Well, well, well, Gary, how the tables have turned.
This is going to be an eth maxi space.
We don't like any alt layer ones.
We don't even like layer twos here.
We don't even like Bitcoin.
And eth is going to go to the moon and everything else is going to become a shit coin and that's
going to be the end of it.
See, this is what happens when I co-host with Fidgetl for at this point, I think it's been over
half a year is my very serious intros have become sarcastic intros.
But I guess I just thought it'd be you know what we do with these with these titles as well.
I never did clickbait titles before Fidgetl came on.
So now we say Solana obviously is not a scam chain.
She did go down down again, though.
I don't I don't know what's going on over there.
And I thought the issues were fixed.
I don't know if it was you, Gary, that told me the issues were fixed or someone else.
I keep hearing about Firedancer because Gary is a customer service, huh?
So Firedancer, I mean, there's some big fires they need to dance around in order to get mass
adoption, I think, because a chain going down for five hours is a big deal, in my opinion,
especially if you want to I mean, I get it if you're shit coin trading and stuff.
But if you are someone with a good amount of money locked in DeFi or you're leveraged
or the market just tanks for whatever reason, and you want to sell your positions.
And correct me if I'm wrong, Gary, for from what I understand, you can't really do anything
on chain until it goes back up.
Well, that's kind of right, but it's kind of wrong.
If you were operating in a centralized exchange, you didn't know Solano was down.
You were trading, you were doing everything just normal.
If you were operating on chain like in like using Jupiter or something like that, then
you were completely locked out for five hours.
But most of the transactional volumes happening in stuff like Coinbase or Binance, and they
were trading just like normal.
But wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Yeah, so just what you're saying is, so if there's no cows left in the world, but we
have some rancid meat left in the grocery store, we're not out of cows.
Well, you know, if it's not your not your keys, not your crypto, whenever it's setting
in the exchanges, you're not actually trading crypto, you're trading a representation of
crypto that you think might exist.
So if you really want to trade crypto, you have to get out of the exchanges.
And if you really want to do that, then you might deal with an outage like we had this week.
Gary, are you are you saying that when it was in the sex, you're trading on like unconfirmed
Like, that's what you're saying?
That's not actually trading though, right?
I mean, like, yeah, but that's what's actually happening from but that's what's actually
But it's what's actually happening.
Gary, that doesn't make sense.
But it's what it's what's happening at Coinbase when you buy and sell Solana.
They're not confirming that transaction on chain each time.
It's not about OK, but but the difference is, right, that you have lag between unconfirmed
and then confirmed transactions.
But the point is that the transactions are being settled.
If the chain is down, then nothing's being settled.
So you're just trading air.
That's not how that works.
That's not how that works.
So so I can confirm really quick.
I can confirm how that works.
He was he was lagging for me.
That's why I kept doing a hot wallet and maybe it's not it's just because it's not a payment
Oh, I switched off my headset.
I was going to say just because you're trading on an exchange and you're using a third party
provider maybe for liquidity or you have your own liquidity like Binance or some of the
other behemoths doesn't mean the transactions don't settle.
And when the chain goes down, you know, it still goes under maintenance for those exchanges
So my concern is not at all with centralized exchange activity.
I was on a I was on a space yesterday where they were saying, well, the price of Solana
didn't even go down that much, which is true.
And the trading resumed as normal on these sexes.
But the whole point is that a lot of people don't want to operate on centralized exchanges.
They want to solve custody and they want to they want to participate in defy or they want
to participate in gaming.
I think it was Michael that brought up a great example of hey, what if you have a blockchain
game built on Solana and and then all of a sudden it goes down for five hours and no
I don't know if you've ever seen gamers rage at not being able to log into their accounts,
I used to be one of those gamers in high school.
And when Blizzard Noah, let's make it let's make it more impactful.
What if real businesses are being run on the Solana network?
Like that's that's our future, right?
Think about the liability alone that could occur.
By the way, I just wanted to preface everything goes down like I mean, this is a five hour
God, it's so hard not to make salacious jokes.
Bank account has never gone down for five hours.
Your bank account holds your money for five weeks sometimes because you put the wrong
word in the in the sub line of of your of your ACH transfer.
So if you want to sell security of you know, of chain transactions, you can't just excuse
a five hour outage across the board.
I mean, there's got to be some coordination that that is a conversation about a game.
Gary, I want to set the stage.
This is not going to be a Solana hating space.
You'll you'll see a lot of those over the next 24 hours because it's easy versus an
actual analysis of the chain.
What does it mean for decentralization and where you're choosing to build and the realistic
Noah chose the name of this title.
I wanted to call it something much more salacious.
So we are here for an adult conversation and it may have included your mom.
Yeah, I was just like, I mean, this is a it's still in beta.
It has the beta name with it.
I mean, if you're building right, we all know we're on a beta chain.
We all know this is not main net release.
And if you don't and you're a developer, then you're fucking idiot.
So when you're developing something on a beta chain, you expect issues like this.
It's part of the journey.
The developer, I didn't know it was beta.
And I read that when I was reading on the updates and I was a little surprised.
I'm going to be honest with you, not both that it was beta, but more that if you are
correct, Gary, I'm not going to argue with you in terms of normal expectation when it
comes to a beta product, you are correct.
There are not that many multi billion dollar beta products that I'm aware of.
And so what I'd be more alarmed of is the ape and nature of people in terms of when
they're making decisions where they choose to develop, right?
Because we're getting to the point now, as we're building products, that it's not as
much about the community as it used to be in terms of where you choose to build, at
And it really is coming down to the technology and where you're building a longer home.
So I'm a little alarmed at the no insult, Gary, the vast amount of people that have
hitched their entire horse, their entire carriage to this beta horse.
That's fucking frightening.
Evil you have your hand up.
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
And interested in the conversation.
Thanks for having me, Jim.
So I mean, I guess just kind of a couple of quick points.
One is to be fair to Gary, you know, Gmail, which was or is a multi, multi-billion dollar
product was in beta for, I don't know, like a decade or something like that, right?
Now, Google used that as a foil, smartly, right, to kind of deflect user issues while
that was happening, right?
Like if there was something wrong, you know, if your inbox disappeared or, you know, mail
didn't get sent or whatever, and you said, hey, this is a problem, they could say, well,
Now that was really smart.
And that's a strategy since then that has been adopted by, you know, every single software
company that I can think of, including some of my past companies.
And I mean, it really is a very smart strategy.
That said, I think the issue here is that Gmail is not live money, right?
And so in software, there's this distinction between what we call mission critical and
non-mission critical software, right?
So mission critical software is like this thing cannot fucking fail because someone
will get hurt or someone will die or some other extremely bad thing will happen, right?
So for example, if you are writing software for a defibrillator or a, you know, I don't
know, a heart monitor, right?
That is not software where you would go out under the beta label and be like, oh man,
this guy had a heart attack and we just fucking missed it.
You know, same with something like, I don't know, flight control software on an airplane,
I mean, anything like that, right?
Now, the problem is when you have a mission critical failure, which can happen, right?
I mean, you know, engineers try their best, but you know, mistakes happen, right?
The excuse is not it's in beta, right?
It's typically depending on what the software was and what stage it was at a huge problem,
which is why something like, you know, something like even Tesla's full self-driving, it's
like the way they're putting it out, the way they're beta-ing it.
If you really think about it, it's extremely slow and it's extremely kind of like careful
in terms of like who gets to do what, when, and how, and how much and so forth, right?
Because what they're concerned about is if they put out software in beta and you know,
a thousand people die in a weekend because Tesla's all decided to drive into brick walls,
like that's going to be a fucking problem for them and potentially a very big liability
So now I grant, you know, maybe people aren't dying when Solana goes down.
I'm not trying to sound hyperbolic, but what I will say is that, you know, when it comes
to people's finances and live money, it can be extremely destructive, you know, from that
So, you know, I would argue that banking software, finance, those kinds of things, my experience,
those are treated as mission critical software, right?
Being that you don't go live product with retail customers in beta, like you just don't
And so I didn't know they had a beta label, but I would actually say that that is extremely
So let me add, by the way, before we go to hands really quick, I just want to say Gary's
I love that he comes here every time and he's amongst a bunch of eat maxis and he is able
to rep Solana and he's honestly brought in some really good facts before and contradicted
a lot of what I what I used to believe.
So definitely hats off to him.
This is not a bully Gary space.
I hope that doesn't come off as an attack against you, Gary.
I'm just I'm just speaking like, well, just attack the other Gary, like there's another
Gary on stage, attack him the whole time and he can take all this.
This is actually, you know, I'll go at him.
This is actually a perfect transition to just this is actually a perfect opportunity
to just take a second to talk seriously about what the issue was for those who haven't researched
And it's actually it's a little it's a little alarming what the problem was because I believe
it's core to the reason why Solana is so popular.
So Solana is extremely popular because of its speed and price for transactions.
And that's based on its sorting mechanisms in the way that it directs gas or transactions
based on gas free and flow.
I forget the technical name for it.
I did invite a couple people who are what I would consider blockchain geniuses to join.
Hopefully they do and they can add a little bit more light.
If anybody here knows, please help.
But the interesting part is that the failure the failure is being attributed to something
called a Berkeley packet filter, which is not necessarily a blockchain centric tech,
but it's a it's a filter technology that allows for the chain to direct the transactions into
the most efficient and effective gas silos.
And the problem is if that's its claim to fame to like double down on evil statement
for talking about mission critical, its entire ethos, I believe, is mission critical on this
And I'm not going to stoke fires, but I am going to repeat something that somebody who
I respect the hell out of in this space, I consider one of the best builders in the space,
a little unknown to the masses.
But he has posited that a very similar filtration issue exists in Solana's future inevitably.
And that fair dancer does not address it in terms of scale and the ability to continue
its allocating of resources accordingly.
So it's important to note why it went down.
And if anybody else has any input, please provide.
In the meantime, Andre, you had your hand up or go to you.
Thanks for having me up here.
So I wanted to kind of make a couple points as well.
And I think one of the points I'm not sure if it was Lucas or who already made about
like the mission critical kind of software.
I mean, this kind of goes to show that there is there's a lot of effort to make decentralization
but there's a huge difference between the decentralization of like, for example, the
Internet and versus Solana.
And we all obviously I'm not going to get into that detail.
And even so, obviously, the we had the Internet kind of bottleneck happened during the 2001
terrorist attack where the entire Internet went to a standstill because a bunch of key
kind of what do you call them?
So what do you call backbone of the Internet or the routing backbone went down, right?
And decentralized plan to go offload to other backbones, it just fell through.
So stuff like this does happen, but there's probably an interesting point to be made here
that maybe this is an indication where we should probably try and figure out a world
where we have thousands of kind of interacting chains, something like Polygon is doing it
for what's the simple fact that if you if you can if a chain goes down, for example,
for a certain type of credit card processing, let's say Visa, then OK, great.
If the chain goes down for a game, OK, everyone blames the game, but doesn't it doesn't mean
all of a sudden that your transactions for that are critical are not working and so forth.
It feels like Solana, I mean, so basically I'm developing a small project and I chose
Polygon instead of Solana and I was considering the two and Solana is definitely on paper
So fast rust instead of well, solidity and but the problem for me was that Polygon, I
think they're striving toward what I believe more in Solana is trying to isolate and build
that the fastest chain instead of trying to build this kind of network on figure out
how to build a network of chain, even if they're all Solana based chains, right?
If you can spin up your chain and somehow interact with the Solana network of chains,
Maybe I hope that this is a path they decide to choose because I think we need a lot more
innovation in this area if if the blockchain is going to start becoming dominant because
we all know one simple matter that we can't escape.
There's a limit to scaling independent chains and we all know this and you know, we're kind
of like, okay, we'll go optimize beyond beyond.
You cannot on board everyone onto a single chain.
You need an interactivity between chains and last point, last point.
The fact that Solana was in beta was actually I kind of missed that and that's kind of was
big surprise when I heard that in this chat because if I knew that when I was definitely
looking out of definitely the disregarded not used for sure said, okay, not Solana,
you know, I decided to pull a gun anyways, but I didn't even consider that because yeah,
I mean, I understand if it's beta, it's like, yes, great software cutting edge fantastic.
And like someone said a Gmail and so forth, but there's certain things where it's like
it got to be note what we're building on a great service.
And welcome to the space anytime.
Tim, just so you know, for some reason I can't add you, I think it's because Noah dropped
But before I go to Jarvis, I do want to say that I am partnered with Polygon.
I will tell you that I'm partnered with Polygon because I like their tech and I like more
importantly the direction they're taking.
I agree wholeheartedly with the multi chain approach that they're doing the CD, the ZK
CDK is a really cool ecosystem that they're cooking up.
And it's really cool to see chains kind of staking their claim for almost like their
preference and the preference of the people, the builders and therefore the community members
I think we're going to see a lot more of that and I think that's a good thing.
I think a future of mission dedicated chains instead of kind of the broad approach that
has been taken to date is both inevitable and I think efficient for the ecosystem, right?
You know, like when you go to a store for a reason, right?
So go ahead, Andre, and then we'll go to Jarvis.
Yeah, I was just going to mention, it's like people choose either AWS or Google Cloud or
There's not going to be one with all, but you got all these distributed kind of cloud
systems all across the internet.
But yeah, you choose your ecosystem you want.
I think the same will happen.
You'll choose your Polygon or Solana, but I think we need inter network kind of foundation
And then the fact is no chain should be going down, period, whether we're going to sit
there and make broad arguments that makes it centralized, like that's just a stupid
thing to say without a deeper analysis.
But just from a pure business perspective, I don't care Web 2, Web 3, you have billions
of dollars in market cap.
I mean, it's been a year, so that's great.
I think February 23rd, 2023 is the last time I went down.
But again, there's just no excuse.
The question is, what does that mean?
And what, more importantly, what do we think people are going to do and therefore the ecosystem?
It looks like the token recovered.
I do not believe that token price directly reflects the quality of the product as it
So we shall see over time.
Doc, before we go to you, I want to go to Jarvis.
He's had his hand up for a while, and then I'll swing over to you.
How are you doing, brother?
I just wanted to touch on what Evil Plan said regarding the Critical Code.
And it's actually, that's the straight truth.
You cannot shut down or have something shut down what masses are relying on.
Look at Jupiter's aspirations.
They want to onboard the stock market to Solana, and you think it can go down for five
It can't go down for one second.
And then your excuse, oh, they're working on it, fired answer's coming, beta chain,
devs are working, validated.
I interact with it every single day.
Right now, it's honestly infancy stage, regardless of the millions or billions that you want
It's just not ready for anything serious.
Like, honestly, their aspirations are huge, and I hope they make them just not possible
Just to underline that, if they're trying to go on the, if they're trying to securitize
like an actual exchange and they've had downtime like this under these circumstances, I would
be very skeptical that that's ever, ever going to happen, because essentially the problem
is like Amazon once had a huge outage in, I think around 2005 or seven or something
like that, but they were already a massive player, right?
So it was incredibly disruptive because everything from Etsy to Netflix went down, but they had
such market size and dominance that people kind of accepted it.
And Amazon essentially me a culprit and swore that this was never ever going to happen again.
The problem though, is that if it happens before you have a critical mass or before
you have that kind of size, then my personal, I mean, who knows, right?
But I would imagine that someone at NASDAQ or whatever would look at this and say, well,
you're telling me that it's never going to go down, but there is this one time that you
said it was definitely not going to go down and then it went down for five hours, right?
And to Jarvis's point, if like the U.S. capital markets went down for five hours, you could
do trillions of dollars in economic damage.
I mean, it is unbelievable, right?
So I just don't think anyone would be willing to accept, I'd be very skeptical that people
would be willing to accept that risk.
Well, Jupiter's not trying to redo what stock exchange are, they're trying to implement
a new method and they did.
During this outage for the last seven days, they just raised $70 million on a public raise,
offering their product, Jupiter, for free to a billion or a million wallets to claim
or however many wallets it was, a ton of wallets to claim.
But then they raised $69 million USDC over the last seven days using their own platform.
They're doing what they want to do.
The outage didn't faze them at all.
