1:07:43 to 1:54:46
yeah this is fun people talk about mouth Oni mask apply Charles Hoskinson owns 40% of 80 shares you notice they never present you any proof we did a public disclosure or how much I owe HK has I don't currently have any of the company does I think it's around 8% and he's hiding between 15 countries I'm hiding I'm right now my home in Colorado but I guess I'm hiding right you know I go to Japan I go to Colorado but I'm hiding and where did thirty billion dollars go in four weeks well that's also a factually wrong statement but who cares trolls never make good statements right brings up a broader point ADA went from two cents to a dollar 20 down to 11 cents it happens it's painful it's exceedingly painful especially if you're the guy at the top because you have to ride the roller coaster down some people have done that some people bought Bitcoin at 1200 and had to watch you go all the way down to 50 it was really hard some people thought a 30 watch to go down to one and that's what I was saying a lot earlier on about the nature of fundamental investments versus technical investments and this idea that everybody is just going to get rich for doing no work whatsoever people if they don't understand what they're doing can lose money in any venture and anything and it is really unfortunate when some people have extremely unrealistic expectations and then when it doesn't work out for them they don't want to blame themselves they don't want to blame their poor decisions they just blame whoever happens to be at the top and they say things that are lies outright lies they make personal attacks and do whatever they want to do and you know that's just the nature of how the space works it's the nature of all these things some days you're a hero some days you're a demon just depends on how the markets are performing but I would hope though that people recognize that an utter lack of civility and no way will make your money come back the only thing that will happen is if we can get better macroeconomic trends the markets are depressed relative their all-time high we as a community are pretty backed up and bashed up and there was just too much speculation and hype I was saying this before the markets went up I was saying this said $500 Bitcoin I went on Bloomberg and said it and I warned people that probably gonna have a collapse then we went up to $5,000 I said the exact same thing I believe it was on CNBC Australia I said the exact same thing to coin desk the coin Telegraph to anybody would listen that guys we're in a speculative bubble the bubbles probably going to burst well some people didn't listen they got hurt but it's my fault apparently you know and II that that is what it is and you know that's just how these things work but one thing I'd ask everybody to do is use some common sense look for facts when people make statements or assertions what evidence do they have and you'll find out that a lot of the people who say these things are actually they have no facts and that's because there's actually an industry now to lie fake news is real trolling is real and it's not some people having fun at a keyboard at our expense it is an industry meant to damage competitors you can pay money on the dark web or in some cases legitimate companies in Eastern Europe and other places to have armies of people go and lie about your competition you do this the short sale you do this to benefit your own position you do this to distract people it happens to Tesla it happens to Apple that happens to political campaigns really was a big deal in 2016 and that's just the world we live in because at the end of the day what is the cost of doing this type of attack a lot of it can be automated a lot of it is just mainstream propaganda and you only need a small team of people and using automation you can broadcast it to thousands of different channels and it can really impact the credibility of projects and really distract people so you know we have to be good critical thinkers because at the end of the day no one's gonna be a critical thinker for us you have to look at the history the track ecord the progress that's been made the statements been made in historical context you have to look at the commitment to transparency you have to look at who are the people behind it and one of those people done throughout their lives and when you string those things together then very quickly you can start separating fact from fiction the problem is that takes time that takes effort that's a commitment and a lot of people don't have time they don't have effort it's too much of a commitment so they just have a mob mentality and follow whatever it is there or just believe whatever the hell they read and that's why we've gotten into some bad positions in life so for my own part it's become so toxic that I decided for example to leave Twitter I'm just using it as a broadcast platform I actually write up the tweet I post it I don't read comments anymore I really enjoyed Twitter when I was on Twitter especially when I was smaller because I had a lot of Twitter friends we would DM we'd say great things over Twitter sometimes I'd send something to Marc Andreessen roots and something back sometimes I said something to Charley Lee it was really enjoyable but when a Twitter mob materializes around some statement maybe I could have been nicer in it or more humble in something but okay a Twitter mob materializes around articles are written about it it's no longer valuable to our company and it's become a distraction and it's become a liability so what we have to do is just pivot use it as a broadcast medium and and completely ignore the feedback coming back that's the consequence of the reality we live in going back to one of my opening statements in this AMA there was the idea of deep platforming