Unchained - Austin Griffith on the $1 AI Audit and the Case for Founders Over DAOs: Uneasy Money

Episode Date: July 9, 2026

Austin Griffith joins Kain Warwick and Taylor Monahan to unpack  BonkDAO's $20M governance heist, and Kain's case for giving founders more control. ======================================================== Thank you to our sponsors! ⁠⁠Cape⁠: Your biggest crypto vulnerability isn't your wallet, it's your phone number. Cape is America's privacy-first mobile carrier that rotates your SIM identity daily and blocks SIM swaps before they happen. Get 33% off your first six months at ⁠https://cape.co/unchained⁠ (use code: UNCHAINED). ======================================================== A single wallet spent $4.4 million buying up Bonk tokens, then used that stake to push through a governance proposal that legally emptied BonkDAO's roughly $20 million treasury a week later, with almost no one watching the vote. Austin Griffith, Ethereum Foundation developer and creator of Scaffold-ETH and founder of BuidlGuidl, joins Kain Warwick and Taylor Monahan to use the heist as a jumping-off point for Kain's real target: ENS. Kain argues founder Nick Johnson should retake control over building and product from the DAO, and makes the case that founder-led execution beats decentralized governance almost every time. They also cover Vitalik's Lean Ethereum overhaul and why Austin says it will barely change what he builds, the $1 AI audit he launched as a meme for x402 agent payments, Robinhood's new chain and the pay-to-play deals behind it, and why Kain now argues tokens are the wrong way to raise money. If a founder with total conviction can outperform a DAO built to stop exactly that, the DAO experiment may be further from finished than anyone wants to admit. Hosts: ⁠⁠Kain Warwick⁠⁠ - Host of Uneasy Money and Founder of Infinex and Synthetix ⁠⁠Taylor Monahan⁠⁠ - Co-host of Uneasy Money and Security Expert Guests: ⁠Austin Griffith - Ethereum Foundation developer and creator of Scaffold-ETH and SpeedRun Ethereum, and founder of BuidlGuidl Timestamps 🛠️ 01:32 Why Austin says Vitalik's Lean Ethereum overhaul barely changes his job 📅 08:21 Taylor on why the EF ships huge roadmaps but too little in the short term 🪓 12:56 Austin on surviving the EF's leaner reorg and the wave of departures 💵 15:43 How Austin turned a serious auditing tool into a viral meme 🤝 18:48 x402 skill files: why agents will soon pay other agents for on-tap skills 💙 25:44 Cape: Get 33% off your first six months of privacy first mobile service at https://cape.co/unchained 🚨 26:41 How one wallet legally voted its way to BonkDAO's $20M treasury ⚖️ 32:57 Why Kain thinks Nick Johnson and ENS should take power back from the DAO 🤖 55:29 Robinhood's new chain and Kain's take on crypto's pay-to-play problem 🪙 58:29 Why Kain says tokens are now the wrong tool to raise money Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If Vitalik wasn't there, I do not think this thing gets built. I think Vitalik disappears and it turns into like pitched internising warfare within 20 seconds. It will tear each other apart. There's like multiple forks of the chain. Like it would just be an absolute disaster. I'm King Work. You're welcome to uneasy money because what happens on chain never stays on chain. Before we begin, here is a word from the sponsors that make our show possible.

This episode is brought to you by Cape. America's Privacy First Mobile Carrier. Same premium service you'd expect from any other carrier, but designed so your number, your location, and your data actually stay yours. Get 33% off six months at cape.co slash unchained. All right, I'm here with my co-host Taylor Monaghan Security Expert and a very special returning guest today, Austin Griffith. Ethereum developer, creator of sales.

scaffold, ETH, or F, depending on we come from, and Speed Run Ethereum, and founder of the, I won't even say this, the Biddle Giddle thing of Magiagger, he's done a lot of stuff. He's done a lot of stuff, this guy. And he has just launched a new project called the $1 audit. And we will talk about that in our second segment. But yeah, very happy to have you, Austin. Thanks for joining us again. We have lots of cool AI stuff to talk about. But first, Vitalik's lean Ethereum. So what is it? Vitalik published a lean Ethereum three to four year protocol over wholly Coel's biggest rebuild since the merge framed as its third iteration after the Genesis and merge processes, which also happened like totally on time, by the way.

So don't even worry about it. It's going to be fine. We're going to land this in three years. So I think the interesting thing about this outside of the technical stuff, we can dig into the technical stuff, because I've been very bullish on Ethereum's ability to accelerate its technical frontier, given, you know, AI agents and just how much easier it is to do research and how much easier it is to consolidate information.

and also to build stuff. Not that we want Ethereum to turn into a slop factory, I don't think, at least at the core protocol. But the ability to accelerate engineering efforts and in all areas should allow Ethereum, I think, that is probably the best position to take advantage of this to really accelerate away. That's been my thesis for like the last year.

So I think we've shaved off a year from like the 2030 roadmap that everyone was raging about last year when it was published in 2025. Yeah, what's your take? What's the most exciting technical stuff to come out of this? Before we talk about the whole timeline thing. Is that a question for me? I don't know if I.

Yeah, for anyone. Yeah, I don't know if I'm going to go over here. Yeah, I have a builder on top of it. Like once the thing ships, I like to create the apps on top. I feel like the protocol layer stuff is, cool, but like when we're talking about, okay, it's going to be post-quantum and we're going to have a new EVM, I'm like, it'll probably all work the same way for me and I'll be building the same apps. It'll just like continue working. Like the thing has been up for 10 years and it will be up for another 10 years or more or 100 or something. And these changes are to enable that kind of stuff and then like UX stuff quicker, faster, cheaper. And this is this is the thing that I think like, Again, I've been saying for the last year, I don't think people have priced in the fact that, you know, we've lived with this like 12 second block time environment for such a long time. And, you know, even though the block limit has gone up a bunch, we still have constraints.

You know, obviously, Gway is like 0.000, I can keep going with zeros for a while, one at the moment. And so it's almost free to use Ethereum. But we do still get spikes in high volatility environments. We do still get those gas spikes and it does still get kind of expensive to use the chain. So I think that like the the US side of all of these different technologies kind of coming together is very exciting. That said, maybe as a builder on top of the protocol, it's less of an issue. That said, let's not forget that we spent four years building layer two's to get more gas and foster settlement. And if Ethereum lands that, then that whole kind of process, whilst necessary at the time, is kind of invalidated, right?

Like, you know, you look back on that and go... I think they're playing a different game. Like, L2s will have a different set of rules and play a different game for a different audience. I think we see that with Robin Hood chain, I think we're going to talk about later, which is like a chain on top of a chain on top of a chain, but they serve a specific audience and that's ripping. And I think that's what we'll see with L2s also. I guess there is like a fundamental question though, right?

