This Week in Startups - Crypto Roundtable: Shkreli's new web3 project, ETH merge, Gensler goes after DeFi protocols | E1542

Episode Date: August 23, 2022

J+M are joined by Sunny Madra and Vinny Lingham for another crypto roundtable! They cover the following topics: Shkreli's new web3 project (1:50), distributed computing projects (16:08), ETH merge (38:00), Gensler's comments (44:57), and more! (0:00) Molly tees up today's roundtable guests! (1:50) Martin Shkreli's new web3 project (14:46) Revelo - Get 20% off the first 3 months by mentioning TWIST at https://revelo.io/twist (16:08) Breaking down other distributed computing projects: Helium, Filecoin, Hivemapper (27:54) Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub - Apply in 5 minutes, no funding required, sign up at http://aka.ms/thisweekinstartups (29:17) Understanding inverted incentives in crypto, market depth/liquidity theory (36:46) UserTesting - Get real human insights from customers, try for free today at https://usertesting.com/twist (38:00) ETH merge: how risky is it, what impact will the fork have, will it lower gas fees? (44:57) SEC Chair Gary Gensler's comment re: DeFi protocols and crypto banks (51:58) Lightning round! Tribe DAO, BendDAO, Sudoswap and lessons learned

All right, everybody, big show today. We spent all yesterday talking about crypto. We're not done. We got our two favorite crypto fellas back for a crypto roundtable, Vinnie Lingham and Sunny Madra, joined to talk about the ETH merge, Martin Schrelli's new crypto project, how anybody can be rehabilitated as long as you don't have to trust them in the crypto universe. Gary Jensler's comments about compliance and regulation on exchanges and more. It's a great show.

Tons of lessons and super interesting information and even. some projects out there with some actual value. That's the thing we keep asking for. It's going to be a great show. Stick with us. This week in startups is brought to you by Revello. Looking to affordably scale your product development with global tech talent in U.S. time zones, hire vetted remote developers in Latin America with Revello. Get 20% off for the first three months at ravelo.com slash twist. The Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub helps all founders build a better startup at a lower cost from day one. Open to anyone with an idea, you'll get up to $150,000 in Azure credits, technical advisory, access to mentors and experts, free dev tools,

and so much more. There is no funding requirement and it only takes minutes to join. Sign up today at aka.m.m.s slash this week in startups. And user testing. With user testing, you'll understand it from your customer's perspective by seeing how they interact with your products, apps, or messaging. Get real-time feedback real fast. Put yourself in your customer's shoes. Visit usertesting.com slash twist for a free trial. User testing.

Real human insight. All right, everybody. It's time for our crypto round table. This is the second time we're doing it. Last time Molly was on vacation, but she's back. So she'll be here for this great roundtable with Sunday. Deep, Madri, you can call him Sunny. He is the co-founder of definitive intelligence,

which lets users view on and off-chain data to understand their web three user base. And of course, Vinnie Langham, co-founder of Civic, the original partner and investor in Solana, and his startup encrypts identity information on the blockchain. Welcome back, gentlemen. Thanks, Jason.

Molly, thanks for having us again. Yep, good to be on with Molly this time. Yes, I know. I'm stoked. Welcome. Molly, you told me that. that Vinnie handed you the bag on salana. He liquidated his salana to you.

You bought $300 worth of salana and lost $250. I drank a little too much of chamath wine and then listened to Vinny for an hour and then went and spent $300 on salana. Had that work out for you? How'd that work out for you? I'm sure it's going to be fine. I'm a holder. It could be worse.

You could have bought Bid Bath and Beyond. It could have been worse. Hey, there you go. But there we have it, folks. There you go. Also, I'm obviously quite impressionable. So thank God we didn't talk about bed, bath, and beyond. Anything could have happened.

All right. Well, speaking of scams and bag holding, farmer bro Martin Schrelli is out of jail if you weren't following. You remember him. He was the most hated man on the internet for, I don't know, three months or something. He has a new Web3 project to create drug discovery software. It's called druglike.com.

Seemed like a reasonable idea. I wanted to get everybody's perspective on if this is crazy or not. It's a computational chemistry software startup. And what he wants to do is take this very expensive software and the resources it takes, you know, GPUs, I think, and make it much cheaper for people to use. Here's 77 seconds of Schrelli on the Milk Road show from July talking about this new project. And I'll get your feedback after. If you're going to make great software, it's that's sort of independent of like what modality you use.

So for me, drug likes main goal is to make great computational chemistry software. If we can help solve the compute problem, great. If we can't, it's still great computational chemistry software. Like right now, there is no web-based comp chem software. So if you want computational chemistry, you have to call the company that makes it. You have to sign a license agreement. It has to get installed in your C-Drive. You are not getting any web access to anything.

And you have to get trained, right? You have to, like, this is whole craziness. And it's not particularly user-friendly either. So we made software that we wish we could use as chemists and as drug developers when we were at those companies. So we were able to sort of get something that you can just up and get running. Could you imagine if you needed a license agreement to get on Google? It would be a disaster. And that's sort of the problem with comp cam is that you're shutting off 80 or 90 percent of users that could use your software, maybe more.

On the flip side, you know, you are gating it to a Pfizer and a Merck that will sign enterprise license agreements of millions of dollars. So I think there's sort of that sales model and there's our sales model. Obviously, to some extent, I have no problem with sort of just this becoming an open source software that's free to use and provide your own compute. I do think that compute challenge is something that we hope we can help on. We think there's some other sort of tools we could do like democratizing the reward as well. You may want to get a whole bunch of expensive compute for free. Well, why not give up a piece of your IP, for example, in return for that compute? So maybe I'm willing to provide my compute, but you've got to give me how to give me how to give you.

half of the intellectual properties if you inevitably file a patent, maybe I can get half of that and I'll give you a compute. And that's a fair shake. So maybe no money has to change hands. What's your take on this concept, Sunny? Alpha fold, right, is something you guys spoke about in the all-in pod. And it's kind of what it's done for society. And I kind of viewed this as a decentralized alpha fold. So I thought the idea was actually quite strong and it's probably getting mixed up in Martin's background and everything that's happened there. But I thought the idea is quite powerful. And maybe I'll throw to Vinny because he's been a big fan of these

decentralized compute resource plays that leverage the blockchain and crypto economies to do it. So I thought it was a really good idea. You know, make it available to everyone and decentralize the compute for it. Vinnie?