and that is another problem with this fake news is it's a soft DES platforming if you're really good at playing the troll or the propaganda game and the fake news game what you can do is take somebody you don't like and then wrap them in an aura of legitimacy making it seem as if lots of people are outraged over what this particular person is saying a great example of that would be how Jordan Peterson has been treated if normal everyday people listen to Jordan Peterson there's kind of two camps one group of people says this guy rambles I can't really understand what he's saying but it's really academic and it doesn't seem to be very harmful so whatever go to the dragon and slay or lobsters or whatever and another group of people they really connect with him and they say yeah you know Jordan Peterson kind of makes some sense okay I'm gonna buy his book his best seller on Amazon but there's some very radical extremely small fringe group of people who have mastered social media and they have managed to convince certain members of the media Serah members of society county councils in certain places that this guy is a bigot a sexist a homophobe hates transsexuals he's a horrible human being a monster and and he any if you put him in power you know he'd strip women's rights away and regress us back to 1900 they're just convinced of this and then you ask basic questions such as which statements are you worried about and they never really give you that they just show up at the rallies with megaphones beating drums and air horns and trying to shout them out or deep Platform him and so forth so these attacks are also used as a soft way of de platforming messages that are inconvenient to particular agendas whether they be economic agendas or they be political agendas or they be social agendas or so forth and they massively reduce the signal to the noise ratio and they basically make people turn off so I think the cryptocurrency space is not immune to this we see it all over people are fanboys certainly the debate between ourselves and the vitalik is a great example of that reddit is definitely not the place to have an academic debate as I mentioned before we were at the Shanghai winter school we were at financial crypto didn't really have time to talk to us there perfect venue to have an academic debate there's chalk boards on the walls we would have been happy to discuss anything he didn't understand or had questions about or concerns instead he chose to use reddit and Twitter the least effective meeting the mediums and the ones most prone to manipulation by fanboys is that transparency well if your aim is to actually have a conversation and a productive debate and understand what each other are doing it's not you know so that's a that's what I'll say about these things okay concerns about car tanto you know I do have concerns everyday you know I wake up and ask myself was Haskell the right choice you know did we have the right ambition to execution you know I I wake up and say was proof of steak the right choice you know we there's certainly a lot of innovation that could have been done with proof of work the challenge with Cardno was that we went for gold we went for everything we said we want the best programmers the best programming language we want the best technology the best consensus protocol the best governance the best this the best that the best says we were insanely ambitious and we brought together really the all-star team because we were so grand and our appetite so grand in our ambition that we were really able to attract people who didn't care too much about the cryptocurrency space like for example Phil Wadler and say hey you know who cares about crypto there's this some really interesting stuff you can do here and when we brought these guys in and we we worked with these guys we really got some some magical stuff but the problem is that magical stuff wasn't quite as fast as we would hope and we worked really really really hard at trying to get you know things to move a little faster and that meant that some cases we had to reduce the appetite a bit reduce the principles a bit and be a little bit more pragmatic like for example with Prometheus in the in the roughs library and that's okay you know that's that's the reality of these projects so you know as a CEO you're always haunted by the poor choices you made the mistakes you made you know these types of things and you know and you just have to keep moving forward and you have to pivot and you have to know when you need to be a bit faster and you have to know when your principles are working the good news is the hard stuff is done and we've gotten over the hill and we have some great people and we've made some great progress the bad news is that we're not already completely out with everything and not them market leader yet and we probably could have been had we just been less ambitious but in the long run all we were really would have been is the is that you know the tallest small tree in the forest and we want to be a Sequoia and we planted some really deep roots and we planted some really deep seeds and I'm really thankful that we have a community that for the most part that's willing to wait with us to have that Sequoia grow and become the biggest tree not just in the forest but in the entire world so I'm confident in the direction now and more so than we've ever been I'm haunted by the delays and the bad processes and you know kind of wish we ought to do over on certain design decisions that we made in the past that we're now fixing today you know whenever you have to rip out code you spent a lot of time and money writing and you have to put new code in you always feel bad about it but overall I feel pretty good and I think cardano's and pretty good footing the system of peer review used