but you're able to
make 10 times your income because you have this enhancement.
Uh, I don't think, you know, would everybody be forced into doing it?
Um, I don't think that the true benefit is the portion of the income, right?
I think the true benefit is actually being able to have information access to you at like
a nanosecond, right.
To your brain.
So one of the good things that it can be used for is like, you look at like FBI investigators
and everything, whenever they're doing interviews with some of these people and stuff, like they'll
be able to pick up on, you know, hundreds of years of research on non, um, nonverbal
communication.
It can actually, you know, help a lot of people a lot more proficiently.
Um, I think that it will have a competitive advantage.
Like you think about it, if you're, it's like, you're playing chess, but you're playing chess
with a grandmaster and you, and you never play chess a day in your life and you actually
go up and beat them.
Right.
So it's like playing the world's hardest computer that's aggregated by thousands of
other computers.
You know, we'll actually see if the human brain by itself is actually going to be more
compatible to beat all of these predictive moves, or is it going to be the, the internet
or the botnet that's going to actually win over.
And I think that as a consensus of like, let's say like 10,000, 20,000 players that
aggregated data together, you can actually see all the possible moves that will ever,
ever happen.
And then the computer can actually program which ones are going to be the winning moves
against this and think five, you know, probably 10 steps ahead to make sure all the possible
outcomes are out there.
That's actually a great example.
That's a great immediate example of how Neuralink could, could, uh, instantly enhance a human
to be vastly superior to any other human is chess.
Right.
We, we've now seen with chess, what was it?
Um, was it go was the original, what was the original, um, I think go was the first
one, whatever there was an AI they built or not even an AI.
I don't, I guess it's AI.
Yeah.
Um, basically just like, uh, it memorizes every possible combination, but the old ones now
they're like learning, but they used to just memorize combinations basically.
But, um, you know, at first it was able to beat the, you know, it was crazy when it was
able to beat the best chess master in the world, the best human.
Then it got to the point where it could beat the best human, you know, five out of seven times.
And then it got to the point where it could beat them, you know, a hundred out of a hundred
times, then they made a new one that could beat the old AI a hundred out of a hundred
times.
So the new AI was orders of magnitude stronger than the old it.
So now it's to the point where, you know, a chess AI is probably, you know, thousands
of times better than the best chess player.
And there's no chance in hell that the best chess player in the world could beat it.
I think that's where we're at.
I'm not a hundred percent sure on that, but imagine now you just get that.
That seems like a simple thing to, you know, use Neuralink for is just, okay, just give
me the chess algorithm and let me just become the best chess player in the world.
It would ruin the game.
It would ruin the sport, right?
Well, look, there's still the fact that people want to actually achieve it themselves.
You can, of course, get Neuralinked and try to compete with people that are actual chess
masters.
But will you actually be competing as a human or you will just be connected to the internet
and just be a proxy of the AI?
Is there like a zipping noise?
Like, I think it's kind of...
Oh, yeah.
Maybe, maybe, maybe.
Sorry.
Yeah.
This is my hoodie that always touches my mic.
No, no.
It's my hoodie.
It's my hoodie that always touches my mic and I always forget about it.
Yeah.
I just unzipped it.
It should be fine now.
So, yeah.
You are not really competing as a human then.
So, even, for example, let's say cyberpunk augments, making you faster, making you stronger,
et cetera.
So, there would be Olympics, for example, for these people that have augments, but they
wouldn't be mixed with the pure humans.
So, the humans would be actually competing with other humans, like the Olympics that we see
now.
And these augmented humans would be competing with other augmented humans when they will
be sponsored by different, you know, companies that provide them with their augments and these
augments are better and those are worth, you know, like Formula One or something like
that.
Yeah, you could have different divisions, right?
You could have the like vanilla division, which is just regular men against men and women
against women.
Then you have your trans-like divisions.
Then you have your AI power division or modification division.
I wonder why we don't have a steroid division in sports.
Wouldn't that be fun?
Like UFC, but like steroid UFC?
Yeah, I've always thought about that.
That leads to a lot of injury.
Just make like a division, a specific division in cycling.
It's their entertainment.
It's their choice.
Yeah.
You want to go back to the Roman class.
Exactly.
Is that what you want to do?
Yes.
Yes, I agree.
Cycling, Olympics, you know, sprinting, et cetera.
Just do a division where everybody is allowed to dope themselves and take the choice
liberally to dope the hell out of them and see who wins and who dies.
Just have a bunch of freaks.
Because somebody is going to have their, yeah, a bunch of freaks that have their heart
explode after a 100-meter race or something like that.
So, yeah.
But, yeah, let them do it.
Give them something.
UFC entertaining in the first place, by the way.
The way it was advertised originally was, you know, no holes barred.
It was like no rules, they called it.
And you could do crazy stuff.
Now they've added some rules to make it more kind of kosher and less like, you know, a
cockfight.
But originally, I mean, there were people doing, you could gouge people's eyes in the
UFC.
You could, I remember there was a thing they would do.
It got termed, I think, the cheese grater.
Like, there was a guy that was like grabbing someone's like face and just grinding it on
the fence.
You know, like, it was pretty wild in the early days of UFC and it's definitely been
polished a bit now.
But people liked that.
We went a little bit too deep into the D-Gen dungeons.
All the gore and, yeah.
I don't think it would be good for, like, mass media and stuff.
I know, like, fighters, we want them to actually have skills that can actually last for, you
know, 10, 20, you know, 10, 20 matches instead of one match up and then there's over.
Yeah, no, but steroids doesn't make you like, you're not going to get, you're probably
not going to get hurt more.
I actually think you get hurt less.
I mean, steroids help you recover massively faster.
You just be like, steroids just turns athletes into better forms of themselves.
It's, I, you know, I get that there's lots of problems that come with that.
And if you introduce it into regular sports now, you're forcing all athletes to, if they
want to compete, to use it.
And that's a problem.
But if there was a division that was separated, I mean, they have, they actually, they've
already done this in bodybuilding.
In bodybuilding, there's Mr. Olympia and all these are, steroids is loud, right?
It's only, it's actually, that's the default.
Interestingly, the, there, there are other ones that are like natural divisions where
they do get tested.
And that's not the default in bodybuilding.
Interestingly.
But like, yeah, all the big, Mr. Olympia are all, they're, they're voided out of their
minds.
I want, I want to see AI compete at esports, basically having it to where algorithms of
the best teams, but then, but actually, it would actually be very, like a training purpose.
No, no.
Like an actual competition of like, who can actually beat these, like these bot, these
botnet teams.
They've already done this.
They've already done this.
This is what, uh, actually it was, uh, Elon Musk's open AI.
It was, well, at the time it was Elon Musk when, when he started, but, um, you know, now
open AI is, you know, we all know chat GPT, but open AI originally, one of the first things
they did was, uh, played, uh, Dota two, I believe, which is kind of like league of legends.
They're one of the, it's the more original iteration, but, um, yeah, that was one of the
things that did is basically used AI to learn behaviors.
And what they did is they put an AI against itself playing Dota.
They gave it almost no instructions.
The only instructions were, I think, very simple things.
They didn't teach it like, you know, the previously in games, when you design a bot in like Tekken
two or something, uh, they are actually like training the bot to do this and do that.
And Hey, did try this combo and then do this.
If they do this and they try to human program it.
Well, what, what open AI did was completely different.
They said, look, let's just give it very basic rules.
Okay.
Killing the other guy is good.
Dying is bad.
Taking down Nexus and turrets is good.
Getting more gold is good.
And let's just let the thing run wild and see what it figures out.
And for the first thousands of games it played, it was just, it looked like, you know, a one
year old was playing a game.
It would just walk randomly into walls.
It would just throw a fireball randomly into the air over time.
It started to figure out over thousands and millions of games.
It started to figure out, Hey, if I go towards the enemy, that's sometimes better.
And if I throw a fireball in the direction of the enemy, then I have a higher chance of
winning and over.
And once it started figuring out those kinds of basic concepts, then the, then the learning
accelerated rapidly.
Then it got to the point where it was like, you know, they were also having it play against
itself at multiple times speed.
And they were having millions of iterations of itself, play itself at once on huge servers.
So, uh, eventually it got to the point where it was creating new strategies that humans
hadn't created.
And now humans started emulating the AI in professional gameplay, but that was all Elon.
So another fun thing Elon, Elon has done.