So, I mean, I think we all know his reputation. And I would say... Can you or should you separate the reputation from the content here? So if it wasn't a pre-mine, In other words, the network went live and anyone could add computer resources to the network and mine for the coins directly. And Martin Scraly and his cohort of whatever's, I want to use too abusive a name to it, but those people actually, you know,

participated in the network on a pari-passu basis with everyone else. So in other words, I could go and rent GPUs. I could add it into the network. I could mine coins. And it was a fair launch, really, of the network. I think it's brilliant. I think this is the sort of stuff I like. I mean, it's, it's, the pre-mine stuff can work with people with at least decent reputations.

And, you know, like, you know, if you look at, look at some of the big projects we've had, Falcoyne, Salana, you know, render, et cetera. These are guys who haven't been in jail, you know, like, you can trust the intentions there, right? The moment it's a pre-mine, to me, it'd be like, wait, this could be a pump and dump, and we're all going to get rugged. And that would be my concern. So, so given, given the, just the background of the team, and I'm not talking about I'm talking about sort of the morality of it, not the intelligence of it, because they're obviously

very smart guys. They know what they're doing. From a morality perspective, I would like to see them launch this thing and say, look, we're going to compete with everyone else. Here's the spec. The network goes live on this date. Anyone can use it. It's compute intensive.

It needs GPUs. You can go and buy all the Ethereum GPUs. You can plug them in. You can rent power from render, whatever the case is. And you can mine on a peripose base to everyone else. And we're just going to help maintain this network and build a token around it. That's the token version of it. On a non-token version basis, I don't know how they scale this because how do you get the distributed compute in the platform.

So it's probably a compute play, but this cannot be a venture capital VC funded thing where they go raise money from Andresen or whoever else. And they get to, I mean, what you're talking about here is everybody's starting at the same start line, right? Yeah, yeah. The VCs don't get to buy the coins at some fraction of a penny. Exactly. They just drop them all at the same time. in terms of fairness. Exactly.

So you publish the white paper, the roadmap, and you tell everyone, this is the spec, everyone gets the same starting point. And if Andreessen wants to go fund them to go mine coins faster than me or Jason or Sunny, good for them. But that's fair because it's all about it. Now, like, there's no pre-mine. There's no, we're holding this back. But also, that's a regulation.

Go ahead, Mal. Convicted felon. Like, it can't be good. It can't be good for the industry when this is the guy who's like, yeah, I want to get in here. Well, I'm not sure I agree with that notion that, like, you know, I think that the sort of veracity of the idea should stand on its own two feet, like separate from what he's done in the part.

Like, if Martin came up with like, hey, this is how you do fusion or something, or like he solves a very tough problem in the world, and just because he's a convicted fellow, doesn't invalidate his idea, right? So, like, your past shouldn't invalidate science. Like, these are two separate things. You can have a really bad guy. Like if I told you today, Satoshi is a criminal behind bars that doesn't invalidate Bitcoin. Yeah.

I mean, I think it's an interesting question. Like, it's clearly not, to your point, a bad idea even. But it's pretty hard to consistently separate the artist from the art in a case like this. Like, especially where you're talking about a project that is built on some level of trust fundamentally. But that's the whole point. It needs to be trustless. That's my argument. It needs to be, this is an open spec.

If Big Pharma wants to use it, if there's demand for the compute power, if I'm adding compute power and getting tokens from it, my actions are independent of everyone else's. It's a coordination sort of rally point for everyone. There's no pre-mine. Me adding compute power to the network doesn't pump up Martin's bags of coins that he pre-mined before it went live. For me, that is the critical point. Okay.

Interesting, yeah. It's interesting, Molly, when you think about it, because people do not want to put their reputation on the line with somebody like that, right? So, like, they've basically been excluded from venture capital or funding because of the past, right? I mean, it would take pretty strong conviction to give somebody right out of jail money. In a way, it's like crypto becomes this, back to permission list, like, okay, my reputation doesn't matter. All that matters is people buy into my idea, for better or worse. I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it is interesting that,

if you have a bad reputation, crypto becomes a platform where nobody can stop you from engaging in it. Well, I guess to follow up on your point just now, Vinnie, like what is the chicken and egg part of that? Because I see what you're saying. It makes perfect sense that as it grows, it is trustless. So you don't have to worry that much about the origin story, if you will. But you do have to have buy-in in order to create this thing from the get-go.

Right? The buy-in is purely capitalistic for you, right? If I'm a big farmer company and there's this way of, like, reducing the cost of new drug discovery and research, and I can produce it 90% cheaper than I can today using this network, and the network is very fair in terms of distribution of tokens or compute power or whatever, if I don't use it and suddenly goes and starts up a biotech company and he comes and does drug discovery at one-tenth of cost, he's going to kick my butt. And then for like you basically, it's an economic discussion. Like this is the whole point of like removing the people from the science, right? As long, and this is why for me it's very, very important that it's not a pre-mine where he owns some part of the network off the bat. This needs to be, if he really believes in the idea, if he really believes in what he's building

and like the good for humanity, it should, nobody should have an advantage over this. It should be open seasons for everyone. And if he winds up being the smallest stakeholder in the network after a year, that's his problem. but it shouldn't be where, you know, it's a pump and dump. And that, so for me, it's all about the science. Like, if the science is good, it shouldn't matter who describes, if someone's, if someone discovers the cure for cancer and they're a convicted felon, mass murderer, whatever, it shouldn't invalidate the cure for cancer.

You should still use the cure. To be clear, I'm not even trying to say that as like a morality or value judgment specifically, although punchable face for sure. what I primarily mean is given the opportunity to do business with Scarelli, I would 100% believe that there is a way that he is finding a way to screw me. Well, this is my point.

If it's an open permissionist network, you're not doing business with Screly. But you're saying if, do we know that it is? Like, we know it's free mine. Like, we know with all those things. It's under construction. I'm just telling you how I would do it. So you're saying this is the universe in which you would be,

you would feel okay about it. Yes. And we know what the actual, yeah. Open source code, open source everything. open spec, like anyone looking in can say this is a, and you know what, there are watchdogs out there,

okay, the guys, like really smart compsci guys are going to look at this and say, hang on, there's a catch, this is a catch, and that'll be exposed

and then no one will want to participate in the network. It would be as if, like, WordPress was, the WordPress open source project was the person who created, instead of being Matt Mullenweg, who was the nicest guy on the planet,

what if it was like a serial killer? So like literally, I'm just doing an extreme case here. The serial killer creates the best publishing platform for the web. But it's completely open source. And then people can use it and they have no control over it. But then you have to live with the fact that a serial killer made it. It's really like a great mind. I don't even test.