this is another thing that seems to be manipulated by our competitors or in the space or trivialized but everyday academics understand you have these conferences they're the IAC our conferences and they publish books like this you know so this is for financial crypto in 2017 so here you go it's a nice little book and basically if you look through it this is a assembly of all of the papers that have been submitted to that to that conference and here's an example of one right here okay and you know basically the process is always the same there is a date announced where papers will be called for you submit your paper and it goes to a review committee the review committees made up of domain experts that are associated with the conference depending upon the field it can either be very large or very small especially you know big fields like artificial intelligence there's lots of people other feels like cryptography it's a bit more intimate and your paper goes through several rounds and what happens is people have a spectrum they can strongly accept it for really optional papers they can accept it week except week reject reject strongly reject now for Tier one conferences about 90% of the time even after you go through this whole process your paper is rejected maybe eighty percent depends on the conference in the year and the committee and how aggressive they are for a particular topic but almost always you have to go through a rebuttal phase where you know you they say some things and they say well we might accept it but we need to understand more about this in this and you have to write a really firm rebuttal and if you don't survive that paper doesn't get accepted this is a time-honored process it's existed for decades and it's allowed us to build modern cryptography so all of the security you take for granted with e-commerce you know all the cryptographic primitives that we use in crypto and Bitcoin and in the cryptocurrency space in some way we're connected to this process it's a very efficient process - it's not slow you know in some fields like mathematics I personally was pretty lamented about how slow the journals could be and publications could be and how long the peer review process takes but reality is when you have a pivotal paper almost every three months there's a conference window that you can submit that to you know and and so if you miss one you always have to know just next quarter you'll get it in so does it work in a matter of weeks no but it does give you certainly an opportunity to get your work seen multiple times per year that's unique for the field of computer science it's very fast relative to other fields of science if it gets accepted to a conference it's just as good as if you got accepted to a peer-reviewed journal so that's another difference between the computer science world and let's say mathematics or physics or other other academic disciplines for conferences tend to be lower on the academic food chain than the journals it's the opposite with computer science if you get tenure you've gotten tenure because you've gone to a conference not because you've published in some journal more often than not so anyway we utilize this process is a great checks-and-balances we hire the best scientists we collaborate with the best minds but at the end of the day these are very dense papers and they make some big bold claims and they're really hard to read and you know even if you're really smart and you have great processes mistakes through peer review is a great way of having an independent team of people who have no financial incentive one way or other to take a look at your work and make a judgment call whether this is unique and novel and something that's added to the science of the space and by definition if you're trying to do innovative things they're going to change the world you have to innovate the science to get there because the existing science we have isn't good enough so it's a check and balance system because it's a way of verifying that what the scientists we have think is true is probably true it's not the only one you still need to write specifications from it because there's lots of hand waving and papers where they say ideal functionality and assume you can instantaneously transmit a blockchain and all of these types of things and basically uh you know that that's that's not real you know you have to actually be engineers and build these things in the process of building it there's a feedback loop that happens in the engineers are hard-asses with the scientists because it's not optional even if you can hand away and say you know what I mean maybe that works in an academic conference but to an engineer a computer can't understand it unless it's specified and it's encapsulated in code so in a way this is a beautiful pipeline where you get thoroughly creative really smart really great people together you have them write innovative papers that solve real problems you go to conferences which are quite frequent you talk to some of the best and brightest people in the world when you couldn't even hire if you wanted to because they don't want jobs they already have great faculty positions you get them to extend themselves into your product for free you know charge you for this and then they give you great feedback which then put you in a really good position to start a conversation with our engineers about that science and then they write a specification and that specification cannot have ambiguity so in the process of writing specification anything that was cheated anything that wasn't certain about the design of the protocol gets teased out and then revisions have to be made and we have to think carefully and make sure everything's right that one two three pipeline is really nice it's independent of a particular person