►
From YouTube: The Baseline Show: Office Hours
Description
The weekly office hours for the Baseline Protocol open source community, Wednesdays at noon in the US-Eastern timezone. And don't miss the show on Saturdays at 6pm in the Indian (IST) timezone. Learn more at https://baseline-protocol.org.
Date: June 15, 2022
A
Everybody
welcome
to
our
wednesday
june
15th.
Sorry,
I
couldn't
see
the
date
june.
15Th
baseline,
show.
We
have
an
open
office
hours
today
with
our
baseline
community
and
we
are
going
to
discuss
how
consensus
2022
by
coindesk
was
that
just
happened
in
austin
this
past
weekend,
as
well
as
all
other
things
baseline
or
baseline
adjacent.
So
I
will
first
start
by
just
seeing
here.
If
anybody
else
here
was
at
consensus,
2022
that
I'm
not
aware
of.
A
Okay,
so
yes
keith
mark
and
I
were
there,
so
I
think.
A
Yep
and
let's
start
then
by
maybe
covering
some
of
the
speakers
and
talks
that
we
saw
keith
if
you
want
to
kick
us
off.
B
Oh
sure,
I
guess
which
which
talk?
Would
you
like
to
talk
about?
First,
I
think
was
the
first
one
we
saw
was
the
first
one.
We
went
the.
A
B
A
B
A
B
Yeah
there
was
a
coin
desk.
I
forget
her
name,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
the
feedback
we
got
was
that,
like
from
other
people,
that
listened,
that
a
lot
of
the
questions-
I
don't
know
they
were
like
more
negatively
charged
like
from
the
panel
the
panel
people
that
I
thought
they
were
going
to
be.
A
lot
of
them
were,
like
you
know,
just
pushing
for
like
hey
what
could
go
wrong.
B
What's
all
the
bad
things
that
could
possibly
happen,
but
I
think
most
of
them
stared
pretty
clear
away
from
that
immediately
and
then
there
was
a
lot
of
arguing
about
like
well
who
who's
holding
on
to
they
kept
like
questioning
joe,
how
how
much
each
you
know,
percent
of
relief.
Do
you
have
out
there
and
then
he
threw
it
back
at
coin
desk,
and
so
there
was
a
there
was
a
lot
that
wasn't
exactly
you
know
like
talked
about
regarding
just
the
merge,
but
maybe
the
things
like
adjacent
to
it.
C
Yeah,
it's
funny.
You
should
mention
that
you
know
I
I
we
were.
I
was
just
on
the
project
governance
board
call
for
baseline
and
for
for
ea
community
projects
and
we're
we
resolve
to
there's
a
really
good
member.
C
I
don't
want
to
help
them
right
now,
but
there's
a
really
good
member,
not
myself,
who,
from
a
really
big
company,
very
good
listener,
who
is
going
to
take
up
the
action
of
working
on
better
governance
rules
for
all
of
the
ea
community
projects
and
actually
for
oasis,
and
I
think
it
might
be
a
landmark
piece
of
work
for
standards
bodies
in
general
in
the
age
of
tokens
right.
You
know
what,
for
example,
as
a
co-chair
should
I
have
to
disclose
my
token
holdings.
C
If
I
have
any,
should
I
not
have
any,
should
I
not
have
any,
at
least
in
anything
that
is
being
that
is
contending
inside
the
project
you
know,
but
other
things
like
you
know,
how
do
you
should
you
know,
is
shilling
allowed
in
a
shilling
not
destructive,
showing
that
is,
you
know,
saying
hey.
My
thing
is
better
than
your
thing
or
you
shouldn't
do
your
thing,
because
I've
done
my
thing.
C
You
know
that
sort
of
thing
you
know
standards,
bodies
for
time
in
memoriam
have
been
populated
by
companies
that
want
to
associate
their
name
with
the
standard.
That's
not
a
problem,
but
how
you
make
how
you
conduct
yourself
in
that
manner.
So
we
see
this
in
the
token
space
all
over
and
certainly
in
a
conference
like
coinbase,
I
mean
this
is
nothing
new.
