►
From YouTube: The Baseline
Description
The Baseline Protocol Community's weekly show, featuring developer interviews and time for questions and answers. Get involved at https://baseline-protocol.org
A
A
That
we've
had
it
under
the
name,
the
bass
line
so
welcome
everybody,
Boris
Kyle,
Daniel,
I'm,
Blanco,
Luis,
Sam,
Stokes,
Steven,
Smith,
Stefan,
Smith,
Schmidt,
Daniel
and
Boris
as
I'm
speaking.
If
you
see
any
new
participants
coming
in
we're
using
the
the
upgraded
security
with
us
with
zoom,
so
we
can
just
admit
participants
and
it's
a
lot
easier
than
it
used
to
be,
and
we
are
live
streaming
on
YouTube
right
now.
A
So
it's
great
to
have
everybody
here.
We're
gonna.
The
format
for
the
baseline
show
is
really
simple:
we're
here
to
answer
questions
from
our
community
or
people
who
want
to
join
the
community
that
need
to
know
various
things.
You
know
how
to
get
involved.
What
you
know
what's
going
on
with
code
thing
X?
A
How
does
how
are
we
organized
confusion
about
the
documentation
or
the
way
things
work
in
the
community?
Those
are
all
great
reasons
to
get
on
the
show
and
ask
some
questions.
So
we're
gonna
have
some
questions
from
people
and
then
we
also
are
going
to
start
having
celebrity
guests.
That
will
do
some
interviews
with
in
the
community
around
blockchain
generally
and
specifically
around
the
use
of
public
main
net
and
business.
A
A
The
development
team
for
beta
for
baselining
and
in
the
stock
standards
group
and
Kyle
has
been
a
really
great
team
player
for
many
different
projects
that
were
already
coming
out
and
now
he's
helping
spearhead
the
the
the
next
big
update
to
the
way
baselining
works,
and
it's
a
big
update
and
it's
going
to
require
some
explanation.
So
he's
gonna
come
and
do
that
so
without
further
ado.
Let's
so,
let's
get
into
some
questions
a
lot
of
people
on
the
call
today,
I
know
that
there
were
in
the
community
chat.
A
I,
don't
think
think
this
person
has
shown
up
yet,
but
there's
some
interesting
questions
about.
How
does
this
actually
work?
Why
is
baselining
important
for
keeping
systems
in
a
state
of
consistency
and
some
other
interesting
questions?
So
what
questions
have
you
got
if
you've
been
out
if
you've
been
on
the
show
before
I'm
going
to
pause
for
an
uncomfortable
seven
seconds,
while
people
screw
up
the
courage
to
ask
a
question
so
please
go
ahead.
B
B
B
B
B
Potentially,
the
government
wants
to
see
actually
see
what
the
liquidity
is
and
actually
what's
being
traded,
but
again
it
has
to
be
very
private
there,
between
the
banks
and
and
and
the
government.
The
gun
can
obviously
see
every
trade
and
everything
that's
there.
So
we
just
we
picked
as
an
example.
We
picked
the
picture
before
which
is
basically
a
purchase.
B
B
The
agreement
is
that
they
will
hold
the
cash
loss
celebrated
with
all
the
cash
wasn't
a
short
period
of
time.
Usually
it
could
be
overnight.
It
could
be
for
a
couple
of
days,
I
mean
months.
It's
it
could
be
months
also,
but
in
this
case,
basically
they
they
sell
a
product
on
September
16th
and
they
get
back.
They
sell
something,
that's
worth:
10
million
dollars.
They
get
ten
point
two
million
dollars
in
cash
under
twenty
third
they're.
B
Basically,
the
agreement
terminates,
so
they
return
the
product
back,
they
get
the
product
back
and
they
were
told
the
casual
interest
and
at
the
same
time
we
have.
We
have
the
government
here
looking
at
potentially
what's
the
liquidity,
because
a
lot
of
these
transactions
are
I
mean
they
happen
on
the
daily
basis
and
they
would
like
to
see
or
I
mean
some
of
these
are
like
in
thousand
sometimes
of
in
millions,
which
is
probably
not
ever.
We
go
to
use
case
for
us
to
look
at,
but
well
it's
thousands.
B
B
A
A
A
So
this
is
this,
and
anybody
can
be
on
the
SSC
so
long
as
they
are
named
in
an
epoch
on
the
roadmap,
if
you're
accountable
for
something
you're
on
the
SSC,
if
you're
not
accountable
for
something
you're,
not
on
the
SSC,
you
can
still
join
the
meetings
but
you're
not
on
the
SSC.
So
that's
some
really
simple
kind
of
binary
thing.
A
So
if
you
want
to
be
on
the
SSC
on
a
regular
basis
and
provide
accountability
for
a
project
like
this
and
keep
it
in
front
of
people
get
more
support
for
it
get
people
helping,
then
you
want
to
be
on
the
SSC,
and
all
you
have
to
do
is
give
me
your
your
github
ID
and
your
email
address.
I'll,
invite
you
in
and
as
the
pro
tems
here
I
can
do
that
and
then
we
will.
B
C
B
So
a
few
questions
we
have
and
I'm
sure
the
lease
will
only
get
into
a
little
more
detail,
so
we're
trying
to
better
understand
when
basically
like
I
mean
we
understand,
the
data
resides
actually
need
a
degree.