there's no cult of personality involved in it there's checks and balances it's double-blind especially on the peer review side and on the protocol site you have a computer involved in it and it has to run and you can benchmark and test it and you have some expectations of what it should do and now you're testing it and if there's a delta between those two there's something wrong there that would indicate that perhaps the protocol is not right that's the process we follow it's not like we invented this process it's existed for a long time it's produced a lot of good things and big companies use it with Microsoft and Google when they're doing things that are based on science the advantage we have is because the peer review cycle is so short with the computer science world it doesn't interfere with shipping of products you know Casper has been researched longer than Ora bores and despite that we actually are ahead of them we have more visitin resistance we're getting very close to having a production system based on it and we solved all the high-level problems like delegation and state pools and incentives and when we flip the switch the systems running we're probably going to beat etherium to the market for proof of stake they had a whole year on us and they're not following a peer-review process why it accelerates you is that will you spend a bit more on the front end when you get to the engineering side you have a pure product that gets to the engineers and as a consequence they can think faster they understand more about it and there's less hand waving there so you can get to the real protocol much faster second what the science and the engineering look like is much closer when you design things in a very heuristic way the paper looks very different when you end up implementing some cases they don't match at all because you have to make compromises and the engineer just makes decision so you might have some wonky way of making random numbers here you might do something completely different there because the reality is the wonky way just can't work maybe there's quadratic complexity or some weird thing like that so that's our process we've been very open about our process anybody's free to participate like we're going to crypto and Santa Barbara here in a little bit guys want to go visit and see our scientists talking to people at crypto that's great we're going to see CSU go into Euro these are some of those conferences we go to we go to financial crypto that's usually in the Caribbean it's a nice conference fun conference to go to you know and we see a lot of people there and a lot of good friends there yeah the other thing that I'd like to point out is we have competitors in the academic world there's Algar and there's thunder Ella there's avalanche there's all these great competitors who are by great people who are incredibly smart and they have great engineers behind them and they have universities behind them and they have ideas too you know what our ideas aren't so good that if they're automatically better than their ideas the reality is that it's a wash some cases they have something better than we have when you go through this process you learn something from this process it's not just about verifying what you've done is correct it's also about asking well is there anything better than what I got and instead of saying well I just didn't know now you're talking to 25 people who are all in that same domain all thinking about the same problem who are probably just as smart if not smarter than you so that humility pays back gives you more back this is really really fun you know and it's something that I think is undervalued you know there's only so much you can learn from putting something on github from putting something on YouTube and having conversations with engineers if you're gonna do science you talk to scientists you're gonna do medicine you talk to doctors you know if you're gonna do engineering you talk to engineers but these are different things and so you have to use the right tools the right processes engage with the right communities be able get yourself where you need to go you know I was on a panel at CT RSA where Adi Shamir Matt green and Sylvia McCauley was on the panel with me it was an amazingly humbling experience I am NOT a computer scientist but I'm on a panel with two Turing Award winners that's the Nobel Prize of computer science and we had a lovely discussion of proof of steak daddy's very skeptical of it Silvio's building his own proof of steak protocol called al grant and I'm there to represent a war Boris and Matt green and actually Bart Pernell was there as well wonderful guys Matz crater Z cash-in we get to talk about these things and say well Adi what are your concerns and in the audience Ron Rivest was there the s and r of RSA are there there is no amount of money in the world that can get all these guys in the same room because they're already insanely rich you think I rich in the 80s so you know they're just going to do their own thing so the only way you can have a conversation with those guys an effective conversation with those guys especially about my things is by engaging them through this format it's a little slower but not too much and you get so much more from it so why would you pass on that why would you say that this has no value Vitalik said it had no value in one of his comments and reddit I asked him why don't you write Kasper up into a format that's acceptable for an academic conference and submit it it's a novel protocol thirty-five billion dollar ecosystem behind it you're obviously a very smart guy so if you're so smart and you can know that we're violating in a possibilty theorem all these things and obviously you should be able to get your paper through the peer review process and the answer was