It only matters if he benefits directly from it in a disproportionate way. That's all I'm saying too. It's like I don't have to like him. But Vinya is doing a great job of laying out the conditions under which you would be like, he can't screw me here. And so this could be a good thing. All in. Exactly.

If this was a company, I wouldn't touch it. And this was like, Martin Scraly's new company, they're raising a seed round that a $500,000 pre-money valuation. It's free equity. And he wouldn't be able to, I don't think. No, no. That's the interesting part about it, isn't it, Sonny? Is that like crypto and open source in the nature of this under the conditions that Vinny puts

out would make it like possible for him to do that? If you're looking for highly qualified. elite international developers, but you don't want to deal with the crazy time differences. I feel you. That's why I use developers who are in my time zone. And that's why you need to know about Revello. Revello is your answer. It's a talent platform. And it matches you with vetted full-time remote developers in Latin America, which is where I have my developers. They work on US time zones. So you're talking to them for eight, nine, ten hours a day. And you can collaborate in real time, not play telephone. And you're going to spend less compared to hiring in the U.S.

And I will tell you that the developers in Latin America are as good as the developers in America. You're going to get matched with your candidates in three days or less. They're going to handle the payroll, the taxes, the benefits, and more. You get to hire internationally without all the headaches. Revello engineers are full-time and embedded in your team just like normal employees, okay? And they're proficient. AWS, Rust, Ruby, React, Python, no JS, as all of the great technical platforms out there, they do. Here's your call to action. Go to Ravelo.com slash twist and mention Twist to get 20% off your first three months.

Very significant when you think about it. R-E-V-E-L-O dot com slash twist. They offer 100% risk-free 14-day trial period. If you're not satisfied, you pay nothing. R-E-V-E-L-O dot com slash twist. Have any of the other projects that do distributed compute hit any kind of scale? I remember there was the rendering one. I forgot the name of it.

I know there's render coins. It's called render. It's called render. Wasn't there another name, though, for another one that was doing, like, animation projects? That was render still. Like, another one that has scale on the supply side is helium. And so what they have like a network of, you know, 4G and 5G hotspots. And that's been an interesting one.

They have, I think, you know, anywhere, 900,000 plus hotspots around the world now. So that's one that's really kind of taking. off in a similar capacity. And file coin, of course. So there's, there's three of these. Have those three hit any kind of user adoption? So file coin,

file coin has got scale, which I think people don't, people don't appreciate how much scale file coin has per day. It's like, it's pretty big. Now, users are not using the stuff. Remember, this is a very low level protocol.

So the people using Filecoin are not, you know, it's not the end user. It's the services that are built on top of it. So you get things like estuary, tech and other services that build on top of Filecoin. Filecoin is the base layer infrastructure. Right now, Filecoin is storing, I need to double check the latest numbers.

It's got like 17 X-a-bise of storage capacity in the network, and that's like 200 times Netflix's archival, 300 times. It's a huge amount of storage that Falcoyne's got. And they're storing, I mean, there's 4,000 miners. I can look up the stats, but it's pretty big. Okay, but usage maybe not there yet. No, no, usage is there. No, usage is there.

So if you look at, if you look at R-Weave, R-R-R-R-R-R-Ev stores about 70, I think it is 70 gigabytes a day, and I think Falkoan store is like a terabyte a day. So it's like 17 R-R-R-a-day. There's these, like, two interesting curves that come together on these, you know, J-Cal, which is, one is when they're early

and, like, how much distribution do they have and how much can you trust, like how much storage do they have? And then as they continue to grow, the centralized services initially have a lot of advantages, because of their centralization, it's only when these things reach a certain scale that their price gets cheaper.

So I think right now, Filecoin's not cheaper than S3 or Glacier. Probably Glacier is a better example, right? It's cheaper than Glacier. It's cheaper than Glacier. Is it cheaper than Glacier? Okay. But there's a point at which those things kind of cross over.

And then, you know, the other thing that factors into this sometimes is we touched on it a little bit before is when the token that represents its utility gets mixed into the speculation. And so that becomes problematic because where, you know, something is meant to power the economy just to drive the scaling of it. People start speculating on it. I think that breaks, that breaks these things sometimes as well. And so that's two curves that you really have to watch with these utility token based services that are popping up all over the place. Yeah. Can the distributed one beat the centralized one in terms of cost and ease of use and all of those things that consumers would care about?

You sent this link, the Starboard Lane. So, Vinnie, here, you explain to us what we're seeing here. So this is dashboard for Filecoin, how many deals we're getting per day in the network. So in the past 24 hours, 1.4 petabytes of data was stored in the network. That's 1,400 terabytes every day. Look at the daily deal statistics. This is not cumulative. This is per day.

Every day. Look at these numbers going up. So what is a deal in this context? Yeah. Thank you. I'm glad you said. I'm like, what is the deal? A deal is basically a vendor asking a story provider to store an amount of data. Got it. So if I wanted to store the archives of this week in startups, 1,500 episodes, I could do that on a file coin and pay some amount. Yeah. And that would be a deal. And then I would pay in cryptocurrency or file coins to do that? You pay in file coins. So there's about...

Every month would I pay it? Or do I pay it one time? You pay for the period of time. Let's say you want to store it for 18 months. You have a contract for 18 months. And then they have to provide proofs that they store in the data constantly. And then you can choose how many copies of it you want on the network. So if a provider goes down, it's still there. Can I make it public available to anybody? Oh, yeah, yeah.

You can have public data. So Joe Rogan could put his whole archive up on Filecoin, make it publicly available for anybody to download? Wikipedia runs on Filecoin. What? Yeah. So when Turkey, so when Turkey wound up. banning Wikipedia. They moved it across to IPFS, which is built by

Protocol Labs, and I think it's running on FileCoin now as well. But it's basically censorship resistant. You can access FileCoin anywhere in the world. You can't shut down the server for Wikipedia. So maybe Wikipedia that we all go to is stored wherever they store it on regular servers. Exactly. But there's a backup

copy mirrored on FileCoin. Think of it as a persistent cache everywhere that you can access. But I mean, if anyone, if you want to go check out Dashboard. Starboard Ventures. Like, this is one of these crypto projects that very clearly,

I mean, like 16xabytes of storage capacity on this network is mind bubble. I mean, Netflix, I think, has got not even an exabyte and I think, Sunny,

what do you think Netflix is sitting on? Yeah, probably close to probably one. Maybe one. Yeah, it's tough to compare it because it's providing storage for everyone,

but I, you know, probably better comparison is like S3 or Glacier or something. Is there a point in time where a Netflix could conceivably use this? They could use it right now.

