Bankless - AMA#1 - Kain Warwick of Synthetix

Episode Date: August 17, 2020

Kain Warwick, Founder of the Synthetix Platform, presents himself to the Bankless Nation for a live AMA! We ask him anything! No question off limits.  This is a BONUS episode. Regular podcast episode (#26) will be released tomorrow. ----- GO BANKLESS WITH THESE SPONSOR TOOLS: ⚔️ GODS UNCHAINED - TRADING CARD GAME - you own the cards - start a free account, play and trade! 🧙‍♀️ POLYMARKET - BET ON CRYPTO - bet your beliefs! - use it to bet on DeFi outcomes!  🌈 AAVE - LEND & BORROW YOUR CRYPTO W/O A BANK - earn some interest! 💸 AMPLFORTH - MONETARY EXPERIMENT FOR BASE MONEY - learn about this experiment! ----- We do AMAs every 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month.  Become a Bankless member to get access to the Zoom Webinar and ask questions to future AMA guests like Kain directly! Here's the video recording.  Kain is the founder of Snythetix, a popular synthetics and derivatives market on Ethereum. The Bankless Nation asks him questions about: High gas fees yams lol Yield farming Future vision for synthetics DeF in a Layer 2 Central bank digital currencies The final boss Eth2 What he learned from 2017 Bull market price predictions! And more.... ----- Don't stop at the show! Subscribe to the Bankless newsletter program http://bankless.substack.com/ Visit the official Bankless website for resources http://banklesshq.com/ Follow Bankless on Twitter https://twitter.com/BanklessHQ Follow Ryan on Twitter https://twitter.com/ryansadams Follow David on Twitter https://twitter.com/TrustlessState Follow DeFi Dad on Twitter https://twitter.com/DeFi_Dad ----- Not financial or tax advice. This channel is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. This is not tax advice. Talk to your accountant. Do your own research. Disclosure. From time-to-time we may add links in this channel to products we use. We may receive commission if you make a purchase through one of these links. We'll always disclose when this is the case.

Welcome to Bankless, where we explore the frontier of internet money and internet finance. This is how to get started, how to get better, and how to front run the opportunity. This is Ryan Sean Adams. I'm here with David Hoffman, and we're here to help you become more bankless. David, how are you doing today, sir? Absolutely fantastic. Experimenting with a new model of content in the Bankless podcast, we're bringing an AMA bonus episode, early in the week with Kane Warwick. These AMA interviews, we do on bankless every other Thursday as a live stream.

If you are part of the bankless nation, if you are in the bankless Discord, you get access to the Zoom webinar where you can ask Kane and future guests directly inside of Zoom. And for everyone else, you can check the live stream out on YouTube, both as a live stream and then also as a video and then also now as a podcast where you are listening to it now. Yeah, and I should mention two of our sponsors who made this possible. The first is AVE, of course. AVE is a lending and borrowing protocol. Fantastic protocol.

You've got to check them up. You've got to check them out. It's a way to borrow and lend without a bank, the bankless style. Go to Ave.com to check them out. And also, Polymarket. Polymarket is a place where you can use crypto to bet on your beliefs. It's a prediction market. Go to poly.

dot market to find out more and start betting polly dot market so ryan what did you think about this a m a m a this is the first format that we've done this a m a in this is a lot of fun we got a ton of community questions fantastic questions from the bankless nation uh i think we got to to many of them though not all of them and we just like covered everything i mean this is a this is a pretty substantial a conversation with Kane. And certainly we ask questions that, you know, the typical guests might not have been comfortable with, but Kane just went with it. And I think he gave us a pretty good take on layer two and how synthetics is reacting to kind of all of this higher gas fee. And, you know, he talked about building in a roll-up, so building in a layer two outside of Ethereum. And we use

the analogy of Manhattan being sort of the main chain and in Brooklyn being this new kind of roll-up. up environment layer two that he's building in. It was just a lot of fascinating stuff here. We got to ask King questions. I think we wouldn't regularly ask him outside of participation from you, the bankless nation. Just a lot of fun. Yeah, what I really enjoyed about this is like everyone has questions about synthetics, right? And like you, I found the conversations around the layer two coming innovations for synthetics really interesting. But I also enjoy the questions from the community that are kind of just like about what else is going on in the space outside of synthetics, because, you know, people want to hear about like what somebody like Kane thinks about things

like Yams or Central Bank digital currencies or, you know, Ethereum 2.0. And questions like those came up, too. So it's a fun, it's a fun experiment to ask people that maybe, you know, everyone's used to hearing Kane talk about synthetics, but what else does Kane think about? Because I'm sure he has opinions on those things as well. So our regular podcast is going to come out two, this week. We're doing this special AMA bonus episode with Kane today. And tomorrow's podcast is going to be with Charlie Noyes from Paradigms. Just a fantastic episode. We get into a lot of the economic security assumptions in particular talk about the question of whether Ethereum can be the global financial system or even Bitcoin for that matter without becoming a money. So lots of

interesting topics there to catch that tomorrow morning on the bankless podcast. stream. Our second two set of sponsors that make these AMAs possible, first is God's Unchained. For those of you that have played Heartstone or Magic the Gathering or Yu-Gi-O, those games are super fun, but they always have this kink with how to own your actual cards. With Magic the Gathering, you own physical cards, and you can't play in an online form, and with Hardstone, you don't own your cards at all. Blizzard owns your cards. With God's Unchained, you own your cards on Ethereum as tokens, and you can play play the game on your computer across the internet while still owning your cards. Really cool innovation.

Check them out at godsunchain.com. And our second sponsor, Ampleforth. Ampleforth is a base money experiment where instead of having an inelastic supply and elastic price like Bitcoin, it's reversed, where it has an inelastic price, but it instead has an elastic supply. So the supply of Ampleforth contracts or expands up and down based on demand while, the price always tries and targets a dollar. Really interesting mechanism. Check them out at ampalforth.org. Let's go ahead and get right into this AMA with Kane Warwick of Synthetics.

Hello, everyone. Welcome to the bankless AMA. We have this special AMA with Kane Warwick from Synthetics. Kane, how are you doing today, sir? Yeah, not too bad. Not too bad. It's been an interesting week. Oh, man, it's been a crazy week. This is one of the craziest weeks on record. So I'm just going to go over a few of the ground rules. So, Kane, this is an AMA. That means folks get to ask you anything. Feel free to pass on a question if you wish. But we don't want the bankless nation judging you for skipping the hard ones.