Yeah, but Gary, correct me if I'm wrong, their aspirations are taking over the stock market
No, their aspirations are the future.
Their aspirations are not to take over the stock market.
Their aspirations are when a new company goes public, they won't go to the stock market,
they will go on chain first using products like Jupiter.
So they don't want to take what's on chain.
So Jupiter's aspirations is that onboarding and it is not ready on Solana.
I forget you might like Jupiter as a company.
That's what you need to onboard or go public.
The argument though is not around Jupiter.
Congrats on Meow and the scam coin they launched.
The argument is on Solana.
Yeah, it's still in beta.
Of course it's an infancy stage.
That's the only argument.
It's in beta and you have all of this amazing shit happening on a chain in beta.
You just had a company do a public raise of $70 million on a beta blockchain.
I think Gary and Jarvis are saying different things.
Gary is saying that Solana is putting out a lot of great innovation, but it's still
It's going to go down and Jarvis is saying, well, hey, if you want to onboard the next
wave of mass adopters, then it's probably not ready for that.
This is actually a question because maybe I'm not clear on this, but my understanding
of the timeline regarding these two events is that the Jarvis thing happened first and
then the chain went down.
Not the other way around.
What happened in the middle?
You mean the Jup thing, right?
The Jup thing happened before it went down.
I was talking because I apologize.
The Jup thing happened before it went down.
I was taking credit for that.
It started one week ago, but it's still going on.
They just closed the launch pool today, so it happened for seven days.
Yesterday was the outage.
The launch pool closed today, and they still had $70 million sitting there.
Yes, it started before this.
Right, but the money went in before the outage is my point.
People could have also hit the sell button and pulled their money right back because
they left the $70 million setting there.
Not while the chain was down.
It wouldn't have worked, Gary, because the chain was down.
Yeah, but after five hours, it came right back up.
Yeah, but after five hours, no, I can't wait five hours.
We all need to touch grass sometimes.
I mean, what are you going to ... The stock market closes at like 4.30 today.
What are you going to do then, or Saturday or Sunday when you want to go to the bank?
What are you going to do then?
The stock market before closing, expecting to get it back the next day.
The chain can't ... I mean, I don't know, Solana or the Core Devs might need to understand
that or have maintenance or scheduled maintenance and have a validator.
Let's give Gary a little breath.
Let's go to the other Gary's at his hand up and then to Terry for a minute.
Gary, you're ... First of all, if you get a chance, we always have a really diverse group
I'll go to you afterwards, Harris.
I like following some of the speakers into the other spaces, especially when they're
Follow Gary into a hexagon space.
I had a blast the other day.
Gary, I don't think I've gotten your thoughts on Solana, so I'd love to hear your input,
We'll go to Terry before.
Terry, I'd love to hear your thoughts, brother.
I mean, look, I'm not ... I'll be honest with you guys, I'm not super nerdy about or knowledgeable
about Solana, but the one thing I wanted to open my mouth for is that I feel like a lot
of these ecosystem chains are not taking enough of a look into privacy.
In fact, what we're seeing is quite the opposite.
Now you see, I think I just posted something like that there, they're listing Monero again.
Soon enough, I know you won't be able to get there.
I think like we were discussing before, it was a lot about the principles of what the
chain represents and what the brand is.
Everybody's like, oh, mine is bigger than yours and I'm faster than yours, but sometimes
I feel like it's not going the right direction.
I think in the hierarchy of values, the ecosystem needs to choose and I think ... I'll give
you mine and then everybody has their own opinion, but I feel like privacy ranks pretty
way up there, just next to decentralization, meaning whether or not you can break a chain,
whether or not your chain can work by itself and that it doesn't need any centralized entity.
For example, the binance chains without binance, what does that mean? Nothing.
Things like that where whether or not the chain can survive, how decentralized it is.
For me, decentralization and privacy is way up there and then speed of transaction is
of course a good metric, but it's not the best for me.
So long as you've posted your transaction and depending on the use case, you won't be
doing high frequency trading on slow chains. I get that, but you can have centralized venues
to do that, but still maintain the nature of the chain on the privacy side.
I think that's the danger of today. We're speaking about Solana versus Polygon versus
... Yeah, guys, but what's really the difference between one or the other besides the marketing?
It feels to me like it's more important to push the entire ecosystem to really look at
privacy because the next very large danger that is coming through is the privacy one,
is the what the fuck are we going to do when the CBDCs come through and they shove it down
our throats and, oh, look, my chain is super fast. Yeah, but governments are still out
full control over what you do and that doesn't kill a social credit score in principle.
So it's just all fugazi. Oh, look, Bitcoin is a rebellious tool for freedom against the
tyranny of the centralized ... It's fucking not, right? It's not. It is the most looked
at token or blockchain and the easiest one to track down because of obviously, it's the
biggest one, right? But the other ones are the same, right? So that's kind of like my
two cents on this. I don't like to trash in this particular forum, I wouldn't like to
trash Solana without trashing everybody else at the same time because to me, I hate them
all the same way and for the right reasons. So if everybody just, like my wet dream would
be everybody holds by the hands and kumbaya and let's be friends by the fire and let's
agree on one thing and one thing only, I think the very next one thing that that should be
is the privacy one. Because otherwise, we all fucked and I don't want that to happen.
So that's pretty much what I have to say. Importantly, I guess sometimes the question
would come, if a chain's going down, which we all agree is not okay, even Gary, well
giraffe Gary, two years. I haven't heard Gary Woods opinion yet. But I agree, Terry,
but privacy is irrelevant if the chain doesn't work. So like order of operations. Gary, by
the way, welcome, Andrew. Welcome, everybody. Thank you for joining the show. We can hear
It's relevant, though, because you need to look at the privacy aspect of your of your
protocol at the source when you start building it. Because if you build it before, then trying
to change it and fork it later, it might not be the best solution, you know, that that
agreed. And by the way, the issue that I'm saying the Berkeley packet filter thing that
is apparently the cause, the impact was for the generation of new of new blocks. So it's
fun. It's like literally a complete halt on a freeway. So it's it's unacceptable. And
it does again, it's reminiscent of the larger issue that my friend told me is inevitable.
So I hope that they're able to fix it. But in the meantime, Gary Woods, welcome to the
stage. What are your thoughts?
Hey, the platform has been a little buggy. Sorry about that. I don't know if you guys
can hear me. Can I be heard now?
Yeah, you're good, brother. Did you hear my intro for you last time?
Yeah. Yeah, a couple of days ago, you popped into a space and, you know, some, you know,
we're having like a heady conversation and then some random troll said that they wanted
to fuck me. So I knew that this was this would come up on the panel. But yeah, the truth
is I helped up on the panel and I hopped up on the panel and told the audience that I
wanted to fuck Gary, too. And the host muted the entire space.
It was awesome. So, you know, this is a very good learning experience for me. Like, I feel
like I've been learning about Ethereum killers since 2017. This is another one, right? Solana
is the most recent iteration. It is the one that has the history with FTX. It has the
rebirth like Phoenix, as far as the price, things like that. So like, that's why we're
having this space is another attempt, it seems, at a Ethereum killer. And I did hear a couple of
comments before trying to come back into the space that were about the outage. The outage,
from what I understand, was about five hours this time. It's had different outages in the past.
And part of the, you know, if you want to say it's a negative was, you know, things like the New
York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ, you know, financial transactions that can affect, you know, trillions
of dollars of sentiments, you know, people reacting to an outage of the stock exchange.
I did post up in the nest, you know, the fact that the stock exchange gets stopped, it has triggers,
it has circuit breakers, and those things are somewhat normalized, you know, when they happen.
Maybe it's something to do with the tech, maybe it's something else, right? So there are
government interventions. It's the same sort of pitch that I hear about, like, Ethereum used to
be this thing. And now it's, in fact, compliant, like, you know, the censorship element or whatever
it might be. Wait, Gary, Gary, are you are you insinuating that this may have been a game stop
Robin Hood situation? Was Solana saving Jup from, from from a death spiral? They shut down, shut
down the chain. Yeah, there's been a lot of that kind of speculation. There has been I'm not saying
it is I really haven't dove into it. I'm not going to do chain analysis or some kind of conspiracy
theory, but like the idea that there's centralized authority to, you know, affect, you know, something
that may be mainstream at the moment, such as Solana, Solana, the reason that people participate
in any of these things, whether the EVM of EOS is going to do it, you know, something else is going
to be an Ethereum killer, you know, the next iteration of a layer to go to layer two, because,
you know, that's faster transactions and cheaper transactions, but it still has the backbone of
Ethereum. Like these pitches have been going on for like six years, seven years. And Solana is
nothing new as far as that goes, in my opinion, it may have new tech, it may have new code,
may have new backers, may have new provenance about like, who is VC supporting it and going
to buy your bags in case there's a collapse or something like, you know, every pitch,
every everything has that pitch, like what who's going to save me in case I lose money.
And so like, it's just something that I want to understand the bipolar nature of the participants
in blockchain, either you want something that's permissioned, right, which are things like NASDAQ
or Tucker Carlson being able to talk to Putin, or, you know, whatever it may be, you want something
that's a permissioned, you know, somebody is going to rescue me, or you want something that's
non permissioned, right, you know, that doesn't require third party to allow you to transact that
that's really the question. And so even I posted up in the nest, you know, everyone loves as far as
Bitcoiners that, you know, maybe the ones from 10 years ago may not love sailor the same other than
the fact that they 30x or 30,000 x their bag, right. But outside of that, you know, sailor saying
that Bitcoin is going to be the backing for the dollar, just like the petrodollar, just like gold,
just like anything else that has had that hit in history. These are all centralized efforts,
they're all basically saying, you as a non KYC participant on the internet, using some piece of
software that either download to your to your computer, or you interact through a web three
interface, you do have permission, or you do not have permission to move code around on a blockchain,
that's really the question. And if Solana represents, like the future of permissionless
transaction, awesome, I'm supportive of Solana. But that's not the history. That's not what's
happened over the past, like, you know, existence of Solana. So like, if people are gonna have honest
conversations in this, I'm not trying to make it into a hater space, or like, evangelist over
Solana being the next best thing since sliced bread, it's just like, be honest,
people are participating in Solana, because the price goes up, people produces it because
the price dips, they say, here's, here's an opportunity, and it will reinflate to my,
my money will go up. That's what I'm trying to make since ages, everybody's in it for the pump,
they're not really in it for the principles. And that's, that's fundamentally the problem of the
industry. Exactly. Yeah, I want to listen in for more about like, what is the tech differential
about Solana versus any other EVM pitch over the past six years, the people are participating,
and they're interested because of price movement more than they are about the three legs of
blockchain, you know, faster or more secure, and all these other things. That's, that's the truth.
So before we go to the agreed game, before we go to Joseph, I just want to throw in one thing,
which is kind of in line with what I said before I pass the mic, which is I think that different
chains focusing and kind of like, kind of like watching kids grow up, essentially, finding
themselves or being comfortable with what they are, is not a bad thing. So I think similar to
what you're saying is, if Solana is the chain that is more centralized in order to accomplish,
and it's accepted that it goes down, that's part right. And that's an accepted part of the ecosystem.
And people accept it for the trade off of speed and cost and, and, and the divergent tech,
obviously, base code completely different and far more flexible for gaming and stuff like that,
then people accept that is a better if it doesn't go down, obviously, but I don't necessarily think
that individual flaws for one chain inherently make it a flaw for another chain, if it's an
accepted trade off. And I think price eventually reflects that. Joseph, you had your hand up.
Let me go ahead, Gary, really quick. The real quick add is the people that have bags of Solana
and wanted to 10x and go from whatever it is, maybe it's I don't know, haven't looked at the
price last time I saw it was like around 100 or something. And they say, hey, it's going to go to
1000. They wanted to next their money. It's the same thing Gary Cardone says about his Bitcoin.
It's the same thing that sailor says about like centralization of his money. They want they want
Wall Street involved. They want their bags to be bought out at a 10x or 100x. That's what they
want. And so like the people that have Solana and support and advocate for Solana, their political
misstep is to say, it is centralized like ripple because or like XRP, because they look at the
chart and they say, well, that kind of breaks the mold of its blockchain versus, you know,
some way for banks or central authorities to transact. Like they want they, they don't want
the price chart of ripple to follow the centralization of ripple. Like that's, that's my
opinion. I don't disagree at all. It's a lot. It's a lot to process. And I'd love to hear the
thoughts from the audience. Before I go to Joseph Evil, you had on Mike, did you want to say
something? I think I was just trying to clarify Gary and appreciate you and your perspective. I
just want to understand are you are you saying or are you drawing a parallel between like
Ethereum's architecture and Solana's architecture from like a decentralization perspective?
Like are you are you saying that they're the same or are you saying that they're different?
I guess I was a little unclear. All right. This is the other Gary, not the giraffe.
Gary Woods, you there? Are you having connectivity issues again?
Yeah, I'm having connection. I'm going to step down and come back up.
Okay. Evil, I had a similar question as well. Obviously, the code and architecture
couldn't be more different in terms of chain differentiations that exist currently, right?
For those who aren't aware, Solana is built on Rust coding language and Ethereum is built on
Solidity. Most chains that you're aware of are what's called EVM. So Ethereum Virtual Machine
related. They're all built on Solidity and can for the most part can interact with each other
in different ways. We won't get too technical there, but Solana is a completely different chain
and completely different technology. The way that these chains operate in terms of
first principles with regards to consensus mechanisms and validators and all that stuff
are similar, but the code itself is substantially different. I want to go to Andre and then Terry,
and then we'll welcome Gary back up when he requests it.
Actually, I was going to echo that point as well. There's a big difference between, first of all,
using Rust or Solidity. A lot of developers really enjoy Rust. The other differences are,
for example, that Visa is committing to Solana and for a lot of builders, project builders,
if you want to integrate Visa transactions, it'd be better to be on Solana. There's a lot of
current differences, but and here's the other thing. Maybe it is right that a lot of people
right now are hyped on the coin instead of the chain, and that's what they're after. You could
draw a parallel to the dot-com bubble, where a lot of people are just investing into crazy
IPOs for phantom companies, but it is the actual underlying tech that is of interest to the
builders and the creators. There was a point made where it's like, do you want authority,
like, for example, listen to Tucker Carlson's interview and have someone grant permission,
or do you want to conduct transactions in a permissionless state? I understand we're all
very focused on Bitcoin, blockchain, tech, how it's going to offer decentralization, but we do have
decentralization in the world, right? If Tucker Carlson can go by domain, put up a server at home,
get a dynamic IP even, and get it routed, and there's no one in the world that's going to
be denying him permission to host stuff on there, right? They'll have to go and break the
rules of what's called the ICANN to basically say, okay, this DNS isn't available, but still,
here's an IP. You can list IP, right? We have torrents forever, so it's not that decentralization
is something new. It's just the decentralization allows freedom of creation and allows a huge leap
forward. So that's kind of the big thing. Yeah. Yeah. Anyways, just a couple points.
Don't disagree. I see my boy, Sir Furious Prime, in the audience. Hopefully, we'll join,
help shed some technical light on stuff. Love when the best in the industry on the space,
so thank you guys for joining, really. Hey, guys. I got to go soon, actually.
Okay, sir. If you don't mind, yesterday, I was having dinner with the former general manager
of FTX Europe that was based here in Switzerland. So we're just talking about the entire debacle,
because he did nothing wrong, right? But he was somewhat responsible also there.
The idea at the time was to consolidate all of the FTX's entities, at least in Europe first,
and then possibly everywhere in Switzerland, rather than the Bahamas, ironically,
because he was considered better and more sure. He told me yesterday something that
was maybe relevant for this conversation here, that in his opinion, the FTX people are going to
get their money back. Can you hear me now? I can hear you now, yes. I just wanted to welcome Jack
to the stage. I'll go to you in a second. And then after, Terry, I want to quickly address.
Evil had a question for Gary that I want to clean up. So go ahead, Terry.