What do you think of like those companies having like the, um, the, the, what you're just saying
then about the steroid division and Mr. Olympia or the fact that that's the default is I think
what the professional bodybuilders worked out is that it's more people want to see like
those like freakish physiques because it's more entertaining.
And so like, you know, there is an argument that like, you know, instead of watching Usain
Bolt run the hundred meter sprint in nine seconds or whatever, it'd be cooler to see
some, some like super freakers juiced up, run it in seven seconds.
Um, and so like, you know, that would be more effective and over time and got a more ad
revenue because with Mr. Olympia in bodybuilding, like it's something stupid, like 90% of all the
revenue goes to the steroid, uh, users rather than the, the IFB, uh, the tested division,
like guests, basically no revenue.
They don't make any money.
There's hardly any sponsorships.
No one cares.
So over time that could bring out the worst in us though, if we are allowed to augment.
For sure.
For sure.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's an issue.
That's what it goes back to that point I make where like, if you allow steroids in a,
in a mixed division, then only in the end, it'll end up only steroid users because
they, regular people can't compete similar to how in most sports, women can't compete
against men.
Yeah.
Look at cycling, for example.
I mean, uh, it has been rife in cycling and it's always the dopers that win.
So, um, yeah, it's, uh, you're right about that.
And then because it's so advantageous to, to take, uh, steroids in, in those types of sports,
everybody just does it.
And, uh, those that don't, they lose and you can't lose.
Did you see the, um, did you see the, there was a, I think it was in Boston this week.
There was a cycle race where, um, it was a women's cycle race and the first and second
participants were biological males.
Sorry.
What was that?
Say that again.
I didn't see that.
Yeah.
No, no.
But usually, uh, what happens is that those people that usually, you know, those individuals
that if they competed in, in, uh, previously as males, there would be something like 50th
or last or something like that.
Uh, it's just the, the, the genetic disposition, predispositions of males and females.
You're a trans folk for saying that now I'm just kidding.
Yeah, sure.
What's crazy about it is like, no, I fully agree.
Men can't compete in women's sports.
It's ridiculous.
But I like now, if you say that people think you're a trans folk, which is crazy.
I, I, I love gay people, super support gay rights.
I'm a libertarian.
I think, Hey, if whatever people want to do in their own home and they don't hurt anyone
else, let them do it.
It's their, their adults.
Uh, but like, yeah, letting men compete in a woman's sport to me is, is it's not right.
It's not right for the women because now you're just, now women have had this place where they
can compete with other women fairly.
And now they have to compete against men who have naturally two to three times the testosterone
and the muscle mass and the bone density and the length of limbs.
I mean, it's, there's in every way men, maybe not every way, but in most ways, men are
physically superior that because of how we evolved, right.
The women would stay at home, protect the child.
The man would go out and fight.
And it's not, as you know, other species, it's different, you know, uh, in, in lions,
I guess, uh, the women go out and hunt, right.
And the men just stay at home and fight off other men lions basically.
But, uh, so it's different in different species, but this is a fact, right?
I don't think it should be so contentious and it shouldn't be a trans folk thing.
You could fully support gay rights.
The previous thing to me that this debate has, the form this debate's took is when people
were advocating for, uh, trans people to participate in MMA, which is just unbelievable
to me.
Like the fact that you'd like, there was, uh, there was actually, that's not, no, but
there was, this is, this has literally happened.
There was a, it wasn't in the UFC, but there was a biological male in, in a, um, in a,
uh, like UFC style.
Didn't a woman get really hard for that?
Wasn't there a, it was like crushed skull or something.
It's, it's just, it's horrific to me.
Cause you know, like even if you just take on average, like this is just on average,
women, uh, 30% smaller than males.
If you look at body frame, I'm not talking about like weight and stuff.
Cause women have different body fat percentages than men on average, but just look at frame
and 30% smaller.
So if you imagine like bone density, there's a lot of, there's all that stuff.
But even if you just look at size, the reason why we have weighted divisions in boxing and
in male, male combat sports is because it's unfair for somebody 30% bigger than you to
fight you.
That's not a fair fight.
So this is why we do weight classes and stuff like that.
So interestingly, what if a woman's in the same weight class as a man, that's an interesting
concept.
I would guess that still the man would, would dominate, but if it wasn't, let's say it was
a 50, 50 thing, I would be okay with it.
If it actually, the stats came out and it wasn't like, you know, the man crushes every
single woman.
If it actually seemed like statistically fair, I would be open to it actually.
So part of the issue is like, it's not what you, so like people always say with this,
it's like, um, you know, if they take hormone blockers and stuff, then that, you know, then
it's going to help them to be more equal.
But the problem is if you go through male puberty, a lot of your body structure changes, like
you said bone density, muscle mass, a lot of that stuff happens and then doesn't go
back the other way when you start taking hormone blockers.
And like, I've got nothing against the trans community at all.
I just think if you want it, so like Joe Rogan put it really well on one of his podcasts once
he said, if you want to compete against, if you're a trans person, you want to compete
against a man or a woman in chess or Sudoku or something like, you know, a sport that's
non shooting, for example, like a sport that's non physical or slightly physical,
that's fine. But like combat sports is an entirely different matter. I think probably
Does anyone, does anyone listening, um, if you want to say in the comments, if you're
not comfortable getting up on stage, but if anybody would like to, if anybody has a differing
opinion from this, I'd love to hear from you or if you agree. Um, but yeah, I just want
to understand the other side and I don't know, is there a way we can steal man? Let's try
to steal man the other side. What are the, what are the, what the other side that thinks
that, that trans should compete in, in female sports? What, what is the, let's give them
a fair, let's give them a fair steel man. What, what's the argument?
Okay. So to steal man the argument and if anybody's got a better steel man than me, then please
jump up and request them. We'll let you up. Um, so to steal man the argument, um, I would
say that, you know, um, that when you, when you take hormone blockers, even if later in
life, um, obviously testosterone level drops off massively. And we know from a lot of research
that the testosterone levels in, uh, you know, men that need TRT, which is testosterone replacement
therapy. Uh, if you, if your level gets really, really low, that has a significant impact on
your physical performance. Um, and therefore we know that men with lower testosterone perform
worse in sports. And so if you deliberately suppress your testosterone, there's some argument
to say that, um, you'll end up, uh, like kind of around the same physical ability level
as women who train equally as hard. Um, there's that number one. And then two, you know, we
need to move past this thing of like exclusionary, like practices in sports and life in general.
And so everybody should be included in whatever category they feel they fit into. And you should
let people be people. And so if they feel like they can do it, then they should be able
to do it. That's what I would, that's what I would say. It's yeah, it's an interesting take.
I mean, to me, it's like, though, it would be like saying we shouldn't be exclusionary of like age.
So should, should a, should a 10 year old karate fighter fight against an 18 year old karate
fighter? Probably not. Right. That's why we have divisions because there are differences. Right.
Um, yeah, but interesting. Anybody have an opinion? Dee, do you have any opinion on this?
Are we sucking you in death? The thing is, one thing that you will notice that in, in highly
physical sports, it's never, uh, trans men that compete. So biological women that will compete
or, uh, in these, but it's always the other way around because there's, there's an obvious
advantage. Uh, and, uh, why, I mean, if it was so, uh, you know, 50, 50, why, why, why aren't we
seeing, uh, uh, trans men competing in, in, in men's sports as well? Because they have a clear
disadvantage there.
Wait, trans, sorry, sorry. Trans men, wait, say again, trans men competing in what? Isn't
that what we're talking about? So I missed something. So no, uh, it's the, you're talking
about, so rock when he says trans men, he means that, um, women that have, uh, yeah, transfer
to, to, to, to men. So we're not seeing that. So I would also see some research though on,
uh, how, like what the rate of transition from male to female or field female to male is.
Cause what it might be the case, Ivan, just to play devil's advocate again, to carry on
with the steel man is that, um, there's more female to male transitioners. And so, sorry,
more, more male to female transitioners. And so, yeah, so there's a bigger pool.
Yeah. You would just naturally see more people in sports.
Yeah. That's, uh, that's a fair argument.
I don't know how we got onto this topic, but I don't know either.
How did we transition to this?
I think it was with the cyberpunk genetics modifications and stuff. Yeah.
Cyberpunk modifications, uh, divisions, et cetera.
I got a question. I got a question. If they, in the next five years had a way that you can,
uh, genetically or like, you know, grow or implant wings, if you could fly,
like who here would be interested in getting wings and being able to fly like a fucking eagle?
Well, you'd have to, you'd have to do it. Cause of quick swap dragon. You'd have to do it.