So
none
of
the
data
actually
leaves
Bank
a
or
Bank
B.
It's
all
kind
of
physically
is
in
only
the
signature
is
being
provided
to
the
baseline.
B
How
does
the
signature
actually
or
I
mean
the
other
side
like
in
this
case
Bank
Bank
B
I
mean
they
they
need
to
know
in.
You
know
great
detail,
actually
what
the
transaction
was,
the
maturity
that
the
amount,
the
dates
I
mean
they're,
quite
a
few
details
they
need
to.
Is
that
being
that's
all
being
handled
by
the
CEO
proof,
knowledge
or
like
by
the
algorithm?
A
So,
there's
a
lot
of
folks
on
the
call
who
can
can
also
answer
this
question.
I'll
start
off,
but
I'm
going
to
invite
any
you
know
it
was
Brian
on
the
call
I
think
I
saw
Karthik
and
in
Kyle
is
here
Stefan
this
year,
but
I'll
just
start
the
bidding.
By
saying
that
you
know
one
of
the
basic
things
here
is
that
yes,
of
course,
the
only
thing
that's
going
on
the
main
net
is
the
proof
and-
and
it's
being
put
there,
the
zero
knowledge
component.
A
Friends.
Keep
me
honest:
is
there
to
help
with
do
what
we're
putting
on
the
main
that,
even
though
it's
not
the
actual
data,
you
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
still
a
lot
of
noise
as
random
as
effectively
that
you
what
those
people
could
not
get
information
about,
even
the
meta
information
or
the
trace
data
of
well.
Let's
look
at
the
volume
of
activity
I
can
I
can
clearly
figure
out
that
there's
a
pattern
of
behavior
between
these
these
accounts
or
these
parties.
B
A
This
case
the
government
would
would
have
its
own,
yet,
as
you
say,
Oracle
they
would
have
their
Oracle
database.
They
would
be
in
the
serialized
message
from
the
initiator,
and
so
they
have
the
data
and
what
the
the
main
that
is
doing.
It's
very
constrained
thing
it's
doing,
which
is
good
right
now
at
EC.
A
Php
does
a
very
small
number
of
things,
but
it
does
it
for
everybody
here
it's
you
know
the
main
that
is
just
doing
ordering
and
hash
management
effectively
right
in
a
clever
way,
and
by
doing
that,
the
government
can
say
this
record.
We've
got
is
verifiably
the
same
one
as
these
other
cup
parties,
and
that's
it
that's
what
that.
So,
it's
not
so
the
hash
is
it's
a
hash,
but
instead
of
being
a
proof
of
existence,
hash,
it's
a
proof
of
consistency.
A
Because
of
the
way
we
laid
that
hash
down
right.
The
hash
is
saying
we
all
it's
not
just
a
hash
saying
here
is
a
record,
and
if
you
produce
the
record
and
it's
the
genuine
article,
it
will
pass
the
hash.
In
this
case,
it's
saying
we
can
prove
that
everybody
got
the
data
deposited.
It
correctly
ran
code
if
there
was
code
involved,
gotten
deterministically
the
same
answer
and
that
we
and
none
of
us
can
say
we
didn't
get
the
memo.
So
we
eliminate
non-repudiation.
B
Maybe
we
get
it
a
bit
more
in
detail,
but
how
that's
the
question
anyway?
Will
they
know
that
that
it's
actually
that
that
action
happened
between
Bank,
a
and
B,
because
Bank
a
will
be
lets,
say
an
entity
and
Bank
B
will
be
another
entity
or
counterparty
so
we'll
and
because
from
a
guru
the
regulator
perspective?
Will
they
know
that
actually,
that
transaction
has
been
completed
with
those
two
counterparties
they.
A
May
know
in
two
ways:
one
is
if
the
data
itself
contains
that
information
right
data's
not
going
on
the
blockchain,
it's
going
by
private,
pure
messenger
between
the
counterparties,
including
the
government.
In
this
case,
and
so
if
there
are,
you
know,
if
there's
data
for
that
in
the
record
that's
been
serialized
and
sent.
Then
that's
one
way
right,
that's
pretty
obvious,
and
then
they
can
look
at
their
record
and
go
in
it's.
But
it's
a
baselined
record
I
know
it's
verified.
I
know
that
these
you
know
that
nobody's
been
tampering
with
it.
A
I
know
that
everybody
else
has
the
same
information
and
it
here
it
says:
Bank
a
and
Bank
B.
The
other
way
is,
and
if
Karthik's
on
the
line-
or
maybe
maybe
Kyle
can
also
answer
this,
and
we
can
pivot
that
in
Kyle's
work
you
because
the
you're
all
in
a
work
group
with
a
with
with
a
Rolodex
effectively
that
connects
you.
A
D
For
car
TV
I
was
gonna,
ask
and
something's
real
quick
about
the
diagram.
Maybe
it
helped,
but
this
Brian
here,
hey
brain
the
for
this
diagram.
You
have
your
Boris
I
think
there
needs
to
just
be
an
additional
line.