it's not proper I don't believe it's worth anything this is the philosophical difference between ourselves and yo sand theorem and other ventures in the space if you believe what we're doing is right eight as your coin if you think it's going to slow us down too much and not make us competitive there are other ecosystems for you what bothers me though are the politics of personal destruction where it's not just good enough to disagree we have to get deeply personal about things and and say that people are idiots or you know people are bad human beings or something for following a particular process that has to stop yeah so the sidechain validation is pretty interesting the way that or bourse is designed you have epics with slots and it's probably going to be okay to have the slot leader make multiple blocks at the same time especially if you have the notion of a stake pool because that actor is going to have a much more powerful computer so it's not inconceivable to say that that slot is going to maintain the state in lockstep of many chains concurrently with fail-safes built in in case one of the blocks is invalid you can still maintain the persistence of the liveness of other chains so for example let's say we have K EVM as its own ledger Plutus as its own leisure yella as its own ledger and SL those would be four blocks every slot and they would be separate chains and then you have a subscription model where basically people can subscribe to the change that they tend to be interfacing and using with it either as a light subscription or a heavy subscription so light note our full block chain and the slot leader will just simply maintain all of that now the good news is that you've just massively increased your throughput and you've effectively charted an or boris has a lot of mechanisms within to actually do that well so that's part of our side chains research and it's part of our vision for SL and CL where it gets really interesting is when you start introducing this idea of elasticity where you know every slot leader that comes up maybe they maintain a few extra few down and there's some economic factor of whether they maintain the chain or not whether the chain pays rent or you know something like that so this is this is where we're gonna get really exciting in 2019 and 2020 because as the classical theory comes to an end and we've solidified all of that we move into the sharded theory and the multi ledger theory in the chimeric Leggio theory that's going to be really fun because we can start talking about that and create models for that and so forth the other thing is the side chains research is all about representations you have history so the whole block chain and you're saying how do I build proofs that are very small that can tell me lots of facts about that whole block chain once you have that mechanism then you no longer have this notion of a light user versus a full user you start off by default with just this collection of proofs and you know basically everything because anytime someone comes in makes an assertion you can verify whether that assertion is correct or not as if you had the whole coffee of all history and then the storage of history becomes a separate problem with that become an essential eyes file system or you know even if it's stored in a centralized capacity there's some way to recall it there's hundreds of solutions you can throw at that but the side-chain thing is really important so these two things were thinking really deeply about and we're working real hard on and we've been writing a lot of papers and I think I'm gonna have some fun with that and see what else we got here yeah Rena can run with current internet technology basically use some like UDP punch into it so it from the outside of you like UDP with the VPN and then it would be this really wonky internal network obviously you could accelerate it if you had custom hardware for it but the arena is just one of a collection of potential solutions we're looking at about long term scalability there are some great ideas like polder cast pol de Arce AST polder cast which came out 2012 and dozens of other things like that which are partial solutions and rina it looks like a way of doing a complete solution and here's why basically Rena is like a collection of foundational technologies that you just stick a policy into and now you have something that looks like a totally different network so you want pub/sub policy now you have it you know you want a different network configuration like gossip clicking now you have it right and so when you have that kind of flexibility then all you really need to replicate a particular cryptocurrency is a policy as opposed to a completely new network stack and that means you can really really focus on optimizing performance and focus on optimizing correctness and getting very good predictability out of what you have and then all of these policies basically inherit from that it's kind of like saying well you're going to compile the java virtual machine or to the the CLR for.net and basically when you do this you get kind of predictable performance so even though you might be writing an F sharp or C sharp or Java or Scala you don't really have a big performance Delta between these things because there's all this stuff that's been figured out underneath it that's helping you do that and that's what Reno is kind of about it's kind of like this Universal machine for networking and then you plug policies into it and those policies allow you to replicate different networks so yeah I like the mathematical elegance and simplicity of that approach and I like the fact that that means I can focus super hard on getting it exactly perfect and it's going to ubiquitously benefit not just Cardinal but all future project as well as permission Ledger's