So he was saying that he didn't elaborate too much, but he basically said that in his opinion,
the FTX creditors were going to get their money back. And now, I'm just thinking, well,
what are the assets of FTX? And in fact, just so you know, guys, there is a lot of value still
in the books, because besides all of this stupid stuff they did and the FTT tokens and the absolute
nonsense that printing tokens out of nowhere was, they still somewhat invested and had stake
in some startups. So those are illiquid assets, but that doesn't mean they don't have value.
Some of these were even AI startups, and they're now on the billions of dollars of valuation. So
there's a lot of gains and capital gains there and so on. So just so you know, before I go,
because I thought it was interesting for the community to know that. And then other assets
that they could have, obviously, is a bunch of Solanas and things like that. So I don't really
know how they're going to go about trying to fix this entire mess of creditors versus
users versus the liquidity. But according to my friend, it was more of a liquidity issue than an
actual insolvency issue. So I wanted to throw it out there, because it's a double-edged sword. At
the same time, what the good news is that if he's in the right, then that means that not all of the
investors are going to be in the right position.
We lost you again, Terry.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, the two last things I want to say is just, it's a positive overall,
I think, because that means that apparently that there could be a revamp or a regain of
confidence because it doesn't seem like everything was lost, that the actual loss of value was not
sought initially. The other thing that could be also maybe not that good is, well, there is a
bunch of assets, and they will be used to repay others. And I was like, how are you going to use
that? Are you going to just take some loan on it and leverage the fuck out of it, which would be
degenerate, but would make sense so that you don't fire sell the entire thing? Or else, I guess,
depending on the regulators, how they go into this, just to sell whatever liquid assets they have.
With this being said, without trying to do some part, it might be also that give or take,
there's an entire revival because a lot of people who thought they were bossed are not,
because they are actually going to get repaid, including weak funds and stuff.
But it could also be that maybe for liquidity purposes, some of these assets will be sold.
And those are like big players, so they can impact markets, right? So hopefully, if that's
the route that is chosen, it won't be done in a disorderly fashion, because they'll be
overall destructive. But yeah, I just wanted to throw that out there because I thought it was
interesting for the community to know that. And so we're probably going to hear about this
in more articulated ways in the news and stuff like that in the future.
But I got to go, and thanks a lot, everybody. It's always a pleasure to come here and give
my little rants. So I'll see you soon. All right. Thanks, Terry. I appreciate you. Whatever you're
doing, be safe and welcome back anytime. If we could talk about FTX for days, I was a little
surprised at the announcement. I forget where it came from, but they said that everybody's
going to be made whole. Alarm me on multiple levels. I'd love to hear anybody's thoughts
with regards to that. Before we get to that, I did want to address Evil's question to Gary Woods,
and then I'd love to welcome Jack to talk about the outage and get a better technical analysis.
I gave my understanding, but I'd love to hear a deeper version. So Evil, if you want to reiterate
your question to Gary, and then explore that, and then we'll get a technical breakdown.
Yeah, thanks. I mean, Gary, it was just kind of a clarification on your comments,
and I appreciate your perspective. I was just trying to understand if you were
drawing a parallel between Solana's decentralized architecture and Ethereum's
decentralized architecture, and whether or not you're suggesting that those things are equivalent.
So I'm in a learning curve about the other competitors outside of Ethereum. What I've seen
is Bitcoin has had send received and maybe time lock built into its protocol, and then
centralized authorities or centralized businesses say, we can add features set to it.
And then I came into crypto in 2017 hearing about Bitcoin, but then it was the ICO craze.
So most of my experience, if it's anything, is EVM chains or competitors' ETH killers.
Different, you know, this code is faster. Lisk is going to do this, and it makes it easier for
people to build, rust, go. These are all programming languages that developers promote,
or they enjoy coding in. But at the end of the day, the people that are pushing the chart
are the ones that do not understand the technology. They do not understand anything other than it
gives you more privacy. It gives you faster transaction. Price is probably going to go up
because you're early. That's why people push the chart. They push it up or down
based on their sentiment and emotion. And outside of that, there's all the technical experts that
can say, this is why you should believe in this blockchain's utility. This is why you should value
it higher than the charts telling you or lower than the charts telling you on the competitor.
That's what I see. You know, when it goes to, I would love to see a poll put up into the
desk or you guys as hosts to be able to put over the course of this and say, you know, if Bitcoin
was pseudo anonymous, like it always has been, and trend and settlement occurred within an hour,
you know, and price, you know, basically of a transaction didn't change, would you go to
anything else? Like, you know, for your principles, your principles of being able to transact? No,
you want Bitcoin to go to $50,000, $100,000. You want gas prices to be higher because then,
you know, corporate players or rich people don't care that they're spending $1,000 on a transaction.
That's, you know, that's the disjoint. The same thing with Ethereum. Like, Ethereum has its history
of being, you know, smart contracts can ride on top of it. The narrative that's been put out there
by others is that Ethereum should be a dumb pipe. You know, the endpoints of value of the highway
trucks and the UPS deliveries and the Ferraris riding on the car on the road. So like the idea
of an L1 allowing value to transport and move around and businesses to be built on top of it,
that's been the pitch of Ethereum. So again, if Ethereum didn't have, let's just say theoretically,
it didn't have prohibitive transaction costs, would you continue with Ethereum? Probably not.
You probably would go to the thing that is going to have price up more than dumb pipe performance,
price performance. That's the reality of like speculation. You want to be early.
And if Solano right now has the attention, it's the best hashtag. People are interested in Bonk
and, you know, whatever else, meme coins that, you know, have honestly existed on Ethereum. Also,
you just see this trend play out over and over and over. I'm glad that Seth popped up on the room.
You know, I do want to hear his commentary, hopefully about Monero, right? You know,
Monero and its history and its recent deed listing. Don't talk dirty to Seth.
Yeah, but, you know, these two interesting things like we're never going to get consensus,
we're always going to be diverse people. And we're going to have different prerogatives about why we
say what we say. I'm just trying to be, you know, understand that and put out there that the reason
we're here is because price goes up. That's why we're here. The tech stuff is just, you know,
you know, it calms the brain about why you believe in one particular thing or another.
Well, okay. I'm going to push back a little bit and just say that I believe you are giving an
accurate analysis of a screenshot of where we are now. I think in terms of that balance between
price and tech, we're far closer to tech being, instead of saying more important than price,
but more correlative to price than it was years ago. So I think the delta between the two is
shrinking, which I think is a great thing, right? At the end of the day, obviously, even stocks
don't reflect actual value of the companies, but they're a lot closer than crypto usually is,
in my opinion. And again, I'd love to be wrong. I do want to take a moment.
Let me say that, you know, I've been listening for the past several months participating in a
lot of UDI and Eric Wall spaces about, like, cosmic casts and the reason why, you know,
wizards and things like that are adding security to the miners of Bitcoin. So, like, this idea that,
you know, the people that hate it and say no transactions on Bitcoin should only be financial
transactions and actuarial and insurance companies and, you know, Wall Street is going to buy it
because I've got a bag. But I hate JPEGs and, you know, Bitcoin having crypto kiddies moments,
you know, basically becoming Ethereum. Like, that's, this is not going to go away. People are
paying five or 10 Bitcoin for an inscription, right, on a sat. Why? Because other people are
willing to pay it like they it's it's complete speculation. That's why we're because those
people are paying because all the those people are paying all the money because the same influencers
who fucking juiced the market in 2021 are running back the exact same playbook, right?
They're just running it back on people that are too stupid to realize that it's happening.
But, you know, I agree with that. I completely agree with that sentiment. That's that's true
because stupid is stupid. And if your hundred dollars goes to ten thousand, you're kind of
happy that you were stupid enough to buy something that went up to ten thousand. Like, I understand
yeah, right up until it goes to zero perspective versus, you know, and again,
there's two million things listed on coin market cap. How many of those are valuable? Well,
it depends like that. You see them rebirth, you know, four years, five years later. And this one
post a chart of a hockey stick and they say, fuck, I shouldn't have sold that for pennies.
Like people are here because they're stupid and they're here because they're smart,
but they're here because of money. Well, well, Gary, they start stupid, right?
So until we get true mass adoption, we're always going to have retail fodder.
It's it's a definitive feature of growth. Right. And as much as we sit here and say, it's funny
because I've been much like everybody here. I've been yelling education for years.
And I keep on thinking that the education isn't sticking, but it is sticking. It's just there's
more and more new retail that needs to be educated over and over and over again. So
I don't think we get rid of that is an unfortunate reality I've come to to understand. And so I'm
focused at the top of the funnel in terms of just continuing to build. I do want to take a moment to
let the audience know, first of all, we're coming up on the one hour mark. Great conversation. Thank
you, everybody, for joining. If you don't already follow, please, please retweet the space, please.
Yeah. Retweet, like invite people. That's how we that's how we educate retail. So we don't have to
have these conversations over and over and over again. And that goes straight to my point. What
you are looking at on this audience are experts in in this field. And if you don't follow the people,
you have a serious prime, Mr. Jack Levin, if you want to learn about code and technology and first
principles and follow his ass, if you want to learn about marketing, there's nobody better in
the space than Andrew Saunders. Privacy Seth must follow stupid DGN jokes, Jay crypto,
Solana, Maxi, Gary, just good vibes and Chia go to Lucas. So if I've forgotten you, I apologize.
If you like hex, Gary, entertaining rooms as well. So if you want these kinds of conversations
information to multiply and your education to be exponentially increased, follow these people,
listen to them. Literally no better sources. On that note, Jack, welcome, brother. Thanks for
joining. Sorry if I woke you up. Hey, guys, I actually overslept. I slept like nine hours,
so I needed to wake up anyway. Thanks. Thanks for having me. How was everybody doing?
We're trying not to make fun of Solana too much. And by Solana, I mean, Gary, would love to hear I
gave a brief explanation of the of the outage related to what they said is a Berkeley packet
filter, which looks like if I'm not mistaken, the mechanism by with which it it filters gas
transactions for efficiency, which is if I'm not mistaken, how it it gets its speed and price. But
I'd love to hear your analysis of the what went down if it's similar to why it went down the past
and kind of how that plays into the entire chain mechanism. Sure, sure. Sure. Yeah, so I did a
little bit of study in terms of like exactly what happened and what happened before. And so the BFP
filter loader is actually doesn't do anything for gas, but it has some components in it.
It is similar to a virtual machine. So that's the that's what they use to execute the the bytecode.
And what happened is, is that there was a patch that actually was a solution to the problem that
they discovered. And they worked on that patch from November. So that's actually, you know,
great news that the team was aware that there might have been issues with with the chain
potentially. They haven't yet released any sort of official statements as to what triggered
the outage. They say that there was some sort of a bug in the Berkeley packet filter loader.
And the patch that they have since November had a fix for that. But what I really like to know
officially, or from official representative representation of Solana is what caused the
chain actually to lose its consensus, because that's that's what happened. My overview of what
could have happened is that there were some validators that could have been testing new
code and push some blocks that the rest of the system. It's not the war. I like so all the
systems are made by humans and the stability of the system is generally can be achieved by
practicing appropriate. We are moving towards consciousness. Um, without
do all these spoofies, spoofy, please. We're gonna lose the chain of I'll go to you in a minute,
please. We can go. So Tara, we're not gonna go. Go ahead, Jack, I'd like to get the text. I'd like
to, I'd like to get the technicals down before we start looking at the sky.
Go goes to the machine 100%. So anyway, here's here's my like personal view on this. So Solana
is always redlining their servers, they're optimizing for speed. Like every time you hear
Anatoly speak, he's talking about Jack, would you mind explain? Would you mind explaining? So
what does redlining code me? Redlining means that imagine you're driving
your car at the top speed in a thread lining with the RPMs. So in context of blockchains and
servers, that actually means that servers are used to their maximum capacity, meaning that you have
very, very little room for any sort of like error correction. So if all of your systems and services
within the server allocated to execute transactions, as fast as you can, there are sometimes no buffer
to handle, for example, forks from occurring, like you have to resolve certain conflicts.
And if you're focusing on transactions at the speed of light, you may be neglecting
verifying transactions or verifying forks, at some reasonable speed, not to cause problems.
And the chains technology usually builds in a decentralized manner. And they do have 4,000
servers or some sort of like that sort of a scale. What I do understand about that is those
servers are unlikely equal in their capacity, which means that the capacity of a server or
server running at 80%, the other servers will have to run 100%. And if you run above, if you run above
100%, your weaker servers will fail, like or will start delaying packets, so they will do like other
issues. So it's very difficult to actually redline the system or approach like the ultimate only one
low worker and the network down the whole fucking. Yeah, well, you're right. But but algorithmically,
this could be solved, like specifically, you could ignore and punish the slow workers, you could,
you know, give them penalty points, so that they don't end up being a blocker. And so,
if we go back to their previous large outage, this is what happened then, and was very well
analyzed. There was a single node that installed that had the old version of the node and the new
version of the node running, running at the same time, which created the branched chain. So it was
two forks running at parallel. And it's confused the hell out of the rest of the network, because
the blocks look like they were legit. But there were some variations to the identical blocks that
that server was producing. And the rest of the service just could not validate the blocks and
cause the whole chain fail. So in the in the in the technical operational world, we call it single
point of failure. And a single point of failure does not need to be a node, it just needs to be
a function. So if you have a function that can disrupt the whole chain, then you absolutely
have to spend 100% of your efforts to make sure it does not happen. Unfortunately,
it looks like with Solana, the, the tech there is like or the domain tech guy basically said that,
well, the bugs will happen just because we're on the chain so fast. But that's actually not
an explanation. He's explaining why things will go wrong again. But the reality is that they
really need to focus on speed and on safety of execution. And they have to combine and balance
those things together. So those issues will not happen.
Jack, can I ask a quick question? No, go ahead. Sorry, I thought you were pausing. Go ahead.
I am pausing. Okay, so and before we go to Seth, and I'd love to hear more about this.
So one thing I hear all the time, and I'd love, I'd love to understand and also specifically for
the audience, I hear people say all the time, that they're pushed back against the Hey, Solana
centralized argument is they, they reference the Nakamoto coefficient. And they say that, that,
that Solana has a better Nakamoto coefficient score than Ethereum, therefore it's safer.
That doesn't seem to make sense under the circumstances. So if you clarify that, I'd
greatly appreciate it. Yeah, so the Nakamoto coefficient really applies to like the,
the very early chains, like Bitcoin and Ethereum, it doesn't really make much sense for
the contemporary chains. The only thing that I mean, like when it comes to decentralization,
what are the first principles of crypto? Well, the number one, like in my book, and pretty much
you can look it out, is inability to censor transactions. So you cannot have a single entity
or an entity that controls multiple servers within the network to that can censor you,
like for example, allow privileged NFT means versus somebody that you don't like, you just
censor them. And so ultimately, that's, that's what it means. And the way that we achieve that,
we have a multitude of nodes across the world ran by I can tell you that it's not going to succeed
in 10 years, because like 30 trillion dollars. Sorry, spoofy, please let the guests speak.
Otherwise, I'm gonna lose my frame of thought. You're new to the stage.
We always like to welcome new people, but please respect the flow.
So anyway, Nakamoto, Nakamoto coefficient, I think is just two fancy words that don't really
mean much practically. What we need to focus on is, does Solana have centralization or censorship
problem? I don't think they do. Because the way that they select nodes that are rapidly created to
or put in line to be leaders, to verify and create new blocks is actually very well designed
algorithm. They rotate the nodes very, very quickly. It's very difficult for a single or
multiple nodes to collude to actually corner some sort of economic energy out of other players out
there. Again, like the issue with technology that I have is that it's not that the technology is at
hold. But I think the attitude should be is that, okay, so we're red lining the chain. But here's
all of our initiatives to keep the chain safer from collapsing from a single point of failure.
And so far, I haven't seen them at all say anything. And I haven't seen their, I think,
CTO say anything either. The response to a question, what, what are you guys doing to
stop this from occurring again? He just responds, well, this is the experimental nature of Solana
were in beta type of thing. And so things kind of like would happen. So like, if I was a major
investor in Solana, I would be concerned if I was on the board, I would press for the documentation
and, for example, team to be formed in terms of that is focused on the reproducing, replicating
and looking forward to potential bugs that would occur. So when I was at Google, we had like a lot
of teams that actually tested Google in crazy possible way. Like, there was a bug.