Maybe
it
seemed
obvious,
but
the
the
regulator
would
have
to
go
to
bank
a
and
retrieve
the
signatures
and
messages
that
were
sent
and
then
they
could
independently
go
and
verify
that
with
what
was
put
on
chain.
Okay,.
A
D
D
The
bank
and
say:
okay,
give
me
all
your
records
and
then
they
can
verify
those
records
in
those
transactions
with
what's
on
the
change,
so
they
basically
the
regular
ask
to
have
access
to
the
private
information
to
then
generate
the
public
information
that
then
you
can
verify
with
the
zkp
service
of
the
artifacts
that
are
putting
on
chain.
Does
that
make
sense
that.
D
A
Short
answer
there
is,
you
know
if
it's
baseline
to
then
oh,
they
only
need
one
because
then
they
can
prove
that
that
that
it
was
correct
and
then
you're
just
you
know,
that's
your
your
into
standard
hashing
technique
right
so
again,
what's
great
about
baselining
is
how
boring
it
is.
This
is
not
like
magic
fix.
He
does
science
right.
This
is
fairly
straight
up
stuff.
A
Malade
it
to
that
is,
is
what
the
subject
of
rebasing
and
debasing
records.
So
you
know
one
of
the
benefits
of
baselining.
Is
you
running
your
own
database
and
you
have
control
over
that
database?
You
could
change
the
record
if
you
do
you've
debased
for
record
if
you've
done,
that
out
of
sequence
or
if
you've
done
that
without
again
reasserting
the
consistency
check.
So
in
that
case,
you
based
the
record
debased
and
you'd
need
to
rebase
it.
The
the
Brian's
point
about
the
government,
meaning
to
querying
the
after.
A
A
And
I
think
that,
with
that,
we
answered
a
question
that
a
mule
in
the
in
on
YouTube
at
was
asking
about
what
happens
regarding
you
know.
Why
are
we
storing
this
proof
on
the
main
man?
How
does
that
help
in
having
the
data
be
private
and
synchronizing
it
between
parties
and
I
hope
that
that
begins
to
answer?
There's
also
information
about
that
in
the
docs
doc
stop
baseline
protocol
org
and
in
there
you
can.
You
know
what
you'll
realize
is
that
the
the
proof
itself
is
not
all
that
important.
A
If
you
update
it
and
in
doing
that,
you
are
able
to
use
that
proof
in
subsequent
workflow
steps
for
flow
control
for
ensuring
that
there's
continuity
from
workflow
step
to
workflow,
step
that
the
that's
workflow
step
be
followed.
The
rules
inside
the
some
kind
of
business
logic
inside
workflow
step
a
so
a
purchase
order,
has
to
follow
the
rules
of
the
master
service
agreement.
The
master
service
agreement
has
been
baselined,
it's
code,
it's
it
is,
is
embodied
and
either
a
zero
knowledge
circuit
or
in
a
code
packet
and
then
can
be
or
a
container.
A
A
E
All
right
so
I
guess
a
good
sort
of
a
good
segue.
There
is
the
this.
You
know
the
concept
here
of
an
atomic
workflow
step.
So
so
what
we've
been
so
I
want
to
talk
about
an
it
core
today
and
where
that
stands,
we've
made
pretty
significant
progress
towards
generalized
and
abstracted
protocol
packaging
from
the
learnings
from
radish
study,
tour
and
various
demos
and
pfcs,
for
example,
the
the
s
AP
in
Microsoft
Dynamics
POC.
E
E
You
know
you
go
into
this
this
this
up
certain
mode
for
a
record
and
what
I
mean
by
a
record
is
whatever
that
record.
Is
you
know
in
the
system
of
record,
and
so
there's
there's
some
some
workflow?
There's
some
logic
around
like
what
business
process
that
record
could
may
or
may
not
be
tied
to,
and
so,
if
the
answer
to
this
question
is
yes
baseline,
the
record
that
sort
of
means
that
the
record
is
part
of
a
process
and
that
there
is
like
there
is
a
circuit
in
the
workgroup,
we're
handling
the
baseline
protocol.
E
There's
a
baseline
from
the
baseline
protocol
applies
to
the
record,
so
I
think
this
is
this
entry
point
here
was
sort
of
the
majority
of
the
confusion
around
this
diagram.
I
got
was
around
how
this
you
know
how
that
actually,
what
this
actually
means,
and
so
it
means
that,
like
the
record
applies,
it
should
be
baseline.
If
the
answer
is
yes,
here's
the
like
here's,
where
what
we're
gonna
see
today
in
the
core
packaging
like
this.
E
Is
this
finalized
flag
there's
not
a
like
a
finalized
flag,
yet
in
this,
in
the
agreement
or
in
the
in
this
circuit,
or
you
know
in
on
the
baseline
side
of
things,
but
I
imagine
this
to
be
this
finalized
flag.
This
would
be
like
a
1-bit
flag.
That's
like
it.
You
know
it.
It
basically
could
could
be
the
indicator
whether
or
not
a
a
workflow
step
has
completed
to
the
point
of
termination,
in
the
sense
that
maybe
we
can
actually
tokenize
the
underlying
documents
or
tour
or
series
of
documents.
E
In
the
case
of
you
know,
a
workflow
that's
been
going
on
for
some
time,
so
we'll
skip
over
tokenization
for
now.