So hopefully you'll answer a few of our hard ones. Now, as a reminder for bankless members, you can ask questions in the bankless Discord channel. So that's open to members. You can also ask on the Zoom chat. we are also streaming us live on YouTube for everyone else. And why don't we just get started? Since I'm moderating, I feel like I get right to maybe ask the first question. Cain, what is the scariest question you could anticipate on an AMA like this, sir?

I don't know. That's a really good question. I think probably the scariest question at the moment would be, you know what are we planning to do for scalability you know it's it's the most topical and I think it's something that you know everyone's very eager to see solved and we've got some plans but yeah you know it's it's definitely an issue at the moment well you know what that deserves a follow-up what is synthetics going to do about the issue of scalability you know gas fees of

300 way are the new normal so how does synthetics adapt to that? Yeah, when I say it's the scariest question, it's because I know the answer, but if I provide the answer, a certain person named Jing will probably murder me. So we're working with the optimism team. We've been working with them very closely.

As you guys know, we did a demo of their L2 solution a few months ago now. We're pushing very, very hard to try and get some sort of pseudo mainnet live, live as quickly as possible given, you know, the current gas environment. So I can't give a timeline on pain of death, but it's close where we're working really hard. All right. Excellent. Well, I'm going to fire off the first question. This one is from bankless member. Oboshi. I'm not sure if I pronounce that right, but he's asking or she's asking this question. Cane, you seem suspiciously

normal. How can anyone expect it take you seriously when your nerd factor is so low? I think, I think the question is, how are you so cool? This space is full of nerds. How are you so cool? I don't know. I think if you actually spend some time with me, you might question that assessment. I mean, you know, if you come into the synthetics discord, we sit around playing chess most of the time and make dumb memes. So, you know, I think maybe it might just be the surface appearance of coolness, but it doesn't go too deep.

So what is your nerdiest habit then, Kane? I probably sitting around playing speed chess or yield farming I would say these days all right well that leads to another question and this one is from the Zoom on the topic of yield farming what are your thoughts on this week

with yams rise and then also it's demise so this is like a you know a 48 hour life cycle what are your thoughts on everything yam this week so it was i think it was Wednesday morning and a friend of mine ping me on telegram when I woke up. It was about like seven or something

like that. And I was just going through messages. And he was like, hey, it was San Diego from Parify. He's like, hey, you know, what are you doing about? Yeah. And I was like, I don't know what you're talking about. Like this thing didn't exist when I went to sleep. Like how? Like I'm doing nothing about it. And and I was like, oh, I guess I'll have a look at it. So I like, you know, started looking at it, read the blog post. And I was like, all yolo win and like what's mess next in there. started farming it. And then, you know, the next day, like, it was the yampocalypse. And, you know, I was trying to scramble around and, like, get the S&X Spartans to kind of help out and, you know, delegate to try and, you know, get that proposal over the line. That obviously didn't work. So I think now, you know,

the plan is, from what I understand, to try and work out a way of, like, you know, launching a V2, have some kind of transition. But, you know, there's a number of proposals. So it'll be interesting because you can't actually have governance now. Like, governance has failed, so it's going to need to be this rough consensus, which for me, you know, I'm probably preferential towards. So it'll be interesting to see a play out now. Wait, so does that mean you think Yam 1.0 is not dead yet, that there's still hope? I mean, the governance is eliminated?

I think, I think, yeah, the concept is not dead, right? Like, you know, the transition from Yam 1.0 to 2.0 still requires the Yam community to kind of like come together, right? So it'll be a question of how do you coordinate that when the on-chain governance component has, you know, exploded. So this is actually a question that we're going to be putting out tomorrow in our Friday open thread. But it seems to me that the Ethereum community is somewhat divided over yams. So there's a whole chunk of the community that's basically like in defy community that's like it was a complete, you know, sham. We shouldn't be promoting this sort of monetary.

experiment, you know, it wasn't unadited, unsafe. And there's another side of the community that's like, hey, we're all adults here. And, you know, this is a permissionless system. And the creators of YAM like can't be held accountable for the rapid success. What side of that debate do you fall on? Was Yams a net positive for Ethereum and DFI or was it a net negative? I think it was a positive, right? And maybe I'm a crazy person, but, you know, my view is I like experimentation, right? Now, typically, you know, in the synthetics community, we talk about doing like small experiments, right? So, you know, we might do like a four-week trial of like $10,000 in incentives, right? You know, what's what I think we've seen play out with a lot of these, you know,

initial yield farming incentives is they start out with the intention of like, okay, we're going to put, even comp, right? You know, I'm sure internally they were thinking, you know, it's going to be a few hundred thousand dollars of incentives a week or something like that, right? And then I went from a few hundred thousand to tens of millions of dollars in incentives a week and everything blows up. So I think, you know, it is really hard to kind of constrain that because there is so much irrational exuberance and excitement. But, you know, I still have a view that small scale experiments and, and, you know, on the grand scheme of things, $750,000 was, you know, lost or locked. You know, it is a small, a small amount, you know, collectively. Obviously, it's not ideal.

But you're right, like everyone is an adult, everyone makes their own decisions, you know, self-sovereign money is, you know, a double-edged sword, right? You know, it's both, you know, positive in that anyone can do whatever they want and negative in that people can do dumb things if they want, right? They can do risky things. Is it the case that you are pro experimentation because it seems to be the case anyway? That's sort of how synthetics found its product market fit anyway, a series of small experiments. And if somebody said, hey, those experiments are not allowed. You shouldn't do those experiments. It seems to be the case that maybe synthetics would never have found its product market fit.

Is that right way of thinking about it? Yeah, I mean, you know, it's not even if. Lots of people said it, right? Lots of people said it. Like, you're bad people. You shouldn't do this. Right. This is a bad thing to do.

Don't experiment. Like, it's too crazy and high risk and everything. And, you know, as much as we were pushing fast and iterating, you know, rapidly, we have some people, you know, core contributors like Justin, for example, who comes from, you know, a large-scale enterprise software background like MongoDB, you know, he's not a lunatic, right? Like, he's, I mean, he constrains me. I'm probably the lunatic in the group, right? So, you know, he's constantly trying to ensure that, you know, we've got as much structure around this stuff as possible. But yeah, if we weren't allowed to experiment, there's no synthetics.