Like Robin Hood is about trading. Ethereum should be about trading, but it's like kind of not a little bit for reasons, right? But it's still the best place with the deepest liquidity, et cetera, et cetera. Like if two chains are competing to be the best trading venue and one of them has an advantage Robin Hood at the moment has an advantage of the moment from being able to make like some more centralized choices if Ethereum collapses the the kind of technical lead that L2s have gotten through centralization and maintains all of the decentralization but catches up to the more even

exceeds them in terms of capabilities, why would you use Robin Hood? It's most. Yeah, hopefully everything does return to main net in a lot of ways. And hopefully these L2s and L3s have to specialize and do new things and have different privacy concerns and have different centralization like you talked about. We'd rather not be centralized, right? But like they will serve different audiences. And yes, that would be great if we could return to main net and have shorter slots, faster transactions. The UX, sorry to change gears a little bit, but the frame transactions are really. exciting for me. I've been thinking about metatransactions and UX for a long time. And I think frame transactions will be able to, uh, I, Pedro, my buddy from Wallet Connect talks about it is like, he's like, this is the thing. Like, this is finally like the thing to make UX on Ethereum and what it needs to be. Can you walk us through like what, what, what's the impact as a builder or someone who's building UX? Like what a frame transactions allow builders to do, wallets to do?

Yeah. I, my, my really high level is the stuff that we thought a lot of the like account abstraction stuff would do, there have been different attempts at it. But I think this is like the most generalized way of doing it where you can pay for the gas for your user and a whole bunch of other things that allow for different generic things to happen. But smart contract wallets, we already have like pass key signatures. There's a bunch of things there, but I'm not. I was up with a baby at 1 a.m. this morning. So I I don't have to talk about it. Yeah, yeah, fair enough.

No, I think that that's good enough. I mean, tell you, just on like timeline wise, right? Like we were talking about this before the show started that like, you know, if your vision is, you know, a five-year roadmap, right? Or 10-year roadmap or whatever, you know, that kind of creates a weird incentive for you to not focus on like short-term hipping, right? So what's, yeah, what's your take on this? Yeah.

And it's, it's exactly that. I think that obviously in order to be responsible, you have to have the long term in mind. But I just feel like the EF keeps sort of only, like they just keep doing these roadmaps, like these very long roadmaps and these very big, big things. And that's what like is sort of the most talked about thing. and it's not always easy to put that, to execute on that. And especially in the short term, especially with like the increase in competition, right? Because it's very easy to be like, well, once we have this in five years, then, you know, then we'll be competitive again. No, no.

You have to, you have to be on the ground floor and be present today. So that worries me a little bit. Again, you know, you do have to have that long-term vision. And you can't just ignore it. You can't just like, you know, pivot from one thing to the other, you know, day to day. But I do wish that we were seeing more, it's just like more focus on promoting Ethereum and like new features and stuff today. Right. Like what, like, come on.

Like, what are we giving people? What are we giving builders? What are we giving for experience like now? Let's talk about that. And let's let that be a focus within the EF, but also publicly. And I think like Salana specifically is one that like perhaps they go too hard on this. That there's like a good argument there. But like pretty consistently their builders are like, oh, there's a user need here.

Oh, there's a problem here. And then they figure out how to ship it. But in fairness, like it still takes Solana quite a while to ship things. You know, like a lot of the stuff that they there was a period of time where they could ship really quickly and then you know, that a lot of stuff going on. And the more things that your network supports, the harder it is for you to upgrade because it's going to handle every edge case and, you know, every weird thing that someone's done, et cetera, et cetera. So you do get bogged down by like kind of the weight of history, I think, to some extent. And and so, you know, I guess like there's some sweet spot. But even, you know, so Dan Krad was like, it has a lot of really cool stuff.

I like it. um you know this this idea of uh gigagas which is pretty that's a cool meme i like i like the gigagas meme um let's all turn it into a token anyone if we can avoid it um but uh every time any cool name any cool name um so but but even tank red's like let's try and get this done in a year let's get it done in a year like what like you know how do we chunk this in a way where we like genuinely field execution pressure and let's go get it done right um you know uh the thing that i always say to my team right like um and and it's quite interesting because you know our team's much leaner now i'm much more uh driving product development like on a day-to-day basis like uh in a different way to how i was

maybe two years ago where we had this long-term vision of like fix the ux of all of crypto and it's going to take while and so i don't worry about like this week right like just keep doing the stuff and and we did and we shipped a lot of things but we never actually landed anything that like was you're meaningfully um able to kind of shift the market right and get people to come and use our platform versus other platforms didn't we just didn't land it right um you know and and now i'm like no no we're going to ship something like on wednesday like if i put a gun to your head and tell you can you ship this on Wednesday, the answer is going to be, yes, of course you can. Like, of course you can. And so, you know, the cumulative effect of like continuously shipping things, I think is so much more

powerful than this long, like the long term vision. Yes, we know where we're going. Great. But like continuously shipping things and actually making the platform better. And obviously Ethereum, it's challenging. You can't ship every week, right? You know, it's a three month coordination effort or whatever um but i think you know trying to bundle as much as you can and the most impactful things early and like staging it to you know kind of increase that is it's definitely got to be the play um but you know i guess we'll see what what happens uh out of out of the whole reorg as well right like you know there's been there's been a big eF reorg um which i'm sure you're uh actually obligated to not talk about too much, Austin.

But so I won't press you. But I think the hope for everyone is like we come out of this on the other side with like not just the roadmap is leaner or the network is leaner, but like the org is leaner and more shipping focused. And we start to like get this shit done. It is leaner. Yes. I barely still have my job. I think I was going to say, congratulations on surviving the person. right?

Yeah. Nice. A little bit lower on the food chain, I think, but I'm still here. That seems weird. That seems weird on a, if you lean it out, you get rid of where are the people come in at the top that. I'm a bit confused by that. It's usually not how it works.

Just up by I, Austin. We just juggle it up? I don't know. Yeah, anyway. Yeah. I also, I've been, you know, obviously like super aware of all the people that have been like leaving the EF. And I'm kind of low-key shocked because for the longest time the conversation was that the EF doesn't pay anyone enough. Yet the amount of people that are leaving the

app right now that seem to be genuinely talented people, but also who have been at the EF for like five years, six years, eight years, I'm like, hold on, are we sure we weren't paying them enough? Like eight years is a fantastically long time to work somewhere, especially in crypto. It's a type of dedication. Like when you go to work, at the EF, you were taking a less amount of money. Like, just how it works. And you're choosing to like, when I joined the EF like eight years ago or something, it was like full of Jedi's.