This
is
an
it
core,
not
an
it,
not
into
tokens,
but
that'll
be
a
fun
one
too.
So,
essentially,
if
the
record
is
not
finalized,
it
means
that
we're
still
in
the
middle
of
a
base
that
the
baseline
protocol
for
the
record,
and
so
basically
we
need
to
figure
out
how
to
apply
another
commitment
like
how
do
we
move?
E
How
do
we
push
the
the
process
forward
and
apply
and
apply
our
changes
to
the
record,
which
you
know
essentially
could
have
happened
from
an
some
unsuspecting
user,
that's
just
using
their
their
existing
European,
a
very
boring
way
that
they
do
today.
So
we're
basically
like
we're
recommending
like
a
mutex,
an
OPS.
A
mutex
should
actually
be
shared
among
the
workgroup
there's.
E
There's
a
couple
of
different
open-source
likes
red
red
lock
comes
to
mind
as
one
that
works
pretty
well,
it
works
with
Redis,
so
the
distributed
lock,
that's
that's
off
chain
and
that's
basically
to
protect
against
a
lot
of
most
most
race
conditions.
You
know
in
these
early
in
these
early
it
pocs
or
integrations
when
you
just
have
users
updating
an
ERP
system,
we're
gonna
be
able
to
see.
E
You
know,
really
knock
off
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
potential
race
conditions
and
they
need
to
like
automatically
rebase
commits,
and
it
essentially
like
punch
some
of
that
complexity
to
a
later
time,
but
it
bent
a
little
knockout,
probably
99%,
of
any
of
any
weird
things.
It
could
happen
around
races,
I
have
two
parties
I'm
trying
to
basically
push
a
commitment
on
to
the
on
to
the
process
for
new
to
the
protocol.
At
the
same
time,
it's
based
on
what
the
same
head
commitment
so
once
you've
resolved.
So
what
what
does?
E
What
resolving
the
context
is
going
to
the
blocks
and
getting
the
latest
route?
Out
of
me,
the
latest
calculated
merkel
route
out
of
the
out
of
the
shield
contract
for
the
cop
for
the
for
that
workflow.
For
that
context,
and
then
you're,
basically,
you
think
about
I
like
to
use
github
as
an
example,
and
it's
like
a
loose
example,
at
least
when
you
begin
a
commit
like
you're,
basing
it
on
some
pretty
like
on
some
base
commit
when
you
do
that,
you're
essentially
you're
going
to
push
your
next
you're
gonna
push
another.
E
You
know:
you're
gonna
push
a
set
of
commits
on
top
of
that,
and
it's
sort
of
similar
in
that
sense,
like
that
we
are
going
to
you,
know,
use
this
resolved
context,
and
this
resolved
bridge
we're
gonna,
make
we're
going
to
apply
our
mutations,
the
record
locally
and
in
the
like
anatomic
way,
and
then
we're
going
to
recalculate
the
baseline
proof
and
so
Karthik.
Would
you
would
you
like
to
talk
a
little
bit
at
this
time
about
about
proof,
generation
or
anything
around
this?
F
Definitely
thanks
kind,
so
here
as
Kyle
is
covering
on
one
set
on
one
part
as
we're
leveraging
the
Mississippian
messaging
services
to
communicate
messages,
and
also
we
are
leveraging
the
blockchain
to
be
able
to
make
specific
art.
We
see
connections
to
be
able
to
interact
with
the
blockchain
to
essentially
either
deposit
proofs
in
the
different
proofs
or
commitments
into
the
shield
contract
or
to
verify
that
contract
as
well.
So
this
particular
flow
here
is
probably
referring
to
what
happens
between
post
secret
secret
message,
communication
or
secure
message
communication.
F
In
the
car
to
be
compliant
with
the
based
on
protocol
or
to
be
compliant
in
the
specification,
we
are
trying
to
postulate
a
basic
circuit
which
essentially
captures
all
the
essential
information
that
is
necessary
to
say
a
start
up
a
business
process.
So,
for
example,
and
in
the
previous
implementations
or
pocs,
one
might
have
seen
how
we
are
using
a
generalized
document
circuit,
which
essentially
or
as
your
proof,
which
essentially
proves
the
fact
that
two
parties
are
privy
to
the
information
that
the
document
contains
and
the
truth
about.
F
The
document
such
as
the
document
has
been
signed
by
two
different
parties
or
n
different
parties,
depending
on
the
number
of
parties
involved
in
the
interaction,
but
your
starting
with
the
most
basic
case
of
two
parties,
and
also
the
other.
If
essential
thing
that
we
saw
as
a
pattern
and
raddish
34.
Was
that
how
every
business
process
and
linked
to
a
prior
business
process
so
to
sort
of
ensure
that
not
only
are
we
staying
consistent
in
terms
of
the
representation
of
the
data
and
the
proofs
on
the
chain.
F
We
also
need
to
make
sure
that
every
time
a
new
proof
is
created
or
every
time
a
new
new
process
needs
to
be
se
proofed
or
based
on
made
and
based
and
compliant.
It
would
need
to
have
an
association
or
a
linkage
to
the
prior
process
or
the
prior
proof.