I
mean
2015.,
those
kinds
of
conversations
were
happening
and
a
lot
of
contentiousness.
C
Oh
you
you're,
just
you
know
you're
holding
this
and
that's
why
you're
saying
that
nobody
could
tell
who
who
really
believed
what
they
were
saying
and
who
was
just
holding
tokens.
It's
a
problem.
D
Not
just
just
do
what
you
do
in
a
in
a
permissionless
system,
assume
100
adversarial
environment.
That's
that's
the
only
way
to
go
otherwise.
You're
you're,
you're,
you're,
you're,
building
layers
and
layers
of
governance
processes
that
are
trying
to
to
to
keep
out
things
where,
if
you
just
assume
everybody's
holding,
everybody
is
shilling
and
it's
a
part.
It's
an
incumbent
on
every
participant
to
to
you
know
decide
for
themselves
is
what
they
hear
is
is
is
to
be,
is
to
be
trusted
or.
C
Isn't
that
the
the
sad
irony
of
of
this
idealism
that
we
have
around
trying
to
create
this
trustless
permissionless
system?
Is
that
we're
trying
to
build
a
world
where
we
don't
have
to
trust
each
other
and
in
order
to
make
it
work?
Apparently,
according
to
that
thesis
andreas?
And
I
wouldn't
disagree
with
you-
you
have
to
not
trust
each
other,
so.
D
D
A
basic
that's,
a
basic
premise
of
of
of
a
permissionless
blockchain.
It's
like
it's
100
must
assume
it's
100
adversarial,
and
that's
why
you
have
you?
Have
you
know?
That's
why
you
have
economic
security
guarantees
because
everybody
is
is
trying
to
optimize
their
utility
function.
If,
if
you
have
something
at
stake
at
all
times,
or
you
put
something
in
that
that
you're
about
to
lose,
if
you
behave
badly,
then
everything
works.
B
That's
true,
actually
I'm
I'm
reminded
on
the
sage
quote
from
adam
smith,
where
it
said
it's
not
from
the
benevolence
of
the
butcher,
the
brewer
or
the
baker
that
we
expect
our
dinner,
but
from
their
regard
to
their
own
interest.
So
we
either
want
to
make
it
better
or
we
want
to
not
hurt
people.
C
Well,
you
you,
we
can
get
into
nash
equilibria
from
here
right
I
mean
it's,
it's
not
about
self-interest,
it's
about
enlightened
self-interest
and
it's
about
establishing
an
illegal,
an
equilibrium.
I
think
that
would
be
the
more
and
that
that
may
be
the
way
through
intellectually,
for
on
this
conversation,
andreas,
wouldn't
you
agree
that
it
isn't.
You
know,
trust,
no
one.
It
is
trust
everyone
to
work
in
their
interest
and
then
try
to
find
an
equilibrium
between
those
things
well
and.
B
C
D
D
D
If
they
abandon
the
game,
that's
fine,
if
you,
if
they
try
to
change
the
rules
unilaterally,
because
they
think
they
have
the
power
to
do
so
and
do
so.
That's
when
you
to
john's
point:
that's
when
you
get
bloodshed.
C
And,
and
that
might
be
I'll
I'll,
encourage
the
person
doing
the
work
on
this
to
to
watch
this
tape.
I
think,
or
this
the
session
I
think
that's
maybe
foundational
to
the
idea
of
rule
setting
in
a
standards
body
that
is
dealing
with
tokens
is,
is
exactly
that
that
you
you,
if
you
you
know
one
of
the
no
no's
is
trying
to
set.
C
You
know,
change
the
rules
unilaterally,
like
like
yeah
like
like
having
too
much
power
in
in
in
the
repo
to
merge
right,
and
you
know
like
being
able
to
have
just
you
know
your
your
cohort
of
token
holders.
C
You
know
decide
on
a
on
a
merge
change,
because
there's
three,
you
know
you
have
three
three
maintainers
and
that
those
three
maintainers
all
happen
to
be
your
guys.