There's no question about that. Let's stay on the subject of yield farming for a moment. So this question is from Gintama, from Bankless Discord. So asking what your thoughts are on how yield farming is evolving. So that's another kind of area that's faced a little bit of scrutiny. Now, I would say in some ways, you know, synthetics has been sort of the pioneers of yield farming, right? Like the Yam's smart contracts were really a fork of the synthetic smart.

contract. But at what point could yield farming start to get, you know, toxic or net negative for the entire space? And how do you see it evolving? Is it evolving in a good direction? Or what's like the next chapter of yield farming, like the 2.0? Well, I think it's kind of multidimensional, right? Like what we've seen is in one dimension, it's become, you know, more open and permissionless, right like we're seeing you know these uh no pre-mine no you know vc no uh team holding token uh kind of experiments right and i feel like uh the the community is much more forgiving of those sorts of things right you know if people write some software and they deploy it they don't get any you know privileged position within the system they've got to participate just like everyone else that feels

sort of you know more fair right even if it's maybe less fair from a traditional startup standpoint that like the people who created things should get some stake in it. So I think that as we push in that dimension of, you know, more openness, more sort of, you know, permissionlessness in terms of, you know, who can participate, it opens up the ability to do more experimentation, right, because people are more forgiving of those experiments. And I think that that's really exciting because when you take some of these things, like, you know, even I was just reading about based this morning, right, another thing that like popped up last night. And, you know, it's, I think what it comes down to is you're distilling the incentives down to their essence,

right? And that's how we really start to see like what is effective and what is not effective. You know, so I think that these experiments, these, you know, crypto economic incentive experiments are really valuable. And, you know, we're seeing them play out. And, you know, they're playing out in a safe-ish space, I think. You know, the scales may be a little bit bigger than we would like. But overall, I'm really, you know, I think it's a net positive. All right. So on the subject of experimentation, you know, YFI and the YERN protocol has been a major experiment in defy lately. So this is another question from bankless Discord.

What are your thoughts on urine, including how synthetics is being integrated with the project? I'm actually not familiar in what way synthetics is being integrated with the project, or if it is. Maybe you could comment on that. Yeah, so, you know, it's an interesting kind of backstory to how this all came about, right? So, you know, Michael and I were discussing creating an SUSD pool, right? And, you know, there was a little bit of tension there about how we should do it and, you know, what was required in terms of effort and stuff. And the conversation kind of broke down, right?

And Andre, you know, this is how good of the guy he is, right? Andre, you know, came to the rescue, right? And, like, pulled, you know, said, you're both being idiots, right? Like, let's actually, you know, come to the table and discuss this. Like, this is a good thing, you know, let's make it happen. And, you know, he talked to me, you talk to me, you talk to my. He brought us together and you know he got the SUSD pool started the incentivized SUSD pool started and so then I think You know that kind of met a pool that was created the the the the the the while then you know took off and and your group huge and then obviously

You know Andre kind of left for a while and then I think when he came back you know and he started this this new you know the the Wi-Fi craze right You know, he took that same pool, but he didn't actually use the SUSD pool because the gas costs were too high and there was some other friction around it. So it's kind of, it's a really interesting story about how it's kind of evolved. But my view is that, again, you know, I think it's a really interesting experiment in this idea of kind of, you know, I guess industrialized yield farming, right? Of like, you know, really optimizing yield farming and ensuring that you're getting the highest yield possible is a really cool direction that we're seeing. people experiment in and you know, Andre is the king of that by far. Yeah, absolutely. He is the king of experimentation and yeah, quite an interesting fellow.

So check out our podcast that came out this week on Andre. It was one of the most fascinating podcast episodes I've, David and I've done. On the subject of criticism though, because Andre has been, I guess, no stranger to criticism. And it does seem to be the case that a lot of D-5 protocols, even, you know, Ethereum itself have been criticized at the very early stage of the project as like this experimentation is dangerous or this will never work and that sort of thing. What are your thoughts about some of the criticisms of synthetics? So this is a question from Dorica. The criticism on synthetics being a bucket shop or the possibility of a cascading liquidation effect coming from traditional markets, similar to make your doubt in March 2020.

I guess everyone remembers the Black Thursday event in March and the question of, is synthetics prepared for that? Or are there some risks in the platform that aren't immediately clear if there's some sort of a Black Swan type event, another Black Thursday March event? Yeah, I mean, you know, it's a very high risk. You know, and I say this all the time, like synthetics is still highly experimental, right? And it's kind of fallen into the same camp of these experiments that have grown very large. And so when you have the S&X market cap, you know, edging up towards a billion dollars, that's a little bit scary. There's a lot of value, you know, locked in there. And one of the things that we have

as a kind of offset to that, I suppose, is this very high buffer, right? The collateralization ratio buffer, right? So, you know, it was at 850, you know, a few months ago. Yesterday, interestingly, there was a proposal that passed to reduce it to 700 which I was against but no one listens to me anymore in in Discord so you know that's just the way it goes right so I still think that we should keep it you know as high as possible for now we need that buffer even with liquidations but you know people you know are pushing for a lower collateralization ratio so that's one way that we kind of offset that the second way is obviously having liquidations but you know liquidations are dangerous because you can't have

this cascading, you know, failure. Thankfully, we've never got to a point where, you know, the system was even close to the liquidation threshold. You know, so I think that buffer is doing its job and the fact that we have like weekly claims which force people to fix their ratios. But, you know, as we saw with yams, interestingly, right? So the price of SNX was sitting around $5, you know, 48 hours ago, whatever. Yams switches on. A bunch of people start buying SNX to farm yams because it was one of the highest APIs, right? Prys, goes from $5 to $6, yams collapses,

the price goes from $6 back down to $5 again. You can literally see like the chart, you know, so it's still reflexive, right? Like it's still highly, highly reflective. I've seen people call that the yamplification effect as it was going on.

There's so many good puns with the yam mean. I just, I love it. Okay, so, but on that subject, is there a point at which synthetics, you would call synthetic safe or like reasonably safe

for more retail and value? investors, we don't feel like you have to like put caution tape around the entire project and say, look, you know, you could lose everything if you put it in here. Yeah. I mean, I don't know how long it's going to take for any defy protocol to, you know, because we've got platform risk, right? Like there's platform risk on top of platform risk. So you've got Ethereum platform risk. You've got scalability, you know, issues. You've got all of this, you know, inherent platform risk just in being on Ethereum. And then you've got the actual smart contract suite itself, you know, which is complex. And, you know,

Look, yes, more time helps, right? You know, in two years' time. But when you're upgrading that smart contract suite, every time you upgrade it, you lose a little bit of that, right? Now, some of the contracts stay the same, some change, but the interaction of those contracts, you know, is where the complexity lies. So until we get to a point where we stop upgrading the contracts or, you know, we've kind of locked down the core of the system, I think there's still going to be a lot of risk there.