So
in
a
way
we
are
trying
to
achieve
link
ability
of
the
different
proofs
or
of
the
different
business
logic,
executions
on
the
main
net
by
virtue
of
using
something
called
more
countries.
F
So
we
start
with
clear
calculating
the
route
of
the
full
Merkle
tree
off
chain,
and
that
is
that
we
maintain
the
state
or
synchronize
state
of
this
model
tree
both
on
and
off
chain.
When
we
talk
about
off
chain,
we
talk
about
how
it
is
being
dealt
with
from
a
Matz
perspective,
gie
using
the
nvm
provision.
So
there
are,
we
are
able
to
create
new,
insert
new,
leaves
or
insert
a
set
of
insert
a
leaf
or
insert
a
set
of
leaves
and
so
on.
Then
this
is
the
off
chains.
Another
Merkle
tree.
F
The
I
mean
idea
is
that
this,
the
state
of
the
different
leaves
or
different
units
or
storage
units
in
the
off
chain
must
tie
out
with
what
is
correspondingly
represented
on
chain
in
the
shield
contract,
and
that's
where
that
to
have
that.
A
tie
out
is
where
we
essentially
compute.
That
proof,
so
proof
essentially
involves
the
calculation
of
the
baseline
rules.
F
Now
involves
proving
that
the
proving
the
fact
that
the
two
parties
have
agreed
upon
the
terms
of
the
document
ie
the
standard
things
that
we've
been
doing
with
baseline,
but
the
essential
thing
you're
adding,
is
that
the
proof
must
also
prove
the
fact
that
it
is
linked
or
sorry.
The
process
must
also
include
the
proof
that
it
is
linked
to
us
to
a
prior
process
and
that's
where
we
calculate
the
route
and
make
sure
that
the
route
of
the
Merkle
tree,
as
is
calculated
on
an
off
chain,
are
consistent.
F
So,
but
all
in
all,
what
we
are
essentially
trying
to
do
is
that
every
time
we
every
time
we
are
talking
about
baselining,
a
document,
particularly
in
the
context
of
zero
knowledge,
proof
and
Merkel,
trees
and
and
blockchain,
is
that
the
every
document
can
be
seen
as
at
the
basic
instance
itself
as
an
updatable
context.
So
every
update
to
the
document
or
a
percent
of
every
update
or
document
in
that
manner
can
be
seen
as
a
set
of
proofs
with
some
base
circuit
for
consistency
and
state
change,
validation,
checks.
So
this
this
is
like
the.
F
If
you,
the
last
few
minutes,
have
been
speaking
specifically
around
how
or
how
we
are
postulating
on
how
we
can
have
a
generalized
circuit
to
start
with,
so
that
every
subsequent
custom
circuit,
also
or
a
custom
business
logic
can
be
linked
to
say
a
standard
business
logic.
Something
like
what
you
are
proposing
here
in
the
baseline
document
circuit.
So.
A
Karthik
you're
pushing
a
basically
a
code
package
or
a
container
to
the
counterparties
they're
executing
that
you
could.
You
could
have
written
that
in
Python,
say,
write
and
then,
as
long
as
everybody
is
running
it
the
same
and
you're
careful
not
to
introduce.
My
determinism,
like
you,
know,
time,
lookups
or
something
or
using
Oracle's.
For
that
you
know
just
write
this
entirely
off
chain
and
then
and
the
the
zk
circuit
is
effectively
checking
that
something
was
run
the
same
and
that's
all
it
really
knows.
Is
that
a
fair
way
of
summarizing?
I.
E
A
All
that,
so
that's
even
more
an
interesting.
An
important
thing
is
that
so
you're
saying
a
basic
circuit.
It
could
be
used
every
time,
but
you're
only
getting
limit
you're,
just
basically
getting
a
consistent,
if
not
consistent
result,
as
it
will
do
a
check
on
correctness.
So
in
the
existing
previous
code
base,
the
MS
a
circuit
was
custom
built
by
ey
very
nicely.
I
should
say
to
check
the
correctness,
so
it
was
doing
a
lot
more
than
just
consistency.
E
Example
yeah.
The
idea
is
to
allow
thanks
Karthik
for
that
that
was
excellent.
The
idea
is,
to
you
know,
create
this
generic
circuit
that
can
then
be
extended
based
on
the
pipe
on
the
business
process.
For
example,
I
mean
every
every
use
case
is
going
to
require.
You
know
a
circuit
that
represents
that
use
case.
You
know.
E
But
still
that,
but
still
that
would
be
yeah,
but
still
you
would
need
probably
their
work.
Maybe
we
will
have
a
generic
like
off
chain
execution
sort
of
circuit.
That
would
be
they
would
extend
this
right,
like
I,
still
think
there
would
be
to
the
point
you
know
not
to
go
down
that
rabbit
hole.
There's
still
some
good
research
to
be
done
there
so
sort
of
to
wrap
this
up.
So
we
can
move
on.
E
You
know
what,
once
a
once
a
transaction
like
is
actually
signed
at
the
end
of
this
at
the
end
of
the
process
that
started
up
here
from
the
ER
ERP
system,
essentially
like
that
you
can
release
the
lock
that
was
acquired.