Jeff, just the audience, weren't you like employee number? What employee number were you at Google?
So just to highlight who you're listening to in spaces. And by the way, just a little
shout out and respect. Jack is the founder of a token called Zen that you should check out. It's
dollar sign x en. This is not sponsored by Zen or anything. I just really like
his projects. And I might get shot for this. Sorry, guys. But he also is the founder of the
true and original x one blockchain. So check out his ecosystem.
Thanks. So anyway, so like at Google, Google always ran pretty fast and always red lines.
And we were focusing on things like, like, how do we do we have an outage prevent prevention,
prevention plan? Do we have postmortem or adequate postmortems that allow us to learn what exactly
causes issues? Like, for example, Google could have been brought down by simply typing two words.
And one of the one of the pairs of words that you could type would be theological cellulite.
The word theological obviously relates to theology and cellulite is like, you know, fat or,
you know, like she's basically an element of your body combined together theological cellulite
forced Google to search their indexes all the way from like from the top to the bottom, crashing
every server in a data center. So that was like, like some one of our guys actually like found
a bug like that. And then and then people found like, okay, well, it's not just theological
cellulite, it could be like all other type of variations of queries that you can enter to crash
Google. And the way you fix it is, well, you have some algorithmic exceptions to that. So I think
what Solana should do is that, like all of their bugs are clearly obvious, they're clearly moving,
clearly developing. I think they suffer from lack of testing. If they had a testnet, like for example,
with their previous bug running both nodes simultaneously and introducing disruption into
the chain, they would have seen that in the testnet. And they would see seen the problems
Jack, are you saying that Solana does Solana not have a testnet? Are they calling it beta this
they're considering this? Okay, they do have a testnet. But but looking at their responses to
the crisis, I, I feel like their philosophy does not include proactive determination of bugs that
disrupt the chain. And their testnet is not like when Jupiter tested, they had to test everything
on mainnet because the testnet doesn't simulate mainnet conditions. So you can't really test what
you need to test. Right. So that's kind of like, I mean, like the biggest issue is that there will
be changes to the code. But the network must be as a priority, resilient to an introduction
of raw blocks that consensus fails with. And so I think personally, consensus is the most important
thing within the chain, because it covers so many things. Obviously, it covers censorship resistance,
it covers decentralization in the way that the the nodes actually come to the consensus of what's
real and what's not, I think execution, and the transmission of the blocks is secondary to
consensus. Now, you could take it to the extreme, and you could say, well, we have Ethereum and has
amazing consensus, but it's also very, very slow. So that is where the balance has to be created,
like you cannot be so fast where all of your engineering resources are focused on the ability
to execute things as fast as you can without stable consensus that takes the chain chain down
all the time. And so I think if you balance those things, if you like maybe hire a person who can
look to see if the practices of the development of new code and implementation of this code within
the chain and the stability aspects, then I think Solana will have, you know, more rainbow days ahead.
And I am a big fan of Solana, obviously, because they took so much risk. They have a non EDM
execution environment. They have different type of consensus, everything's different, like,
and they launched the phone, like they did everything not by the book. And I think I would
give them like a plus for disrupting the world. And like, if you guys ever been to magic, you
didn't bother any NFTs in Solana, the experience is like is like running or shooting a howitzer,
you know, machine gun, like, your NFTs just end up in your wallet, like before you can blink,
it's incredible, right? I think the team needs to put their big pants, big boy pants on,
basically say that consensus is the number one thing that keeps the users assets secure. And
basically should be the underlying base technology with the acceleration of transaction execution
engine at the speed of light on top. And then I think they will be unstoppable.
So Jack, before we go to before we go to Seth, my last question is, then why are what's a what's
a practical reason or like a logical reason why they aren't currently doing that? It sounds like
they're just, if I'm not mistaken, they're just not hiring enough people or or paying enough
attention to testing is what you're saying. And why would they not like, they got billions,
billions in market cap, they're not short on funds, the foundation has sufficient funding.
Why are they doing it? So you know how, like, Microsoft has Windows. And there's also like
Macintosh, and Windows just always sucked, because they never paid attention to UI, like really be
like amazing. And it just took them years to get those those things right where Macintosh was like,
oh my god, amazing. It's like breathing pure oxygen when you touch it. So sometimes the groups
organizations do not pay attention to certain things. Like for Windows, the office office 95
or whatever the Microsoft office was the number one selling software. And Windows operating system
was created as an afterthought, just to run that, where Macintosh was more of a consumer oriented
company that focused on UI. So what I'm saying is that maybe perhaps similar things are happening
in Solana, where they're saying consensus is not as important, it kind of works. But we have a
bigger challenge, where like the philosophy of running transactions at the NASDAQ speed or at
the speed of light is more important. So I think it's ultimately it's not about the people, it's
about who makes the decisions and who says who sets priorities, I think Anatoly should come out
and should just say that we have a pattern of going down for similar reasons. Here's what those
reasons are. Here's what I'm doing to address those reasons. So those things will not happen
again. And this is the effort that we as a group an organization implementing within our organization
to get things more stable. So I think he absolutely needs to say that. And he can do it on Twitter.
And there should be a postmortem like should be two pages with the timelines, how things went down,
what went down, why it went down, and then the solutions to fix that. It's actually not that
like much of a rocket science to do that. The problem is, is the ego, like you could say that,
oh, you know, we're still the best, we still have like the most transactions. And therefore,
and we're also in development. Therefore, you guys need to suck it up, we're still early,
we're going to go down again. And that's just like how things are going to be. But in the space
we're in, there's like other companies out there, like for example, Avalanche, Avalanche hasn't
really been down that much. And they run at pretty, pretty fast speeds. Phantom is the same way,
also fast and also polygon. Polygon is getting faster. And there's also like all of those like
layer two. So so the thing is, like, if you do not pay attention to what your Achilles heel is,
it will absolutely bite you at the ass and ultimately make you mediocre, just like the
wrong decisions made Windows mediocre. Super interesting. We're gonna go to Seth,
but I hadn't thought about that. Essentially, what you're saying is, it is the resulting problem is
technical. But it's not necessarily a technical problem in nature. It's an organizational problem
that leads to tech problems. If I understand your organization. Yeah, exactly. So engineers come up
with technology, and they put their like, I would say mental DNA into into into the development.
So absolutely, they're the proto parents of the technology that that has been born technology by
itself. Ultimately, it does not matter. It matters how you handle it. It matters what you put your
priorities on. And that's how it is everywhere. Like it's that's how it's been with Google. And
pretty much in any technical product out there. So it's definitely it takes one person to set the
tone, I think Anatoly should just come out and say that here's the common pattern, be completely
transparent, and then educate, educate the community as to what they're planning to do in
the future, to to make the consensus better and to be more resistant to bugs like that.
So totally, if you're listening, your buddy Jack is giving you the playbook. Don't be put aside
your hubris for a moment and be honest about your product. And I think I agree. I think the community
would embrace it with open arms. I mean, this is the chain where I hear people say, we expect to
get rugged on meme coins. Like they don't they don't really say something I almost did a leak
today. I went to Namecheap and I searched for domains. And like the best that I found was like
rock pull that directory. No, that was a joke. But on sole that directory on so like you want to do
hat, hat, hat, so you want to do cat, cat, cat, so you want to do hat, cat, whack, hat with hat
with that hat. Like, what the hell? Why don't you just put them all under one domain under one
umbrella on so that whatever. Like, thank you. Thank you, Spoofy. I actually don't understand
what you're saying. Am I crazy? Am I being mean? Or do I do I not understand? But this being said,
Seth, sorry, guys. Evil was that agreement? Or? No, I have no idea. That's like a lot of words,
but there don't seem to be in any particular order. Okay, I thought maybe he was a genius. And I was
and I just didn't understand. I'm sorry. Seth. Yeah, me too. That's why I didn't say anything.
I was like, is this guy just wicked smart? And I just don't understand what you're saying. But
I don't think that was the case. It was like we're playing. It's like you're playing reverse.
Or maybe none of us can understand because we're just not we're not on that side of the
I'm not I'm not on that much drugs.
Seth. Anything more coherent?
Yes, Solana is a scam chain. She goes down again. That's what I was gonna say. I mean,
it's an original thought and it's mine. And I wanted to jump up on stage to use a little bit
of time just to bring in those this novel concept. But okay, I guess maybe since I'm here. First off,
thanks for having me on stage. Always a pleasure. And the reason I believe Solana is a scam chain,
the reason I have very great difficulty to do that is if you want to see a canary in the coal mine,
look up a project called lava cash, lava cash. And this is I got I don't know anybody with the
founding team. This is not me taking, you know, cheap shots at anybody. I'm sure that they put
forth an honest effort, but there was meant to be something of a of a corollary, you know,
or parallel service to tornado cash on on Solana. Never subtle light a day. It, it had a really cool
landing page at a really fancy, you know, I think squeeze page where you could give them an email
address, doxing yourself, so you could maybe get privacy from them down the line on Solana. And
then nothing, right? There are no, there are no zk enabled smart contracts, at least not being
deployed at scale in a retail oriented product. And that is a problem, right? There are several,
even though tornado cash, right, the developers were made an example of very publicly, it didn't
die, right? Because code doesn't die. And Solana, we just never got there, right? It's one thing to
be a has been another thing to be a never was. And Solana is in that camp, there is no privacy,
there are no credible privacy protocols there. And it seems like maybe because of that saber
rattling from the treasury, that there might not ever be. So there are huge anonymity problems on
just fundamentally on Solana, then there's there's nobody stepping up to address that. And for that
reason, I'm out. Shots fired. So quick, quick comment. So I think you're, you're basically
saying that the Solana foundation should come up with some sort of tornado cash equivalent,
which I don't agree that they should. Clearly, I didn't say that, because those weren't my words.
So what I did say was in that ecosystem, there's nobody doing that. And, and that's the ethos, I
don't I wouldn't I wouldn't roll with it with a group of people that doesn't value privacy at all
to the point that they are telling me that I am forced to be using a public blockchain by default
at all times, and have zero recourse for privacy other than the exchange loophole, which is kind of
janky, and you know, not not the best way to add privacy to blockchain. So you're judging the whole
chain and the whole foundation by the fact that there is no team that actually like broad
internet or the cash. Clearly, clearly, that's also not my point, because those weren't the words
that I used. But respectfully, what I'm going to say is what I have against the foundation is
deeper than that is on a security level. When you start with VC funding, and you have a you have a
roadmap leading up to launch and I go to market strategy, and you don't add hardware wallet
support or make sure that that on the that on security side, that users are not constantly
getting rug pulled, then that maybe I take some issue with I didn't mention that before, but I'm
glad you brought up the foundation twice in the straw man argument. But so let me let me criticize
foundation. The foundation I have problems with because there wasn't proper hardware wallet
support, they had every opportunity to reach out to ledger Trezor and other heart popular hardware
makers, and to add support before they launched. Instead, what we got was a massive rug pull with
janky products like slope wallet, that stored C phrases in plain text. So there are a couple
other problems that I would take umbrage with and not with anybody personally, the foundation,
just to say there was time, there was opportunity, and there was plenty of money to solve those
problems early. But instead, we had high profile hacks and massive damages. And privacy is the tip
of that iceberg, I think. And, and it's just it's another massive fundamental problem. So,
so yeah, the foundations of Solana, I have a problem with everybody at the Solana Foundation,
or, you know, or any of the VCs that are Solana focused, I have no problem with anybody individually,
I just think there are huge problems with Solana in general.
Well, I can't, I can't really speak on their philosophical approaches to what should be on
the chain or what shouldn't. I mean, like clearly, I wouldn't go as far as calling them a scam
chain, because they're not willingly scamming people, they may be busy working on like things
and the priorities are, are different than like what what you would expect. And there's many
examples of other chains doing the same thing. That's a very charitable approach. That's better
said for sure. I yeah, so I mean, I was being inflammatory because the name of the space I
hope you forgive me for saying it's a scam chain. But I mean, like, I, I have no relation in Solana,
or no relationship with any anyone in Solana, I just like to study their technology. So but we
need to be fair in in the way that we're describing the ecosystem. No, for sure. And that's why and
that's why I use the fair and objective measure of every EVM chain having support every major
relevant EVM chain with with significant TVL having support on tornado cache as a protocol,
or using zk, you know, zk, zk P's in smart contracts to add some sort of forward privacy.
And there's zero correlation, even though much of that is boilerplate, or could be studied,
maybe not directly forked, but could be that could be studied and used and implemented in Solana,
and nobody's doing it. That to me seems like a massive problem in terms of feature parity.
I absolutely agree. I mean, like they do they do have some elements of technology, I would give a
class and some are absolutely terrible, including the inability for setting setting the priority
fees for any transactions, like you cannot actually have a wallet that says priority fees. And a lot
of the chain is bought it, like most most of the transactions that are hitting the talking program,
which is like their equivalent of ERC 20 are failing. And the reason why they're failing is
because bots are trying to snipe trades, and their underpricing transactions and most of them
fail, just spewing junk into the chain, actually, potentially making the chain slower, just because
there's no good gas management system yet. And I, when I spoke on Twitter to Anna told you about it,
he said that it will eventually be coming. When I think, you know, I think, you know,
I think, I mean, like, they do have phantom ball that everybody loves. I think they should
really present those guys to include priority fees, being, being part of the
wallet that people could use to execute. Because like when bots are running, like I remember,
I was trying to, to, to mean soul maps. And I couldn't mean to single soul map using a wallet
using traditional web wallet, because bots were just minting that project non stop. And the way
that I can tell there was a bot, every transaction fee had 666 in it. And it was a recurring pattern
of the fees applied. And you could see it's actually single person running a farm of bots
with many accounts, sniping all of the soul maps, and users just couldn't get them just because
they don't have the capability. And so what I did is I wrote a program wrote my own kind of like a
bot thing set the priorities he fees higher above the bot and actually got some soul maps. I mean,
like whether it's going to be an amazing project or not, I don't know, it was just an experiment.
But the point is very proud of it. Yeah, the number one issue with the chain, the way I see is
bunch of junk transactions, no ability to set the priority fees. And of course, the biggest
elephant in the room is that it doesn't feel like the team is focusing on the consensus bugs. So
that's why I'm like calling out there and I told it to stop step up and basically say that so great
is our priority for the month. It sounds like you guys are both agreeing that Solana is a
scam chain. Thank you for reaching consensus. I think Jack is he's laying a much deeper seated.
That's what I was going to say. Super hot cake. Just one second. Just my thought and then please.
The rest of the spaces you're going to hear for the next 2448 hours are going to sound like
it's a scam chain. It's not decentralized and no substantive analysis. So please,
if you're in the audience and you're going to participate, write down some notes.
These are the substantive, actual, not token price that's not relevant to the actual
conversation. These are the reasons why chains are differentiated, why we have issues, and it's
completely separate from how many dgens are in there to a degree and what might happen to meme
coin prices or anything like that. So separate the two in your thought process. Evil, go ahead
and then we'll circle to Gary and Lucas have had the hands up for a while and then simple welcome
This is my thank you so much. And I didn't mean to speak over you. This is this is my
super spicy hot take about Solana. And I will say I don't know them. I'm not an investor. I
don't really have any insight into what their strategic plans are or not. So just as a disclaimer,
I've been thinking a lot about kind of them as a chain. And you know, my view is that I'm very
much a kind of a multi chain world person. I think that there are going to be different tools for
different jobs. I think you're going to see different levels of specialization and ultimately
kind of the market will sort of sort it out in terms of, you know, what they're able to support
or not with respect to that specialization. Having said that, you know, they made the announcement
about like a million TPS and I was thinking a lot about that. And, you know, it's kind of a funny
thing because when you think about it, like Visa, which I think is about 15,000 TPS or whatever,
they're able to operate their global payments network just fine at that level. Right. So it's
kind of this question of like, well, who needs a million TPS? Like who's the customer for that?