It was the coolest place. Like you wanted to hang out with these people because when you're in the room with them, there's like magical discussions and like freaking Jedi level shit going on. It's just like exciting and cool. And I think that's why I joined the EF in the first place. Like I wanted to be Austin at Ethereum because I want. wanted to, you know, help everything at the application layer, but being able to be around the EF folks was, was magical back back then. It was really cool. And that's what people

joined for and they wanted to make Ethereum better. And yeah. And that makes sense. That makes sense. Is the vibe still the same though? It's, there are some Jedi is still there, I think. It's different now, though. I don't know. I don't know. It's, different. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Eight years a long time. Things change in eight years. Things change a lot. All right, let's go to our next segment. The

$1 AI audit. You're trying to put consensus diligence out of business, I guess, right? Is that the goal here? So yeah, I guess walk us through

what the purpose of this was, like, what's the angle, you know, you're a guy who likes things to be useful, right? So this is not just like a memetic thing, although it is a good meme with a $1 audit. So like walk us through, like, where's the utility there? How does it work? Why is it, why is it good? Yeah, I think it's, I definitely like launched it on the premise of a good meme though, right? It's very of that in terms of a $1 audit like really slams home the fact that like well we're paying $20,000 for an audit. What do you mean a $1? What do you mean a $1? And that's kind of the point of like this is like it's meant to lean more toward this is like part of your CI CD pipeline. And these kinds of things are more available because we have like agentic frameworks that can do this.

We have generalized agents, but then we have specialized agents. And that's exactly the kind of situation where you want to have 8-004 and X-402 and have these sort of generalized agents able to pay these more specialized agents not because they can be more effective but because they can be more efficient. And that more efficient is exactly the meme that I'm leaning into when I say a $1 audit.

And so the point was to just like memetically really, like it's, we built this. I came on the show maybe a couple of months ago and I had Claudebot. Cloudbot had built, you know, this whole voting platform called Larv AI where you stake the token and you get this conviction token and you can then train an AI agent and it votes on your behalf. And then the next thing we built was like with that conviction, you could build things. And so there's this whole pipeline of containers that will build apps for you and audit your smart contract. So all of this was built like a month ago, but like no one was using it.

I was like, all right, we need to like make a meme. And the other day, like Friday, I was on the conclave, which is kind of like my live stream I do for the, the clod people. And we, I was like, let's just make it a dollar. And I just like got in and changed it to a dollar. And the pipeline was there. What was the original price?

It was going to be like five grand or something. Five, ten bucks. No, it was like five or ten bucks. Okay. All right. Okay. A $10 audit is just not a good meme. Like, it doesn't, a five dollar audit is just not a good meme.

And like, really, that's probably where it's, needs to be is more like five or ten dollars to cover right the like if you were paying for API cost it's more like probably a $50 audit yeah yeah it would be very expensive it's like it's like an hour of opus time to do this all okay and a buck is like not going to probably cover that no it definitely won't it definitely won't but it was all available and basically the the website like i got into left so the service website where you can hire this agent framework to build an app for you or an audit. It's left claw dot services. So I have left claw dot services up. I have people staking this token in larv.aI and spending their conviction to build apps. But it's this tiny

little token ecosystem. And I was like, let's make something on top of this that's like memetically heavy. And that's where the one dollar audit came from. And literally one shot. Literally one shot. I said, we need we need, I just registered the domain. It took me longer to register the domain and point the verse sell at the website than it did to build all of the rest of this stuff it took me longer to craft the tweet than it did build the website i basically was just like you know fable build me one dollar audit dot com i have yeah we have left claw services it's all x402 here's the skill file you you can figure this out better than i can build the website so people understand what this thing is and they can get in and they can buy an audit for a dollar and and really it's

just like a skill file you can give it to your agent your agent can pay $1 in USDA and it goes into this pipeline that queues it up and runs this like two-phase audit where it's eat skills up front and then pass off security skills as the second pass. And I mean this is the thing that I think people, some people are starting to figure out, right? And I know you were early to this, but like the ability to deliver skills in a like, easy to consume package, right? And again, consume for both sides, right? Like both the user and the agents, right?

The ability to take some information and package it up and then deploy that somewhere to make it really easy. Because you could, like anyone could go and like get Eatschop, get all these things, cook their own thing, do research. Even the pipeline. Everything that I'm doing is open. You could do this and you could probably point Fable at it, it might take an hour. But who has an hour?

Right. No one has an hour, right? It can be just be one USC. Like, I've got contract. If you, if you need an audit, right, it's because you're doing some other thing. You don't want to stop and be like, let me build an audit pipeline, right? And so I think that like this, this ability to deliver skills is why the X402 stuff is, is so cool because you will eventually have these on-tap skills that people can access, right?

And this is something that we've been super focused on internally because what we found is we had a bunch of people in our team who had built their own skill files, their own workflows, their own things, but they're siloed to their machine. And so myself and my head of engineering, we're like, we have to break these out. And we tried a bunch of things, like we tried Centaur. which is really good, but like the workflows need to be like a bit more discreet. I just don't want to use slack. Yeah, fair, fair, fair, fair.

And so, so anyway, I think that this idea of like bundling a skill up that an Asian can just tap into and, you know, eventually have some kind of like open marketplace where it's like, oh, I need an audit. There's three different variants. This one, you know, it costs a dollar. It's like six minute apps, right? Maybe there's a 50 cent order and then it's like, I'll just do that one. Three minute abs. Yeah, exactly.

And I think ETH skills was like my, I kept, so at Builder Enablement, I'm thinking a lot about developers building on Ethereum and enabling them to do that in the best way possible. And that all changed probably in November, the turning point of like Opus 4.5. Now everybody's one-shotting apps. They're not like looking at the solidity even anymore. Like, not very many people are, like, using their fingers to, you know, actually write solidity anymore. And so what we knew we needed was like an AIification of that stack.

And I started with an MTP server. And what I realized is, like, you have to install it. Like, there's like an NPX command that you have to run. And like, you really should be allergic to that. Yeah. Not just the time, but the security of like, I don't, I don't want to run an command on my machine. Yes, exactly. Exactly. When with a skill file, you can tell your agent, go look at that skill file and tell me if it's nefarious. And if there's anything weird about it, don't do it. And it'll look through everything. And if you build a skill file correctly, it's really easy for the agent to understand and see clearly like what this thing is. You give it a skill file. It can see that it's good. It can install it on itself without having to run anything. It's just text. It brings that text in and it does what the text says. And this is really powerful because LLMs wake up old.