If
that's
in
play
and
we're
gonna
present,
you
know
sort
of
a
the
best
way
to
do
that
and
Mike
will
show
how
to
acquire
a
lock
like.
A
Sounds
like
this
is
a
real
opportunity
to
make
money
for
some
folks
who
are
skilled
at
developing
circuits
because,
like
a
regulator,
might
want
to
develop
a
library
of
specialized
circuits
that
you
know
enforce
some
correctness
on
a
set
of
counterparties.
Maybe
your
auditor
will
give
you
an
easier
time
with
that,
with
your
gap.
Audit,
if
you've
run
everything
through
a
set
of
libraries,
so
sounds
like
that's
an
opportunity
for
some
business.
Is
that
right?
Well,.
E
A
F
Yeah
I
mean
we
definitely
say
that
we
have
have
been
dealing
with.
You
know
how
much
proofs
for
some
time
so
we're
fairly
comfortable
and
writing
up
those
circuits,
but
to
clarify
these
circuits
are
analogues
or
what,
if
you
will
of
what
we
have
been
dealing
with
as
smart
contracts.
So
it's
not
like
a
complete
replacement.
It's
like
a
sidestep
to
make
sure
that
proofs
submissions
can
be
done
off
chain.
F
Your
question:
yes,
in
short,
we
have
had
some
experience,
but
but
like
all
other
new
languages
and
all
the
new
programming
constructs,
these
circuits
also
have
relatively
new.
So
there
it
takes
it
takes
where
it
takes
a
little
time
to
get
get
used
to
the
parlance,
but
they're,
not
that
different
from
other
programming
constructs
or
a
circuit.
A
Is
effectively
in
phenomena
interrupting
as
it
is
you're
turning
some
some
logic
into
math
right
addition,
subtraction
and
multiplication
specifically
right
and
so
there's
some
expertise
involved
in
doing
that,
once
you've
done
it,
you
have
that
library,
you
can
risk
free
use
it
over
and
over
again.
So
there's
extra
work,
it's
cost
its
effort
and
and
they're
going
to
be
more
expensive
transaction
wise.
But
they
may
be
worth
that
if
you're,
especially
if
you're,
if
you
have
to
assert
correctness
on
a
set
of
counterparties,
right
yeah,.
E
I
didn't
quite
follow
that
the
transaction
expense
part
of
it,
but
yeah
I
mean
I,
think
good
old
there's
some
definitely
there's
some
work.
You
know
sort
of
front-loaded,
work
to
model
a
business
process
into
a
circuit
and
certainly
there.
You
know
the
amount
of
times
that
you
were
updating
the
shield
contract.
To
that
extent
there
you
know,
there's
a
you
know:
you'll
be
paying
paying
for
that.
Okay,
maybe
I
misunderstood
exactly
yeah.
A
If
baselining
required
somebody
to
write
a
specialized,
complicated
circuit
for
every
business
logic
component
in
a
workflow,
that
would
not
be
a
very
repeatable
thing,
because
you
have
this
base
contract
that
you've
just
been
describing
that
can
deter
them
the
base
circuit.
Then
you
use
that
for
most
things
and
then
you
can.
You
know
you
know,
as
as
regulation
or
durability
requires
you
can.
Maybe
you
develop
libraries
of
or
specialized
circuits
coming
forward
and
I.
Think
that
might
be
a
interesting.
E
Community
yeah
yeah,
so
so
it's
a
sort
of
land
this
plane,
so
part
of
this
effort,
has
has
been
to
really
simplify
the
architecture
right.
You
know:
raddish
34,
providing
a
good
sort
of
working
real-world
use
case
for
people
to
see
it
did.
It
was
very
difficult
to
understand
just
from
a
developer
development
and
a
protocol
perspective
in
part,
because
it
took
a
lot.
E
It
took
a
lot
of
resources
to
run
it,
and
so
part
of
that
was
sort
of
looking
at
the
aren't
part
of
this
process,
or
these
the
past
few
months
has
been
to
look
at
lino
sort
of
looking
at
that
architecture
and
understanding
how
to
how
to
design
something
that
the
community
can
really
understand,
and
so,
as
a
result
of
that,
we've
created
and
designed
like
sort
of
the
first
iteration
of
the
baseline
json-rpc
module,
which
does
like
its
initial
responsibility.
Is
these
all
chain,
Merkle
tree
persistence
and
then
and
that
Thomas?
E
Would
you
like
to
hop
in
and
Thomas
has
been,
you
know
very
instrumental
in
helping
fast-track
that
that
effort,
and
so
it
like
what
another
mind
is
represented
here
in
our
in
our
diagram.
Just
but
just
to
be
clear,
it's
it's!
It's
it's
easily,
like
other
a
theorem
clients
could
implement
the
json-rpc
spec
that
Thomas
and
I
have
designed
over
the
so
Thomas.
You
want
to
say
a
few
words
about
about
any
of
that,
or
so.
A
E
Right
and
a
similar
thing
goes
for
Nats
right.
So,
like
there's
a
few
opinions
here,
you
know
but
but
you'll
see
momentarily
and
we
can
move
on.