Right. And there are like some, you know, maybe some use cases here and there. But like by and
large, I actually don't think that it's necessarily that useful for most people. Like most applications
do not need anywhere near something close to, you know, real time processing of transactions at that
kind of scale. And I, you know, it's like it will enable some products to exist that haven't
existed before. That's true. But I think my general kind of view is that I feel like Solana
would be smarter to reposition themselves. And what I mean by that is this. Right now, the
conversation tends to be, you know, Solana versus ETH. I don't think that that's the right comparison,
because, you know, if you're going to compare to Ethereum, you really have to kind of like
talk about all the layer twos and, you know, just sort of the larger ecosystem. And that's
really the more like apples to apples kind of comparison. I don't think they win that.
But I do think that they can they can position themselves as an alternative to AWS. And here's
the here's the interesting thought. Right. Which is, if I'm not a blockchain, right, if I'm just a
distributed architecture where people can, you know, launch apps and can achieve, you know,
edge to edge and, you know, reasonable uptimes without like a permanent SLA in place or having
to pay for one. That's that's actually pretty interesting. Right. Because like right now,
as an application developer, if I wanted to put something out, you know, that has any kind of
cloud based architecture, I'm going to deal with AWS or GCP or, you know, Azure or whatever. Right.
And I'm going to pay for that. And the idea that I could launch an application into a distributed
network where I'm shifting that cost structure from myself, right, having, you know, a monthly
bill to my end users paying some kind of nominal transaction fee that I think is super interesting.
Not only is it super interesting, but I feel like it kind of gets them off of this
treadmill of comparison. Right. Because like the reality is, if that's what you're building,
then it doesn't really matter if you went down for five hours. Like that's the cost of doing
business. That's that's the trade off you're making. Right. If you want to pay for like
absolute zero down times, then pay Google or pay Amazon or pay somebody. Right. But if you
are willing to accept maybe like slightly or potentially degraded service at times
as a trade off for not having a monthly cloud based bill, like I think that that's that's
actually super fucking interesting. And I don't know. I mean, it's just a kind of like, I guess,
a hot take on Solana. But I feel like it would be really well served to just stop saying they're a
blockchain and start talking about themselves as as more of a distributed kind of infrastructure
company. So very, very good hot take. I would say every blockchain is a distributed system,
obviously. The from the very genesis of Solana, they wanted to solve the problem of slow execution
time so that people could actually have ability to execute trades without having our bots sniping
their transactions, which is like totally the case on Bitcoin today and totally the case on Ethereum,
like the longer your blocks are waiting to be executed, the more of a sandwich attacks you can
have and you can actually you will not ever like get the the best the best pricing. So I think
it's very important to have almost instantaneous blocks and almost instantaneous transaction
confirmations. Like basically, if we just throw away all of the smart contracts, paradigm all
together, and we just basically say that a chain is a platform that's sufficiently distributed
sufficiently fast to run a DEX or distributed exchange that allows you to trade tokens without
getting slippage or or getting sniped. So, and that's how you can get to to value because right
now, like on Ethereum, the value is really driven through an auction of the gas arbitrage to the
speed of transaction execution or to be included in the block. Like specifically, we all suffer from
major, major gas spikes on Ethereum, like when I launched some of my projects,
whether it's an NFT or a token mint, it affects the whole Ethereum, like I can literally bring
Ethereum down by launching some sort of a shit coin for having it like properly marketed. And
that is not the world that we need, we should be in. I think Solana's initiatives are very,
very solid in a way that's not only that their blocks are fast. They also have something that
they call segregated fee markets, which basically means that if you have a hot NFT minting,
the fees go up for that project, but not the other project, or it will not affect the DEX
trades. So I think none of the chains that I have seen have segregated fee markets that basically
disconnect some sort of a spammy token, or just like when people are way too excited about the
project, they will not affect the rest of the chain. So I think definitely A plus for getting
that done. And also like this thing that you mentioned about the visa comparison and millions
of transactions. So first of all, when you swipe your credit card, you get this sort of a soft
confirmation, the settlement for the vendor actually happens in a couple of days, like maybe
24 hours, maybe 48 hours. So it's not really... They're not even necessarily. I mean, the swipe
on the magnetic strip is not even necessarily online to your point. But my point is that
it doesn't matter, right? Like at the end of the day, it kind of depends what your use case is.
So from a technology perspective, I agree with you, but I'm also saying that it's like if you
want to go fight... Like for example, if they want to fight a battle with Bitcoin over who's
more decentralized, or they want to fight a battle with Ethereum over who's security is better,
right? That is not necessarily I think a battle that they are positioned to win, right? On the
other hand, if they want to fight a cost battle over cloud deployments with application developers,
that is something they could absolutely win, right? And they could win it without necessarily
having to take on or cover some of the technical challenges that they would... If they were trying
to go head to head with some of these other chains, which just in my view are pretty specialized in
some sense for kind of specific things. I totally agree with you about the trade-offs around that,
but I'm just not sure that their current path is really is paying off, right? I mean, the fact
that they had the outage that they did in my view, I think it's going to erode confidence, right?
Because at the end of the day, it's like kind of this problem where everybody remembers the
bad thing happens, nobody cares about the good thing, right? So the fact that they were up for,
what was it, 340 odd days or whatever, isn't relevant, right? The fact that they went down
is relevant. Yeah, I totally agree. I think an outage like this or outage that are coming in
series will erode confidence of the community towards the foundation team. Basically, in the
relation to what I said before, you have to have certain priorities, you have to communicate really
well to the communities as far as what exactly is going on. The problem, speaking of decentralization,
I always view decentralization as ability to or inability to censor and not having
counterparty risk, essentially, within the chain and on top of your transactions. Currently,
I don't see Solana as having an issue with censoring transactions. The problem with the
transaction censoring is the bots. So if a bot is running outside of the wallet ecosystem,
just for basically running a program, they're literally censoring your ability to min stuff
and to do certain transactions. So they don't have the on-chain censoring done by an organization
that can censor your transactions from executing or just throw them out. But when a bot is in front
of you, minting a shitload of NFTs, and you can't do that, that is no difference than censoring.
And that is the bigger problem than anything else that they have within their technologies,
like right there, inability for end users to prioritize their transactions well.
I don't 100% agree with that. Thanks, guys. I know that Lucas and Gary have had their heads
for a while. I haven't heard from Lucas, and he did DME some interesting stuff. I'd love to get
your thoughts, Lucas, and get the panel's opinion on your analysis. And then we'll go to Gary circle
around to simple and Andre. And I appreciate you guys. Well, thank you, Fidgetl. And Jack,
I really appreciated your summation of the red lining with Solana. And the concern that I,
or I think you're absolutely right that sorry, I've got dogs that are going crazy here.
To me, Solana is not looking at Visa. They're looking at NASDAQ. And they're having the same
problem that the stock exchanges have in an arms race for technology. Jack, I wondered if you're
familiar with alpha bill Solana Solana to there's a Solana phone and also the the concept I know
came from and totally his background was in cell phones or cell phone towers. And just in that
regard, I it would seem to me an alpha bill is a UT XO blockchain that also aims to be a payment
system in Africa, but it can settle offline. So it would seem to me like Solana needs to be working
in time windows for years in which they can settle transactions offline or else they will be a victim
of the arms race of trying to be NASDAQ. Anyway, those were my points, Fidgetl. Sorry, I have dogs
go crazy the moment I might. So NASDAQ settlement, actually, that's a bit of a misnomer as well. When
you do a trade on NASDAQ, you get the confirmation, but the clearing house actually transfers the funds
in literally 48 hours. So comparing an execution time within within NASDAQ to a chain that's trying
to actually use consensus to settle your funds that you're trading and securely deposit them
in your wallet that you're custodian off is an entirely different technology. So we can't even
compare that. And also, I wanted to very, very quickly mention to like that thing about 1 million
transactions per second, that will likely not happen pretty much ever. And I know they have
this project called fire dancer, I looked at their codes, fire dancer, that's transaction
verifications, it doesn't do much for consensus, it does accelerate networking capability of the
node. But the network capability of the node actually is not responsible for settlement of
transactions, the consensus is. And I don't see how you can have very, very quick network or
transaction verifications, even if you're running at a million TPS within the scope of verifying
transactions, the settlement within the chain is the slowest part. That is where you cannot achieve
a million transactions that are actually settled. So very different things. So I know they're
marketing for 1 million TPS. If you don't mind, so I was raised in ultra orthodox too in my youth,
everything was waiting for the Messiah. And the Messiah was going to come and it was the afterlife
and it was going to solve everything, which got away for that. That's how I feel that a lot of
people talk about fire dancer. And I don't think anybody actually has a clue what it is. Me included,
would you mind if it's possible, a quick explanation of what the fire dancer upgrade is
and what's the problem that it's solving and how it solves it to understandable way?
So those are the Anatoly's words. He basically says that Ethereum has been around long enough
for people to implement the consensus code and node codes in a bunch of different ways. Like
for example, there's Java implementation, there's Golang implementation, there's even Python
implementation. What Anatoly is really worried about is zero-day attacks that can happen within
an infrastructure like his having only one or two node implementations that run. Basically,
nodes are clients for the blockchain. So fire dancer is yet a third implementation. So they
have the original Solana Labs implementation, plus GTO node that does like math optimization,
and gives you like better yield. That's rewritten. And the fire dancer team is part of the jump
group that I believe actually invested in Solana. They looked at their code and they said, okay,
we're going to rewrite everything and see, which supposedly, arguably, which that can verify
transactions quicker. So they're working on this third version of the Solana client that should be
an alternative that should the zero-day attacks happens on the first two, the last one, the third
one, unlikely to have a problem. Now, they obviously marketing it very, very heavily where
they say it's going to be a million TPS, it's going to be so great, it's going to be awesome,
because they have enough time to develop it properly. The problem is, is that fire dancer
really all only looked at transaction signature verifications, network acceleration. And I haven't
seen any code that's open source that actually deals with consensus mechanism. That is like what
actually makes the chain slow, pretty much every chain is slow due to the consensus. So I think
there's some I would say intellectual dishonesty that I wish that Anatoly would step up and say
that here's what the problems are on chain today. Let's stop talking about fire dancer that doesn't
even accelerate consensus or fixes consensus or makes it better. Let's actually focus on aspects
that users are suffering from today, rather than like some future 1 million TPS that's unlikely
even going to be the case. Got it. So if I can sum that up, and then we'll go to Gary. What you're
saying is that the issue is in the consensus mechanism and fire dancer doesn't address the
consensus mechanism. So any claims that it solves everything, regardless of the accuracy as to truth
of a million TPS or the other accomplishments, it doesn't address the issues that are causing
the chain to go down and potentially fundamental issues with the chain.
Well, it's it's exactly right. Like basically, they're saying let's read, let's redline the server
or servers even more by creating more efficient code. And they talk about it's like, like every
time like I listen to their new tech, they're all 90% of them are excited about fire dancer,
they should be more excited about making the consensus faster, or consensus more stable.
And it's sad that they do not because it's actually misleading people and this is pumping
the hopium balloon, you know, full of hot air that's actually not helping them.
Got it. And it makes sense. I'm wondering, I wish we had more Solana maxis to kind of push back if
there is a pushback. Every time you've explained something to me, and I've researched it, it's
turned out to be accurate. So I would I would be interested, would be interested to hear the
foundation's response. Gary, thanks for waiting. What's your thoughts, brother? And then we'll go
to Andre, simple and then Andre. Yeah, I always think this is an amazing learning opportunity
whenever Seth and Jack get, you know, basically into the technical weeds. It's, it's great
information about, you know, respective beliefs about like the use case of blockchain. I think
it's awesome. I posted up in the nest, you know, friends with Jack, I think he thinks I'm a friend
as well. I like that he pokes holes in different, different chains. I think he actually motivates
people, whether it's out of them being pissed off at what he says, to fix the holes or the problems
they may have in their own product. So I always appreciate when he when he has commentary. Same
thing with Seth, you know, I think his commentary earlier when that can help conditioning and it's,
it's kind of like, why am I here? Am I here because of price? Am I here because I'm in it for the tech,
you know, I'm in it for freedom, you know, it helps an audience to still wire they here.
So I heard the last thing before I came up was digital saying, you know, wish they had some more
Solana maxis. My most recent thing up in the nest is the chart. The chart for Solana, at least on
coin market cap, kind of displays maxis, whether it's the maxi, that's a VC or market maker that
says, I'm gonna restore the dip to previous price before the five hour outage, or whether it's people,
you know, speculating and saying it's just going to recover like it's done 15 times before. You know,
it's opportunity where people will push the price to where they're at. So like,
these these are philosophical reasons to be here. Sure. I think that's awesome. If Seth does make
comments, again, I do want to hear more about like Monero, like, and also I like whenever,
when Jack makes commentary about like first principles and what makes crypto different than
clawbacks that are in the stock exchange, you make a trade, it has a clearing house,
you can have government seize your assets, doesn't matter what you traded, or what bank account you
you got your cash in after a trade, you can have a lawsuit, you know, so like the centralization
versus the decentralization nature of our speculative instruments is interesting. I heard
a lot during this stream about Visa and you know, millions of transactions. And even if the
settlement from your credit card is the next day to the merchant, it can be six months or a year
later that that merchant again gets a clawback because someone says, hey, that was an error,
or you know, they shouldn't have charged me that much or whatever. So like, those aren't
good comparisons, really, because it's not the nature of this blockchain, you know,
thing. So again, just want to give the valid tech commentary that especially Seth and I think evil
plan also made. But like, you know, at the end of the day, the chart is what people are paying
attention to, because they don't want their backs to go down, they want their back to go up. That's
why that's the screenshot that's in the nest. Anyway, good commentary. Love it. Yeah, it's
interesting. Something super, super fast, because I think maybe it got kind of lost my point about
a million TPS versus Visa was to say that, you know, if you had a blockchain that was at 15k TPS,
like that's functionally equivalent to the speed necessary to support Visa, i.e., you don't need to
necessarily have, you know, you're not going to you may get nominal benefits from getting to,
you know, 50,000, 100,000, 200,000, right? Because there's just simply not that kind
of transaction load. And you know that because Visa's at, you know, roughly 15,000 and essentially
able to maintain. So I guess my point was like, imagine you had a situation where you had a
blockchain that had that level of TPS, right, that you're not necessarily going to gain by,
by, you know, posting a much higher number, I guess, I guess that to be to be super clear.
Sorry, thank you for the, thank you. Wow. Thank you for the clarification,
Abel. Apparently, apparently, I'm much, I'm much more understandable when I talk slowly. So I've
been focusing on that. Simple. I'd love to hear your thoughts as a fellow Zeni.
Yeah, I'm just just kind of keeping it simple and stupid here. Shout out to Moby Media,
Noah and Fidget always good to good to see you in the spaces. Yeah, I kind of wiped the sleep out
of my eyes. And I was like, Oh, Jackson, this space is cool. This is going to be a great learning
experience. And so I was like, kind of questioning the space. I was like, is this a X1 Zen dev room
right now? It felt like we were just getting way too much alpha for the general public. And we
like to siphon that off in our own community. No, I'm just playing. But it is really interesting to
hear the takes that Jack has on these different blockchains, especially, you know, just since
Zen has been launched on a bunch of different chains, basically stress testing all these
chains, including, you know, Gary Wood's favorite pulse chain there. And yeah, it is really,
it's really awesome. I did have a question for for Jack. Just when it comes to all this tech and
stuff like that, you know, this, like, wasn't salon supposed to be like a proof of history or
something? And they're trying to do something with like a bunch of different nodes. And
and I guess just where where do you see that now? And like, is that like a I know,
at least from zen's perspective, it's like a proof participation.