Well, I mean, technically they can, but could they practically with the number of users they have, would the network support it, you think? Yeah, eventually, that's the whole point, right? Distributive storage at scale. They have to, there's a retrieval market that's coming soon.

You know, the idea is that you can, like, look, the cost of moving data from one place to another is pretty high, right? So if you have localized storage in a sentence, if you want to store local videos for South Africa with a South African provider, that's a lot more efficient than storing it in with a CDN in UK and then streaming it across to the local provider. And you can actually get it very granular. You can get it down to someone in Johannesburg storing the data and then you pay them for streaming or whatever it is delivering it. It's going to get there. We're not there

yet. We're probably three years away from that sort of thing or five years away. Right. And when you say it's censorship resistant and censorship proof, it's because it's distributed compute. It's like the setty of storage. Bang on. Exactly. Exactly. And there are 4,000 providers worldwide currently in the next, you know, if the price of falkoin rises, so let's go, it's like six bucks right now.

Let's say go back up to 100 bucks or 50 bucks. That 4,000 is going to go up to 7,000, 10,000 more more providers worldwide because there's more revenue in the network. There's more value in the coin. And so to mine those coins, the same way you mine Bitcoin, more providers will come on the network. So the issue that Falcoyne has right now is it actually has, I'd say too much storage right now, 16 Xabytes, but if you look at how much storage the world needs over the next 10 years, that's nothing. So there's going to be this point in time where there's a flip over. We don't

know when it is. It could be three months, six months, two years, where Falcoyne becomes the most valuable decentralized global storage platform. And the key, like the way I look at Falcoy in a very simplistic way is Falcoyne is the Amazon storage infrastructure, the software, the software for that, but everyone runs their own hardware. So right now, Amazon has a centralized data center, and they've built all this, all the software, you know, from a very low level to abstract it all the way to the front end for developers to store data, but Amazon owns the stack. They own the hardware and they own the software.

Filecoin is basically, here's the software, and you can go plug in your own data and create your own data centers, pay for your own electricity, your storage, your security, and people can store where you on. We'll give you software to run it. So it's kind of like a, it's like, it's like hotels and hotel software. That's, and the way I kind of think about these things, you know, it's like building off like Jeevan's paradox, right? If you're familiar with that, it's like the more of a, you know,

kind of a, it's something you make available, more people will consume it. So they know, you know, Airbnb and hotels, like one didn't wipe out the other one. There just became more use of people wanting to do, like use of that utility. And I think we're seeing a lot of, another great one, you know, as we're talking about things is HiveMapper. I don't know if you're following that one. No. What is it? They're basically building like a, maybe Nick can pull it up. It's like a decentralized Google Maps with the street views that everyone can use. So it's not owned by one company. Everyone can contribute to it. And so it's really,

really, that that's another one that's kind of out there that you can imagine if you're building anything that's location based or something like that, you don't want to be at the mercy of Google is the only person you can get this data from. It's super powerful. So with HiveMapper, you put a camera on your dashboard and you drive around and then you contribute to it and get paid a token? Yep, it's what's called Honey. That's their token. Oh. Yeah.

And basically you contribute to this decentralized Google Street View, which, you know, it's an awesome thing. It's like everyone owns it and everyone can use it. But they're making the hardware. So the actual hardware, you have to buy it to then contribute to it. personally you'd have to buy a server but pretty good price yeah hopefully it does pay off for you to do that that's actually a brilliant idea as well

yeah but this is helium do the same thing and that's it's kind of the helium model yep the thing about the helium though I saw a tweet that went viral this is from this guy Laron Shapira

yes so this guy Leron Shapira is a bit of I don't want to say troll but he's pretty critical all the time He was ripping a bunch of clips from the different pods, and I had to tell him like, hey, pump the brakes. He can't take the show every week. And then, yeah, so I stopped him from doing that.

But he says here, helium often cited as one of the best examples of a Web3 use case has received $365 million investment led by A16Z. Regular folks have been convinced to spend $250 million behind hotspot nodes in the hopes of earning passive income. The result of Helm's total revenue is 6.5K a month. I don't know if that's true or not. What do you think of that critique? We can double check it, but I think one of the things that's happened here is, you know, this is one where the supply and demand curve didn't match.

And the utility of a wireless network is tougher than something, say, like a file coin, because if you're going, if you're, let's say you're a company, whether you're a scooter company or an automotive company that says, hey, you know what, I want a lower cost alternative. I need some constant connectivity. I don't want to be sort of tied to the big networks. That's a great concept that you'll get this distributed network to do it. But you can't really make that switchover if you don't have 100% coverage. So this adds like an extra dimension to like a SETI at home or a file coin where you have the dimension of location. So in order for this to work, they need like a really highly distributed network.

And you can imagine where these nodes pop up. They pop up in a very kind of clustered way where you know, you could see, you know, huge, huge clusters in the East Coast and the West Coast and not coverage anywhere else. And then that makes it much harder for, say, a company to jump on this. network and start consuming it with that sort of odd distribution. And that's something that these projects sort of have to balance out. And the other thing, which we were just mentioning earlier, when the utility token becomes a speculating token, then a lot of times, and in this case, you know, people were buying the hardware to mine the token. So you end up with lots and lots

of supply because people are speculating on the token. And you're not, you don't have the appropriate demand coming in on the other side. If you're running a startup, you know that every little bit of help counts between running your team, building the product, getting compliant, hiring people, studying customer support, everything. It's overwhelming. I know that. I work with you all every day. But the Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub is here to help you. They're going to help you build a better startup from day one, whether you're plugged into Silicon Valley or not. The Microsoft for Startup Founders Hub is a digital platform created by founders for founders. And they give you amazing benefits. The first one, right off the bat, unbelievable. Up to a

$150,000 in Azure credits. And then one-to-one technical advisory on scalability, best practices, security, your tech stack, all that stuff. And you get access to a huge mentor network plus free dev tools like GitHub Enterprise, access to partners like OpenAI, Bubble, and others, free Microsoft software, including Outlook and Teams, and much, much more. The program is open to everyone. There's no fundraising requirements. You don't need to know somebody.