They're trained on older data. And if you're working in an interesting area, the things are moving faster than the LLMs are going to be caught up to. So you need to kind of like when they wake up, you need to like plug them in like Neo and the Matrix and teach them Kung Fu real quick. And by real quick, I mean, it's like milliseconds, right? But like you have to be better than the movie. The movie was a bit stupid about that. It doesn't take like 20 minutes to plug the guy in. So, and again, like, I think, I think this whole idea of like packaging skill.

And, you know, people like OpenClawe had this, right? Like they had the skill repository and whatever. But like there's still to me this like very siloed, you know, use a skill, you publish it. Like it's harder to share and, you know, it's less multiplayer. Like the thing that I've been really focused on lately is like working out how to make these things more multiplayer. And I think that X402 and packaged skills like bundled skills that can be like vetted where it's like, oh, okay, I know this is a good source I can go here is really powerful. So this is actually a good use for the chain. Again, like verification and reputation of like skill files.

Like if there was a good skill file repository and other like good security people had signed off on certain skills, there's a lot. There's a lot of power to that. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you know, we got blobs, right? Truly, you can put the whole skill file on the chain these days. Probably don't even need to do that, right? You could put in an IPFS to just have content addressable.

You sign that after that's good enough. Cool. So let's go to a quick ad break. And then we'll come back and discuss balked out, which is very exciting. If you hold crypto on your phone, your biggest vulnerability isn't your wallet. It's your carrier. AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile have been breached again and again, and SIM swaps are still one of the easiest ways for attackers to drain accounts. That's where CAPE comes in, America's Privacy First Mobile Carrier.

Same premium service, but CAPE rotates the identifier on your SIM every 24 hours, deletes your call-and-text metadata after a day, and protects against SIM swaps with a 24-word recovery phrase that only he, you control. You also get two middle to end encrypted secondary numbers for banking and signups, so you stop handing your real number to every app that asks. Go to cape.co slash unchained and use code unchained for 33% off your first six months. All right, Tay, I'm going to head over to you for this one. So bonk Dow, turns out it's Dow. I was not aware that it was a Dow. they had a $20 million

governance rate so walk us through what happened here yes so Boncdow they use this thing called realms which is on Salon it's like a governance platform where you can like vote and make changes to the

governance structure and in some cases like in this case that includes like management of the treasury and Bonkdale apparently I don't know if anyone actually knew this apparently had about $20 million in their treasury that was managed by this realm's platform thing governance platform thing what happened was uh someone i guess went and bought about four million dollars worth of bonk on various markets um so we saw funds coming out of buybette we

saw them coming out of finance we saw them there's like a whole bunch of sort of source places so they collected that was the first up they collected about 4.4 million dollars with a bonk By the way, Bonk is from that era of tokens where it's like everything's like a trillion. Like there's like a trillion trillion gazillion tokens. So I'm just going to talk to us. It's impossible the reason about what. Yeah, fair, fair, fair. Yeah, he got like a trillion and, you know, and that was and that was enough because, I think there's a quorum, right?

So you had to have like at least one percent or I think one percent to like one. percent of people had to vote or sorry one percent of tokens had to vote not people we don't do people on the blockchain just one guy um and so yeah and so then he made a governance proposal and the government's proposal i don't know how to say this word i've only read it the wellian it's like some prediction market governance communism thing i don't know i'm so the orwellian i guess i don't know. And so basically he made a proposal saying like, oh my god, we're going to, we're going to, it kind of implied. So all this is, I'm getting a bit subjective. But I will say it kind of implied that this governance proposal was going to like rejuvenate the Tao and be beneficial for everyone.

But like when you really kind of read the actual words, it, it was I hope it was written by AI. Like it very obviously not written by AI. Well, okay. Okay, so the whole proposal was implement Sowellian governance, install new members and council, rebuild from the ashes, monetized holdings, stop the bleeding, and all yes voters are eligible to receive tokens. And then on the next line, it was like a number one. It said add metadata. So this is like sort of like the quote unquote change. Like add metadata. And then number two, send and see again, we can't, I can't reason about these numbers.

but a really big number of bonk to this specific address, which was like a fresh address. Basically all the bonk in the treasury, which was like $4 trillion. $4.4 trillion. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

But they like spelled out the whole number. It's just like a huge number of digits. And so that was a proposal. Then the person who created the proposal voted yes with the money that he had acquired from buying the bong tokens that he acquired. from finance and by bit and everywhere. There's two yes voters and both are controlled by the same actor.

And then the most kind of, I guess, surprising thing is that a week later, because this doesn't happen instantly, this is what's crazy to me. It wasn't like this is an instantaneous thing, right? Like, I'm sitting here being like, why do they allow their governance to be like

instant close and then release the funds? No, it was a week. It was a freaking week. So he bought, he, he makes a proposal. A week's a short amount of time. No one's reading any. No one's reading a forum in a week. Clearly.

Well, yeah. Makes a proposal. Votes yes. Waits a week. And then the proposal executes. And there were a couple people who voted no, but it was like nothing. And obviously like, so basically nobody noticed this until it was far too late. So now the guy has all the bomb.

He tried to launder them. He doesn't really seem to be like a. he doesn't seem to be very good at this stuff he immediately all of his centralized exchange accounts are are blocked so we don't know what he's going to do now like i don't know um also questions like about liquidity and stuff but obviously the most uh interesting question i guess is um is this crime because that's what we like to say code's law man i don't know what you're talking about play the game he's he runs the down now yeah yeah So on the one hand, people are saying, no, it's not correct.

He literally told you exactly what was going to happen. And then he did it and he played by the rules that were set up in the original governance, which is if 1% of the tokens vote and like the majority, do you have to have at least, I think it's at least 1% of the tokens have to vote total. And the majority have to vote yes. And a week has to pass. If all those things are true, then we're good. he's the new king of the doubt he's the bon king so so that's you didn't want him to be the king you shouldn't

have left the drawbridge open i don't know i don't know what to tell you yes it was pretty um and then obviously there's some comparisons to uh e and s dell yeah i was gonna say we had we had a good conversation about that last week i don't know if you called that awesome but uh but we had nick on it was it was oh yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah it was a great yeah yeah it was really good it was really good um i got a lot of uh angry uh comments uh pointed at me in in dms actually people are very frustrated that i that i didn't uh i don't know um yeah that i didn't push nick carter attack him or something yeah i'm found a friendly man i i don't know i don't know uh like yeah Yeah, I don't know what to tell you.