And, I mean, do you see that a proof of work proof of stake hybrid be better than a proof of
history chain? So proof of history is not a consensus mechanism within Solana at all. So
like proof of stake, for example, is is what secures Solana ability to like when you have a
node misbehaving, they could be slashed. So having having a sort of economic secure token that
has any value stakes, that ultimately drives trust in consensus distributed trust, I would say,
the proof of history, what that is, it's basically shot 256 calculation, the trans in the loop that
establishes the order of the transactions that are coming in. So it's like a tick system. And they
called it verifiable delay function. So VDF, verifiable delay function, it's not a novel
concept that existed before. And Anatoly describes it as two radios talking on the same frequency
and jamming each other and causing a lot of noise in the signal to noise ratio. So the way that the
towers broadcast solve this is that they synchronize the clocks, so that they broadcast
within the intervals where one does not broadcast. So that's how their leaders organize transactions
into sequences relatively quickly. And like the way that Ethereum world runs this is every account
has nonce. So nonce gets incremented and that's what makes sure that you do not replay transactions
that are old or end up like front running transactions within the same wallet, whereas Solana,
for example, does not currently have the nonce system that is wallet driven, they have the nonce
system that is proof of history driven. So the node runs this proof of history, it's really
basically proof of work, running SHA 256 very, very quickly and in issuing ticks like every 200
to 400 milliseconds, I figured exactly like how long those ticks are. And that's what allows the
nodes to agree that one node waited for the other node to finish execution of the transactions in
the queue, essentially. Hopefully that answers that question. Yeah, simple answer your question.
Yeah, yeah, it's definitely without beyond my my understanding fully. But yeah, it just sounds
like a bunch of extra steps written in their in their code. So TLDR, it makes bots faster on Solana.
Wow. So so like the kind of like what you're saying earlier, just like kind of with the
bots and not necessarily having a chance to mint NFT without creating your own.
We're having that having that like Intel to be able to create that yeah, it's just doesn't sound
like it's very scalable. Yeah, I mean, like if you think about it, for you to let's say like front
round anything on the here and you have to have 1000 accounts doing the same thing at the same time.
And even then you have to be ordered within the block based on your priorities fees. So again,
my criticism of salon is that there's no way to set priority fear unless you're coding your own
wallet. That's a problem. And also the fees are low enough to attract bots that are willing to lose
1000s of soul tokens just to front run the like mint opportunity for themselves. So those those
are like really, really major issues that in obviously consensus. So I think proof of history
super fun and very, very interesting. But it's not solving any of those things is just enables
certain things to run faster. And again, this is the argument for like, how can you redline the
server? And, and I totally understand like why they would want that their whole philosophy is
where you should not pay more gas than the cost of the server that you're running. Like when I when
I see the server, I'm in the node, which is a very noble and great direction that they're taking,
I think, but it shouldn't be taken at the expense of weak consensus. Yeah, and I guess
I just have a quick question here. And obviously, there's some hands up. Just wanted to ask you,
you know, it just seems like man, just ever since I've kind of come across, just just what you're
outputting with the first principles of crypto and everything like that, it just seems like you're
making everything around this ecosystem of crypto, no matter what chain, it seems like you're making
it better. You know, for example, like, you know, with the with the phantom code, you know,
you found a bug there, you're actually making their chain better by it. Okay, okay, okay,
simple, simple, I just want to stop doing splits. My friend says, I just I just want I just want to
know if I've already showed him enough. Okay, no, no, I'm not showing him. I'm just curious if he's
kidding report this stuff to check. I just want to appreciate a shout out to you for letting me
your Lambo. I was able to drive to the Children's Hospital and drop out.
Dude, you should see the car I drive a Ford truck. It's like 12 years old. I don't I don't have a
Lambo. First principles, right? The fourth principle is now shot not by Lambo. So yeah,
yeah, my my my Ford is red. It's rusty. And it has mighty tires. Well, regardless, I was able to
drop off others gifts for the Children's Hospital that you purchased just amazing. It's just
incredible. I mean, like, so going back to simple question, I think open source is amazing. And it
gives everybody opportunity to to look at the code to play with it, to fork it, to spank it as
hard as you can to find the bugs that the additional team may not have found. And overall,
it just makes everybody better. And I think that's why like open source is so amazing. 30 years ago,
open source gave us Linux. And from Linux, all kinds of web to company amazing web to companies
were born including Google. And so I think even though I may sound critical and harsh, I actually
think that it would like the criticism supposed to be constructive. Like you can't say like,
oh, look at the scammer, you know, they suck there always be idiots, right? Like this is this is not
the world we want to be living in. We're not about clarifying our own egos. We want things to be
better so that we can invest into opportunities that present bigger returns in the future. And we
can only do it together. Even though we dunk on each other and say, hey, you're not paying attention
to what's real, you're paying attention to something that's like basically short term pumping
your narrative, which may or may not be important right now. But ultimately, you have to come to
the table and say that here's the top three issues I'm working on. And it's not about necessarily
like amplifying existing narrative that's, that's not real anyway. And I think things like that
should be called out like like Michael Saylor, you know, he talks about Bitcoin all the time.
And he often gets called out for saying that Bitcoin has more hash power than other networks
that run through work. In reality, he fundamentally does not understand that those other networks
run different algorithms and the hash power does not equal security. So like his narrative is like,
look at Bitcoin, it has the most hash power, therefore it's the most secure. And nothing could
be further from the truth. And so a lot of people pull out that sort of misnomer representation
because he has millions of people following him and he needs to be told that he's wrong. And I
think like a lot of founders, they, they surround themselves with the teams that love them. And
they're sitting in this echo chamber, echo chamber, essentially, and listening to their own words
coming back at them. And everybody who is surrounding them just constantly repeating what
they say, parroting them. And this is not the way to improve technology, and actually to move
forward and solve problems. And I think the, the side of like criticism, like I welcome
criticism from others, and I want to improve too. So like, and I want to make mistakes so that I can
learn from them. And I think others should do, should kind of like follow the similar philosophy.
By the way, I know I see we're going to go to Andre in a minute and Luke and see and Al,
your hands are up. A, I just want to point out that this, whether it's hubris, or what have you
with, with chain founders, or maybe it's just, they've doubled down too much. I do see this
problem or this, maybe it's a problem, but a similar trait with a lot of founders, even
Charles Hoskinson, also the founders of Chia, and other people that are building great tech who,
who refuse to, in their mind, they think they're saying they're, you know, they're not going to
bend to, to public opinion. But often it's just like, it leads to irrational decisions, like
building an entire Chia network with zero promotion, like, and then expecting that you're
going to be the enterprise level solution for everything, like nothing personal. I get it.
It's cute. But like, is that really the best approach to be taking? I did want to let,
sounded like Seth came back up to pick a fight. So I haven't had a little excitement in a minute.
So I was going to go to you first. I mean, I can do some thumbs down if you like.
There's the thing, you know, I just love dissent. And no, Jack's, I think his approach is,
it's admirable, right? As far as actually seeking, seeking, you know, small failures, so you can
figure out or see where the small problems are. So you can, you can continuously improve, right?
Kaizen, I think by any other name, is, it's a brilliant world philosophy, brilliant worldview.
And I think everybody who actually achieves anything, at least has some degree of that
worldview, if not, if not all consuming version of that worldview. So if anything,
just the opposite, not trying to pick a fight at all. If anything, I'm trying to say, like,
from earlier, I, you know, we were with the main topic of Solana, right? And using extreme words
like scam chain, I wanted to come back up and see if we were still on that topic of just discussing
Solana and the myriad ways in which it falls short now and can learn from, from the worldview
that Jack just, just offered, right? Of accepting the criticism, admitting there's a problem,
and then fucking fixing it. That'd be awesome.
Thanks, Seth. Andre, you got your hand up for a while. And by the way,
I love having you up Seth, always. And again, thank you everybody for joining.
If anybody who's upset, I'm going to say it publicly. It's my job to curate this space and
curate the most effective conversation for the audience. This is not about me. This is not about
any one individual. Moby media is a media outlet, and we are here to have the best conversations we
can to impact the best education we can, and that this is a job. So please respect it. Thank you,
guys. Andre, you had your hand up for a while. Apologize for the delay. I'd love to hear your
thoughts. Oh, yeah. No worries. And thanks for bringing me back up. I had, I don't remember who
was speaking, but the topic of basically, one, token, just having token transfers on the blockchain
to get rid of smart contracts approach, and two, the front running on Solana. The question I had is,
if we don't do priority gas fees, doesn't that pretty much eliminate or at least minify
the ability to front run on Solana, or am I misunderstanding something?
Well, the issue is this, is that none of the consumer facing wallets have
give people ability to set the priority fees. And ultimately, you want to pay more
for the means that you really, really want. And currently, there's this imbalance,
whoever writes a bot gets to set priority fees, but the regular wallets not. And so that's like
a fundamental problem. Now, when the wallets actually will support priority fees, and by the
way, obviously, the chain can accept the priority fees, just not with the web wallet. Once they
have it implemented across the board, and I'm talking about like phantom and software,
then obviously, we're going to see higher transaction costs, not across the board,
but per project. But it's going to be fair, it's going to be fair for people to get into a mint
and actually end up paying a little bit more and participating in the sort of an auction for the
digital asset that they're trying to mint. And that's what that's what would make this sort of
whole ecosystem healthier, rather than basically saying, Oh, look at all those transactions. And
and yes, there's about 4000 transactions coming in. But, but three and a half thousand as just
votes that shouldn't even be shown and and 70% or 80% of the program token transactions are actually
failing because they're all bots. So I think they need to have a sober look at their
representations. And and once they have it more exposed, they're more vocal about it themselves,
I believe the priorities will set themselves in place automatically.
Okay, go ahead, Andrew. You want to follow up?
Yeah, yeah. So that makes sense, right? So it's basically the limitation on the
implementation of the wallets. Okay. But the the whole point of like, okay, well, we will have
bots regardless, right? And I mean, one, you can, it's hard to kind of just quantify what a bot is,
because I remember you said the recurring number 666, meaning like two thirds of something of math,
math calculation was done a bunch of transactions. Well, the there's going to be inevitable
software that's going to write and figure out what they're going to set their priority fee. And
it will be, it'll be hard to kind of figure out on the network level, what's about and what's not.
But that goes back to the other point you made, where just have token based transfers instead of
just like smart contracts and so forth. I can definitely imagine a chain in the future,
bumping up the to work just basically only on that and have part of the my hopeful
future of aggregatory kind of approach of interactions of chains. Well, like, well, I
would say like Bitcoin is one of those chains, all they do is transfers. I mean, it used to be
just satoshis and now it's originals in BRC 20s. I'm not actually saying that it's the chain will
somehow run better if you don't have smart contracts. What I what I meant 20 minutes ago,
when I was talking about it, I just view the self custodial decentralized trade as a cornerstone
of a chain of of any blockchain technology, essentially. And that is what you need to pay
attention to first and foremost. And if that aspect of the chain is continuously bought it,
and users have no ability to, you know, to trade properly, then it needs to be addressed before
you actually get into the smarter smart contracts, because you're just delaying and moving the problem
from, like this underlying first principles element from one issue to the next without
addressing it. So that's, that's what I meant. Okay. And then yeah, I guess, and I'm a slightly
different opinion, where I think the fundamental core to the benefit of the blockchain is the
smart contract is the fact that I can define a set of rules that govern how a transaction will be
made, regardless if it's done through my marketplace or another, right, if I can work with an Oracle
to verify some identity as part of my transactions, that's identity rules, let's say, that's that's
important to me, there's tokens and everything else, it's just important to the people that are
right now focused on selling JPEGs and coins and all that, there will be level of tokens,
I'll be definitely important from real world assets from property and so forth. But every such
transaction will still be governed by a smart set of rules that will maybe have like, for example,
if you're transferring a property, but imagine those transactions will need a title company in
the middle to approve the transfer, or some, or confirms residency in the state or something else,
and those smart rules are what's in my mind, the core to this, all the token stuff, in my opinion,
and I know that, again, this is, I heard, it's like, I heard bold statements that were made,
but I would say all the token stuff, what the way it is today is more or less the attractive kind of
attractive playground for people, to put it politely. The real interest stuff is building out
a very complex set of rules and allowing massive unlimited integrations across different kind of
different developers, different companies, and so forth, right? So if I tokenize a set of
real world assets, I follow a certain set of rules, there could be other people that immediately
bring them on and integrate with them to offer their own services without me having to do anything
in terms of actually supporting that integration. That's beauty. That's what we're building. That's,
I think, the cornerstone of what the web 3 is. But anyways, that's my thing. Thanks for the
Well, yeah, I think it's important that you're not to conflate two different things, right? So
like, when we're talking about currency, we're talking about, you know, a medium of exchange,
right? Or a model of exchange, that's common between people that allows for commerce. But
when we're talking about, you know, smart contracts, and you know, sort of DeFi, it's the emphasis,
in my view, is on the finance portion. And finance and currency are not the same things,
right? So, you know, finance is like the banking system, saving, saving some loans and so forth.
Sorry, it depends on the token, right? So for so far, I know that there was some talk just about,
you know, people talking about like, it doesn't in price. Well, no, it does. It actually does. And
no, it actually, it actually has nothing to do with the token. Well, then you don't know. Well,
then you don't know Zen. Okay, so I think what I'm talking about is kind of the concept,
or the difference, conceptually, between a smart contract. Well, you're talking about that,
well, you're talking about simple, simple, simple, please let them, please let them finish, if you
don't mind. And I understand, I don't want to conflate the conversation about the difference
between tokens and contracts and Zen, we can get into that. But my point is simply, and again,
like, I don't want to get into semantic, you know, definitions about, you know, what is the
word token mean. And I think for a lot of people in software engineering, it's a much more generic
term that extends, you know, to many, many, many things, right? But regardless, my point was simply
that, you know, like, even when you're looking at, let's say, like Bitcoin versus Ethereum, right?
And like, what's going on there? And like, why are these things sort of functionally different,
you know, in many respects, like Bitcoin has, well, I don't want to say the word currency,
because it's more of a store of value for a bunch of other reasons. But, you know, basically,
the idea was to create a currency, right? And a currency in and of itself doesn't have to be
intelligent, and doesn't have to be programmable, right? Like, just like the dollar bills in your
pocket, or the pounds or whatever, they're sort of stupid, right? But, you know, you use them in
finance, right? Like they go into other infrastructure and other programmatic systems
that enable things like insurance, and, you know, savings and loans, and, and, you know,
various forms of trade and exchange and so forth, right? Futures, options, like all these other
things that we build, that we consider to be financial infrastructure. And so I think, you
know, just philosophically, right, it kind of like, it's important to understand, like, you know,
whether or not you're focusing on, you know, the idea of decentralized finance, right? Or you're
talking about the idea of decentralized currency. And, you know, you can, you can have a currency
within a decentralized financial system. But it's not necessarily the case that you need to have
decentralized finance in a currency system, right? Like, I think both have to exist and both have
their sort of their place, right? But I mean, at least in my view, I don't think it's necessarily
like a zero-something. Yeah, and I mean, the whole blockchain kind of starts erasing the
strict lines between those two concepts, right? So, and I think that's maybe, I wanted to hear
more about the Zen concept. Simple is going to mention his. Well, yeah. So, I mean, the Zen
concept, and obviously, it's more of a community token that was kind of launched from, you know,
Jack here and his team. But I mean, it's the same ideology you're talking about, Evil Plan,
the Bitcoin, right? And Bitcoin isn't just shit, because there's numerous other tokens that we're
trying to build currency and value. But I mean, it's really Satoshi's, you know, basically having
peer-to-peer digital cash with no counterparty risk, you know, trust your consensus and self
custody. I mean, those are some of the key tenants of Satoshi's white paper, right? And in the same
way, that's how Zen operates, right? There is no like, there is no origin address, like some of
these other chains, like pulse chain or some of these other ones, right? There is no VCs,
there is no, the supply started at zero, it's the only way you're able to get it is through
minting it, right? You can definitely buy it, but, you know, none of this is financial advice or
anything like that. But it's ultimately, it's created through the lowest barrier entry in the
game, which is a gas transaction, you know, and, you know, it started in Ethereum about a year and
a half ago. But, you know, we've launched on total 13 different chains. And so, I guess just kind of
going back to what Evil Plan was saying, just, it gets it gets weird when we're talking about
the charts and stuff like that. And we talked about value exchange and things like that, because
I think, yeah, people are in it for definitely, you know, for for dollars. But also, I think
they're in it for the tech. And I think if people knew a little bit more about the tech and what
they're building on, they probably wouldn't build on, you know, like polygon or some of these other
chains that, you know, might not necessarily be for the masses and onboarding, you know,
people onto a platform that isn't going to be, quote, unquote, rugged. And I think that's like
the core tenants of Zen and why I personally, you know, fuck with it a lot is because it's the
closest thing to Bitcoin possible. It's Bitcoin on EVM. And I would suggest if you don't know Zen,
definitely go do your diligence, go to go to faircrypto.org and learn more, read the white
paper as no one really likes to do anymore. But yeah, thank you, simple. So this is officially
a Zen space. Jack, I'd like to welcome you to them. I'd like to welcome you to the mobile media
team. You've been a great host. No, I will say that I mentioned this a lot in spaces.