Got it. All right. So let's talk about stable coins for a minute. So you guys have S-USD, of course. which is a pretty unique stable coin that's going out there. But a question came in about, I guess the other side, less of a crypto-native stable coin and more about central bank digital coins.

What's your take on central bank digital coins in general? So it seems like the central bank of China, the People's Bank of China is moving really fast in creating a Chinese central bank digital currency. it's likely that Western nations won't be too far behind. What's your take in general on central bank digital coins? My history of stable coin predictions is littered with abject failure to predict all kinds of things. So I would not listen to my prediction in any way.

Like I was saying nothing like USDC can exist like a regulated stable coin for years, right? All through like 2016, 2017, I was like, just can't happen. Why did you think that, by the way? I just, you know, I, maybe I thought that regulators would be more skeptical of, you know, having something, having an asset like that. You know, we knew that there were issues with Tether. It was operating in kind of this gray regulatory environment. I just thought, you know, if you turn up to a regulator and say, hey, we want to do that thing, right, but we want to do it, you know, under kind of some regulatory regime that they would laugh you out of the room. You know, it's, it's amazingly impressive that, you know, the sort of center consortium was able to get the, you know, that over the line. I still find it really impressive. Same thing with Paxlow's true USD. All the regulator stable coins, I think the fact that they even exist is is pretty impressive. You know, obviously a central bank stable coin has a lot of advantages in that, you know, it is made by the regular, you know, the same regime, right? The regulatory regime that, you know,

is kind of dominating that particular country. So I think that they're more likely to happen. What the impacts of them are, I don't know. I mean, my hope is that like the other stable points, we've seen that, you know, it makes access to legacy finance easier and it creates like a, you know, a better bridge. But that remains to be seen. Do you think it's good for crypto? It depends on what they're built on. You know, I think if they're built on like their own permissioned chain that's like a fork of

something, then like maybe tangentially. But I think if central banks start actually issuing stable coins on Ethereum, you know, that there's no question that's a net positive right that's a big indicator that you know large entities like you know nation states believe that Ethereum as like the global sediment layer is a thing so I don't know how likely that is and I don't even want to predict it because I'll probably fuck it up but yeah that's that's that's my sense all right so this is a question from CryptoMuniac so Cryptomuniac wants to know what the vision for synthetics is for the next few years. So the entire DFI space is rapidly evolving. What's what's the place of

synthetics in that space? What are the aspirations of the synthetics protocol? Yeah. So I mean, this is going to be a bit of an alpha leak, I guess, but you know, that's kind of the point of these things, right? So I think, you know, back to your earlier question of like, when do we get to a point where synthetics is not so high risk that, you know, a normal kind of user could feel comfortable coming in and participating in the ecosystem. I think there's a number of things post synthetic futures which are launching that will help to reduce risk. So one of the things that we're kind of doing some research on in the background is the idea of siloing the different debt pools into asset classes. Right. So at the moment you've got this undifferentiated pool where you've

got, you know, potentially equities, crypto commodities, et cetera. You know, when we talk to large scale market makers, they think that's crazy. And it is crazy, right? There's no question having this undifferentiated pool is pretty wild. But, you know, it makes sense kind of for bootstrapping in the early phases. So one of the things we're experimenting with is this idea of separating out these pools. The other is, you know, when we have some kind of open interest cap on positions in the system to switch over to some kind of hybrid model. And we're also experimenting with that with options, right? Where you've got the bidding period where, you know, it's against a pool, and then the tokens are issued, and then you have to go out to some other secondary, you know,

exchange, an AMM or something like that to trade the options. So it's an experiment with a number of things like that that I think, you know, it's going to take probably, you know, 12 to 18 months to see that kind of play out and get to that level of scale. But at the moment, still very focused on, you know, this core undifferentiated debt pool. So we did a tactic recently on your new binary options that synthetics released. How's that going? It's going well. I think the thing that's missing right now is like the vertically integrated UI. So, you know, one thing that synthetics has kind of not touched is this idea of bilateral trading, right? This idea of creating a venue for people to trade directly against each other. You know, we've stuck with this AMM model. And so what it

means is that, okay, people can participate in the bidding period, but once it gets to trading, there's actually no place for them to trade. So what we're hoping to do, through our grant style is fun. So if you're listening to this and you're looking for something cool to do, building like a fully vertically integrated binary options trading platform, which hooks into the synthetics protocol during the bidding period, and then switches to either an AMM like Uniswap or balancer or something like that, or even uses like some kind of orderbook style mechanism,

we think that that's going to be really powerful. And until we have that fully vertically integrated solution, I think, you know, it's high friction. All right, Selham, what's the incentive for them to build something like that, Cain? Yeah, so, I mean, firstly funding, obviously. You know, the grants down will help to fund it. The second thing is that we've got a program that's going to launch, I think, in the next two or three weeks. I'm not 100% across all the low-level details, but it will essentially provide rebates for volume that's put through the synthetics protocol.

So if you are an integrator or you have a DAP or you have a mobile wallet or something, you can essentially apply to join this program and get paid a rebate. So if you are building this options platform, you can essentially get paid rebates for the volume that you put through the protocol. Gotcha. Very cool. All right. Let's talk about ETH2 for a minute. So do you think ETH2 will have a big impact on the synthetics trading volume? That's a question that actually came in from YouTube. I think it's too far away to tell. I mean, there's a lot of uncertainty around exactly how we will implement what the transition looks like. You know, our focus is at least, I would say, for the next two years on, you know, Eke 1X, right? I think that's where the vast majority of volume will happen. And in order for that to be viable for the next two years, we need L2 scaling.