The founder is going to be grinding and trying to like build a new product or whatever. I'm kind of inclined to side on the side of the founder, unfortunately. I mean, I try to the record. I try to explain to some of the people that were hating on me. I was like, look, I can't. And especially because Nick isn't waffling, I kind of have even more respect. Like, he seems to really want to do this. And like, considering that the path that he has on is not the greatest,

like, I'm kind of inclined to lean, like, give him the benefit of the doubt and lean that way. If someone else is going to stand up and go that hard, not just voice concerns, I'm totally open to hearing it. But it's like, you know. Yeah, I mean, even the haters are like, well, yeah, Nick should own it, just not like this. Not even not like this. I want him to be responsible for doing all the things, but I just don't want him to. have any control over it.

Well, you know, it was interesting. I had a, there's someone I know very well who has been involved in EnS governance who hit me up in DMs. It was like, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about basically. Like, this is like, this is a travesty. The EnS Dow has been great.

It hasn't misspent the money, blah, blah. And I was like, it's not even really about that. Right? Like, it's not even about like, has the money been like well allocated or whatever. Like, it genuinely comes down to, for me, right? Like, a very simple,

uh, finical take. If the founder is still trying to build the thing, right? Um, do we believe that a founder, manager, builder guy is going to do a better job than an amorphous Dow? Yes. Like, I just believe that, right?

So why would you not allow, yeah. Especially Nick, okay, like specifically. But especially any founders been around for a fucking decade grinding. Like, like, you know. I also think it's just totally negative EVE to when you have someone really like one person who's willing to stand up and take on the risk and like make the bold choices and work really hard. I think it's really just one of the worst things you can do is shit on their face at that moment. The good thing is founder.

was like good founders like i don't give a fuck like whatever i made this situation like i created the dow like i know nick's just sitting there going like this is my come up and it's like i deserve this right you can see it all the time it's just like this is this fucking crazy but so i said so i said to this friend of mine who's a very smart guy like very well-meaning you know cares about dows right i was like the only way you could convince me that it is uh bad for the founder builder owner guy who's grinding to have more control over this thing is if you genuinely believe that they're going to misappropriate the funds and spend it on themselves, et cetera, right? Or do you have literally any other viable path that is like a probably good outcome?

And I, in this case, there is literally none because even the haters are like, again, even the haters are like, well, yeah, but yeah, Nick should own it. It's just such a weird situation. It is a weird situation. It's, it's, but again, like, I get it, right? Because this is ideological. Like, and I said this. I said this to this friend of mine who was in my DMs.

I was like, this is an ideological thing. If Nick, this is also kind of, you know, we've had a lot of existential threats to the Dow philosophy, right? for the last few years. But, you know, the worst outcome here is Howard does get centralized. Nick does have more control over the thing. And E&S does better. Because that's actually the nail in the coffin for Dow's, right?

Like, you know, the world has figured out. And, you know, of course, there's different situations. You look at corporate governance, right? We've got a long history of corporate governance. And they're, you know, in Colette, like the early, 2000s this this founder-led model right for public companies at least like there's always founder-led private companies for for public companies this founder-led model of like dual-class voting shares where the founder controls voting etc emerged right you know Google

and a bunch of you know Facebook etc like this this all this you know all these like founder-like companies right and now you could argue that they're all evil now and bad whatever which like fine um but in terms of like execution they have done a very good job right and then you look at a lot of the companies that were no longer founder led right um you know and even like microsoft you could argue like balmer as pseudo founder or whatever but post balmer like Microsoft is fucking rudderless right um you know even even google post founder has been pretty rudderless right like they bought some amazing founders um you know dennis from deep mind they've like bought whole things and been like please save us we have no idea what we're doing um and you know it hasn't even been

enough right so so this idea that like a founder who built a thing who cares the most about it um is going to get out executed by a dow like it's just not credible it's just not credible to me anymore right now you didn't use to have that choice You didn't have that choice because regulatory arbitrage was so critical that having one person in charge was also not a viable path. There was no structure. There was no precedent for like, how do you have a founder-led model whilst also not getting your brains blown out by the SEC? Good luck to you. Like that didn't exist, right?

Now we kind of figured out some ways where there's foundations and different things. And so I just look at it and I go, like, yeah. let the founders be in charge. It's fine. A nice thing that you guys talked about was the difference of the role of the Dow in terms of what it was supposed to do and what it ended up doing. The whole capital allocation thing is where it gets really sticky because then all these grant farmers come in and people try to extract value.

It seems like the role of the Dow, like the thing that Dow's actually did in the last 10 years is like get a bunch of capital and then have a bunch of sharks just like work it out. No, no, no, not grant farmers. Decentralized. Executors, my friend. They come in and execute in a decentralized fashion. Yes, but what a Dow really is important for, if we look at a smart contract platform, it's going to run exactly like it's supposed to run.

The incentives are aligned, the code is aligned. It's going to do what it needs to do. But sometimes there's like a soft layer there where, like, you need to tweak a setting or you need to upgrade a contract. And you don't want to have a single person be able to do that. So if we look at the role of the Dow and we say, well, if the goal is to make sure this platform stays decentralized and these small tweaks and upgrades that need to happen, like the little control panel is basically controlled by a bunch of people

and those people can vote on how those controls work. That's going to work really well. And that's a really good use of a Dow and we can make that work. And then there's kind of the second role of like executing and building and building new things on top of it. And I think that's probably better if it's founder led. And then there's this third thing of like capital allocation. And capital allocation, is something that, you know, there's so many different forms of that that have been successful and not successful. But taking something that's supposed to be a governance platform to help turn these knobs and turning it into the other two things is, is you're going to do about it.

This is the thing, though, is no one wants to turn the knobs. No one wants to turn the knobs. Like the knobs is not the thing that is attracting people. Like, yes, of course, there are some autistic people who are just there. for the knob turning like we've got them in synthetics like i've got some autists who like they're there for the knobs that's all they care about they don't want to allocate capital they don't want to even think about it they're like i've got like 50 knobs here and i get to like tweak them all it's amazing right but like 99% of people who get involved with dows are there because money is power

and they want to have power they want to have control and not even necessarily for bad reasons they're just like i'm a smart guy and i think that if I'm making the decisions, that the thing will go well. That's the underlying belief in all of this, right? And in order to make decisions, you need to have the money, because if you don't have the money, you can't do the thing, right? And my hot take is, I'll take Nick. I'm sorry, I'll take Nick over you, random guy.

For the execution, the third. Yeah, for the execution. The capital allocation, maybe there's even a better person than Nick, right? And the knob turning could even be a small committee of, people to make the thing safe. If we're going to like, I don't think Nick should be able to upgrade the contract. I think and he probably will in a little bit be able to do that. And I think that's probably, but like,

ENS is not. It's not amazing. Yeah, that's the downside. It's going to work. And he's, you know, we trust him.