It's okay. It's not a show. It's true, though. It's fucking true, though, man. It's fucking true.
I think it's a good ecosystem as well. And I enjoy the ecosystem of people and Jack specifically,
which is why I fuck with y'all. So it's not a show. It's opening people's eyes to other products and
ecosystems. And I think you'll find some really interesting stuff about what Jack has done with
Zen and the impact that he's had on different chains and the contract approach that he's taken
and now X1 that he's building or that he's launched. I'm sorry. And he can talk a little
bit more about that. But I did want to thank you, Jack. When it comes to topics that I have people
in the audience that know more than me, my job is to shut the fuck up and learn. So hopefully,
I can know 20% as much as Andrew knows about marketing and 10% as Jack knows about blockchain
infrastructure. Actually, Jack, I've told you this before, and we'll go to the hands. I'm sorry,
guys. We'll go to Lucas, Alan, and Gary. You remind me of almost like a warm,
in a nice way, a warm blanket of the early days for me of crypto.
The days when we'd be like, I say this all the time, be like in Puerto Rico on fucking deep sea
marlin fishing boats, may or may not be doing some hallucinogenics and talking about the
potentials. Imagine being able to buy crypto with a credit card was like the most incredible
thought in the world. And Gary mentioned EOS before, stay away. But again, a funny memory from
the history that has gotten us here in crypto in general. And I don't know if you guys knew a
friend, Brian Larkin, actually was suspiciously passed away a couple of weeks ago in Bali.
The shit is real. So I just want to thank you, Jack, for coming. And these conversations remind
me why I got into this space in the first place. And I think we're kind of touching on it. Is it
are we talking about cryptocurrency? Are we talking about smart contracts? Are we talking
about blockchain? I sometimes like to get back to the core of it, which was things like first
principles, right? The double spend conundrum. What can this mean for nation states and true
sovereignty? So never forget that stuff, even if you are just shitcoining on pork and dork,
dork, dork all day. Had to get that out. Lucas, you had your hand up. And thank you all for joining
us. Thanks, Vigil. And Jack, I don't mean to press you more, but you're you're just too too great
and wealth of information. I mentioned alpha bill earlier. And I guess what I was getting at alpha
bill speaks to you mentioned the proof of history and using that proof of history concept, concept
combined with a UTXO model and alpha bill allows for the settlements to be gathered on cell phones
and then uploaded. I wondered, I wondered if you saw that as like a viable solution to the instability
problem. I mean, say if if the Solana users at the wallet level could still make transactions and
then that was clear through the like the Solana network. Is that dreams in the clouds or do you
see any possibility there? I mean, there's definitely a possibility. They just need to
implement it and and talk more about it because I mean, like right now, it seems like it's it's a
feature that could be turned on. But nobody from the Solana Foundation is actually, you know,
pressing the the wallets to to implement it. So and I think if they make it a priority, then
it's just going to be better for their change. Well, and I mentioned the NASDAQ earlier, because
when I hear the Solana Foundation, etc., they always seem to go back to like they want to be
that exchange. But even even our exchanges, even the NASDAQ, you know, just takes a break on the
weekends, it reboots. And to me, if I mean, you were absolutely right about their instability
problem. But I just I have, I saw a solution in alpha bill, and I've never heard anybody else
speak of it. So I wondered if it was on anybody else's radar. I've never heard of it. So that's
first time for me, Jack. Yeah, I didn't hear hear that either. Interesting. Lucas, I'd love to hear
more about it if you can find some some documentation. In the meantime, wanted to go to
Howell, because you haven't spoken, then Gary, and then we'll get to web eight.
Howell, and others, and Ian, you guys flock together. No, okay. Gary, you have your hand
up and then we'll go to to web eight. Yeah, the app is kind of crashing a lot for me. I'm going
to step out after this. I'll just listen from here on. But yeah, again, kudos to everyone that's
been on the panel today. It's been awesome. Terrific. I love that Jack, you know, offers
so much information about code and history of technology in this space. I do like that sometimes
he teams up with Eric Wall as like trolls of different systems, including Bitcoin,
including Ethereum. And I do wonder if like over the next few years, something quote unquote
perfect, evolves from like stress testing, stress testing founders, communities, the tech behind it,
the governments that want to control it, regulate it, you know, permissioned or permissionless
systems. So again, I appreciate everyone that came on to speak today. And I hope to join in
in the future. But I do need to step out. Gary, you should happen to mining some Zunbox with
Argon 2 hash. What I was going to say is, Jack, I'd actually like to take this opportunity,
if you don't mind to explain that a little bit, and what you've been building.
Again, this is not sponsored. I don't actually even have any Zen, even though Jack has
essentially yelled at me to mine it. Too busy.
I would like to know a little bit about, I have two miners. So was wondering if I can just use
any. Wait, Zen, Zen block miners? Whoa, Noah, you're in, you're in, you're getting down the
ramp. Noah, can ASIC miners be pointed at? Can you mine Zen with ASIC miners? Or do you have
to have a specific type of mining? No, it's not possible to do ASICs because
Argon 2 is a memory hard algorithm. You can only use GPUs, basically. I mean, so yeah, I mean,
like if you're interested, you will have to have like a cloud miner or a machine at home with the
GPU. I think Noah will enjoy the technicalities of Zen. Sorry, go ahead.
Yeah, yeah, I was just gonna say that I haven't shilled Zen in so long because
I mean, it's just like, it's just a little weird just because it's like part of my life,
so to speak. And why don't you just tell us what it is then, instead of showing it?
So back in the day, I mean, like back in the day, like a couple of years ago, I just looked at
the crypto ecosystem and... Sorry to interrupt, Jack. Would you mind also just before you get
into that, giving a little bit more about your background? I know I touched on the Google thing,
but I think it's important for context what you felt. Yeah, moved to the United States from Russia
in 1990, attended high school in St. Louis, Missouri for a couple of years, went to the
University of Missouri at Columbia, got a computer science degree, moved to Silicon Valley in
1996, 1997, got hired working at one of the startups that went belly up. From then on,
from 1997, 1998, started my own business doing encryption, consulting, firewalls, VPNs,
that sort of thing. Met Google founders in Stanford in 99, summer of 99, got hired at
Google as employee number 21, stayed at Google for about six years, was in charge of the cloud,
kind of like cloud formation and the creation of the data centers technology that ran Google
indexers and distributed matter. So it's like not very different than blockchain, actually.
My job was to set up as many data centers as possible and have the Google queries flow into
each data center and have the data center respond flawlessly with the query responses.
So that was until 2005, where I decided to quit Google and start my own company called imageact.com,
which is actually still operational in one of the largest sites in the world, hosting billions of
images for people out there. Started a few more companies afterwards, one of them is imageizer.com,
that's currently running image optimization and access a plugin into CDNs to accelerate
product images for ecommerce websites. And a couple people use that?
Well, at peak, I think 60 million people, 60 million uniques used imageact.
It was actually used by Twitter officially as image hosting and video hosting service before
Twitter built their own image hosting ecosystem. So I know Twitter founders, and we'll work with
them for for about three years, running images on on Twitter. And that was like right, right when
the mobile revolution came in like 2007, 2009, 2010. And so moving forward, in 2011,
I got introduced into Bitcoin, literally went to launch launch with my Google buddies. It was it
was the cross from computer history museum and Mountain View, I had had the opportunity to have
a burger and the guys there were joking about Bitcoin and how you can buy like flamethrowers
and bazookas with with that and not get caught. And I thought, wow, this is awesome. I mean, like,
it's definitely some sort of interesting online game that, you know, I could potentially play.
And because I had the exposure to data center technology, and I had plenty of data centers
running imageact, I started mining Bitcoin in 2011, and one of the I was one of the larger
miners running GPUs. I had a few hundred GPUs at the time, producing three to five bitcoins per
day. That was before a six, when a six came came to be actually, obviously, things got much, much,
much harder. But anyway, so early Bitcoiner loved decentralization, left the first principles.
And what, what brought me to launch then was essentially the reproduction of Bitcoin like
architecture and first principles within the ERC 20 contract. So I thought that rather than
creating a token, an ERC 20 token out of out of senior, just minting a shell out of it, and then
like selling portions of it to the community, why not have community create that token by themselves
by mining it with Ethereum gas. And when I say mining it with Ethereum gas is that it started
with the zero supply, you come to the smart contract, which is really only 400 lines of
code. It's very, very basic. It has the Bitcoin like difficulty that grows higher every day. So
the scarcity is enforced by the contract runtime, which is about eight years. So in eight years,
no more than can be minted. But you go to zen.network, and you connect.
Yo, dude, you're acting like Solana didn't do it first. There's a there's a NFT slash coin
called ghost. Look into that your chain. I look. Yeah, I suggest you do. I suggest you do your
chain took over their implementation. So before you you start saying it's the first and it's the
best and it's the best ever. I don't know. Wait a second. I never, I never said it's the first and
I never said it's the best. I said I'm following the Bitcoin first principles. That is the only
thing I said now whether it's the best. It's it's for the shilling. And I mean, like, simple will
say it's the best because he loves it. I say there's no perfection in the world. And everything
sucks to some degree. And we're all here to make things better. But anyway, so zen actually zen
type of style fair mint. And that's what like we really call fair crypto zen is fair crypto because
everybody gets them into fairly just by using the the gas of Ethereum. It actually I believe gave
rise to ordinals because ordinals is are just as fair in the way that they were introduced first
to Bitcoin and now it's going to have a lot in here while he's shilling a shit coin. The contract
is literally. Okay, hold up. No, I literally just wanted to hear about zen. He's not showing
anything. He's not telling anyone to buy anything. And in fact, I'm gonna give the disclaimer at the
end of the space. Don't buy anything because none of us know what the fuck we're talking about.
I just want to know what zen is. I don't I've never really heard of it before. So guys, please
Yeah, thank you for that. I myself never told anyone to buy zen.
In fact, I never had zen myself. I minted zen together with the community. And that's what
separates it from the rest of the the kind of like the other tokens that are pre mined. But
anyway, I wanted to draw the parallel with inscriptions. I think inscription technology
is very, very interesting. And if you looked at the chains utility, you could actually see that
avalanche had like 100x jump and in gas. The funniest thing is that their founder was really,
really crying about how inscriptions is not the is not the real crypto. And I think it's just like
it really messed up his narrative of cheap gas on avalanche. But I think it's an opportunity to
learn to make things better. I mean, like clearly inscriptions are here to stay. And I think it's
one of the ways that you can create tokens fairly just like zen. And the market has voted
with their dollars. Like if you look at BRC 20 ecosystem, it's it's billions of dollars. And it
was one of the first ever projects that started from like March last year and within just a couple
of months, reached reached, you know, billions of dollars worth of valuation, which is just
incredible. And I think this is the vote of confidence from the crypto community at large,
that people do not want to buy tokens that have been mined by the founders and then sold to the
community. I think people want to participate in crypto fairly. And that is one way to to create
tokens and then like whether the tokens will have value or not. So what's the way to introduce
your token fairly? What is the way to introduce your token fairly is not to have a token at all.
To start with your token. It's not his token. It's actually it's our token. It's the people's
token. It's not has nothing to do with the founder. Okay, so what's the best way to show it?
We're not showing it. We're participating. No, bro, it's participating.
Guys, listen, spilling has a lot of negative negative connotations, obviously. And generally,
anybody like the market. It's kind of crazy.
Like really are what there's like 200 people in here. There's it's hardly going to pump anything
him him talking about, like, I'm not going to go buy it. I think everything's a shitcoin, except
for like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and maybe a few other things. And I'm just I just want to learn about
what Zen is. And I want to understand I don't care about many tokens that can be mined these
days anymore. So I'm curious, like, like proof of work type mind. So I just want to hear about how
it works. And he did say that there is no pre mine. So at Genesis, I mean, I'm sure there are
people with inside or people that were early who got to mine at first and have more of the more of
the supply. But that's with Bitcoin, too. I mean, I wish I was finding three or five Bitcoin a day.
But I just want to I want to hear what Jack has to say before I start to ask questions and kind
of poke holes into it. Right. Okay, sounds good. So so speaking of mining it early, there was
actually the formula in Zen has the logarithmic declining curve in that that represents whale
resistance. So like, in other words, if you get into the token early, and you're mining it early,
it actually does not mean you're going to make more, it means you're going to make less.
If you wait a little longer, then the contract opens up the ability to mine more as the time
goes by. And that is actually makes the token basically so widely dispersed and so popular.
If you look at the number of holders, it's, I believe, 170,000 right now. If you look at the
either scan, FTM scan, Binance scan or or polygon scan, you will see that we have been
in top three tokens on top for the for entire year by transactions by uniques.
And the reason why we're there is because people think and really understand and look at the
immutable contract that cannot be changed, has no admin keys that actually integrates the DNA from
Bitcoin that represents fair mining. And people think that it is really their token, it is really
their crypto, the founder is not shilling it, the founder is not selling it, there's no unlockable
supply, the community itself creates the crypto out of, you know, out of the blockchain, building
blocks itself. So that's what makes it so popular and so attractive. And you embed the gas difficulty
of the chain within the token. So if Ethereum gas is high, it's hard to mean Zen. So that's like the
difficulty. If the Ethereum gas is low, like on the weekend, you can start your means, start your
miners at a fraction of a cost, maybe 10 times cheaper. So you can orb the weekends versus the
weekdays. So on the weekdays, nobody can mint because it's too expensive. On the weekends,
you can start, start your means. And so this is how you can manage the orbs between the gas
fluctuations. So and again, like with Bitcoin, we use electricity for difficulty and the total
number of miners out there. With Zen, we use gas ecosystem or basically the cost of transactions
that represent difficulty of the token at their core value.
What does the token do? That's my first question. Why should someone hold Zen? Because of its
deflationary property, because it's going to be capped after eight years because of the
consensus algorithm or consensus mechanism that supports it. I just I kind of want to know,
like, yeah, what is the goal for the token?
It's I would say the goal is to represent first principles of crypto. And I know it is it is very
nebulous. However, here's what I would say. Generally, we get into tokens because we know
that it has a trajectory or some sort of a thing that's happening to it that will literally pump
its value. So currently, like, would you get into a token that has 5000 holders or 166,000 holders?
Clearly, you would get into something that is has more inviter reach. Now, the way that we are
setting up this ecosystem is that Zen is used as a building block for other projects to launch. And
here's how this works. Zen contract in itself has this function called proof of burn. So we have
encouraged others to build using Zen as currency and implement proof of burn, where you use Zen as
the currency to get into other projects, burn your Zen. And then that burn action removes the supply
or literally deletes the supply from them from the from the total supply number. And that actually
what makes it more scarce. So the more projects that are built on top of Zen as a building block,
the more valuable Zen becomes. So you would invest into minting Zen or maybe buying Zen when it's
cheap, due to the fact that it has a trajectory that's up and to the right when it comes to
community acceleration. The other thing that is really positive for Zen is Zen is convertible
to x1 blockchain native gas coin. So an L1 that I'm building will actually use Zen burn records
to convert into a gas token that will be the fundamental crypto asset of our x1 blockchain tech.
All right, I'm gonna go to some hands because I see a lot of hands up Jarvis, go for it. If
you have to say anything, I didn't see your hands up. Otherwise, I'll go to a simple I'm not I'm
going to skip you for now. Yeah, man. You guys ready to go for Jarvis?
Um, you're on the Solana chain for a reason. And you're building an L2. Supposedly or something
you said like dude, no one gives a fuck about Google. Like we're here to make money. I'm
actually like not allowed on the stage because I'm so like, it's out of pocket what I say.