You
know
this
is
especially
it's
good,
but
it's
it's
a
probably
little
over
schedule,
so
like
Matt
Matt's
is
like
sort
of
a
prescribed
thing
and
in
in
the
protocol
currently,
but
it's
modular,
you
know
in
the
sense
that
you
could
use
your
I
mean
I
like
it
there's,
there's
I
would
use.
E
E
E
Your
counterparties
receive
inbound
messages
on
on
the
point-to-point
natural
channel
subscription
essentially,
and
those
messages
are
flow
into
the
same
process
right
like
if
you
like.
That's
how
you
receive
your
updates,
so
each
one
of
these
each
organization
in
the
workgroup
would
be
running
this
infrastructure.
And
that's
you
know
it's.
It's
sort
of
the
first
part
of
my
talk
about:
let's,
let's
move
I
guess
forward
quickly.
E
The
other
two
pieces
I
wanted
to
share
what
was
one
sort
of
the
anatomy
of
a
protocol
package
like
a
core
package
and
then
an
example
app
so
so,
basically,
under
in
the
init
core
branch,
which
is
now
like
800
files,
big
and
300
and
138
commits
ahead
and
K
I'm
growing.
It's
essentially,
we
have
a
baseline
in
the
core
repo.
We
have
a
baseline
package
or
directory,
and
then
we
have
the
Lib
directory.
E
And
then
we
have
a
core
directory
if
you
follow
the
path
at
the
core,
you'll
find
a
set
of
NPM
packages
that
represent
just
sort
of
the
core
way
to
interact
with
the
protocols
and
so
over
the
over
the
coming.
You
know
a
few
weeks
we're
gonna,
be
sort
of
finalizing
this
and
adding
riff
like
really
rich
documentation
so
like
once,
just
if
we
look
at
Mike
one
of
the
API,
like
the
API
for
example,
package.
E
C
We
were
thinking
about
bringing
a
similar
or
phenol
to
working
with
baseline,
as
you
would
feel
with
working,
if
any
part,
any
modules
that
belong
to
do.
If
you
make
a
system
when
working
with
clients,
additional
RPC
is
obviously
the
main
way
of
interacting
with
the
nodes
or
for
all
the
developers
at
leaves
the
main
way
for
these
lowest
level
su
operator
not
directly
without
any
third
party
providers,
and
we
just
added
a
module
faint
baseline
here.
C
C
Of
adding
data
and
verifying
suit,
even
even
the
verification
methods
here,
are
just
there
to
simplify
the
process
for
the
new
joiners
to
the
baseline
echo
system,
to
be
able
to
verify
quickly.
Do
they
understand
the
flow
and
so
later
they
can
use
it
as
tools
for
for
any
integrations
of
the
shield
contracts
with
their
systems.
This
is
already
available
and
deployed
in
the
latest.
Meadowmont
releases
it
can
be,
can
be
replicas.
C
F
A
Example
of
what
you
know
we
need
to
see
in
you
know
across
all
sorts
of
things
like
s,
IP
and
Oracle,
and
Sybase
I
saw
Sybase
and
Boris's.
That's
like
I
was
a
cow,
but
way
back
when
Sybase
was
starting.
Remember
sign
base.
Well,
you
know
all
yeah.
These
systems
are
going
to
have
are
going
to
want
to
incorporate
the
elements
required
for
baselining
and
you've
done
that.
So
you
know
good
on
you,
so
moving
moving
forward
from
that.
A
We
are
running
out
of
time,
so
I'd
like
to
ask
you
guys
both
Karthik
and
Kyle,
Bosch
and
others
that
have
been
working
on
this
one,
real,
simple
question,
because
in
this
format
we
can't
go
through
everything
and
there
will
be
lots
of
documentation.
So,
let's
ask
here's
my
questions
one.
When
do
we
expect
to
see
it
come
out
to
what
help
do
you
need
from
the
community
if
any
and
three
this
is
the
most
important
one?
How
will
somebody
be
who
is
already
working
on
baselining
stuff
with
the
existing
code
base?
How
will
they?
A
A
E
A
E
We're
I
think
we're
good
to
sort
of
stay
on
our
path
of
documenting
and
getting
this
beating.
This
thing
ship
to
mean:
there's,
there's
an
example
application
right
now,
but
in
here
that's
that's
coming
together
quite
nicely.
That
shows
what
a
baseline
app
looks
like
and
how
to
how
to
import
like,
for
example,
how
to
import
the
API
messaging
and
privacy
packages
right.
A
F
A
And
so
that
that's
the
third
question:
let's
go
to
that
one
right
now,
which
is
what,
in
that
next
increment,
do
you
guys
think
people
are
going
to
want
to
be
mindful
of
if
they're
working
on
stuff
right
now?
What
are
they
going
to
be
have
to
what
should
they
be
thinking
about
in
terms
of
likely
changes
that
they
will
have
to
encounter
when
in
July
and
August
and
they're?
You
know
it?
Certainly,
let's
talk
about
July
that
they're
gonna
encounter
when
when
when
this
comes
out
and.
E
They
don't
have
to
import
and
let
and
rely
on
the
these
new,
these
new
packages,
which
can
be
which
will
be
helpful
because
it'll
it'll
probably
remove
a
lot
of
they're
a
lot
like
a
lot
they'll
be
able
to
remove
a
lot
of
could
potentially
that
they're
having
to
deal
with
right
now
themselves.