So we need to be, you know, on optimism on the OBM. So we're still getting a lot of questions from Fez, from others on layer two. I just think it's top of mind because, like, we're still dealing with these high gas prices. And people are like, well, it's not even worth withdrawing my yams if it costs. more than, you know, what I put in. Let's talk about that in the context of ETH II first, and then maybe we'll pivot to layer two and DFI. So in the context of ETH2, kind of my impression of the ETH2 roadmap is basically, like you

said, like, you know, phase zero is not going to help the scalability at all. Neither is phase one, really, quite frankly, maybe. But phase one.5, before we get to 2X, we have sort of this data layer that could potentially host roll-ups like optimism. Is that going to start to be helpful? Is that where, I guess, some of the ETH-2 scalability promises start to kick in, do you think? I think so, but there's a big thought there, right, which is like, you know, the composability issue. And that's still the issue that we have with all of the L2 solutions out there, right? And so, you know, we need some sort of coordination mechanism for the existing D-Fi protocols to ensure that, you know, we don't

lose composability because if you lose that, you know, these experiments are going to become much harder, right? A lot of the stuff that's happening at the moment becomes much hotter. So let's talk about that because you guys are implementing your solution and sort of an OVM, right, kind of a roll-up. What are the rest of the D-5 projects doing? Are you coordinating with them at all? We were talking to Joey Krug on the podcast recently and sort of, you know, use the analogy of the main chain is a little bit like Manhattan, right? It's getting really expensive to live there. And not everyone needs to be there, but a lot of people want to be there because Wall Street's there because, you know, it's got all of the perks of being in Manhattan, right? You've got

great restaurants, all of these things. So there's almost a like a game theoretical aspect where it's just like, okay, Maker, you guys move first and then maybe we'll move, you know. So So no one wants to move from the main chain. How are the DFI projects coordinating about layer two now, if at all? And how do you think we solve that problem of coordination to figure out what the most composable layer two solution is and sort of settle on a set of those solutions? I mean, you know, personally, I'm a big fan of Brooklyn. That's where I spend on when I'm in New York, right? So, you know, I think the plan is we're going to set up, you know, a nice,

area in Brooklyn where everyone can come and hang out and you know you can come willingly or you can come by force right so you know I think that the coordination is going to be getting at least a few of the projects to you know migrate across and you know do it in a way that ideally doesn't break composability so for us what that means is minting you know the the actual issuance of debt can happen on L2 without impacting composability too much right it's the trading and the you know transfer since that needs to happen, you know, on L1 for now. And so I think what we'll see is a phase transition to allow minting to happen, you know, at low gas costs, right?

And then you'll be able to transfer those assets back to L1 and use them, and then slowly edge our way out of L1 onto, you know, fully L2 with the exchange and everything. I think what you're saying is basically you're okay with moving some things to Brooklyn. You want to invite some, you know, other friends to move to Brooklyn, too. And then you're going to make Brooklyn so awesome that everyone else wants to move to Brooklyn, That's the idea. Invites a strong word, though.

Strongly suggest that they join us over there. Got it. Got it. Let's talk about, and guys, everyone who's watching this, we are about 30 minutes in, so that means 30 minutes left for your questions, keep them coming via the bankless discord, and also Zoom if you're there as well.

Let's talk a little bit more about stablecoin. So this is a question from Joseph, IT. Let's talk about SUSD, when it's over a dollar, how is that dealt with? Maker has had a lot of trouble recently maintaining its peg at a dollar. How about SUSD? Do you guys have some secret sauce for that? I think there's kind of two levers that we can pull,

you know, the strongest levers within the synthetics ecosystem. The first one is the collateralization ratio. So one of the reasons why that lowering of the C ratio passed was to ensure that there's more sensitivelytherly. out there. The reason why I was against it is because I think it's less about the C ratio. There's enough since out there to get into the curve pool, get into some of these AMMs and, you know, reduce the premium, which isn't too, you know, I think it's, it's less than a cent, but it's been hovering, you know, around that mark for a while now, which is not ideal.

So lowering the C ratio is one way of doing it because you increase the supply. The issue that I sort of see, though, is more of an educational one, right? There's no interface that clearly communicates to you why this is a good idea, what the benefits are, et cetera. And so we're in the process of doing a bit of a brand refresh, and alongside that we're going to migrate Minter, you know, the Minter interface to staking dot synthetics. And that staking interface is much more educational. It's much clear about, you know, what your role is, what the tradeoffs are, risks, et cetera. And one of those things is going to be to try and get more supply out into the market. And I think that will help to reduce the premium and get it back to the peg.

Overall, how does a S-U-S-D compete against some of the other stable coin options that we were talking about, like on the one side of things, a central bank issued fiat coin, or even a C-USD or, excuse me, a like a USDC or a Tether or something like that. I think, you know, there's two broad tradeups, right? You've got the very hard pegged redeemable assets like USCC, USD-ish, you know, true USDA, etc. And then you've got die and SUSD. And, you know, there's some new, you know, types of non-reedemable stable coins, right? Like crypto asset back stable coins coming out. And those just have a busier peg, right? There's more risk around the peg, you know, it's harder to kind of keep them really tightly pegged because they're not redeemable for the underlying asset. So there isn't like a really tight arbitrage loop to bring them back

to the peg. But they have other cool properties, right? So, you know, with dye, obviously it's permissionless in a way that USDC and UST aren't, right? With SUSD, it's also permissionless, but you have this cool property of being able to convert it via synthetics exchange or via the protocol to, you know, synthetic Bitcoin, if you want, right? If you want, exposure to Bitcoin. So I think that there are advantages to the permissionless ones that, you know, tradeoffs, right? Like the peg is a little less tight on the permissionless side, you know, on the crypto asset backside. But they have some interesting cool properties that, you know, if you're building defy, are worth looking at. Right. And I think for most people,

you know, they kind of get those tradeoffs. So here's a question that came in via Zoom. What were some of the lessons you learned from the 2017 ICO boom and Havens race? Maybe that's the context of thinking about like 2020 is starting to maybe look a little bit like 2016. So what things did you learn in 2017? And what advice would you give for 2020? So, you know, prior to Haven, I was running like a Fiat payment gateway, right? And we worked a lot of the exchanges in Australia. And so we were facilitating, you know, even back as far as like 2016, millions of dollars with the Bitcoin purchases, right?