the problem with rina is that it's a very ambitious project the a lot to do there's a lot of basic research to do and you know even if we were to go completely gung-ho into it it takes years to get it all done so it cannot be the condition upon which Cardno is successful we have to have halfway house solutions and we do have them and we are building them and implementing them for Shelley Gogan and other steps in the network that will definitely provide us exactly what we need to be able to scale to large settings it's more of a question of future proofing and that we get reusability and we get a lot more flexibility furthermore because you have policies being able to guide network configuration when you start talking about things like the needs of a spark contract or a private network or a multi-party computation protocol you can now modify the network protocol in a very trivial way to be completely different to meet the needs of that so for example if you go from the main network to a private life chain network or something like that you have some way of doing that in a fair coherent way so that's why I like Rena and that's why I think that there's a huge amount of Merit promised there and for well over 20 years people have been thinking about it one way or another and a lot of the pioneers of the internet do you agree that something like this would have been nice to have had think how to do over you know as for the notion of specialized hardware that's just a matter of making it run faster and more reliably and so forth but you can interface with Reena using traditional internet protocols adds a little bit more fragility and brittleness to the protocol but there are ways of mitigating that and so forth it brings up a broader discussion of well as the inner the internet we have good the answer is no it's terribly broken it's broken because nobody was in charge it's broken because nobody could be in charge and it grew in a very asymmetrical and strange way and then there's all these gigantic companies content companies that have huge amount of influence over it and all this weird policy exists and so it has resulted in this kind of Franken monster and nobody's quite happy with it and everybody talks about how over the next ten years we're gonna fix it like the Stanford clean slate initiative 5g you know they said the Iowa tea movement is going to force a fix to the Internet ipv6 will somehow force to fix the internet it's software-defined networking will force a fix to the internet and we've never just quite gotten there yet so of course the Rena advocates say the same thing they they really believe in that but you know we all have our own book we talk and we can't take ourselves too seriously okay let's see what we got here what else maybe one or two more questions is ADA working to comply with regulations u.s. government that's a really interesting question because it presupposes that there are regulations for us to comply with the answer is there aren't any regulation of crypto currencies has so far not been at the protocol level but rather the use in facts and circumstances behind the use of the crypto currency so basically the idea is if you have a Bitcoin you can have a Bitcoin that's not a problem but then if you choose to use that Bitcoin in a particular way like sell it through an OTC transaction or in person on little bitcoins or if you use it to buy drugs or if you use it in ICO or something like that you may inadvertently be violating a US law or state law or County law so when you build these things the first regulation point is the issuance side and we're past that so now the regulation point stems around the use and the facts and circumstances of that use now that might change a little bit there's a lot of open questions about it for example how gdpr will apply to block chains and legal scholars are kind of haggling over that and there's also a lot of desire to regulate in some way private crypto currencies and some way give the government a backdoor hide the way that's not a new debate that Apple ran into that debate a lot of people make cryptographic software have always run into that debate back in the 1990s you guys might remember the Clipper Chip debate and boy that was a tough one so so far you went United States America has no regulation that applies to us about things we have to do with cryptocurrency as engineers and it probably won't for the foreseeable future that said it is probably a really good idea to self-regulate in that it's a good idea to create standards that can benefit the community have followed for example there was a paper recently published out of University of Pennsylvania School of Law it's about a hundred pages long and it's called coin operated capitalism now that paper covered icos and they went I think over 50 icos and 2017 and they even to the source code itself and they found that over 70% of the IC OS that occurred in some way defrauded the buyers ie they made claims in the sale that were not represented in the code or conduct of the people behind the code so when you have a situation where you have an institution or 70% of the time the person buying token is in some way mislead and in some cases they don't even care because they can immediately divest the token on an upswing of the market place that is a moral hazard whether the regulator steps in or not it doesn't excuse the fact that that is a broken marketplace and we do need to do something to fix it now we could cry and complain and say oh that's a bad deal and we're bad people or we could create standards where we could talk about custodianship and escrow and divestment and use of funds and community control over use of funds and so forth and we can encode all of that up into best practices and create a standard and then you guys as buyers of tokens