They want to support all founders. it takes just five minutes to apply and startups get all these massive benefits immediately. So learn more and sign up for Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub today. Act, you're going to write this down right now. Stop what you're doing, get a pen, get a paper, ak.m.s slash this week in startups. That's simple.

AKA. dot MS slash this week in startups. Yeah, we talked about this a little bit yesterday and we'll talk a little bit more about the SEC in a minute, but this idea that basically, like, once you start to financialize a product before it actually has value, you've sort of inverted the process, right? It should have built value.

And then maybe you build some financial instruments on top of it to make it more valuable, but it's this kind of inversion that seems to be, you know, muddying the waters, I guess is the best way to put it about the industry for people right now. The issue that crypto struggles with is that everything is subscale in terms of market depth and equity. So when you have, when you have like any. these projects that come out there and everyone sort of piles in to start mining or adding coins. In the moment, you get to a point where there's just no bids. Like, people just dump the stuff.

And so there's this interesting view I've got on crypto, which I think it's definitely developed over time. I mean, Bitcoin has the deepest liquidity pool by far. And then second is Ethereum. And then over time, you're going to see more pop up with deep liquidity pools. The real issue is the rate of inflation at the beginning and then how it, declines over time. And there's a lot of players, actually the best way to make money, quite frankly, is to ob the intermediate step. Okay. And so that intermediate step is what we saw in

Bitcoin in the first eight years, where there's this, you know, before the halvings came along, every time there was a huge spike in Bitcoin, people just dumped it and they dumped it down and they made their profits. They short, they short of the market. But eventually the inflation, like, tapered out. It's like, whatever, 4% right now. And you can't, you just can't do that anymore. It doesn't work. Bitcoin, you know, it's down. from 60K down to 20. It's not down to three. You know, it's like,

it's got a new high, a higher high every single time or, or a higher low. And you're saying the liquidity in plain English means a lot of participants. When you get a lot of participants, the volatility comes out. Yeah.

So things like, let's go out Falk coin for a second. Falk coin pumped like to 230 bucks at one point because it was a low liquidity and everyone started mining the coins. You had, you know, exabytes of data, storage coming in the network,

miners were borrowing coins to stake and whatever else. And they went through the cycle and then they mine these coins out. The farcoy inflation on day one. So it was 15 million coins were released by the time the network went from TestNet to Mainnet. And so there was this huge pump. But go and look at the market cap. So that's price. Now look at market cap. So the market cap went up to 10 billion and then it started going all way back down to where it is right now. So that's 1.7 billion market cap. Now go and check where the price right now is at at 630. Okay. And look at what it was at the previous market cap at the start of the year. So at six bucks last time. You're saying when was it last six bucks? Not even there,

but like a little further back. It only listed it was like 20 bucks. So the market cap has changed dramatically because the inflation has gone from 15 million coins to like 300 million in the past two years. So what you've seen, it's hard to overlay, you have to probably have two screens to show it. But the point I'm trying to make really is the liquidity of falk coin has actually increased dramatically. We've gone from 15 million coins to like nearly 300 million coins in the float. The market cap is sitting in 1.8 billion. It was a lot higher. But now the inflation has gone. So the inflation from 15 to 300 million is like 20x. It's the same when Bitcoin had its first million coins, we're now on coin number 19 million or something in Bitcoin, it's at 19 times

expansion. Falkoines just gone through that same phase in two years. And now Falkoines' inflation is like 20% a year and dropping dramatically because it's just the law, it's the law of large numbers combined with the actual caps of crypto coins. So you have this evening out, and now you can't really dump it as easily because you can't mine it as fast. And so the people who are holding it long term, I think you have much better returns. But the problem that all these crypto projects have is you have this gap. And sometimes it's three years, sometimes it's eight years between where it initially starts and call it like some sort of terminal inflation or a terminal infection point where inflation drops to a reasonable level like 20%, 10% a year

or whatever it is. And so there's a lot of arbitrages out there, guys who are mining in China or wherever where they don't care about the project. They, see, most of the miners don't actually, they don't care about whether it's Bitcoin or Ethereum or Filecoin. They just want to So the way the arbitrage works is this. The coin pumps up to like 60 bucks. They short it. They borrow. They pay some interest rate 20%.

They short the coin. They buy the hardware. They mine it and they got locked in guaranteed profits because they know the mining costs are a fraction or what they shorted at. So that's why crypto, by and large, looks like a pump and dump across the board for most projects. And most projects, there are a pump and dump. But for the really good projects, once the liquidity pools deepen,

it's exactly like that's not the case so you're saying i should jay trade file coin right now well i mean file phone's one son is another one he's got the glasses ready he's ready to go he won't make a trade what's your take on that uh sonny this rings true to what vinnie's saying is that as the the percentage of new coins generated every year starts to fall down to 10% of the total float the total number available you start to get the stability and you have a deeper a liquidity pool? Yes, you do, but I'll just go back to what Molly said. I think if the things are financialized before there's like product market fit, all of that will just kind of fuel speculation rather than actual utility. And I just think back to, you know, startups for the longest time.

We and the financial markets gave them the flexibility to not worry about, you know, financial returns, you know, profits or anything like that, as long as they were searching for product market fit and growing. I think here when that gets inversed and people, people are starting to trade on it, all of these financial mechanisms that Vinny's touching on that you're tucking on come into play, whether you have deep liquidity of a project or not, but if it doesn't, it hasn't kind of found its core actual utility to folk or its service, I think you're in a really, really dangerous spot with these projects. You like founders selling, Molly, their equity in a startup before they have product market fit.