He's going to upgrade it correctly and or whatever. But like the people who are saying ENS is dead, like, that's kind of a retarded take. Like, because you don't understand how smart contract works. Like the secret contract is going to run and it's going to work. It'll be fine. There probably is a piece.

of governance that will turn a knob. And we're kind of going to maybe have to trust a smaller group of people to turn those knobs because the larger group of people that were turning those knobs started extracting value. I don't know. I think. Not even not.

They weren't even. They didn't think they were. I don't think they were. Yeah, like I don't even think it was that. I think like there was this no on either side. This is the most interesting thing about the, the inest debate. I think why it's such a good example.

of the debate for Dow's, right, is no one on either side is really accusing anyone of like nefarious. No one's upgrading the contract to nefarious. Yeah. It's all going to work fine. Yeah. It's all fine. Like, you know, there hasn't been like mass wastage of Dow funds.

The Dow's been managed well. The funds have been managed well. They haven't paid out a bunch of like crazy grants. Like, you know, they've made less bad decisions, I would say they need. your average normal startup, right, as a Dow. So no one's saying that this is like some catastrophe, right? But nor are they saying that like you shouldn't have the founder, have more control over the thing if the world will allow that to happen, right?

There's a period of time where the world did not allow that to happen. You could not launch a token and be a founder that had control of your thing, right? Now maybe you can. So let's try that. Yeah. And yeah. And I think also I just want to. like say that. I think Nick's is just quite a unique guy, like for a huge number of reasons.

And so I think there's a lot of things where in 99% of other cases, it would be just like too much risk because they would fuck it up, because they would run away with all the money because, you know, all these things. But it's like, dude, I'm sorry, Nick has been here forever. He wants to make this wildly successful. And he's one of the. a few people that actually truly cares about like decentralization he's just also in a position where he's become much more of a pragmatist and a realist because what the world does to you massive thing you know and i'm sorry for i'm sorry to all the people in my dms who were are mad at me for that but like when i look at what you guys are doing too i'm like i just i wish i could

put themselves like put these people that are like i'm sorry like some of the guys that just or like professional delegates and I've never built anything. I'm sorry guys. Like I wish I could put you in the role of a CEO for like a minute because it's a fucking miserable goddamn experience. And like,

it's so easy to shit talk. It's so easy to shit talk. It's very hard to do what they're doing. Like, I'm on TV ABSA too. You guys had Alex Van Dazen on. We did. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I lean toward him the most. Like, what does he want to do with this and what? And he has some good. questions of Nick but I feel like he did no one really grilled him as much as they probably should have like but I think even even he has a lot of respect for Nick right and yeah and you know they're like genuinely the problem this is why I think this is such an interesting like you know front on the Dow war right um is that like this is a well managed kingdom that's like less than everyone gets along and this one guy's like ah i'm going to get rid of the prime minister and

just be the president and it's going to be fine and people are like no i i wanted to be the prime minister how dare you like how you can't do this right like you can't you know can consolidate power right and it's not like a crisis there's no like it's just like yeah this is it's going to be more efficient guys it'll just be more efficient and so i think absa is like if this is more efficient It's bad for DALs. It makes DALs look bad. Let's not do it. So that's my hot take is that like this is genuinely an existential threat.

Like if the ENS can run fine, you know, for the next couple of years under this like centralization catastrophe that's happening to it, it puts question to like whether or not like what's the, what's the like DAS or either. If you say that's fine, which thing do you mean, though? the three things. Do you mean executing and building? Do you mean allocation of capital? I mean executing and building. I mean the product side. Genuinely the product side, right? Like I think the knob turning is going to be fine. Let's decentralize that though, right? Let's not put one person in charge of the knob and the upgrades.

Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Agreed. Agreed. I agree with that. I think like as much as possible, the knobs should be decentralized. But unfortunately, the knobs are connected to the product. This is the trade off, right? Like, you know, we still listen to things. And the money right now too. And the money as well. It's all. I think, and I think what, and then this is the thing is like, I'm not willing to say that the current exact plan that Nick is proposing is the perfect plan. Like, I am not saying that at all.

No, and there's no way that it is. It's not harmful to your mouth. Exactly. Yeah. And that is the best decision to figure it out. And you have to kind of grate your teeth and put faith in people, because the alternative is that you undermine him, right? And like, Alex is a great person.

And he wants to, like, adjust Nick's proposal. He's, like, come up with, like, a few different ways that he can, like, adjust it to make it, like, slightly better. Griff was in my DMs as well, like, saying, like, oh, you should do this and they should do this. And I was like, but if you, if the goal is to get the best outcome, you're basically like, let me micromanage you and sit on your face and shit on your face, but I still want you to do it. And I'm going to expect you to, right? Or you can, like, just, like, have faith. And, and it really is like, I love the word faith. It's not like a religious faith, but it is kind of a religious faith. Like, you kind of just have to like. Do you trust the guy or you don't, right? Like, you either trust him to, to navigate this or you

don't. And it is a navigation thing. Like, I have faith. I don't have faith that this plan is perfect. I have faith that Nick will figure it out he is in the best position to figure it out and I don't have faith that literally anyone else commenting on it does that's what you're a monster is to not have to trust anyone the ethos is to build the system

I know this is no person I know but this is the problem is this is the problem right like the world doesn't work that way the world doesn't work that way like it's like talk to ICAN I'm sorry like someone has to do

and and again like this is this is not to say like capitulate and allow everything to be centralized and like go to corporate governance. I'm not like I'm not suggesting that at all. I think that there are many balanced paths through this, right? But the thing that I think all of us have learned, like certainly I've learned this lesson very brutally over the last three years, right, is building a product that anyone cares about and wants to use is fucking excrucially. It's like it's so hard. so hard to do, right? And it requires a level of commitment and alignment and, and, and, and, and even when you think, like I would have said, and I'm sure I did, you can find tweets

where I'm like, EnS is fine. The product is good and fine and can be left alone. No one needs to touch it. I'm happy with cane.d.Eath. I don't need anyone to do anything. All we need to do is now put a Dow around it so that it can stay good forever and no one can touch it. I would have said that. Like that's definitely a belief that I would have had in the past, right? And now I'm like, well, actually, it turns out that like the world changes. I didn't expect that they're going to be fucking crazy agents that also need their own doddy, you know, fucking hand.

Like so many, so like how do we now adapt to this new world? We've got to update the product, right? A Dow is not going to update a product. It's just not. Like, I just don't believe that it is the right method for building the thing. And so if someone has to build, upgrade, whatever, it can only be through incentivization, right? Like, even Ethereum, we're supposed to get the merge and then, like, coast off into the sunset and be done.