could ask questions like are we following this standard or not and then self certification and self regulation can enforce this for example the purchase of Wi-Fi products you know say oh well this is a Wi-Fi router and I said well that's great does it comply with a known Wi-Fi standard like 802 dot 11n or a dot 11 AC or something like that why do you ask that question because you have to connect your phone to it you have connect your laptop to it and as a consequence you have to rely that they're following the standard because your phone manufacturer probably never talked to that router manufacturer so did the government step in and mandate to Netgear and mandate to Asus and these other people you must follow that standard for that Wi-Fi product know the marketplace did and we as consumers have an expectation for these things to work properly so I think we can apply self-regulation like that to icos and to privacy especially the denomination of transaction using some notion of escalations and we can end up getting much better systems that work globally Wi-Fi works globally I traveled to dozens of countries every year I have a phone my phone can connect to the Royal host diner in Osaka Japan that same phone connect to a diner in Ethiopia that same phone can connect to a diner in Toronto Canada and in Denver Colorado okay and I never had a negotiation with these people I never knew these feelings there's a lot of this hardware is made on completely different parts of the earth and it's installed by different people different languages but that global standard works and the international community didn't have to come together to figure that out it just was a markets naturally doing that so I do think that that is the way to go and I think that 90% of the moral hazards and issues and concerns we have in this space probably can be resolved there and that slice of 10% probably doesn't require any new regulation because it's fraud and fraud is fraud if you buy something and you thought it was X and it turned out to be Y and the person deceived you into thinking it was X so that they can get your money they committed a crime in almost every country in the world and you know if you have good functioning judicial systems you usually can get recourse either through a lawsuit or through some form of a criminal enforcement and for the most part criminals do go to jail so I think we can self-regulate for the big stuff and for the rest of the stuff the existing system will work pretty well all right it's a final question you know what has surprised me the most about the Cardinal journey you know you never know how these things are gonna go we were very ambitious in in what we wanted to do but the reality is the ambitions were constrained to concepts that were not known by the public most people don't know what Isabel is if you say they probably think something different than what you thought you said you know if you talk about things like by simulation or things like peer review they just have completely different concepts of that and you know we entered in on a different wavelength than the entire space and that's really difficult to do if you're too far ahead of the space or you're too distant from the space people are not so comfortable and they might not come along with you what has been tremendously humbling going all around the world meeting people in the community people like the ones watching this this AMA has been just how tremendously loyal and excited and passionate people are about some of the concepts we have we tried not to break human nature with them we tried to accept that we're flawed and we can make mistakes and we can get overly arrogant and some cases get too big for our britches and tell people were the CEO of a big company but you know the market has a way of humbling you and people have a way of humbling you and people focus less on us and more on these concepts you know I can't tell you how many people have read the or Boris paper you know Kokoro shoe good friend of mine runs run time verification when he did the Kay EVM paper and published it I think there were more downloads in the first week of that paper from the Illinois website then any of paper he's written in his life probably all of them combined you just blown away by these I've never seen this type of response to a formal methods paper this is a paper that maybe 10 guys read because you know it's just the nature of the field and they have 5,000 downloads for it so that has been tremendously surprising you know the the thing that has been surprising has been the quality of the conversations that I've had with people when we talk about liquid feedback or liquid democracy in some cases we have people who have done pioneering work show up at a meet-up or a place I'm at and say by the way the papers you referenced I wrote Wow and you have a conversation with that guy or that gal and and they say well it's pretty interesting that you guys are trying to use this I never thought that was possible or I did but there is an issue you probably haven't thought about and you say wow that's incredible so it's been a great journey and that's it's been a very surprising journey on the other side of the token I don't think I was fully prepared for the negativity of the space people aren't built to take criticism and no one's constructed in a lab it's like building a human being to take a car crash or something like that criticism can be just as frustrating and harmful as physical abuse and it psychologically comes at you and you know you you always ask yourself like what did I do to piss these people off what did I do to make these people so angry or you know to make these people think things that are just so strange and what you can't do is let it bother you and everybody says that but it is hard