Right. Which is the exact same thing. It has happened. It's the exact same thing. And it always winds up, as my. grandmother would say it's going to end in tears. Right, because then it's gambling chips, right? It's not a, it's just chips and there's no cash in the back room, let's say. Well, so. But also you're not, you know, the other thing, Molly, is now you bring it up,

you think about the distraction level of, you know, extreme wealth or quick wealth or quick money. It's very distraction distracting. What, you know, what I see when founders are able to liquidate, and people are talking about like, hey, how much secondary should we allow the founders to take? How How many should we buy it from this? It's like very thoughtful conversation in the best cases where they say $25 million is going to make this founder start looking at planes and second homes. But $2 million or $4 million, they're going to pay their taxes. They're going to have one to two, $3 million left. They're going to pay down their mortgage or have some money for their kids $529. It's completely different, right? And I think we've all seen that up close and personal, unfortunately, is that these big checks can really distract a founder. experience what your customer experiences with user testing. Whether you're launching a new product, a prototype, or a marketing campaign, you'll get video feedback straight from the people who you want to reach most. Your customers, the user testing human insight platform lets you understand it all from your

customer's perspective. And it allows you to target your exact audience, ask any question, or request to perform tasks and most valuably get a window into their world. And unlike focus groups which can take weeks or months to deliver results, with user testing, you get to see real reactions and hear real opinions really fast. You'll get responses in real time and at the speed your business demands. So get insights into what's working and what's not so you can adjust your message, refine your user interface, and understand exactly how people are responding to and interacting with your product, service, or brand.

The result, you'll feel what your customer feels so you can build the best experience imaginable. For a free trial, visit usertesting.com slash twist. User testing.com slash twist. User testing, real human insight. I want to ask you guys about the Ethereum merge because that was a big, that's a big topic on your list, and it's a big topic in general.

It seemed like it was maybe going to happen on August 15th. Now it's sort of tentatively scheduled to happen. September 15th. It's interesting for a lot of reasons. One is the goal it sounds like of this merge is to make Ethereum less harmful to the environment, which is near and dear to my heart. Also, though, provide additional security to its network and faster transaction speeds when the Ethereum network switches from proof of work to proof of stake. Can one of, Sonny, you're nodding, so I'm going to call on you. Like, can you sort of explain to us what this merge is about and like why it's such a big deal? Because it sounds like people have been snapping up Ethereum ahead of this event.

Yeah, and I'll just try to distill it to like its simplest form. Like I think what it will do, like one, you said it's reduce its like computational intensity for, you know, making the transactions like cemented into the blockchain. But more importantly, it reduces the cost. And one of the things that we've seen in the last few years, especially as a price of Ethereum and the whole, you know, crypto markets were really kind of pumping up is that things became quite expensive. So, you know, this notion of gas fees and the transaction cost to do anything on the blockchain became quite expensive. And so from there, you know, we saw a few different things happen. We saw a lot of like new L2s emerge for Ethereum trying to compete to solve that problem. I think what this will do is it'll actually push back innovation into Ethereum.

And that's why there's the excitement and that, you know, people were going to avalanche or Polygon. And they'll continue to do that for specific use cases. But I think this allows more innovation to come back into Ethereum, which is why I'm excited about the merge and that coming to reality. Yeah, the gas fees got too big, right? Well, yeah, it's funny because the chat now is going crazy being like, nope, does not provide extra security. It's a consensus layer change. Gas fees will stay the same. Help us understand, like, concretely how it will create extra innovation.

Well, like, I tend to disagree. I mean, I don't know, right? Yeah. I don't mean to facilitate that. Yeah. I don't mean to facilitate that. Yeah, I know. I mean, I think basically by lowering sort of the compute intensity required for that consensus

layer to solve those problems, the gas fees come down. Right. So sort of everything boils down. Let's go to first principles, right? You make it simpler. It's less compute intensive to do something. It's going to cost less money, right? We don't have to get into the code by code what's happening there. But I think we'll start to see that happen. Vinny, are we supposed to be buying Ethereum now?

I would be. You're like, don't seem that interested. You're like, yeah, it's fine. No, it's not that. I think there's a substantial amount of risks in this merge that's underpriced by the market. I think that my price target for Ethereum is around 2000 pre-merge. So I think it rallies to 2000. And then I think that if it goes well, it comes to 2,500 or 3,000.

And if it goes badly, it dumps to 1,000. I think 2000 is kind of my like equilibrium point. So at the 1600 level, I think you're going to see another surge going to 2000. But I'm betting on that. I don't think that we have a lot of steam in it. Like the merge has been so overhyped already for so long. I don't think you have enough momentum for a 3,000 run pre-merge. I think if everything goes well and there's a lot of arguments for ESG investors

sort of coming into Ethereum that couldn't go into Ethereum pre-merge, they can go by it post-merge because now it's more environmentally friendly and, you know, et cetera, et cetera. But that's assuming things go out. I mean, there's going to be a fork. We know this. There's going to be a proof of work fork that calls off and does their own thing. There's a little bit of a ton of confusion. You know, and it totally was on a podcast me the other day.

And he said something which I think is very fair, is that the surface area for attack on Ethereum is very large. And so it's very hard to say that this thing is entirely safe. Now, they've done it. Like, thinking about it this way, okay? If you're a hacker or you're trying to do some nefarious activity, are you going to expose some vulnerability that you know during the test net mergers? Or you're going to just hold back and wait until it goes to main net and then, you know, claim your victim, right?

Right. The test, you're never going to, I mean, you're never going to release like a zero-day vulnerability on a test net. You just keep quiet and you wait until the final merge is complete. And that's the risk. This is where we should explain that this switch from proof of work to proof of stake, for those who don't know, is a switch in the way that these, and the way that basically minors are compensated. Proof-work uses a lot more energy. As we know, there's, there are reports that this merge. if Ethereum switches fully to proof of stake,

could cut electricity use by 99%, but is much less tested, to your point, Vinny, right? Like, we just don't know if this will be as bulletproof and as hard to hack. And so you're saying there are plenty of people out there who are probably just like, I know exactly how to bust into the system the second you make this switch,

which is why there are some miners saying that they might, this is where the fork idea comes in. Some miners are saying, like, we're just going to stick to proof of fork. Like, we're going to keep doing our thing over here. But it's a law of unintended consequences as well. Like, we don't know what, I mean, I think, and Atatoly is just a really smart guy who understands. And it's a lot of founder.

Yeah, yeah. Like, you know, understands it better than me and anyone else. And he's point stuck with me where he was just basically saying the surface area is very big. It's a non-zero chance. It's not like no one can go out there and say there's a zero percent chance of something going wrong. Like the smartest people in the world cannot say. So if it's not zero percent. 15th of September.