And then I think it was either late 2016 or early 2017, we enabled direct ETH purchases for the first time, right? And, you know, we saw a lot of demand. And I got really excited about EF, you know, I'd been kind of following since the Dow, you know, because this idea of like decentralized capital formation to me was really interesting. Coming from a place in Australia where we don't have a B.C. ecosystem, there's a lot of brain drain. So you don't have good founders that have been successful that are kind of like giving back to the community. There's a lot of Australian founders that are very successful, but they live in fucking San Francisco, right? They don't live in Sydney. And so, you know, so it's a, it's an

issue that we've been dealing with for a long time. And so this idea being able to like bring capital formation, the Dow was like the most exciting thing that I had seen in a long time, right? I was, I was super excited about it. And when, you know, 2017 came, you know, I was participating in ICOs, I was doing all that sort of stuff and, you know, holding Eath. And I think we from me, uh, you know, it just, it really, it was probably like late 2016. I started thinking about, you know, how can we solve some of the problems that we have? And, you know, in the other business that I was running, one of the problems we had was this like crypto premium that had had had kind of crept up like the kimchi premium that we saw in, in Korea. And so we were like, there should be an easy way to move money around.

And so this idea of stable coins, I really went down the stable coin rabbit hole and that's what got me in. In terms of like lessons learned, I guess, you know, certainly for us in 2018, probably is where we learned the most lessons, right? Like that was where it was the most painful. 2017, I think in a bull market, you just need to, you know, kind of strap in and be along for the ride. It's in the bear market where you need to kind of batten down the hatches and really focus and keep building. That's where most of the hard lessons will learn. So what do you think? Are we in a bull market?

Are we heading towards a bull market? I mean, you know, Eath this morning, like hovering around 420. you know, it's, I think we're getting close to it. You know, we had that that kind of false rally back in, you know, July of 2019 where things started to kind of heat up a little bit and then and then fell back. My sense is that we're getting close to that. But I think the big difference between 2017 and now, and I said this a lot of the time, none of the things in 2017 did anything.

Like, you know, and even the things that were, okay, that's, that's probably not fair, but like it's pretty fair i think very few right very few of the things uh you know were real right actually did anything uh it wasn't until you know we saw the launch of like die um you know we saw the launch of uh of a number of things in like late 2017 early 2018 where like real stuff started to you know arise that you could actually do stuff with um and you know even a lot of the tokens like okay there were tokens but there were this like you know payment uh chip that you could like use for some ecosystem that didn't exist right like it was not real right and I think now what we're seeing is that and you can see it by gas prices right like you know we're seeing that a

lot of stuff is happening there's a lot of activities a lot of demand for access to L1 and that's just a very different you know so it i think uh to kind of you know to to close it out like yes it feels very frothy in the way that 2017 did but it also feels more real than 201 17 to buy an order of magnitude. I'm going to have to agree with you on that. That's exactly what I think I see. Here's a question that AMA Dio is asking in the bankless discord, and he's linking an article here.

She's linking an article here, Washington Post. I can't open it, but I think it's a story about the U.S. seizing millions in cryptocurrency meant for terrorist groups. And the comment is they want to get minors to give assets over. I've not looked at this article. I don't know the news. So maybe this is sort of a general question on what crypto calls kind of the final boss. Back to your fear that you were talking about earlier, that governments would never let stable coins get away with issuing stable coins that USDC shouldn't exist or you didn't think it would ever exist. How do you think crypto can survive

the final boss and do you think the final boss being the nation state will eventually crack down and turn its head our way? Are we just too small that they just haven't done it yet? I mean I think it's possible right and and you know there there's certainly some component of like a race against time right like the SEC is not the US government they are different beasts like completely right you know so the SEC might say well Ethereum is sufficiently decentralized that like we're not going to bother it. That doesn't mean that the US government or, you know, or China or the EU or, you know, someone doesn't, you know, decide that actually it is worth, you know, trying to crack down and set an example, you know, something like this. But I do think that we are getting to a point

where these systems are open and permissionless and shutting them down. You know, there were these kind of quaint theories in like 2015, 2016, of like people are going to go off from miners and like going with hammers and smash all the mining gear and stuff. And like, yeah, okay, fine. But like, it gets to a point where, you know, and this is where you eat 2.0 on steak, where you don't need giant mining rigs and proof of work where it becomes really, really hard. Like, unless we're talking like door-to-door sweeps of like anti-cryptych, like it turns into like a kind of crazy like apocalyptic, you know, scenario to really shut it down. Maybe we get there. I don't know. Like, crazier things have happened in the world, right?

But my sense is that the cat's out of the bag. It's hard to kind of unwind this now. This is back to kind of the point. You know, the shirt and the movements is bankless. But I actually don't mind the fact that banks are starting to join. The J.P. Morgans of the world, for instance, they just made an investment in consensus. They're building out their, you know, J.P. Morgan coin. Coinbase itself, you know, maybe going public, they'll have sort of Wall Street buyers. It does seem like maybe that provides a layer of protection on the industry because

crypto becomes more and more useful to the world outside of the self-sovereign individual crowd that maybe we come from a little bit more. Do you think that's a protection for us, getting some of the banks involved in building on top of an open protocol like Ethereum? 100%. So banks have this interesting property where there are these regulated entities that have databases that are money. They've got these little walled gardens where like whatever they say happens in there, like that's money, right? And then, you know, they have to talk to each other. The way they talk to each other is like nonsensical, right? Like it might as well be carrier pitching, right? And so, you know, the question is like, how do you wire these things up? How do you

have like an open and permissionless settlement layer? And the hardest thing when you're dealing with legacy, infrastructure, legacy, you know, entities and organizations is that they can't agree on anything. They can't even agree internally on what they want to do, let alone externally, right? So you try and get these consortiums together and takes years and like millions of dollars, billions of dollars and it goes nowhere and then the whole thing collapses. I think if you forcibly move them on to this global open permissionless settlement layer that none of them control and it's wired up to these old school databases, I think you get a really, really powerful kind of next phase in the evolution of crypto. And I think it's kind of necessary. So if you want to

live in the ether and never touch legacy financial ecosystem, great, right? But there are people that don't want to do that or can't do that for whatever reason. And having Ethereum wired up to every single bank and being the settlement layer for all of those banks is, I think, inevitable and going to just, you know, usher in like even more, you know, interesting stuff. There's a, there's a funny story, though, about this. So Brian Armstrong tweeted, I think two or three weeks ago about how bank frick in Lichtenstein, which is a, you know, a regulated bank had started accepting USC as a settlement option. And I was super excited about this. I was like, holy, this is exactly what we're waiting it's happening right it turns out not so much right

so i actually i actually took the time i went and i got in touch with uh with the bank um and i got in touch with someone there and it took it was painful right um but i was able to get through it and actually what happened is they basically you know they support uh they've got a brokerage partner right it's not even the bank themselves they've got a partnership with a broker that you can send bitcoin any and they will convert it for two percent fee right, and they'll settle it into the bank in, you know, euros or USD, right? So it's not that exciting. And all they did was add USC as like an accepted cryptocurrency.