B
Anyway,
back
to
consensus-
and
you
said
there
was
a
lot
of
kind
of
some-
you
know
tension
in
the
air
as
far
as
the
the
merge.
B
E
B
C
D
Because
you
can
change
beacon
chain
uses
casper
ffg,
so
that
that
that
works
really
well
and
and
has
been
proven
now
to
work
really
well
in
in
in
production.
The
big
thing
is
is
is
is
taking
out
is:
is
modularizing
the
client
right?
Basically,
what
you
have
in
the
ethereum
client
or
two
things
that
not
necessarily
have
anything
to
do
with
one
another
or
really
three
things
number
one
is
your
mempool
of
the
transaction
number
two?
Is
your
state
execution
engine
and
number
three?
D
Is
your
consensus
engine
so
what
the
merge
does
it
rips
out
the
consensus
engine
entirely
and
and
replaces
which
is
proof
of
work
and
replaces
that,
with
a
with
a
with
a
consensus
module
that
that
is,
is
running
on
a
different
client?
So
you
have
an
execution
client
and
you
have
a
consensus,
client.
The
execution
client
dumps
the
the
results
to
the
to
the
to
the
consensus
client.
The
consensus
client
tries
to
get
consensus
on
that
on
that
on
that
sucker
right.
B
D
You
have
eventual
consistency
which
actually
has
a
significant
advantage,
namely
if,
if
the
longest
chain
gets
attacked,
you
can
always
switch
over
to
another
chain
and
go
on.
If
you
have
strong
consistency,
that's
not
possible
you're,
you're,
screwed,
basically
and
bryce.
Could
you.
C
Give
us
a
quick
primer
on
the
different
there's,
a
subtle
difference
between
that
and
say
what
the
avalanche
protocol
proposes.
Right.
You
know,
gunsir
was
on
the
zero
knowledge
podcast
a
few
weeks
ago.
He
was
talking
about
how
you
know.
Even
our
probabilistic
system,
with
ethereum,
for
example,
is
still
trying
to
get
to
absolute.
C
You
know
a
statement
of
of
absolute
consistency,
whereas
avalanche.
I
think,
if
I
understand
it
correctly,
is
kind
of
okay
with
limiting
two
zero
for
forever
right,
so
they
don't
have
the
forking
problem,
but
they
they
kind
of
take
advantage
of
infinite
forking
or
something
right.
Like
the
you
know,
you
you
tell
five
friends
and
they
tell
five
friends
and
and-
and
you.
B
D
Yes,
you're
getting
local
consistency
and
then
you're
you're.
That's
why
it's
called
avalanche
right,
so
you're
starting!
It's
like
it's
like
it's
like
you're,
you're
you're.
You
have
different
different
cells
of
consistency
and
they
compete
with
one
another
and
the
one
that
gets
that
gets
to
the
to
the
to
the
quorum
fastest
is
the
is
the
is
the
is
the
winner
so
who
can?
Who
can
convince
enough
of
their
friends
to
to
agree
on
what
they're
saying?
D
And
if
you
have
a
sufficient
number
of
them
from
the
from
your
from
your
group
from
the
overall
group
from
from
other
groups,
then
you
won
right.
So
it's
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
race,
so
you
have
the.
Basically
it
just
says
that
whoever
wins
wins
and
that's
the
that's
the
end
of
the
the
story.
Right,
that's
the
that's
the
that's
the
that's!
A
basic,
not
gonna,
go
into
into
any
any
any
subtleties,
but
that's
a
basic
basic
assumption.
Again
there
is.
D
D
D
C
C
Consensus,
the
the
the
the
topic
of
consensus.
D
So
everybody
gets
their
panties
in
a
bunch.
It's
it's
primarily
making
sure
that
the
that
the
that
the
that's
an
old
british
saying
I
apologize
if
I'm,
if
I'm
offending
anyone,
but
I.
D
Thin
knickers
chinese,
they
have
variants
the
the
because
there's
there's
obviously
there's
a
risk
that
you.
If
this
falls
over,
it's
not
it's
it
will
it
will.