at times especially if the criticism comes from people that you considered to be friends or people that you thought you had a good relationship with and for whatever strange reason it comes their way partly you can justify it through economic incentives partly you can justify it with the people changing and situations changing and and so that's that you know some of the criticism is strange like we're in ERC 20 token or we don't have any code or it's a scam or it's just a white paper it's it's like well how much objective reality do you have to throw out these guys before they understand they're lying to you but you know you receive that criticism and I wasn't completely prepared for that because I didn't live in a world where I endured that on a regular basis so it has been pretty surprising and it turns out that you have to build an immune system for it you have to build some controls and protections and checks and balances within the organism so you don't get too exposed to it you know the other thing is that you always lose when you engage the criticism I've never won you know people have just said really horrible things I've engaged and I look like a jackass a great example would be with the meta mask incident you know I sick-ass in Vietnam had a long day and I just learned that they got to list it and you know I we they're very small venture guys there's probably less than five people there you know so you're thinking probably one of those five people runs the Twitter feed why would they hire a dedicated person for such a small project so you reach out to them and I've reached out to hundreds of other people that same way and I can't send them a direct message if they don't follow me I can't send them one so I would have sent them a DM but I couldn't send them unto them so I follow him I say hey send me a DM and they send a message back send us something at support it's an open source project there's no warranty there's no expectation of dedicated 24/7 support I have gotten hundreds of small open source projects send me that very same query I've sent hundreds of messages out they seldom get answered I had a time intensive question so I just said you know guys come on I've been in the space a long time seven years you know me I've done a lot could we at least be realistic here if you want to ask me a question I extend you the courtesy of a private channel with me could I have the same with you that was my intent now everywhere I go I see people say hi I'm Charles Hassan Salameh ba you know and it's even in this very chat some people have done it as if I'm this narcissistic guy and you know it's just I've gone to thousands of places I've talked to thousands of people you can do a survey of them I stay after I've had tons of conversations I go out of my way to be to be a bit humble we fall a very humble development process but now there's this perverse image that people have built up about the whole thing second I eat I'm a human being I eat you guys do too it's a dirty secret I guess and you know what when you eat sometimes you take pictures of your food pretty common in Asia ask any of your friends and you know what when you're traveling all around the world and you've had 16 hours of meetings take a picture of your food you have a hundred thousand followers on Twitter you share it you say hey guys this is what I did today I can't talk about private meetings if I meet with a world leader and it's confidential I can't talk about that I can't talk about HR issues or personnel issues but I can talk about the duck that I had a lot of cases people buying for me because they're inviting me to a meeting or something like that so I share it and then they make a montage of all the food I'm eating as if it means I'm not working and I'm wasting investor money or something like that this is the I think the dehumanization and the and the fundamental unfairness of the social media notion of the space the fake news of the space as I mentioned earlier and that did surprise me because in a way it was like an invitation to people to kind of share with my experiences I'm no different than anybody else I just have this incredible luck to be the CEO of a company that allows me to travel all around the world and go to places like Africa and Japan and South Korea and China and Australia and South America and so forth it's a very humbling thing and I have this great medium where I can share those experiences blow-by-blow what it looks like in the plane what it looks like on the dinner table with the world and there are some people who would rather interpret it as I'm bragging and it's a lifestyle rather than saying look at this cool thing that we all get to experience together that was that was pretty amazing to me and you know it the result of it is you just can't share because it's weaponized against the company in the project and ultimately it just hurts ADA so as a consequence I lose that Avenue which was quite therapeutic so that's the positive and the negative I'd say the most surprising things that I've learned you know humbling to be able to have conversations with some of the most amazing people all around the world and I'm really glad that we had an opportunity to interface a creator of the web browser you know I've had a lot of really interesting people I never thought my life I would meet and that was just amazing and is so humbling a negative side I wasn't prepared for how harsh people can be or how brutal people can be and I wasn't prepared for how people react to honest gestures so you take the good with the bad that's just the way the cookie crumbles that's just the way the life is anyway I'll just keep doing AMAs keep doing update videos looking forward to 1.4 thank you guys so much for attending and this was a lot of fun all see us sometime later Cheers