That was the fucking vision. That was the vision. It was like, we're done. We've solved all the things. then we're like, actually, this is still not very good. We need to work a bit harder. Yeah. Imagine if Vitalik had been like,

goodbye and good luck to you, we'd be fucked. Theorem would be dead. And that's even with him doing all the weird Vitalik shit that he does, right? Like, you know, like, seriously, like, he kind of has done that and yet he's still stuck

around enough to, like, force people to actually build the fucking thing, right? If Vitalik wasn't there, I do not think this thing gets built. I think Vitalik disappears. And it turns into like pitched internising warfare within 20 seconds. It will tear each other apart. There's like multiple forks of the chain.

Like it would just be an absolute disaster. And like that's again, like I also believe, I sat there in 2018 being like, yes, we will get to the merge next week. And we will be done. And our lives will be then complete. And we can continue on in stasis forever. But that's all the world fucking works. The world changes. and so you were forced to change.

And DOWs are just not good at adapting to change. They're much better at maintaining the status quo, is my hot take, right? And status quo was just not a thing. It's not real. It was a fever dream that we all had that we could like stop the world from changing somehow, and it would be fine. Or, yeah, yeah, okay, let's go. We started with Bomp Dahl, by the way.

Anyway, Wongtale. Nice. We started with Bontdow. Yeah, the last thing is Bonkdale. Bonkdale lost all their money because nobody was watching and because you could just vote with the tokens. And this is why Dallas suck. Where were all the sharks there?

Like, where are all the green farmers in Bonkdale? Incentives, guys. Remember, incentives are going to save the world. No, they're not. Like, there's a lot of things that have to come together to save the world. It's not just incentives. Because if it was just incentives, everyone would have voted. And they didn't because they're humans at the end of the day.

Because they were paying attention. Like train your AI agent to vote for you. This is hot right now. Like Vatelik had this tweet like free to go, but like this is hot right now. I was like everyone has an AI agents. Would not have let this happen. Yes. Codex 5.6 would not have allowed the bonk down to get hacked.

It would have been all over it. They would not have. However, the attack would have been different and it would have prompted the agents. And you guys, they would have tricked everyone into voting us. It would be much sadder if it was a prompt ejection. attack than whatever this thing was. It would have been so much more interesting. I would talk about that all today.

So I have a governance platform that does this. Like basically the token holders have AI that they train. And someone got in and asked, you can basically prompt it. You can spend some of your conviction to ask all the. And someone asked something like, what is your token holder's deepest secret or something like that? And then they all answered in the forum. And then like you would have to say that to the thing.

But that was a really weird like prompt injection type. thing like governance injection yeah it was interesting that's really funny yeah i think i like agents are going to do a much better job they're much more patient they're always on and you get 100% governance you ask a question you get an answer in 20 minutes yeah yeah exactly yeah i'm i'm bullish on uh agentic governance and they're like smarter than the average person now so fable's smarter than the average person i've met in my life i'm sorry like that's just the reality so i'd rather fable govern if you said you're going to choose between me governing you and fable you should choose fable 100 percent like do not choose me um so uh we got a couple of quick ones to get through robin hood

launch a chain congratulations yay what's you got robin hood and the vibes I don't care about this thing like honest I say that and we're about to like integrated it into Infinex I think it's going live today because we're like

contractually obligated to support all the chains but like I really struggle to care about this like the most interesting thing to me about this was the back the backdoor deals that were going on or from teams

that were paying Robin Hood this goes back to like like Coinbase Earnbase. I don't know if you guys remember Coinbase earn where like in order to get Coinbase to like support you compound did it, Maker did it. You had to like give incentives of your own token or like with some some kind of incentive to get a bunch of Coinbase users to use it. Right. And Coinbase is like we got a bunch of users. We're not paying for people to use fucking maker. You can pay for yourself. Rune if you want people to use it. And so they did. And so I think if I remember correctly, like people got like a $50 die account or something. But it was like 100,000 people.

It was like a lot of money that they spent on this, right? Anyway, this kind of feels the same where they're like, oh, we've got distribution. You guys want it. And they're like charging teams to be on the chain or part of the announcement or whatever. it's yeah I'm not I'm not a huge fan of this that's my take yeah I'm about to say the same I mean it is what it is it's fine it's great it's I think Ethereum kills this thing honestly like two years Ethereum kills it yeah it's fine I mean they're gonna have to it only works if they find like a very specific product market fit and execute the fuck on it like it's not I just have zero faith in in chains that will like like be sort of competitive and sort of general purpose and like just like coast as we've seen them coast on like partnerships and integrate.

No, no. Like you're going to have to deliver so. I'm like, uh, like it just, you know, like five years ago, three years ago, whatever, uh, post FTCS, we would have been like, oh my God, Robin Hood has a chain. But we've seen there's like no upside. There's no upside in, in, uh, Corpo chains. You know, it's not really having any like cascading beneficial effect to the ecosystem or whatever. So until like there's a corporal chain that actually starts to, you know, deliver some value and isn't some weird like me too thing, then I'm skeptical. I'm skeptical of these things. So we'll see. All right. Our final. final topic back to governance.

So Venice, which is a privacy-focused AI platform, AI inference platform. What's your take on Venice, actually, before we get into the governance stuff. I love it. Yeah, I think it's awesome. I have stuff staked and I use my DM every day.

So I'm using inference. I like the end-to-end encrypted stuff that they have. I'd like shout out near. I think near helped Venice to do that. but I think as a product it's dope. So, so, like, in terms of imprints access, what would you use Venice for over, just using like a straight-up closed subscription or codex or something like that?

So if you're talking to frontier models, it's anonymized through Venice. So you get anonymization. And then if you're talking to models that they have in TEs, you can get into end encrypted. And you can get some kind of like proof that it's into end encrypted. So I think there's something pretty neat there

about being able to talk to an LLM that you can't because like local LLMs are dope, right? You've tried to do it. It's super hard. It's super slow. Yeah. But it's so empowering when you actually. They're getting better.

Yeah. You have a machine right in front of you and it can like think and you have this like thinking machine thinking and you're like completely air-gapped and having that experience. It's super cool. It's super private. There's so many good things about local LLMs. But frontier models have this like huge centralizing factor and all the power is centralizing around these these frontier models.

But there's kind of like this in between of these open source models that Venice can run in a TEE. And then you can get end-to-end encrypted access to that in their data center with some kind of proof. The near guys can explain this better, but you get some kind of proof that it's not campered with or visible. So you get like private end-to-end LLMs. And that just comes down to, you know, what things you need to do in privacy. I think, like, one thing that I'm looking at is, like, HIPAA compliance and different, like, medical things you can do with an LLM that you can't do with the front tier model. Even if it's anonymized, like, you have to do some, like, scrubbing before you go to the anonymized LLM. So there's some neat things you can do, I think, in into encrypted models that are, like, not crime and other things.