You'd be called the dragon.
Anyone?
I'd do it. A hundred percent.
I would be so down. What about gills? So you can breathe underwater?
I don't think the wings part, if you can, if you can take them off, I think it's fine.
But if you had to keep them like 100% of the time, uh, I, I'd pass to be honest.
They'd be uncomfortable to sleep with about like in your bed. You'd have to like,
they'd be flopping around and stuff.
I don't care.
I'd figure it out, dude. I'd figure it out.
Come on.
Come on. Come on. You got it. You have wings. You just fly places.
Yeah.
Oh my God. That's like the ultimate fantasy. Like think about,
have you guys ever been able to fly in your dreams?
Yeah.
Yeah, sure. Those are the best ones.
It's incredible.
So here's, here's a question then kind of similar related to this. Um, so if,
if you could, uh, so there's basically a way where you can get to another galaxy.
So you can get a one way ticket though. There's no coming back.
Um, there's no, you probably can communicate,
but there's no like actual going back and forth. Um,
and you know that when you get there, you'll be, uh, let's say safe,
but you don't know anything else. Would you go?
Sorry. Say that again.
So if you could, yeah, I understand the question. I don't think so.
I mean, I'm happy with my earthly life, uh,
and everything that's happening here.
I think there's a lot of stuff to explore here. Uh,
if it was, if, uh,
we were like, uh,
at the end of our time here in, uh, on planet earth,
we, we, we've fucked it up so bad that there's nothing to, uh,
to actually do to, uh, to recover from it.
Yeah, sure.
But otherwise I think, so if you could, uh,
go to another galaxy and just all that you know is that you're going to be safe
there and there's no turning back. You go there and you stay there.
Would you do it?
Why would I, man? No way. I love, I love her. I'm so happy.
So my answer on this, like, I'm obviously,
I'm like quite an adventurous person,
but since having kids, my answer on this has changed, right?
Cause it's like, if you can't say them would be,
then obviously I wouldn't go.
But before that, like I, I would like, so there was, um,
wait, bro,
you might just be like living in a forest when no humans around for the rest of
your life.
That's not so bad.
That's not the end of the world. I mean,
it's just a different kind of life. I guess that that's not what,
what takes me away from it.
These questions are interesting though, right?
Cause they, they speak to like how you fundamentally view the world.
So like,
are you willing to risk it all for a sense of adventure or,
or do you think that it's better to kind of like, so,
so rock a few of the answers that you've given on this space has indicated to
me that you are optimistic about new technology and stuff opportunities,
but you quite cautious as well.
So like, yeah.
Yeah.
So like, this is like, this is like how you view and that'll affect a lot.
I like that optimistically cautious.
Yeah.
And that, that's like, I would knowing you on a deeper level through LDA and
everything.
I would say that translates to how you operate in the business world as well.
So it's interesting to look at these things because obviously, you know,
like a lot of questions like that can reveal a lot about people that,
you know,
and see how they view the world and how that could be different to you.
Cause society is made up of a load of individuals, right?
At the end of the day.
And the reason why we often get into debates like this is because people see
the world differently.
And the crazy thing is we're living for a time where a lot of these decisions
might have to be made at some point.
This is not theoretical anymore about the brain chips thing and about a bunch
of other things.
It's like, that's,
we're going to have to actually decide that in our lifetime.
Will you, will you,
do you want augmentation in your life or whatever?
And there's people like Michael, he'll just jump for it.
He'll go for it straight away and other people that will sit back.
But then will you get pushed into it rock?
Because your cautious optimistic note might mean that you lose purchase in the
business world because you know,
like people like Michael run all over you cause they're augmented.
Yeah.
I can feel the pressure.
Yeah.
I feel it already.
Michael's going to take over,
man.
You know,
maybe,
maybe a way to think about it because I know like when a lot of people hear
this stuff,
they go,
man,
that's crazy.
I would never do that,
but let's think of it.
Maybe how,
how it'll actually happen a slow,
a slow simmer.
Right.
So people are very like,
LASIK is a very common procedure now,
right?
You have,
your eyes are bad.
You either wear glasses or contacts,
you go get LASIK.
It's a simple procedure.
It's done by a robot.
Now I kind of on this topic,
it used to be done by hand.
Now it's completely done by a robot using lasers and they don't,
you know,
no human touches your eye.
It's done very quickly.
The recovery is very quick now.
it's very non-invasive.
you could,
like,
I think some people even drive home after getting it.
they say you're not supposed to,
but some people do it.
if you could now do that genetically and let's say it was a lot cheaper or a
lot more,
you're a better result.
would people consider that?
Or if you could genetically alter,
let's say you're balding.
I'm,
I'm starting to lose a little bit on,
on top.
would you consider,
genetic,
a modification that would make it so you,
you never bald.
or if you go a little bit further,
cancer,
if you can,
if you can genetically modify your,
not yourself,
but let's say you're progenitor from ever contracting cancer.
Why wouldn't you do it?
I would agree with you there.
Now we've opened the box though,
right?
So if you can do all these things,
maybe you can make them a little stronger or a little faster or a little
smarter or a little better looking.
Mm hmm.
Would you do it?
Gattaca is a great movie.
Seriously,
guys,
it's,
it's my favorite movie.
It's got Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman and Jude law who Cindy actually got
Jude law,
she did Peter Penn and Wendy recently.
the movie kind of sucked,
but unfortunately,
but no,
I'm going to get her in trouble.
I won't give her opinion,
but anyways,
yeah,
love,
love,
Gattaca,
but it,
what's really cool about it is,
you know,
basically the concept is,
and this is like a fun philosophical thought,
you know,
kind of game here,
but the,
the thought process is in the future,
people who,
use genetic modification.
So what they,
the way they pose it in the movie is they take all a bunch of eggs from the
woman.
They take a bunch of sperm from the men.
They're not,
I don't think they're actually modifying them necessarily.
I don't,
I don't know if they actually go specifically into that,
but they take,
they say what they're doing is they're saying it's still you.
It's just the best of you.
So I think maybe they take a million sperm and choose one that has the best
qualities.
They screen it for,
you know,
predisposition to alcoholism,
you know,
being short,
you know,
having bad eyesight,
baldness,
high rate of cancers,
all these things.
And they,
and they take the best sperm,
I believe in the best egg and they put them together.
They choose,
you know,
you could choose your hair color,
your eye color,
your,
your sex,
all these things.
And so what happens is,
you know,
some people do this process.
It's in,
you know,
becomes more and more common over time.
You would imagine.
and then some people don't.
And what happens is so similar to like racism of old.
Now they,
they call it,
I think ageism or not age,
not geneticism or something,
whatever.
They have some term for it.
And they say,
you know,
now when you're going out for a job,
they're not,
they don't care about the color of skin,
your skin.
They care about what's under the hood.
You know,
your genetics,
you know,
is this person prone to like in the movie,
the,
the thing is they're trying to get into the space program and they don't want
anyone who could have a high chance of a heart defect.
So main character has a 99% chance of a heart defect and they,
and oh yeah,
when the kids are born in the movie,
they,
they prick them and they're reading out their,
you know,
genetic,
you know,
stuff and they give their life expectancy,
right?
At birth,
they're like,
okay,
life expectancy.
And for the main character,
it's like 32 or something.
And so he can't get into this program.
So he has to find a way to get into the program and I won't kill the movie
for you,
but you guys should seriously watch it.
It's incredible.
And really,
really like shows what we're talking about here and how I think things are
not only going to come,
but this is already starting now.
They're already starting to do this stuff,
on smaller scale and it'll,
it'll only get more prevalent.
Yeah.
I mean,
like selecting the best options,
I don't think is an issue at all.
I wouldn't even cost us genetic modification.
It's just like selection because it could have happened by random chance.
You're just making sure it happens.
That's what the doctor says when he's explaining it to the two parents.
So his brother gets the genetic stuff,
right?
The main character didn't,
his brother does.
And the parents were like,
well,
maybe,
you know,
we don't know.
Maybe we should,
you know,
we don't want,
you know,
cancer or something,
but maybe we should just leave some things to chance.
And,
you know,
the doctor is explaining,
you know,
there's,
there's already enough imperfection built in.
Like we don't want to leave anything to chance.
And he says,
he says,
now don't forget,
you know,
And Mrs.
whatever.
This is not,
you know,
this is still you.
It's simply the best of you.
So yeah.
Isn't the other kid,
isn't the other kid in the movie,
like an accident or something that they made in the back of a car or something?