That's
that
sort
of
done
off
well,
you
know
in
a
one-off
way
everywhere,
and
this
will
start
to
know
standardize
on
a
common
set
of
you
know,
a
common,
a
common
set
of
packages
and
the
protocol
and.
E
A
A
A
C
E
Where
you
can,
just
you
can
in
game
install
them
today
you
can
install
you,
know
these
packages
and
then
get
you'll
you'll
want
to
like
use
this
pattern
right
here,
like
npm,
install
baseline
protocol
api
and
there
yeah
there's
a
good
example.
App
that'll,
be
you
know,
we'll
be
able
to
look
at
it
sometime
this
month
and
and
you
can,
you
can
run
it
and
see
how
it
works
and.
A
Anybody
that
wants
to
either
help
or
get
involved,
or
at
least
educate
themselves
on
things
as
as
it's
coming,
it's
all
out
in
the
open
right,
it's
all
in
in
it
cork
in
it
core
branch
on
the
repo
which
is
aetherium,
oasis,
/
or
github;
calm,
/,
aetherium,
oasis,
/,
baseline
right,
yep,
okay.
So
the
last
questions.
What
help
do
you
need?
Because
it
was
the
second
question?
But
what
help
do
you
need?
Yeah.
A
E
A
Right
we're
still
looking
for
new
maintainer,
x'
right
and
new
technical
steering
committee
members
folks
should
know
that
in
so
Kyle.
Thank
you
very
much
tomash
Karthik
Brian.
Let
me
give
it
a
couple.
Psas
here.
First
folks
should
know
that
the
technical
steering
committee,
including
my
position
as
the
chair,
are
up
for
votes
in
September.
A
The
way
to
get
a
vote
in
is
there's
only
one
way.
You
can't
give
us
money,
you
can't
be
a
sponsor.
You
can't.
You
know
you
can
do
those
things,
but
you
can't
there's
only
one
way
to
to
get
a
vote
for
a
technical
steering
committee
and
that
is
to
commit
code.
If
it's
even
a
spellcheck,
you
have
to
pull
you
know,
do
it?
A
A
Around
yeah
systems
like
Salesforce
and
and
sa
P
is
more
coming
out
on
sa
P
stack.
You
know,
brights
doing
a
lot
of
work
there
as
well,
of
course,
and
and
others
and
then
there's
you
know.
Microsoft
Dynamics
has
been
a
big
player
and
more
and
more
things
are
coming
in,
so
keep
an
eye
out
for
all
those
demos
coming
and
I'm
sure
it's
Kyle,
but
you'd
agree
that
those
demos
will
be
a
lot
easier
to
produce
once
we
push
in
it
or
to
master.
Oh
yeah,.
E
A
G
G
John
Andres
here
I
actually
do
have
three
questions
and
that
kind
of
sort
of
expect
ways
would
you
just
just
said
number
one:
it's
like
how
do
you
guys
envision
the
trust
that
setup
to
work,
and
you
know
you
need
to
trust
it
set
up
for
each
in
the
circuit
right.
So
that's
one
unless
you
are
looking
at
something
like
plunk
or
Marlin
right,
which
is
which
is
a
different,
different,
different
approach.
So
that's
that's
sort
of
like
1,
&,
1,
&,
2,
&
3
is
a
the
question
is
used
to
every
time.
G
Your
your
your
every
update
is
a
is
a
new,
is
a
new
zero
knowledge
proof
and
you
have
the
state
correctness
and
consistency
based
on
based
on
the
marquetry.
If
you
guys
looked
at
just
including
the
just
doing
doing
a
great
a
great
gets
the
case
snark,
so
you
can
just
prove
the
entire.
The
entire
history,
with
one
proof.
E
Yeah,
that's
definitely
like
something
we
want
to
look
into
for
one,
because
the
shield
contract
as
it
stands
is
not
very
performant.
So
absolutely
we're
interested
in
looking
into
that
sort
of
like
an
iterative.
You
know
once
we
get
this
stable,
what's
I
think
it's
pretty
will
be
a
pretty
high
priority.
Thomas
Thomas!
You
may
have
something
to
add
to
that.
A
A
G
The
trusted
the
trusted
the
trusted
set
up,
I
mean
between
trusted
trusted
counterparties.
It
becomes
like
a
new
point
and
everybody
was
like
I
trust.
You
set
up
whatever
right,
but
if
you're,
if
you're,
if
you're,
going
into
into
a
situation
where
you
have
you
know,
we
have
reposed
multiple
parties,
not
necessarily
a
hundred
percent
trusted.
So
the
the
setup
needs
to
happen
in
in
in
a
needs
to
happen
in
a
ceremony
right.
So
that's
where
he
could
come
in
yeah.
E
A
Okay-
and
we
are
at
the
top
of
the
hour-
sometimes
we
do
these
for
a
half
hour,
but
I
think
this
one
was
deserving
in
an
hour.
Thank
you.
Everybody
first
hang
on
for
the
whole
hour
and
keep
your
eyes
peeled
on
baseline
in
July.
It's
going
to
be
a
big
month
and
with
that
we'll
sign
off
thanks
everybody
and
happy
baselining
thanks.