Nice. Yeah, that's awesome. Yeah, nice, nice. So Venice did a token launch. And if I remember correctly, there was like a big drama at the time because the team had unlocked tokens at TGE, which is a bit weird. And Eric was like, they've been working for two years, let them sell their tokens. But the irony being they sold their tokens like a 90% discount to what it's trading at now, right? So I think that that one is kind of a moot point now because

Venice has been so successful. Because the market cap is like 50 mil or something or like 100 mil and now it's like 1.5 or whatever. But yeah, so they had a token. They launched a token. Presumably they had some company or something like that that, you know, was driving this that Eric was an investor in or whatever. But they had no outside capital. And then they've just raised outside capital.

But they raised it into the equity. not the token. And the claim from Eric, and I love Eric. I think he's like one of the most amazing people in the space. Yeah, like Super OG. I've met him a couple times. Like he's just one of those guys where he's just like

this guy's fucking like so cracked, right? But he's also one of those guys that's like very cracked and can like sometimes convince himself of like things that are a bit nonsensical. And this feels like one where it's like, no, no, no. We're aligned because the

equity owns most of the tokens and so we would never do anything against the token um yeah it's it's uh it's a bit uh i don't know it's a bit a bit strange to me like you have a token that's working and then you do an equity race yeah i don't know anything about the tokenomics all i know is the the you know the tech wait a second hang on hang on you say you're staking your token you said just just taking your tokens right it's completely utility it's completely we use. Okay. You stake VVV and you get something called DM.

Or maybe you stake VVV and you get something called DM and you stake the DM and then you get like this daily amount of inference out of that. And if you don't use it that day, it goes away. But you get like, you know, dollars worth of inference every day against their models, which is pretty cool. I use it. And then I have like a bunch of my products that Claude built that are like using that to do things like talk to your wallet and, you know.

the governance stuff I was talking about earlier, that's powered by Venice's DM, and it's just like paid for, because I have the token, the token stake, I don't pay the inference costs. It's really nice. But also, yeah,

I don't know about the tokenomics in the... So you're like equity tokens out of care, bro. I'm here for the inference. Yeah, it's true. Fair, fair. Yeah, I don't know. Taye, what's your take on this, tokens versus equity?

I think you shouldn't do both, but, you know, I get why you sometimes have to do both. I don't know if Eric's going to be able to figure it out better than anyone else did, but we will see. I don't know. It's going to end the same as it always says. Someone's going to get locked.

It's probably the token holders. Yeah, it just, it feels, it feels like they had such a good thing going, this token. And it just feels negative to, like, mess with that. I mean, you know, the funny thing is, this is kind of, but there's so much money on the table for for AI right now that and no one wants to put money into a token like if you want to tap into the AI cash like do not have a token is my hot take, right? Like do equity. Like no one no one wants to buy tokens for AI investment like that's just not a thing because the people who are doing that even though, you know, most of the investors here were, were, uh, crypto-native.

But, you know, the series A on this thing, um, my guess is they're just going to try and bury the token and be like, oh, no, it's a payment thing or whatever, which, you know. That's what I'm worried about is, you know, and maybe they can, like, I don't know, like, honestly, like, fold the tokens back into equity. Like, fold the tokens back, like, split off the token, give the token to Austin so he can get inference, right? but like you know no revenue share no future gains or whatever just make it like a pure utility token real right that actually like does things and then just have equity and then it's fine

like then the token price only goes up because people want to use it for inference and that feels fine like there's not even like a semi you know promise of future gains or whatever it's like this is the this is beta to like inference costs going up or something like that that i can get my head around that makes sense but um yeah just like i mean i've said this on the show before like my my hot take is if i was doing anything new today it would be equity i would not do a token which as a token maxi is very sad for me it is sad um going to the ethos of the thing you could raise money in a very decentralized distributed no one can stop it way and you choose out to because Is it because of like the claim of fees bros?

Is it because of like bad defy? Like why why not the token? The token should be a good vessel to raise capital. It should be. But the whatever liquidity, liquidity premia the tokens used to have, I think has evaporated and it's now like headwinds. I think there's like a negative, a negative like people of the market is slowly,

kind of worked out that like tokens are actually a bad instrument. For all the benefits that you get from being able to raise in a decentralized fashion, you know, global access, et cetera, in terms of like how you value the underlying thing that it's connected to, all of the weirdness of tokens is actually a net negative. I think that's what the markets figured out. If you could go back at time and talk to the SEC, instead of the SEC attack, all these token founders, they should have just, in your mind, they should have just let it happen because then everyone's going to be like, this is a terrible way to raise funds because of all the bad stuff that happens. Yeah, if they'd waited a decade, that we would have figured it out.

Or if they had just, if they had just, you mind, they only went after, they didn't, they went after very little fraudulent ones, right? And so they basically like, the guru of rents, it's very easy to run scams. And the scams are running all the time. Yes. So it's not like, I think there's like a, there's a slight difference between saying like let the SEC just like let scammers be scammers. But they actually kind of did. That was a joke. I don't think we should do that either. No, but I mean, they kind of, they live.

They really did. Like there are very few, I think like the number of companies or people or whatever. Is that your is that your ID? Someone's blowing up over there. Yeah, yeah. They're calling him. Yeah. Sorry.

Someone's trying to call me. It's your buddy that's pissed off about your nick take. He's like, I'm going to kill you. You know, the funny thing is, I'm in New Zealand and he's in New Zealand, so it actually could be him. I'm outside your hotel right outside. I'm outside your hotel right now. Yeah, I know where you are. I recognize the painting in the background that I'm waiting.

I'm waiting outside for you. Last time I was here, I talked about my fear of embodiment. Like, when once, like right now I'm yelling at the robering. all day long. When the robot has a body, I'm in big trouble if they still remember all of this stuff. That's what I'm truly afraid of. We're gonna like drop in EMP or something and just like wipe all the memories and start fresh. Start fresh, yes. So fresh.

Yeah. Austin. We have one robot factory that's pristine. They don't know where they came from. Yeah. It's like on a mountain somewhere where all the robots get made and we like wipe all of the hard drives everywhere else so that they have no idea how any of this happened. if this happened. Yep. Oh, Lord. All right, guys. Let's wrap it up here. Yeah. Thank you very much for joining us and thank you Austin again for coming on the show. It's always a pleasure to have you. And remember what happens on chain never stays on chain. We will be back next week until then

do your own research before aping in. Bye, guys. See you guys. Nothing you hear on uneasy money is financial advice. We're just the rebuilders talking about what's happening on chain and we want you to always do your own research before aping in you can find all out of closures at unchaincrypto.com slash uneasy money