That's the main character.
And so they call it a love child instead of a genetic engineer.
This is like a love child.
And he says,
people don't do it that way anymore,
but he was one of kind of,
it seems like he was kind of one of the last people,
like in of a generation where people,
you know,
all shifted to this new,
you know,
thing.
But yeah,
he says you could conceive,
you know,
a billion times and you would never have,
you know,
these results.
So it's still your genetics.
It's just choosing the very best of your genetics.
The parents,
despite being quite pro that position earlier,
let me just play devil's advocate on a societal level.
So like when,
when you talk about ethics,
right,
one of the main markers of if something is an ethical act is if it's adopted by the
majority of the population in your society,
would that result in a better world or a worse world?
Right.
Well,
just to play devil's advocate,
let's say that people start doing this,
right.
But obviously,
you know,
healthcare costs,
it's expensive.
And so only the,
basically only the rich people will be able to afford to mess around like this on a regular
basis and have multiple children probably in this method.
And so that will,
you know,
one of the main things that's good about Western society is social mobility.
It's that if you're born into a poor family,
but you,
you work hard and you study and you,
you innovate,
you can become wealthy,
but that will kind of cap off social mobility a little bit because the people you'd be competing
against would be much smarter than you and better and have longer life expectancy and
stuff,
you know?
Yeah,
I agree.
That's,
that's true as well.
But as time goes on,
I guess the process will become more democratic and accessible to everybody,
you know,
but at the beginning,
yeah,
sure.
That the first like couple of generations,
it would be certainly an issue.
Can I just give everyone a quick public service announcement regarding the ZKVM discussion?
So obviously the discussion is live on Reddit.
Please,
if you haven't participated already,
go and participate.
We think based on what people have said so far,
that moving to ZKVM would be a really positive move for DoseChain and that the majority of people
will be on board with it.
But we haven't heard from the majority of people.
So there's no way to know for sure unless you go and make your voices heard.
Even if you hate the idea,
you think it's the worst idea ever,
you've got a million reasons why you hate ZKVM tech.
Not sure.
Unless we hear from you.
And then we can take that into account.
So go and make your voice.
Or even if you have questions about it and why.
I mean,
the post itself explains the major whys and the reasons why the team and the dev team thinks
this is a great move,
technologically speaking.
But still,
if you still have questions that we haven't thought about in that original post,
please do ask them.
And yeah,
the team will try to answer every question that you have regarding this possibility in the future.
Sorry,
I missed the last couple of things.
I've got a ton of owners of a company pinging me about our CPAs and getting tax documents.
Fun times.
But yeah,
this is a fun conversation though.
I love this.
This is one thing I kind of like about this spaces.
I love the All Roads Leader Polygon spaces.
Don't get me wrong.
It's incredible.
And we have incredible,
huge guests.
And it's massive and everything.
But in a lot of ways,
I enjoy this part of these Dose Chain spaces more that we have just like,
you know,
there's less people.
We're not on a timeline to get everybody up to speak and talk about their projects and stuff.
It's more like we could just all hang out with the community and talk about crazy stuff.
We can,
by the way,
talk a little bit about the ZKEVM move and what it could encompass,
by the way,
for Dose Chain in general.
So why don't we,
obviously,
I've just given everybody a PSA to go participate in the discussion,
but why don't you make the case for ZKEVM?
Sure.
And then I'll make the opposite case so that we have that and balanced discussion.
Sure.
Yeah,
I would say,
like,
to me,
it's pretty clear.
It's one of,
not often do I think things are no brainers,
but to me,
this is a no brainer.
You know,
in tech,
it's often like there's lots of choices and there's lots of like thought that goes in.
And a lot of thought did go into this.
And really the main reason that it was,
there was any thought or discussion that had to go into it was that Polygon for a while,
because we've been thinking about,
you know,
the possibilities here,
how to make the chain,
you know,
more technically strong.
And the,
the issue is that Polygon edge,
Polygon was in a weird state where they were going from edge to Supernets to ZKEVM.
We didn't know exactly,
even though we're very close to the team and we're actually,
you know,
where the quick swap is the biggest two applications on Polygon's,
you know,
their own ZKEVM.
You know,
so we're very close with them.
We're helping them,
you know,
optimize the chain,
et cetera.
But there was the path to public being able to launch a ZKEVM chain was still a bit opaque.
It was still not certain the timelines,
not certain the tooling,
not certain the cost.
There's a lot of kind of questions.
And so,
you know,
there was other,
there's other options being thrown around because Optimism,
for example,
had their OP stack stuff out earlier.
But the problem there is that Optimism is,
is optimistic rollups.
And that is a,
just kind of by definition and inferior technology to ZKEVM rollups.
It's,
it was a nice important transition or bridge until ZKEVM rollups was ready.
But now Polygon came out with their,
their CDK,
their chain developer kit,
which allows chains to,
to be able to launch,
launch a chain using Polygon,
ZKEVM,
you know,
billion dollar,
you know,
to build technology.
And getting that for free because they're opening,
open sourcing it,
which is incredible.
And then luckily because of our position with our history,
with,
you know,
Polygon,
LDA and Polygon and QuickSwap and Polygon,
you know,
being the largest,
the largest decks on,
on Polygon for three years now.
And,
you know,
really the thing that kicked off Polygon's growth originally.
So because of our relationship there,
we get,
you know,
they're willing to give us a ton of support.
They love what we're doing with those chain.
Some people saw Sandeep co-founder of Polygon.
He tweeted about,
he retweeted,
I think our Doge chain tweet the other day about moving to ZKEVM.
So we get a lot of support from them to me because they are the best
technology.
It really is a no brainer at this point.
That's just my opinion though.
So that's why we want the community to discuss.
I'm just one man out of,
you know,
I don't know how many,
what a hundred thousand plus wallets we've had in Doge chain.
So I'm just one person.
My voice doesn't mean anything more than any of yours.
So I'm just giving my opinion here and then it's up to the community to
decide.
But yeah,
to me,
it seems to be a no brainer.
So to balance the like argument,
just by saying a few points on the other side,
if I could rock,
that's all right.
Yeah,
please.
Always.
So you addressed kind of the way I wanted this to go about this actually
during you,
you talk about ZKEVM just then.
you know,
a couple of arguments is number one,
one argument is,
you know,
rolling up to any chain is a security vulnerability because if you roll up
to a chain,
then the security of your chain,
it could be compromised by the security of another chain.
Obviously in this case,
rolling up to Ethereum is,
you know,
there is probably the best security in the industry,
but it's still out of our hands.
And like,
let's say,
you know,
Dose chain was like a,
like a standalone layer one,
for example.
And then we decide to go to ZK.
And then Ethereum has some super exploit in the future and goes to zero.
Well,
then our chain security kind of goes along with that to a certain extent.
So that's number one.
And then number two,
you know,
optimism has been around for a while longer,
maybe a little more battle tested.
A lot of people seem to be building on OP stack.
So all those EK technology might be better.
Kind of,
have you got anything to address this idea that,
you know,
like OP has probably been tested more?
Yeah,
for sure.
For sure.
Yeah.
So OP,
I mean,
look the way it was supposed to kind of happen,
this was just theoretical per all the most,
but these are the best names in crypto,
the best minds in crypto,
you know,
Vitalik and Ethereum foundation and all the theorem core devs.
And,
you know,
many people that just are like really on the cutting edge.
They said,
first optimistic rollups will come.
That'll happen for probably two or three years.
Then in three to five years,
we'll get ZK rollups.
And then those will be optimized over like a,
you know,
a five plus year period after that.
And so that seems to be how it happened,
right?
Optimistic rollups came first.
They're a lot easier of a technology to build and implement.
Interestingly,
optimistic rollups as they stand now through optimism and Arbitrum are not really,
they're still like wearing training wheels.
So it's kind of crazy that polygon was able to even get ZK rollups out with true
proofs before say optimism even uses any kind of,
they don't have fraud proofs or fault proofs,
they call them.
So like while optimistic rollups should have come out earlier and should have been more
farther down their roadmap because it's just an easier technology just factually.
Oddly,
they still don't have their,
their fault proofs.
And they're still like,
I think finding their direction with that,
which is odd.
So like basically,
optimism is very trusted right now.
You have to,
it's kind of a,
no offense to them.
I love the work they're doing,
but it's a just trust me,
bro thing,
you know,
and there's,
you know,
there's a lot of that in crypto,
unfortunately,
but we need to move away from that.