So it's not even close to what we were hoping for. So like I was really excited. I thought we had like kind of bridged that gap, but we're not there yet. So there's still a bit of work to be done. Yeah, you got to, sometimes you got to dig behind the headlines and see what's really happening, what's really going on. But it is interesting because I'm not sure all the banks will survive this transformation, right? So, Defi, it seems to me, is disruptive to banks the way that the communication protocol of the internet was disruptive to media companies like newspapers and such.

And some of them adapted. Some of them are still around. Many of them are not. Many of them just couldn't cross the chasm and bridge the gap. And so I think many banks are just stuck with their existing models. And it'll be very hard for them to see kind of this new paradigm. I have a question that came in bankless discord from QAZ. This is a bit more specific to synthetics.

When can we expect limit stop loss, stop limits in other advanced order types on the synthetic exchange? So this is a story of decentralization, I suppose, right? So we put out a Grant's Dow RFP to a bunch of groups to build a limit order of functionality because we just didn't have the capacity to work on it as part of our core. roadmap and so a team stepped up and they built it but unfortunately you know the complexity of the synthetic contracts is such that you know when we went to actually deploy it which was a couple weeks ago the contracts themselves work

but the actual infrastructure for for you know acting as a relayer just wasn't capable of handling the throughput that we needed and so we've had to put another some additional resources to kind of build that out so you know it's one of the challenges of having these decentralized contributors that maybe don't have as much awareness of the core protocol, it does slow things down. But I would say Limitores are probably two or three weeks away. We're hoping to get them out by the end of the month.

So the contracts have done, the relier stuff is still to be built. Sometimes, Cain, in crypto, in D5, we talk about one billion users, right? Like we want to onboard that one billion users. Here's a question from Joseph Turner. what do you think the weak link or the bottleneck is to getting those one billion new users into defy into crypto? So, you know, again, coming from a FB at Gateway background, right, and, you know, having built a business that did that,

the on-ramps and off-ramps are still very poor in a lot of places. You know, we need either really powerful decentralized infrastructure to solve this problem, or we need better integration with legacy finance or both in order to be able to onboard, you know, someone who's in Southeast Asia or, you know, in South America or, you know, somewhere that maybe they don't have access to like a brokerage account for equities or something like that that wants to have, you know, price exposure to, you know, equities. Synthetics can solve that problem, but you have to get them into the system first. Right. So, you know, I think that having those, those really, you know,

frictionless and low cost critically, you know, it has. be low cost as well on ramps and off ramps is a critical component that's not quite there yet. What are you seeing? Is there any progress on that front? I've seen things from ramp, for example, also from wire. Are those kind of the types of solutions that we should be looking at for those fiat on ramps for that bridge? I think so, but people forget, you know, in Australia, for example, we've got, I think, the highest adoption of like tap, you know, NFC-based payments, right? in the world and like literally i don't even carry a wallet anymore i never have cash so we you know we forget that a lot of the world operates on cash like go to berlin right and everything's cash like

you know you ask someone to pay with a credit card and they're like going out the back to find the credit card machine right so still you know like and there's a lot of places in the world that are still heavily heavily cash based and so i think you still need cash you know actual be it cash on ramps, you know, particularly in emerging markets, it's critical. So, you know, wires amazing, and that's great for like the U.S., but, you know, there's a million different ways you can get money into crypto in America. You know, we need it for, you know, other markets, for sure. Just an observation. It seems to be the case, though. Once money moves into crypto, it tends to remain sticky in crypto. So I found myself even when, you know, crash has come or I want to

decrease my exposure to crypto-native types of assets, I don't move to U.S. dollars at a traditional bank account anymore. Traditional bank accounts kind of suck, to be honest. I move to something like, you know, a stable coin. It does seem to be the case that once the money does cross the chasm and bridge to the other side, it tends to stay there. Are you seeing that, too? I agree, but, you know, again, it depends on what money we're talking about, right? Like if you're talking about, you know, your investable assets that you don't need for day-to-day living, then sure, right? But, you know, it's not necessarily that easy, you know, to turn up and buy lunch with USC, right? Right.

Of course, there's some places where you can. And so, again, I think, you know, we need ways to kind of close the loop, right? And allow people to spend crypto, you know, there was a lot of. a lot of effort and time and money invested by Bitcoin maxis back in the day to try and get people to spend Bitcoin, which, you know, was a bit of a, a bit of a foregone conclusion, right? That was not going to work out. It's just too volatile. And I think we know that now. We understand that. And so, you know, we need that next. I think a lot of people looked at that and said, oh, well, people don't really want to spend crypto, right? It's not about spending crypto. It's, you know, people want better payment.

mechanisms. They want better payment rails, right? They want cheaper payment rails, less friction, etc. And so I think that we can do that. And you know, particularly with with L2 solutions, you know, spending die, you know, is something that I think is, is needs to be much easier. You need to be able to spend die and SUSD and other stable coins anywhere in the world. Hold your ETH, spend your die, spend your SUSD, but hold your ETH. That's a mantra. All right, let's do some rapid fire questions because we have 10 minutes left. Can I hop in here with a question? Do.

Yeah. David. Yeah. So for those watching on YouTube, you won't be able to see my face, but everyone in the webinar can. So, Kane, we've been talking a little bit about on ramps, and we've also been talking about fractured L2s, right? And so L2s are going to be not really all that interoperable.

There's going to be some friction there. And so that's going to kind of fracture liquidity. And we're also, you just mentioned how we also need on ramps. And there's also plans for synthetics to migrate to L2s into the future to encourage trading volume. And it sounds like that we can also talk about on ramps directly into synthetics, into whatever L2 platform that synthetics is on. So is there a potential future where there's an on ramp that goes straight from, you know,

the Fiat world right into the synthetics platform, bypassing ether, bypassing die, bypassing USCC and just going straight from bank to SUSDC? Potentially, potentially, but I think we're still ways away from that, right? Like I still have a sense that, you know, most on-ramps are going to go via ETH, you know, and there will be versions of ETH on these L-2, you know, shards as well, these L-2 chains. So I think that, you know, some kind of tokenized ETH that's, you know, low-cost to get access to is still pretty likely. But, you know, it could be dye, it could be SUSD, it could be even, you know, USDC or one of the other stable coins. I mean, one of the interesting things about synthetics is that we've got, you know, other denominations of stable points as well, right? And you can convert between them pretty frictionlessly.