Um, no one's used to that. And Kiro, hey, buddy. Lucas, you're a fucking scammer.
Evil plan. Oh, yo, yo, yo, yo, yo, this is a friendly space for education. Yeah, yeah. Sorry,
man. I had to, I had to, I had to remove you just because I don't want to, I don't know,
this is too much drama. I don't really feel like dealing with that. Um,
all of the, all of Atena, I'm not pronouncing that right. Sorry, guys,
I'm recovering from surgery. So I'm a little out of it. But all of Atena, go for it.
Yeah, Jack. So you often talked about the Google and how you had your first task was to scale it
from to 1000 servers or something like that to build the cloud. And how is it different to
to do something like that at Google and to run your own blockchain like X one.
This is my first question. And the other one is about proof of history of Solana. So we run our
validator nodes, nodes on the X one. And we, we see that we need to be synchronized to,
to have the best performance. So I was wondering what happens if Solana has this proof of history
and the synchronization synchronization phase if someone if there is some corruption or how does
it happen? So those are two separate things. How the proof of history is used for transaction
bashing and execution, where the synchronization of the chain itself is the peer to peer aspects
where the blocks are synchronized across the the whole chain. So it's those things are not
related in any way. And I kind of missed your first question something about 1000 servers.
Okay, and the other thing about running expansion, the difference between Google.
How is it to deal with? Well, it's Google.
Well, clearly, with with Google, it was a company and, you know, and I was the dude that made all
the decisions or anything. I mean, like I was one of the dudes on the team of three. And I was the
first one there. So they all looked up to me for like solutions and direction. And it was an
organization that's a company and whatever you want, just happens, which is very different than
the decentralized world. Like you have to have a community that actually believe that you're not
full of shit. And you're not a scammer. And you actually believe in a vision and you're intelligent
enough to join the community to run the node, understand how to run it, understand, you know,
the principles of operations, and be in sync with the community leaders out there. So it is very
different than than a company. And but I do like it more because you just get to meet very interesting
people and you get challenged in different ways from kind of like this, the distribution of the
community, not like in a company where like, you know, if if you say the wrong thing to the boss,
you may get fired, right. But founders technically cannot fire some, some voiceover community,
especially like if the community is putting their money into the the infrastructure, like so to
speak, they're staking their tokens. And clearly, they need to have a voice and the founders need to
pay attention to what to what the vibe of the community is. So that's the difference in my book.
So you build six data centers, if I remember well for Google, the first six data centers. And you
are saying that doing x one now is harder than doing it at Google?
Well, it is harder because half of our community doesn't even speak English like, like all those
like we have this one Asian dude, you know, shout out to Zen artists that that translates to,
you know, to Mandarin on, you know, and those guys are running 200 nodes. So we have to have
like the sort of, you know, complex, cultural and technological idiosyncrasies that we're dealing
with. So it is a little bit harder. But it is more fun, because it's just more rewarding,
because you're actually touching the world. You're not just touching some company's data center,
you're touching the whole world with your technology, which is incredible.
Yeah, so it's more a communication problem than the tech itself.
I mean, well, communication is a simple way to say it. But it is like,
all the nation, maybe people can have a coordination.
It's it's cultural. I mean, there's there's definitely an engagement level, based on the
forward looking statements, such as our tech will be great tech, or is great tech, or our
token is great token, and it will pump it will make you money. That that is something that should
not obviously be ignored, because we are in this space to make money. I mean, like, let's not be
Yeah, so anyway, that's my before I go to before I go to web through web eight. I have a quick
question. So is it? Is it the Zen crypto token XEN on? What is so if there was no pre mine,
and it was whoever interacts with the contract for I'm not a tech person, but like whoever
interacts with the contract first, whoever minds the genesis block or whatever it is, right? It's
first come first serve, then why is there such a huge dump at around launch? I mean,
it seems like it's got the negative 10x. If I'm looking at
No, it's because it's like there was no Zen in existence before that. Like,
people did short term, right? And then they just dumped.
Okay, so like, basically, there was no liquid supply. And whenever there's no liquid supply,
it's more valuable just because everybody wants it now to flip. So you try to, you see something
rallying, you get into it, and then you get out and you make like, I don't know, 20%. So that's
exactly what happened is that the, the first day when Zen was minted, it was maybe 100,000 Zen,
it was very, very low supply. So people played arbitrage games at the beginning of the chart.
And as them gets more numerous, the price discovery stabilizes and finds the floor.
Hi, movie media. First of all, Noah, thank you for hosting space and for inviting Jack onto
to talk to us. I just want to pose the question to Jack in a different in another way,
which is, let's say, if you were designing a blockchain itself, what kind of infrastructure
would you implement, put in place to avoid the chain constantly going down like Solana?
Because I understand you have your background with Google and setting up their massive
service infrastructure. So I would like to hear your point of view as to how you would design
the blockchain yourself to make that as proved as possible. Thanks.
Yeah, so we, we cheated a little bit, we just worked Phantom, and Phantom has not been known
for going down, but it has been known for being one of the fastest chains out there, they're using
DAG technology, which is translating to direct to take a quick graph, which is different than
the blockchain, where every block follows the other block. So when, when in the traditional
sense of the word, the blockchain follows the Nakamoto consensus, that actually what makes it
slow. So in other words, every block has some sort of a time delay when it's great, so it
accumulates transactions, and then it's attached to the block prior to that. And then the new block
prior to that, and then the new block is attached on top. That's what makes the immutability so
robust. The problem with that is that it's very, very slow, and everybody compete to be included
in the block. So they end up paying higher and higher fees. That's what ultimately makes
the chain like Ethereum and Bitcoin not scalable in the way of transaction speed, because ultimately
you run into a ceiling of how much gas you're willing to pay. And when those things are
equalized, you just end up not being able to scale or to build on it well. That's why layer
two solutions are trying to short circuit the need to pay $100 per transaction limit here.
So with the DAG system, you actually do not have the Nakamoto consensus. You have
to visualize a blockchain as a trunk of a tree, and then the branches on the tree are your
DAG graphs, which is kind of like parallel blockchains. So the data structure in Phantom
is parallel blockchains that can execute at the same time without actually driving the gas fees
to the roof. And again, so we forked Phantom, and we're using their latest release. We're improving
the code. We found some bugs that we're working to fix also with the Phantom Foundation.
We're also implementing the proof of work as an aspect within the chain that we call ZEN blocks.
So not only you can or will be able to buy XN token or XN coin and stake it to run the node,
you're also able to mine ZEN blocks with GPUs that embeds the economic energy of the time
in electricity spend and technology operated into a token we call ZENium, XNm. ZENium,
you will be able to stake within the X1 ecosystem for yield of XN, which is the native gas token.
So I believe proof of work is very important for very, very basic reason that when you start
the chain as proof of stake, if your token that is used proof of stake has no value,
like it would not have value at the beginning of the chain, you cannot secure the chain economically.
Because what's stopping from someone going on a market and buying all the tokens for cheap
and taking over the network. So it's a chicken and egg problem. Ethereum solved it by being
proof of work first, creating value for ether, and then converting to proof of stake when the
value was already there. The problem with the new chains that are starting with the proof of work,
proof of stake right away, is that there's no value to the coin unless they raise shitload of
money from VCs. Then maybe the VCs kind of like act as this sort of a barrier to entry. But what
we're doing that's different, we're creating a proof of work proof of stake hybrid chain,
where the economic energy from the proof of work supports the security or economic security of the
chain operations through the proof of stake of XN, XN being the native gas token. Zenium is the
token that you mint in mind from using GPUs that gets channeled into the same chain by bringing in
basically the valuable asset that people do not necessarily want to sell off right away and run
away. I feel like it always gets confusing when you add multiple tokens to an ecosystem. I think
of just like Neo and the gas token and other ecosystems that tried to implement dual token or
tri-token model. I totally agree. Avalanche has the same issue. Avalanche represents themselves
as three different chains. I think it's hella confusing for people to understand
what exactly Avalanche can be used for. But I think with Avalanche, there's three different
chains, but there's one underlying token. I think when you have multiple, go ahead.
It's the same with X1. XN is the one token that runs gas and the one token that you stake.
XN is basically approval work token that exists within X1 ecosystem. We could have done the same
thing on Ethereum. Literally, you could mine XN and Ethereum will mint it for you. Same thing.
It doesn't actually make Ethereum a dual token chain. It's just another token that's part of
the ecosystem that brings the economic security. Is it like an XP or an XP token?
So then what is XN? Sorry, maybe I'm getting confused.
There's Zen that's launched on 12 different chains.
And Zen launched even before we thought we're going to launch the blockchain. What happened
with Zen is this, is that every time we launch Zen, it would take the chain down.
Every chain, no matter what the chain was, the only chain that stood firm and did not
falter was Phantom. Every other chain had some sort of issues. Like we literally broke polygon
for 24 hours. It just did not work. Ethereum had very, very high gas fees for like a day or two.
On Binance, you couldn't even transfer BNB tokens when Zen launched. So launching on 12 different
chains, learning the aspects of the chains that are relatively weak, we have decided to
create and run our own chain that solves all of the issues that Zen as a token has exposed
on 12 different chains. And that is why X1 came to be the way it is now.
Got it. And then in the spirit of making money, because like you said, most people,
if not all people in this industry are here to make money. I mean,
I guess if you're a unicorn, then you don't. Did you say, do you say zoonicorn?
Maybe. But so if I was to, what kind of a GPU would I have to purchase? Can I, can I mine this
with just a powerful single GPU in my desktop or do I have to make a GPU rig? And what is,
I know it's a broad question or rather, yeah, broad question, but what is the ROI look like?
If you're, so, so if you're a techie and you just want to like play with your own
at home computer is definitely a way to go because he gets like literally physically touch it.
It's not going to be great ROI at all, just because you will be technically front run by
the cloud miners. There's companies like run pods, also vast.i or vast.ai, I forget.
They rent their GPU rigs for AI model computation, but the Zenyans just repurposed their platform
to mine XNM. Now, full disclosure, XNM does not yet have a market. There were a lot of
sexes reached out to me to list it and I told them to please wait until we actually get it
integrated into X1, which we're actually working on. So currently you can mine XNM, but you cannot
sell it. So your ROI is, is in the future, basically. I got you. Ted Ape, go for it. And
then I don't know, Fidji, I think we've been running for three hours. It's probably a good
stopping point, especially since we're getting off topic a little bit. Yeah, exactly. Let's go to
last hand, then I'm hungry. And my dog is looking at me like I'm neglecting.
Hey, we're talking about, about money and whatnot. I love Zen. I freaking love Jack. I think he's a
scaling king, but we're coming into this bull run. We're seeing a lot of stuff get launched. We're
seeing beta, the layer one, we're seeing Celestia, we're seeing Manta. Jack, how do you see us with
X1 competing against these giant BC backed projects? So the giant BC backed projects do
not build communities. It's the teams and the projects that are actually functional in life,
build communities. Like, for example, you can definitely launch a chain
and have like $50 million, $100 million back in that chain. And like Celestia, for example,
really, really good story, very well backed. Not that big of a community. I think we have it,
like think about this, this is my benchmark. Every chain will launch a project on pretty much any
project now goes down. And once it goes down, I don't mean like down, down, down. It means like,
it's basically useless for other transactions, all of these transactions that are dominating
is our mints. That is my benchmark as a measure of success. That once we integrate the approval
work and proof state technology and release the main net. And by the way, like X1 has been around
for a while now, as incentivized testnet that we call Fastnet. You can actually burn your zen and
have an airdrop of XN on Fastnet right now and keep the tires and see how it works for you.
And you can all find it at X1blockchain.net, all of the links that they're X1blockchain.net.
So I feel like we have very vibrant community. We have been in the top three tokens on 12 different
chains for a year. Everybody else, they're trying to raise money, try to use that money to entice
people to use their tech. But ultimately, they're all very similar in the way that they approach
their business, so to speak, if we call this thing a business. But I think we have more of a
grassroots, not the top bottom approach, but bottom up, where we build things that are relevant to
people. And that is where the strength is. Ultimately, what matters is how big the community
is and how happy people are and whether there are other projects that are building on top of zen.
Where again, like the other chains, they have to raise money and they have to spend
marketing dollars to build like Solana shop where you can sell Solana phone. And there's nothing
wrong with that. What I'm just saying is it's different. And our approach is similar to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin was very unpopular and cost nothing for the first two years. So like, oh, eight,
oh, nine, 10. It was like 15 cents, 30 cents. Bitcoin talk.org. That was the place to to trade
it with the OTC. There were no markets. But look at it now, like pretty much the worldwide acceptance
has happened as the ETFs have launched fidelity trades, Morgan Stanley, everybody now can sell
or buy Bitcoin with an ETF. And it all started with zero VC dollars. But I mean, it took a while,
but I think the fundamentals and the principles were sound. And I think that's what we're trying
to reproduce and follow with our projects too. So I think that's where the success is.
Right on. That answers my question. I appreciate it.
Thank you for the question. This was a very thought provoking conversation today. I really
enjoyed the mix of panelists and the contrasting views. And as much as I like to hate on Solana,
I think they've done something magical over there. That can't be refuted. The outages are an issue,
in my opinion, I don't I personally don't want to use a blockchain that can go out for five,
five hours. That's me. I don't use centralized exchanges. I like DeFi and I participate in
DeFi. And so I would be very livid if I if I couldn't access my funds for that amount of time.
But with that said, it is still a product in beta. And it's better to not judge them this
soon in the game, because you never know what's going to happen. This is not a Zen sponsored
space. I literally asked Brian about Zen because I think he's had an interesting journey. And I
think that Zen kind of Jack Jack, sorry, this is what the painkillers do to me, man. This is what
the painkillers do. Um, I I price a marijuana it's a little bit a little bit better for her.
Oh, man, I wish it I wish it helped as much as this oxy, but it doesn't, unfortunately, it doesn't.
But yeah, I simple, simple, simple. It's not a recreational. He's actually just just so yeah,
no, I've had shoulder surgery and stuff. And I tried doing the meds thing. And I just couldn't,
I couldn't function. So no, I feel for any type of surgery had. I'm just kind of joking around. So
yeah, no, no worries, man, joke, joke away. But look, I think that the Zen questions were
strictly because I was curious about Zen. And I think again, most tokens are shitcoins. And I
think that most of the stuff that I'm personally it's up on coin market cap in 10 years is going
to go to zero apart from some of the big winners. But ultimately, we're this is a this is a platform
of curiosity. And we brought on projects before that I absolutely hate. But I try to approach
everything with a from a neutral perspective and, and ask questions and get a better understanding.
So again, this was not a Zen shell space. This is a Solana space as long as this is a Solana
hating space. No, I'm just kidding. This is a lot of spaces to have discussion about what went on
in and kind of the pros and cons. And Jack, I won't call you Brian again, Jack's, Jack's
breakdown of Zen kind of in kind of his experience building Zen or rather the experience design
community, tied into the broader conversation. So I guess the last thing I'll say is, remember
that everything you hear on these broadcasts seriously, it's meant for educational purposes
only. Nothing is financial advice. No one hears a financial advisor, except for digital, anything
he says is financial advice. And if you lose your money, you can go ahead and sue him.
I was gonna do it to you. But I was like, you know what, Noah's fucking
he's anal about this shit. It's recorded. I'm not gonna do it. And then you went and did it.
That was a big joke. I'm kidding. See, this is I've been I've been hosting with digital. I'll
actually come back full circle to what I was saying at the beginning of the space. I've been
hosting with digital for about, I think, six, maybe maybe even more than seven months now.
But I was very serious when my intros my outros is very formal and proper. And I think he's gotten
me to loose loosen up a bit and crack some jokes. No, really, digital is not a financial advisor,
no one hears financial advisors. This shit is super volatile. And people lose their money when
they when they gamble too much. So with that, that's a grain of salt, take it as take it with
a grain of salt, buy some Bitcoin. And other than that, everyone have a great rest of your day.
And we'll see you all next week. Take care. Mine some sun blocks too. It's fucking not