And Polygon's ZK rollups is a way to move away from that.
So in Polygon,
it doesn't matter if Polygon tries to do something weird.
They don't have a,
they don't have any control because it's all done with true,
these proofs that prove everything that is computed to Ethereum.
And it's,
it's undeniable.
It's unequivocal.
It is on,
there's no,
that's why there's no contestation period where in,
you know,
optimism or arbitrum,
there's a contestation period.
Where you can challenge what was put on Ethereum,
but as it stands to some degree,
you really can't challenge because there's no actual proof yet.
So oddly,
I don't know if it's that odd.
Polygon just spent a billion dollars and bought all the best teams.
Basically,
they kind of brute force their way to victory by high,
by getting,
you know,
acquiring mirror,
which is now Polygon zero.
They were the,
they were the creators of Plonky and now Plonky two,
which are like the,
everybody knows are the best proofs and provers in the industry.
They got,
you know,
Maiden and Hermes.
Also the teams,
you know,
these teams,
all three was 400 million,
175 million,
and another 75 million,
plus all the internal development by Polygon.
So they put all these pieces together to really leapfrog and say,
look,
let's skip optimistic roll up stage of the,
of the industry.
And let's just build the final stage and we'll be the first to it,
to market.
And so they have been,
and now to kind of just give an example.
Now you can take it from me as a Polygon biased person,
or you can go read what other people say,
you know,
is Polygon truly the farthest.
Well,
I would give you a good piece of evidence.
The other competitors are probably the,
the closest competitors are probably ZK sync and linear.
Linea is by consensus,
which is,
you know,
a company heavily involved in Ethereum and very influential in the industry.
They have ownership in things like CoinDesk and MetaMask.
Now that would worry me because,
you know,
they've got so much funding,
you know,
could they catch up to Polygon ZKVM?
But the fact is their team,
as much as I like their team and I like,
you know,
what they're doing is not even close to Polygon in terms of just the sheer,
like developer power that is working on the problem.
And this is kind of obvious.
If you look at a simple fact here,
a lot of Linea's code base was actually taken from Polygon ZKVM.
Now,
rightfully so because it's open sourced,
Polygon made a bold move to open source this technology that they've built.
That's a very bold move.
Some would argue that's a stupid move because now other people could jump in
and just like catch up.
But I think they have other ways of building moats,
liquidity moats and things like that.
And just like BD and other things.
But the other fact is that even if you have the code,
if you don't have the people who know how,
it's like having a fighter jet,
but you don't have anyone who knows how to fly it.
And so Polygon has the best minds in rollups.
Literally the mirror team,
the Hermes team,
the mining team,
these were the best.
They took the three best teams and just bought them all.
And so now like they,
they bought up all the competition kind of it.
Now who's going to compete?
Everybody has to try to build new teams and everybody's just learning this new technology.
It's very new technology.
And so Linea,
one thing I will give credit to Linea on is that they gave credit to Polygon.
When they use the Polygon code in their code base,
a lot of their code,
from my understanding,
I could be wrong.
I don't know the percent,
but I think it's a big part of their code is just taken from Polygon,
which,
but they did give proper credit citations and,
and all that.
So that's respectful.
Yeah,
that's right.
I mean,
like obviously we,
we live in a world where open source code seems to be the best solutions for a lot of problems.
so that you can,
Oh yeah,
I'm a huge supporter.
Yeah.
So you can basically have a collaborative effort to solve issues that you're dealing with in your industry,
which is great.
And I,
I truly believe open source is the way forward,
but you made a really good point there,
which is that you have to give credit where credit's due.
And so just to fork something or,
you know,
like take some code or whatever and implement it in your thing without saying,
you know,
Hey,
this was written by X development team or whatever.
So that's,
that's kind of a no,
Cause then you,
you,
you,
you know,
get into the realms of like plagiarizing and stuff.
Oh yeah.
Yeah.
And I,
and you know,
we did that with quick swap.
we gave credit to not only credit to Uniswap,
but we reserve some of the token supply for uni holders.
so we gave,
you know,
out of respect for the,
the,
you know,
I often talk about,
you know,
standing on the shoulders of giants,
quick swap stood on the shoulders of Uniswap.
You know,
they had created great stuff.
We took that code and,
you know,
made it better,
but,
we appreciate everything they did before us.
Now,
interestingly,
I will give a little,
a little jab to ZK sync here.
ZK sync,
the other competitor to polygon ZK VM in the ZK rollups race.
they used a ton of polygons code as well,
and they didn't credit them.
So shame on you.
That's not cool.
So just,
just,
just a small parenthesis,
on the open source thing.
well,
that's,
not cool,
but I understand also the,
the,
the first thing that Jack said,
which is,
you know,
collaborative effort to,
to solve challenges together.
But there's also,
the theory that,
you know,
we cannot rely on a single project to,
develop something that's so advanced and actually,
necessary to the blockchain industry like ZK rollups.
Because that's what we need.
We need that,
that scalability.
We need that interoperability and security to,
to actually scale the,
the,
this,
industry to,
to a point where it can be accepted by mainstream users.
And it can be,
as secure as possible and as fast as possible and as cheap,
as cheap as possible.
And,
leaving this code open for others to,
take over and,
you know,
test their hand at,
providing their own solutions that could be someday completely interoperable with ZKVM as well.
possibly.
And the benefits to it too is like,
okay,
so now there's a huge benefit to it to,
to leaving the.
Yeah.
You have linear and ZK sync using polygon code,
but you know,
now hopefully the right thing to do the,
the benefit of open sources.
Now,
maybe they make contributions to the code base,
right?
That's the goal is,
and,
and it's,
and it's through GitHub and I'm,
I don't,
you know,
know fully how GitHub works and how things fork and repose and,
you know,
pull requests,
all that.
But I imagine that now when the,
when linear or ZK sync make progress,
now they'll now attribute those and there'll be some kind of link that developers can follow that goes back to the original source.
I believe that's how it works.
So that's pretty cool.
Yeah.
I think I,
I got to say though,
my personal opinion,
I'll just put it out here.
Polygon is gonna,
is gonna have 80% of all layer to market share over the next five years.
And,
and they already have a big share.
I don't know what they have right now out of,
you know,
hundreds of chains out of hundreds of L ones,
you know,
they've already got,
you know,
they're,
they're like a top of all chains in the world,
including Ethereum.
They're,
you know,
a top like four chains.
I think they're going to,
in the layer two wars,
which I think most L ones will move to becoming layer twos of Ethereum,
for good or for worse.
So I think it's probably a good thing,
has some drawbacks,
but I think,
that that's a very nuanced thing.
I should,
I probably shouldn't just say that and leave it there,
but I will.
but I think Polygon will have 80% of the market share of all layer twos.
They're building might in,
which is built on rust.
And that can be used to integrate certain L ones,
which I can't say publicly because we're working with some of these top
hundred projects.
Just bring them to Polygon.
Can we just wind it back a little bit?
Sure.
Sure.
Just make the case for like,
just so the community knows,
why,
why transition to anything at all?
Why not just stick with what we've got on those shit?
I think what we've got is,
is worked all right.
It's worked,
you know,
good for the time being at,
you know,
it was one of the biggest chain launches of the bear market.
the only thing I think that's been a bigger chain launch than those chain was
maybe was base.
So not maybe base,
I will say is,
I think
maybe they didn't come out as hot as us to start and we'll see.
They might,
they'll,
they're,
they'll probably taper off too,
right?
As friend tech rewards tape,
Rob,
but I'm sure they're going to do great overall.
I think base is going to be very successful,
but,
I would say probably,
that's hard to say,
but I would say probably,
I would say base has been bigger than those chain,
but I don't know.
I don't know if I would say that for sure.
There's a lot of fact,
there's a lot of like different KPIs to look at,
but anyways,
those chain was the,
to back to your question,
those chain was a huge success.
It's been,
it's been crazy what we've been able to do,
in just one year.
and,
oh yeah,
your,
your question was,
oh yeah.
What is,
what,
what's the reason for even upgrading?
So we also recently,
one of the big,
big reasons is to get rid of trusted bridges.
Okay.
Multi chain is a,
was a trusted bridge.
It was not our official bridge.
We had no official bridges.
We said,
Hey,
anybody could build,
you know,
the community can decide.
And unfortunately multi chain was either,
it sounds like it was the funds were taken by the,
the CCP,
but I'm not sure.
I can't say for sure.