15th of September. Wow. Oh, wow. So we'll definitely keep track of that. Okay. Why was it, why was it variable? There was some? No, because the community being like we're not ready. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It's just amazing that an open source project can coordinate such a big change. I mean, that's to me the fascinating part about this with so much money on the line. I mean, it is pretty extraordinary. Like, we're talking about billions of dollars are at stake here. And they're, making the switch and nobody's in charge? You know, like... It's like a database merge or a day. Yes, there's a couple of issues here. Like, for example, can you imagine Jason and I signed a contract and I promise to pay him $10,000 in USDC, you know, for on a contract.

And now the merge happens. And now there's USDC on Ethereum proof of work and Ethereum proof of stake. And I give him $10,000 worth of useless token, 10,000. Use as coins because the one chain is, you know, Circle says we're not honoring the USC on that chain, but we're honoring on another chain. Or you have like, you can have these weird anomalies happen where even an NFT. It would be like a great time to just get off the chain, get into Fiat and wait it out. Go to Salon. Well, okay, whatever. All right, listen. On Friday, SEC chair, Gary Gensler, I know Crypto's favorite person wrote an op-ed

in the Wall Street Journal where indicated that a lot of defy products might actually be securities. There is no reason to treat, there's a quote from Gary, the double G. There is no reason to treat the crypto market differently

from the rest of the capital markets just because it uses different technology. Across the decades of cases, the Supreme Court has made clear that economic realities of our product, not the labels, determine whether it's a security under the securities laws.

That BlockFi had borrowed crypto wasn't the issue here. In fact, you could replace crypto with any other asset. The issue is what it did with the borrowed assets and what it didn't do as a firm provide the required disclosures to investors. He continued compliance with our laws protects the investing public. Unfortunately, some platforms that offer crypto lending aren't complying with the applicable requirements. Sunny, what's your take on his piece? What's fair and what's unfair? Yeah, I had a long chat with someone about this yesterday, and I think it's kind of two,

I break it into two areas. If you are a crypto project trying to in any way, shape, or form replace what traditional banks do in our financial ecosystem, you are really going to be impacted by the statements that he made. Because whether you're lending, you're giving people interests, you know, use different words, whatever you want, or anything that looks like what a traditional bank does, you are going to be under the purview of the SEC. And I think there's lots of projects.

across all different elements. It could be exchanges, they could be coins, they could be all over the place. So I think for using that lens as a consumer buying these things or an investor putting money in these things, those folks are going to become highly regulated

because they're doing what banks do and banks are regulated and banks are going to make noise on the other end and say, hey, why are we subject to all these rules and why aren't these folks? I think on the flip side, if you're like an NFT project for some of the things we were talking about before,

you're not really replacing what a bank does. You're probably on the, outside of this. That's the way I'm kind of translating it right now. And I think that's where a lot of the noise is coming from. And if you look specific to what he talked about with BlockFi and what they were doing, it was very much bank-centric. So that's my view on how this is coming up. Did the op-ed read to you like Gensler was saying to these, let's say these exchanges are like block five, right? Like, you should have known. You should have, which I think we have said many times on the show, that's true. Your, you know, security-like product looks like a duck, walk

like a duck and quacks like a duck, so it's probably a security. But is it a little weird that he seems to be coming along saying, like, after the fact, we're going to tell you you should have been complying with these rules all along? Or is it fair to say, like, you guys knew you were setting up a basically a parallel investment banking system? And of course, this was always going to happen. I think these are like the ebbs and flows of innovation, right? Even last time we talked, if you go back to 2000 in the dot-com bubble, right? Look at all the rules that we had to bring into place just around regulation of stocks or what companies could do to IPO. And so these are the ebbs and flows of innovation, right? Something gets ahead of it. Then the government has to come in because a bunch of people

get hurt, which is really terrible. And the government has to step in and fix it. So I think, you know, it is probably a little bit backwards looking saying you should have known, but I feel like those were the same comments that led to Sarbanes-Oxley and all that kind of stuff saying, well, hey, you know, we shouldn't let companies, you know, create sub-companies and then price them themselves and use that to basically pump up their stock. You should have known better. Right? This feels like the, you know, he does, Molly have like a reconciliate, reconcilatory, is that a word?

Reconcilatory approach here at the end, which he says, fortunately, there is a path forward. I encourage platforms offering crypto lending to come in and talk to SEC staff. Getting these platforms into compliance with the securities laws will benefit investors in crypto market. In the meantime, the SEC will serve us cop on the beat. As with seatbelts and cars, we need to ensure that investor protections come standard in the crypto market. So it does seem like he knew that he was saber-rattling and that he wants to

saber-rattle people, you know, down a certain path was my take on it, Vinny. What do you think? Look, the big issue here is that regulators don't move at the same speed as crypto, not even close. So it's always like, it's trying to catch the horse after it's left the stable type of thing. And it's a constant game of like, I mean, three years ago, I could have told you this is going to, I mean, I've even sent you the clips. Like, this is, I already said this years ago. This is what's going to happen. And the issue, I guess, is when you're on the ground. So at Civic, we tried actually integrating with our, when we launched our wallet a couple of years ago, which wind up not, we couldn't make it work because of Ethereum gas fees eventually.

We tried actually integrating directly with these defy protocols. We spoke to Celsius. We spoke to, Craig, a couple of others. We wound up not launching the product for one simple reason. None of them could guarantee us that the funds would be available when there's a withdrawal by our users because they were re-hypropocating funds, earning interest, and we thought they were taking undue amounts of risk and not disclosing it to their users, and we didn't like it.

We didn't launch the product. We had so much work on into it, and we couldn't find any one of these DIP providers who could give us any assurances that our users wouldn't lose their money. so we never did it. And we, and, you know, like, I've got probably the email threads

with Celsius and a whole bunch of others. We had all these calls. And I'm looking at this, and we're looking at two years ago, like, we're probably going to miss the boat as a company on DFI, and we did.

Because we just, we, like, I have my reputation to uphold. You know, I don't want to have, like, hey,

I want to be like Celsius. Like, hey, we just lost all this money for our users. You know, Vinnie, I trusted you with all my Bitcoin and now it's gone, you know,

in your wallet and it's locked up in Celsius. Like, we couldn't have that happen. So we didn't do the product. Very simple. And then I watched BlockFi and all these other guys take off and I was like, I'm an idiot. I should have done this. You know, because like, you know, you feel bad at the time.

And I'm like, well, then, you know, you sit back and you go, oh, boy, I hope this doesn't end badly. And then as it gets closer to ending, I'm like, oh, boy, this is going to end badly. See, yeah, it's, this is what happens when you have to make hard decisions about doing things correctly, doing things, right, being good to your user base. And, you know, intervene. And sleeping well at night, Jason, seeping well at night. Like, like, I don't want to wind up in jail.