So, you know, if you, you know, want to get in with euro or, you know, or something like that, then, you know, you've got access to that. So I think that that is something that, again, you know, we need the infrastructure side as well. L2 helps. But it's the actual, like, on the ground infrastructure that's missing right now. All right, we've got a few rapid-fire questions from the bankless nation. I want to try to fit these in in the last seven minutes here. Here's one. What do you think the week, wait, actually we asked that one already. If you could snap your fingers and fix a problem in the crypto space, which problem would you solve, Kane? Scalability. Okay. How about the current incentive programs in synthetics? Do they meet your expectations? Do you plan to keep them? Are you going to tweak them moving forward? forward, is the community going to tweak them moving forward when this current phase ends? So the next big incentive mechanisms coming out is around this rebate for integrations,

as well as direct trading volume. So that's something that we're pretty excited about, and I think it's going to have a big impact. How about gas fees? Do smaller stakers of synthetics, are they, them being priced out of staking, claiming rewards? Has that had a material impact to the synthetics ecosystem so far? It has a material impact to, my sleep at night. You know, it doesn't sit well with me. So, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if you're a small staker and, you know, obviously Sibble attacks notwithstanding, right? If you're a small staker and have been a small staker, I wouldn't be surprised once we get you on to an L2 solution that lowers your cost. If you would not expect some kind of incentive or, you know, compensation or

something like that from the Synthetics Dow for your troubles over the last three months. Who is your historical founder that you identify most? Is it a Musk? Is it an Edison? Is it a Tesla? Yeah, that's a really good question. I'm a big fan of Ben Horowitz. I'm actually reading what you do is who you are right now.

I'm a really big fan. I think just his approach to running startups is not necessarily unique, but like it's it's very much his own style and it's something that you know uh the hard thing about hard things when i first read it really resonated with me i you know i i enjoy doing hard things myself so that was a fantastic book i that's one of my favorites as well is argent your favorite mobile wallet uh my favorite mobile wallet um it's it's up there um i you know i like i live on desktop and i live with my treasor like i don't use mobile wall that much There's a bunch of them that I like.

But Arjun is definitely really cool, although I saw that they're not paying for gas anymore for obvious reasons. So, you know, that's not ideal, but it's just the world we live in. Maybe you should get them to move to Brooklyn with you, Kane. Working on it. All right. This is a fun one. Price predictions. Give us your bull run price predictions for first Bitcoin, then Ether, then SNX.

So Bitcoin, I think if this is genuinely the bull run that we've been waiting for, 50K plus is definitely possible. For ETH, I don't have an upper limit. I don't want to look like an idiot in 12 months' time. I think that, you know, ETH is highly reflexive. And, you know, if we get some of the things that we're hoping to around L2, et cetera, you know, $1,400 is going to look laughfully cheap in the future. How about SNX? You want to do that one? I mean, $6 was the meme, right, that we all like kind of loft about back two years ago. So, you know, I'm happy with $6. I think we touched $6 yesterday. I'm pretty happy with that for now. Price prediction for SUSD, still a dollar, I hope? If it's not a dollar, we got bigger problems. So, yeah, like a dollar plus or minus.

All right. Do you see tokens? This is a question from Sid Powell. Do you see tokens? This is a question from Sid Powell. see tokens in the future, more taking the form of like an equity, revenue sharing in the platform or more usage utility, like paying fees in MKR. The comment is, synthetics appears to be a hybrid between the two. I guess the question is, how do you see defy tokens in the future accruing value? I mean, I think, you know, there was a long time where there was no value being generated, right? Like, you know, there were these proposed ecosystems that didn't do anything, right? And I think we now have a bunch of different systems that actually generate value, right? Like they provide a service and people are willing to pay for that service.

And so the question of how you accrue that, whether it's a burn model, whether it's, you know, direct payment for, you know, whether it's through some kind of inflationary incentive, et cetera. I think, you know, I'm just happy that tokens are not this, you know, black mark and, you know, this kind of unmentionable thing anymore, right? There was a period where like having a token was like the worst possible thing you could do. So the fact that we're back to like understanding tokens or a coordination mechanism that it was really powerful, that's more than enough for me. I'm happy with that for now.

All right, guys, we have two more minutes for questions. We might be able to fit in one or two. This is one for me. What is your favorite defy collateral for synthetics besides SNX? I mean, ETH, obviously, but aside from ETH, I would say probably right now, RenvTC is the thing that I'm most excited about. I think that that will be a thing that will happen. I mean, we like market forces to determine things. So any permissionless BTC implementation, so, you know,

obviously TBTC being the other option, we will definitely consider, and maybe both of them will be included. But, you know, we need to get BTC collateral, I think, to pull the maxies into ETH land. Kane is ETH money? Of course, absolutely. I think I gave it to someone, but I had ETH as money.ETH for, for a while as an ENS domain.

And then I gave it to someone on Twitter to you. Maybe even, I can't remember who it was, Scott or I don't know, maybe you guys. I would have liked to stash that one up, actually. Yeah, I gave it to someone. I gave it to someone. My money is on here. My money is on here. Yeah, Eric, that makes sense.

He tries to front run everybody on those things. Yeah, yeah. All right, we've got one minute left for, so it's time for our final question. And Kane, thank you so much for spending some time with the Bankless Nation. Bankless Nation, thank you so much for your questions. This has been an absolute blast. We will post the recording. I think the recording actually will be auto-posted on YouTube.

Thanks for all of the participation. Yeah, immediately, David says. So the last question is, Kane, how can the Bankless Nation help synthetics? I think what we need is, you know, more people participating in governance. So we have this rough consensus process. But, you know, there's a lot of things that are still open questions and experiments that are running. And so we need more people scrutinizing, you know, the things that we're doing and participating in that governance process to ensure that we've got, you know, really strong checks and balances on the direction of the project's moving. Fantastic. We're getting great feedback. People are saying great AMA. Thanks to all, Kane. We want to thank you again for spending some time with us. Have a great day.

Thank you, guys. This is really fun. Take care.