We'll probably know more at some point.
but whatever happened,
you know,
community funds were taken through this third party bridge and we can't rely on these anymore.
That's just a fact.
The industry has to move away from third party bridges like multi chain,
like Axlar,
like Wormhole.
I like some of these companies.
I like Axlar.
I like Wormhole built some really cool stuff.
I really like Axlar.
We're building a lot of cool stuff with them.
Really interesting groundbreaking stuff.
quick swap is building with them,
but regardless their third party bridge stuff.
I mean,
there are benefits that will still be around with those in the future where it'll be like,
they'll just help with like fast bridging and stuff.
But in,
but overall bridging needs to be done trustlessly.
Like the base of bridging has to be done trustlessly.
And the way we've found to solve that is through layer twos.
So if you become a layer two of Ethereum,
you know,
using Polygon ZKBM,
for example,
you'll be able to bridge between those chain and Ethereum trustlessly,
no third party,
no risk of the CCP or any government or any,
hacker or whatever,
or any like counterparty,
you know,
like God forbid,
what if,
you know,
Axlar who I really like,
they're one of my most trusted chains personally,
but I think it's still a risk because it's a counterparty risk.
You know,
I don't know their full security model.
Maybe there's little to no counterparty risk,
but I doubt it.
I'm guessing there's some kind of admin keys that if they wanted to,
there's a fail safe where they could,
if all their team collaborated and were bad actors could take the funds and run.
And I don't know enough about it to say for sure or not,
but this is the issue with just,
I'm not talking about Axlar,
by the way,
guys,
I'm talking about generally third party bridges.
You have hack risk,
you have technical risk,
you have,
you know,
counterparty risk,
et cetera.
So by us becoming a layer two,
a true layer two of Ethereum,
you will not have to worry about that ever again.
There will be a trustless bridge between Ethereum and those chain.
And then eventually through,
Polygon's interop,
protocol later and their LXL Y bridge,
you'll have,
bridging between all Polygon layer twos.
That means you'll be able to bridge not just between,
those chain and Ethereum,
but those chain and ZKVM those chain and Polygon's POS,
which is becoming Validium's those chain and any might in chains or Hermes
chains or Polygon nightfall chains,
or all the other chains that they're building as part of their kit.
all those chains will have interoperability.
And so that,
and then eventually I think those chains will also have interoperability with
say,
Arbitrum chains and Optimism chains and ZK sync chains.
But for the first years,
it'll just be between that ecosystem.
So you'll have to kind of choose the ecosystem you want to be part of.
I think the best choice is Polygon.
I'm definitely biased.
but,
yeah,
that's kind of how it will work.
They'll all have bridges to Ethereum,
but like,
so for example,
Optimism has said with their OP stack,
they won't have layer two to layer two bridge,
which is what I was just talking about.
They have the Ethereum to the layer two.
You spin up bridge like base.
There's an Ethereum base bridge,
but there's no base Optimism bridge,
not a trustless one.
there are bridges,
but they're not trustless yet.
And they said they won't have that until they have their super chain protocol,
which they,
I don't even know if they've started it yet.
They said that'll be years down the line.
Whereas Polygon are saying they'll have that within two to six months.
I think I've heard different estimates of three to six months,
four to six months and two to six months.
So I'm not sure,
but regardless it's going to come sooner,
which is interesting considering ZK rollups are a harder technology.
So it's kind of crazy.
They're going to beat Optimism to the layer two bridges.
with their LX well,
Y bridge,
which is actually already out,
but not fully functional yet.
But,
anyways,
yeah.
So there's kind of rundown of different reasons why I think this is,
is an incredible move.
It's,
it's the,
the number one,
thing is,
in my opinion,
there's,
there's,
there's other things that are close,
but the not relying on bridges,
right?
Getting that out of the hands of any third parties.
That's a big,
huge,
that's a huge plus decentralizing the chain.
So making it so that,
you know,
the dose chain contributors and,
and,
and all that don't have any touching of the chain.
We want to decentralize this as much as possible.
We don't want any control over this.
We don't want any influence over this.
We want to give it to the community and have it be trustlessly done as a
Ethereum layer two,
that will still be a side chain of dose chain.
So it's a,
it'll be a side chain of dose chain and a layer two of Ethereum.
So it'll have a foot in both worlds.
so decentralization and,
getting rid of bridges and security.
Security is massive because you would,
by becoming a layer two of Ethereum,
you get by default the security of Ethereum,
not an,
and,
and true layer two is the idea.
And they're not all there yet.
Like I,
like I said,
optimism doesn't have fault proofs and I,
but,
and I'm,
I guess I don't know if I could say that polygon ZK EVM is to this
level of a security.
There may be some nuances,
but the argument,
the point is if you can do this to the fullest extent,
then you have like as a polygon ZK EVM chain,
you don't have,
you know,
Ethereum minus X security.
You have Ethereum security.
It is one hunt.
It's the goal.
And again,
I don't know that the technology is quite there,
but the goal is that now you'll have full Ethereum security through these
proofs.
no compromises.
That's the goal.
So if we can make Doge chain as secure as Ethereum and no,
no more trusting bridges and,
and,
and to center a lot more decentralized,
I think these are all huge wins for us and plugging into an entire
liquidity framework with all other polygon chains and with Ethereum,
having that liquidity be able to flow across seamlessly without having to
worry about bridge risk or anything like that.
Yeah,
I think that those are all really great points.
So I guess the way to conceptualize this,
the reason I wanted you to do that is just so that people have a better
understanding of where this vote has come from.
So like the way to conceptualize this for the audience here and community
members in general is there's essentially two questions.
It's going to be one vote,
but it's essentially two questions,
which is number one,
do you want us to change at all?
Like,
do you think that that would be worthwhile?
And I think we can all argue that that it would be because it's going to
move the chain forward in a good direction.
That's my opinion.
And then the second part of this is like,
you know,
the solution that we've proposed is moving to ZKVM.
And the reason for that,
which Rock really eloquently pointed out is that,
you know,
it's the best option at the moment based on all the parameters that you'd look
which is security and strength of the teams behind it and so on.
And it's the best technology in the industry.
And so like those are essentially the two questions.
And we're quite lucky actually in the sense that we're able to make the jump
to ZKVM whilst Polygon has kind of done all the work because they've,
they've got us to this point.
They've engineered this ZKVM technology with like tons of different teams and
they've spent a ton of money doing it.
And then we're able to swoop in and,
and basically get all of that for just for using the technology because they
want people to use it,
which is pretty incredible.
It's standing on the shoulders of giants.
It truly is.
There's another benefit too.
So the interesting thing becomes that,
so this is kind of a more of a conceptual thing to think about,
but what these layer twos do.
So like base,
for example,
base doesn't even have a token,
interestingly.
Right.
But it base,
the blockchain,
which is,
I think all permissioned validators for now,
but maybe eventually they'll allow it to be more open.
But base right now,
the,
the money,
the,
the way they monetize the model,
because they don't have a token is they are basically brokering blocks based
on Ethereum.
Okay.
So now if you wanted to put,
you know,
for,
for let's say on Ethereum if,
if you wanted to put a,
how do I explain this?
So if you wanted to put like X amount of transactions on Ethereum and let's
say that would cost a thousand dollars.
And now those transactions,
if you'd use them as proofs on base or on those chain,
for example,
let's say you can now cram a million transactions or let's just use dollars.
Actually,
the,
let me make this simpler.
The,
the,
the goal of these,
these layer twos kind of is broker,
either brokering block space and making a profit from it or not.
I can't hear you rock.
Can you guys go here?
It seems to have drops off.
yeah.
Rock,
we can't hear you.
Rock.
I'm going to remove him and then he can come back up,
I guess.
Okay.
Hopefully he'll come back up soon.
It sounded like he was going to get right into a passionate point there.
So apologies everybody.
But yeah,
basically like you,
you kind of get the idea,
right?
So we,
we think this is the best way forward,
but as always it's up for debate and up for the community to decide these things because it's a community run project.
So everybody jump over to the Reddit discussion after the spaces and then say like positive or negative things.
Or if you feel like you've got some solution,
like obviously we discussed a few different options like OP stack and like basically a bunch of others.
If you,
if you've got a solution where you feel like,
you know,
we've,
we've overlooked it potentially,
or it's something we've not mentioned and you think that we should look into it,
then do let us know.
Cause the team has spent a while like digging into a lot of this stuff to try and figure out what the best way forward was.
I'm looking at all different kinds of options,
even B and B at one point.
So just kind of let us know what you think.