Right. No, you know. It's not, not, like, someone may put a tweet. You would not do well in jail, Vinnie. No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't. I would not do well in jail. Someone put out, someone put out a tweet.

I'm sure to be a nice jail. No. But like, someone put a tweet out the other day and they were like, you know, they replied one of my tweets and they were like, oh, you know, I can't remember what they said, but there was something along the lines. Like, I've only made money in crypto, so whatever. And I'm like, you realize, like, I only go and to crypto after like selling companies and built.

Like, crypto was like the latter part of my career, right? Lightning round. Here we go. Rari tribe mess. What is this? This was a project that, you know, had a failure. And they had kind of, this kind of shows like sometimes these DAOs, right, what we all expect.

You know, you guys have talked about it separately. These DAOs are meant to be organizations where, you know, it seems open. We talked about it even in the beginning, right? And this group had kind of promised the holders of their token, the returns of some of the assets from the treasury, and then they basically just backed out of it. And they said, well, you know what, forget that vote. We're going to just take a different decision. And so this is kind of one of the kind of scary things of crypto is that we look at these structures and organizations, say, oh, it's meant to be idealistic, but we see them fall back into place that we've seen

it before. So that's a scary one where we've not seen the Dow structures work the way we anticipated them to work. Somebody can just run off with the bag and say we changed our mind. We changed our mind. We didn't like the way that vote landed. Let's do something else. And it was all triggered by a hack, right? That's what led to sort of all this happening. And so it's kind of fascinating.

Can I make one more comment on the ETH merge thing? Because I was just reading through the comments as Molly brought it up and there's a lot of interest there. In terms of gas fees, yeah, the merge doesn't lead to it in like the first phase, but the merge sets up ETH for like a whole bunch of new features. Like one of them is like called sharding. That leads to ability to have more transactions per second, which will then lead to lower gas fees.

So just for hopefully that calms folks down in the chat. Sure. The old database. Oh, nothing ever will. Yeah, but thank you. Sudo swap. What's the story there? Or blue chip NFT price drops.

What are those? Let's do blue chips first. Vin, why don't you talk about that? Yeah, this weirdly seems related to the Ethereum merge, right? People are all of a sudden buying tons of Ethereum, but not NFTs and now even Bored ape and cyberpunks are, that's the technical term for the price is dropping, by the way. A fart noise. I'm just a child.

There's a Dow called Ben Dow. And so Ben Dow is a dial that you go to. If you own an ape, you can borrow money against your ape. When Bort Apes are trading up, I don't know, hundreds of Eiff each, and you go to Bend Dow and you put your ape in, you can borrow like, you know, 100, 200 Eth, whatever it is, converted to dollars, USDC, and you can do, you know, you could basically spend their money. And so you have all this wealth that was created, all these Bored Ape holders. And they lever it, they levered up.

Guys, like, if anyone is listening to this call, the one thing. I do not, like, I recommend people do not do is add leverage to crypto. Volatile enough? Yeah. Crypto is leverage in itself. Would you like some kerosene on top of your gasoline? No? Exactly.

Exactly. So it's, it's just, you just don't do it. Okay, just don't do it. Anyway, so they go lever up. They go put the asset down there. If you need money, sell your board app. Okay, if you need the money, sell your assets. Lever up, like the most you should do is like one or two percent if you need some

leverage. That's it. Like, you should not be doing 20, 30 percent on any asset. Anyway, long story short is, a lot of these apes, the price have come down so much, there's a margin call that's about to happen. And because the floor is dropping, there's a liquidation event that can happen. So if it drops a certain point, there's going to be hundreds of apes sold at the floor prices to get the money back for the people lending to the Dow. That's going to crash the price of AIDS. Then you have a, you know, you have a downward spiral. You have a cascade. And, you know, that's what happened with Bitcoin, Right? People were margined at 60K because they're like, I bought my Bitcoin at 30K. It's at 60K.

I'll take half the money and spend it. It's house's money. But they don't realize is when they hit that 32K or whatever, they get liquidated to pay back people. Now they have nothing. So this is the issue now. The issue everyone is struggling with is the people who in every cycle. So let's say I came in cycle number two with Bitcoin, like 2013, 14. Then you had cycle number three.

which is like 2017. Cycle number four, which is this recent one. Every cycle, the people from the previous cycle learned not to use leverage, the people from the new cycle don't. So all these Borde A people are all a bunch of crypto nobs that are just using. And so the next cycle, once they get liquidated and they lose their Apes,

the next cycle they'll be a bit more conservative. And hopefully over time as a global community, we get smarter about using leverage as crypto. But for now, that's the problem, is that this leverage, and so the floors keep dropping because everyone's waiting for the liquidation. Like, if you have a board ape, what do you do? You probably sell it now.

You drop the floor a lot more and you wait for it to collapse so you can buy it back cheaper. All right, everybody. This has been an amazing crypto roundtable. We'll do another one in two weeks. Thank you, Vinny. Thank you, Sundee. Thank you, Sundee, Sondi, give a shout out to your company. I know that last time you got a couple of new customers.

Tell everybody what the company is. Yeah, definitive intelligence, definitive I.O. We basically focus on helping Web3 teams understand users and grow their user base. And so if you have a project and you're going back to what we were talking about earlier and you really want to drive actual function and services and maybe even a good from your project,

come talk to us and we'll help you grow your user base. All right. Shout out, Sonny. I'm an investor. Okay, and Vinnie? You know, I'm working on two things really. One is civic.combe. You can check it out.

It's an explorer for your NFTs, and we've got some really cool features coming to predict your NITES. It focuses more on Solano right now, but you can do Ethereum as well. And then I'm working on Waitroom.com, which is a video conferencing platform. It's really cool for rapid-fire conversations. Gary Gensler should get on waitlist and then use that. And then you take all these crypto questions.

And then he can take all these crypto questions about compliance. Boom, we fixed it. Virtual press conferences is the perfect use case. You get like 30 journalists, give them two minutes each. You go online and there's a clock that counts down and the next person goes in. So, you know, we'd love people to try it out. It's still very new early tech, but it's looking pretty cool. It's in bed.

All right, everybody will. Waitroom. Waitroom.com. I said wait list, but it's not. Wait room. Thanks, guys. See you next time. Bye, bye.