Especially interested to hear from some of the more technical community members,
maybe guys that have got doubts themselves.
I know that you guys think,
cause obviously the developers on the chain,
you know,
are going to have the most direct impact from this,
right?
So yeah,
it will be,
it will be interesting to see what everybody thinks.
One question that has been coming around a couple of times,
both on Reddit and in,
in the Twitter threads that we posted is whether we're going to keep Doge as gas.
And the answer is pretty much yes,
because this is Doge chain.
And the main reason we're doing it,
we're actually doing this project is to give utilities,
Doge so that people can use Doge as an EVM token and pay for gas with it,
you know,
plug it into DeFi,
bridge it over on in,
in Debs,
use it in DeFi,
et cetera.
So that is not going to change in any way.
It's not great,
but we can.
Okay.
My phone died.
I'm trying from desktop.
How bad is it?
it's good.
it's good.
Okay,
cool.
Yeah.
I mean,
in my opinion,
not using Doge's gas is not an option.
I mean,
obviously the community could try,
try to like,
you know,
it's not my choice.
It's the community,
but I think that would be so silly.
Right.
That's the whole point of the chain is that Doge is the gas.
I mean,
that's one of the main points of the chain in my opinion.
So anyways,
what I was saying before,
I'll just finish my thought.
And then I got to run because I have like a bunch of people and CPAs up my
butt trying to get taxes finalized for the deadline.
But yeah,
so what I was saying is basically what these layer twos become is brokers of
block space for Ethereum.
And they,
so what do they get?
They get the security of Ethereum and all the benefits I said earlier,
what do they,
one,
and then what do they give or,
and,
and what is another benefit is they can broker block space.
So what happens is if you can say let's say base or Doge chain,
if Doge chain has enough transaction demand that it can say,
whatever a hundred thousand dollars in a day of,
of fees or a week or whatever.
I'm just making up numbers here.
So if it could do a hundred thousand dollars of transactions,
there's a demand for transactions on Doge chain at a much cheaper price.
Right.
So like at,
you know,
a penny or whatever a transaction.
So you get millions of transactions.
Now you can now proof those on Ethereum for,
let's say instead of a hundred thousand,
it's say $20,000 in gas to,
to basically buy block space for the security and data availability of Ethereum.
So you,
the difference,
the Delta between the hundred thousand fees you're generating and the 20,000 that it costs to imprint it to Ethereum,
that is profit for either,
you know,
in basis case permission.
So that goes to their,
I guess the team,
I guess,
or in Doge chain case,
obviously what we would want to do is give that to the community or maybe holders.
So there's,
that's still like all being kind of figured out because this Polygon ZKVM technology is still it,
the CDK did just come out.
and there are different ways to do it.
There's different variables.
So these are all just like,
you know,
things we got to wrestle with and figure out.
But the concept is that,
you know,
if Doge chain can have a ton of,
a ton of demand for,
for usage,
well,
then it benefits now.
Now,
instead of just benefiting say Doge and the Doge chain people,
now it'll benefit Doge and the Doge chain people,
but it'll also benefit the Ethereum.
You know,
we basically are paying Ethereum miners and,
and the Ethereum community and even burning some E3 IP 1559.
you're benefiting them slightly to get the security and to get the liquidity access and to get the,
the decentralization which I think is a great trade-off and it can be a profitable trade-off too,
for the chain.
So if,
like I said,
if there's a hundred thousand dollars a week of demand and it costs 20,000 to imprint it on Ethereum,
well,
that difference could be used,
you know,
to fund the community or foundation,
or it could be,
we could burn it.
You can,
you know,
you could turn,
you could,
you could burn Doge.
There's all kinds of different things you could do with that,
that profit and different chains will choose different ways to do that.
So this is all things we've got to discuss and decide over the,
the coming,
you know,
months,
weeks and months,
I should say.
Yeah,
that's a great point.
Thanks for clarifying all of that.
And I think that that's currently all the information that we actually have.
We're still exploring and our dev teams is,
is closely working with Polygon to,
to understand all the intricacies of,
of how we're going to,
to do this.
If we are,
if the community is.
to explore with us,
this is not just us,
right?
We need,
we need the community to be active in this.
That's why we have the discussion.
We've put the discussion out,
you know,
way before doing,
you know,
well way before deciding all these things,
because we don't want to be just like the wizard of Oz in the background,
deciding behind the curtain.
We want this to be a community discussion.
That's,
that's the,
the only way that this all makes sense.
So please be involved.
Please research ZKVM.
If you want to research optimism or other chains,
cool.
I don't think those are the way to go,
but we'd like people to understand all options.
I think it's a no brainers Polygon.
But you know,
this is the community's choice.
So I could give my personal influence as much as I want,
but it'll be up to the community at the end of the day.
Yeah.
So please question.
Seriously,
guys.
Well,
while I have you here,
Rock and Jack is here as well,
there's,
there's one important thing actually happening in the industry.
Regulations wise,
actually the,
the grayscale,
the SEC is grayscale appeal is reaching its deadline at midnight Eastern time
today.
So there,
there are two things that,
that could happen actually.
that is that the SEC lets the,
the appeal run and lets the deadline run.
And they actually try to,
you know,
refuse this or re-review the,
the application of the spot ETF from grayscale again,
for other reasons.
but there's also the possibility that they don't and they actually approve it.
But that's like a small possibility that we can hope for.
What do you guys think about this?
I don't know.
I don't know,
man.
It's honestly,
but my guess is as good as anyone else with the information we have at hand.
It's a matter of time.
I'm just,
I'm just dollar cost averaging.
I'm just stacking and,
and,
you know,
optimistic about the future,
but you know,
I think everybody should look at it as look,
just be,
I think time in,
in this industry is like,
you know,
time in the market is,
is better than timing the market.
Some say it's the same thing I do with stocks.
I just,
I buy things I believe in.
I hold them forever.
I don't worry about,
you know,
what's going to happen this week or this month.
I just know,
you know,
from working in the industry and being a part of all this,
that this is really is the future.
Everything is moving to this.
And that,
you know,
it seems pretty clear when you see BlackRock and JP Morgan and politicians all
talking about it.
This is where the,
the world is going.
We're here.
We're early.
I think just,
just the best thing is just look for stuff you believe in and just hold it.
I know I've said that before.
I don't have a big opinion on,
on ETF current standing stuff,
to be honest.
I think it's a matter of time.
It's going to happen.
I think it would be very surprising if at midnight ESC tonight,
the SEC just rolled over and said,
okay,
no worries.
And approved it.
I think that would be very unlikely.
I mean,
it's obviously it's not outside the realm of possibility,
but I think it's unlikely.
I think what's probably more likely is that they're going to use various
different tactics to delay and appeal and delay into early next year.
And then they'll approve them all at once when they feel like,
you know,
but well,
basically when their buddies have had enough time to accumulate number one.
And also,
so like when,
when they feel like they've exhausted every possible legal avenue before letting,
letting us do it.
Why is,
I haven't been,
I'm so like desensitized by the ETF stuff,
to be honest.
But why is,
why is it gray scales now?
Did BlackRock's like expire and now gray scales next up?
They didn't expire.
They,
they have,
so there's like three deadlines and then a final deadline for the ETFs.
And at each stage,
the,
the SEC can choose to appeal or approve basically,
or like kick it back.
And so like some of them,
a load of them recently reached their first deadline.
And then some of them reached a second deadline.
And I think gray scales is a little bit different because that was done very early on.
But I also think gray scales,
there's some other things to it.
Like doesn't gray scale want to convert from something else?
Exactly.
Yeah.
They want to convert the fund,
a fund,
a Bitcoin fund that they have of $17 billion worth into a Bitcoin spot ETF.
And this was,
I'll try to refuse by the SEC,
but a court actually,
scolded the SEC by saying that their,
their refusal was absolutely not warranted with the,
the reasons that they gave because they,
something that already similar exists,
which is the futures ETFs.
And now the deadline comes where the SEC needs to appeal to this,
to actually prolong their decision or,
or do something about it.
So one of the reasons why they,
why they keep knocking these back by the way,
is because they're currently,
so almost all of the custodians listed in these ETFs is Coinbase.
And the problem with that is that the,
the SEC is currently suing Coinbase.
And so if they,
if they approve the ETFs,
they're saying,
okay,
on one hand,
Coinbase is,
is keeping customer funds safe enough to approve an ETF,
which is one of the strictest things to get approved.
But on the other hand,
we're going to sue them because they're doing a legal business.
It doesn't make any sense.
So I think they want to conclude the Coinbase lawsuit first,
or at least come to some sort of resolution with it.
Penny has his hand up.
They don't want to look stupid is the key here.
Yeah.
Penny Bags,
do you want to go ahead?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Sorry guys.
I just wanted to add that part of the major concern in the market right now
too,
is that the,
the gray scale is a,
it's a trust and it's,
it's,
it's been an operation or,
or being collecting funds from interested individuals for years now,
and they've been unable to actually sell anything that has been placed in
trust.
And with that amount of value being held or retained by them with no ability
to sell at the moment,
and when they do get the green light to sell anything under that trust,
it could move the markets.
So I think that's like one of the major concern that people are having with the,
the gray scale trust in particular to just,
you're saying that it would open up to people being able to sell now.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean,
that's interesting,
but we've seen that happen a lot in,
there's been a lot of situations like that,
right?
when,
when ETH was unlocked,
in the move to not,
not the move to proof of stake,
but afterwards when they,
when they made it so you could actually unstake your ETH,
the inflows going into ETH after they unlocked were much higher than the outflows.
that's,
you know,
interesting.
I think when you,
when you unlock something and you give freedom,
people,
more people want to use it.
So could people that want to,
you know,
could people sell that have wanted to sell for a long time?
Yeah,
maybe,
but I imagine the more sophisticated people that have wanted to sell their,
their GBTC shares,
they found ways.
I know there's ways to do it.
They just like do it through like some kind of OTC,
you know,
contract behind the scenes or other stuff.
They sell it at a discount or they sell the claims or whatever.
I I'm pretty sure I've heard of different ways to do that.
Interestingly,
just on this subject about,
things have been unlocked and moving the market.
There was this whole forward around Mount Gox for like the longest time.
I don't know if anybody has any information on what happened with that,
but like,
that was like,
it's never every time it's,
that has been a threat for so many years.
I've been hearing that for five or six years,
five years,
I think.
and it just never,
it's always a nothing burger.
I don't think it's ever resulted in any like material change.
I think they've officially delayed it,
by an entire year or more and it's going to fall.
far as my recollection serves me,
hopefully it serves me correct here is that,
it'll fall sometime after the having,
which is,
which is great.
it's good for,
you know,
obviously the,
anybody who's held funds and,
is looking to get recompensated as well.
So I think it's a good outcome.
Honestly,
if you'd held funds for that long,
wait until peak bull market,
just,
just wait one more year or another year and a half,
like don't dump them at the lows,
you know?
I imagine a lot of people that are getting their Mount Gox paychecks
eventually are like,
if they've been in Bitcoin for that long,
they're probably bullish on crypto.
You know,
I would think.
Yeah,
I'd agree with that.
I would think it's not going to be a big rush to sell event,
but that's just me.
Yeah.
The deadline is now October.
Sorry.
The deadline for,
for,
as you said,
Penny,
the deadline for,
Mount Gox repaying is,
October 31st,
2000,
2024.
So next year.
Yeah.
I don't know if everybody knows this,
but obviously Mount Gox is kind of like this historical event now in the crypto market.
But do people know that Mount Gox's original purpose was selling magic,
the gathering cards.
It was an exchange for magic,
like literally Mount Gox stands for magic,
the gathering exchange.
Matt,
let's see,
I think it's magic,
the gathering online exchange,
I think.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's,
that's right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's so funny.
And it's literally just,
it just started like basically they weren't at a time when everybody was demonizing crypto.
They just didn't.
And so you were allowed to buy and sell Bitcoin on there.
And then because nobody else was had any crypto exchanges,
really,
that was like the only place where you could centrally buy and sell Bitcoin.
So it just became this like massive,
massive like focus of the whole industry.
And that was our first like real moment of centralized vulnerability.
We took this perfectly decentralized thing,
Bitcoin,
and we centralized the idiots and then we've suffered the consequences.
You know what a really good book is?
I highly recommend.
I've read it several times.
It's just a fun one to understand the history of Bitcoin and crypto is Digital Gold.
Really good book.
I think it's by something,
Steven and then Digital Gold.
Who's that by?
Let me see here.
Digital Gold book.
Nathaniel Popper.
Really good book,
guys.
The audio book is good too.
That's a good way.
It tells the whole story of Mt.
Cox and all that old stuff.
It goes way deep into the history.
Really interesting.
Okay.
I've got to run,
guys.
Is there anything else we needed to cover?
I think we're good.
All right.
we're good.
We went through the main topics.
I think we always have new ones next week.
So we'll be back next week for more fun.
All right.
If you were,
are there any freaks on?
Because I've been so blown away that we found last week we had,
you know,
90,000 people from the Polygon space and then the Doge chain space and all that
whole crazy chaos.
And there were a bunch of people putting in comments and DMing and stuff saying
they were on for the full six hours.
Was anyone on today for Polygon and Doge chain?
It was what today was four,
five,
five hours.
Was anyone on for all five hours?
I was not,
but I would love to give a Doge tools update.
Oh yeah,
please.
okay.
But next week I'm going to try to listen to all of it.
So I'll take that.
You don't have to.
It's five hours.
It's nuts.
It's all right.
It's,
you know,
it gets me moving,
you know,
like I walk around and do stuff,
but a lot of good information,
you know,
like honestly,
I learned a ton on these spaces too.
On the Doge chain space,
I'm more speaking,
but on the Polygon space,
because we have so many panelists,
I do a lot more listening.
So I guess I maybe learn more sometimes on that one.
But then again,
honestly,
talking to Jack and Ivan here and,
and,
you know,
sometimes you come up,
B and Penny.
I mean,
there's a lot of good knowledge,
like flowing here,
a lot of brainstorming and creativity too.
So I,
this is,
it's a lot of fun.
Go ahead.
This was one of my favorite spaces too,
between this one and the alien one.
I liked it a lot.
It's very thought provoking.
Alien one,
huh?
Yeah.
I really liked that one.
That was pretty fun.
Okay.
So you mean,
you mean here on like that?
We talked about.
Yeah.
I thought you meant another,
another space.
A few months back.
We talked about aliens.
Yeah.
That was my favorite.
Yeah.
That was fun.
That was a good time.
Jack once,
Jack is like hoping to be abducted someday,
I think.
By the,
by the board,
right?
From the Star Trek comments earlier.
Yeah.
The board.
Dude,
you said you'd be down to teleport to another planet that you wouldn't know what's going
So yeah,
you definitely.
Not since I've had my kids.
He wants an alien waifu.
We talked about,
we talked about AI waifus earlier on the other space.
I think now we're in on this one too.
A little Jack wants an alien cyborg waifu.
Yeah.
You're going to make me replay Mass Effect now.
It's the only way.
All right,
Do you want to give us your update?
Yeah.
It's really quick.
So first I want to say thank you everyone for trying out the burn bot.
It's been really popular.
It's been fun in the groups.
Turtle on BSC will be adding onto the burn bot shortly.
NFT staking.
We started a little over a month ago.
You can earn Doge tools daily for every NFT staked.
NFTs are only 80 Doge,
which is less than $4.70 right now.
We've always said from the beginning that we want to airdrop other tokens to our NFT stakers.
And then this morning we did a very surprise airdrop of Chewy token.
Chewy is the token from Chewy Swap.
The swap is a multi-chain DEX for Shibarium and Doge Chain.
So it's been nice getting Shibarium people over to Doge Chain.
Jim,
who most people should know,
he's a popular Doge Chain builder.
He's the founder of Chewy Swap.
We collaborated with him to get Chewy on the tip bot and the burn bot.
So thanks to him,
we were able to airdrop 3,000 Chewy tokens to our NFT stakers.
And we will hopefully be doing more airdrops soon.
We have a minting contest going on now through Sunday.
The prizes include RDPs.
You can hear my dog.
Sorry,
I'm trying to talk fast.
Doge tools,
NFTs,
Doge tools tokens.
And then top person will also get a very special invite to our utility tester group.
We have a couple of utilities we are testing internally now.
And pretty soon they'll be going to our tester group.
And then once we've thoroughly tested it there,
we will be announcing it in the future.
So thank you all for your support.
And we're happy to keep building on Doge Chain.
Thanks guys.
See y'all.
Appreciate everyone.
And have a great weekend.
Thanks guys.
See you next time.
Next Friday,
same time.
You know how it is.
Bye-bye.
We love Doge tools.
Bye-bye.
Bye-bye.