It
will
be
you
know
it's
like
ethereum
is
going
to
go,
you
know
sideways
or
that's
the
fear
and
there's
a
lot
of
money
tied
into
that
going
going
going
sideways
so
or
you
know
if
it
goes
sideways,
so
everybody
is
nervous.
My
answer
to
that
is,
it's
like
it's
like.
D
Nothing
has
gone
wrong
yet
from
rollout
to
anything
it
that
it's
like
it's
like
deliberateness
has
proven
out
to
be
right
and
I'm
pretty
sure
that
they
will
go
in
august
or
september,
and
then
it's
that
it's
it's
it's
it's
gonna,
it's
gonna
be
good.
It's
not
gonna,
improve,
scaling
or
or
or
anything
like
like
like
like
that,
but.
D
What's
going
to
come
with
sharding,
which
is
going
to
happen
next
year,
so
the
scale?
What
is
scaling?
You're,
half
scaling,
you
use
you
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
do
if
you
want
to
do
a
web
3
game,
you
know
build
on
optimism
or
arbitrarily
or
any
of
the
other
optimistic
roll
up
that
have
high
throughput
yeah.
C
Because
I
want
I
want
to
spend
two
weeks
getting
my
you
know
getting
my
stuff
out
of
there
yeah
that's
well,
but
I
mean.
C
D
Hear
you
john
the
point:
that's
why
I'm
saying,
if
you're
playing
what
three
games
right,
you're
not
concerned
about
opportunity,
cost
of
your
liquidity
right,
if
you're
concerned
about
that,
then
use
zk
roll
ups
right
for
for
the
for
the
stuff,
because,
because
you
have
you
have
you
know
you
have
immediate
data
availability,
so
you
can
exit
right
right
away.
You
don't
have
to
wait.
So
it's
like
again
coming
back
to
what
I
said
before:
choose
your
solution.
Based
on
your
use
case.
Don't
do
you
know
web3
games
on
zk
roll
ups?
D
C
Just
gonna
build
my
web3
game
on
and
cloud
and
then
call
it
web
3.
is
sonal
did.
Did
you
guys
at
consensus?
Did
you
run
it
across
any
sessions
on
zk
and
and
security.
A
Yeah,
so
one
of
the
major
ones
that
had
their
knowledge
in
the
title
that
we
attended
just
to
try
and
get
as
much
zero
knowledge
exposure
as
we
could
there.
We,
the
title
itself,
sounded
exactly
like
baseline,
it's
not
like
they're
explaining
baseline,
but
it
was
called
how
zero
knowledge
proofs
change
the
narrative
around
privacy
and
bridge
the
gap
between
blockchain
and
enterprise.
A
It
was
not
baseline,
unfortunately,
but
it
wasn't
actually
even
super
related
to
zero
knowledge
in
the
way
that
we're
focusing
on
it
in
our
research
and
development.
But
it
was
done
by
the
co-founder
of
horizon
and
keith
I'll.
Let
you
actually
cover
what
it
was
around.
B
A
B
Except
you
know,
baseline
is
better
and
far
more
unique
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
Okay
go
ahead
and
far
more
composable
than
just
a
zero
knowledge.
Standalone
I
mean
horizon
is
pretty
cool.
I
think
it's
especially
for
me
because
every
time
I'm
going
up
to
the
booth,
I
went
up
to
the
verizon
booth.
I'm
asking
them
like.
You
know
how
what
how
does
this?
What
does
it
do
for
me
as
a
developer?
B
What's
the
connection
and
it
you
know
it
offers
all
these
kind
of
in-class
tools
for
developers
like
myself,
you
can
build
out.
You
know,
custom
private
public
blockchains.
They
offer
basically
all
these
tools
to
build
out
these
chains.
You
know
with
some
kind
of
zkps
factor
to
them
and
whatnot
I
didn't
get
re.
B
I
wasn't
able
to
like
dive
into
the
tools
yet
on
their
site,
but
that's
the
thing
I
want
to
do
in
the
next
week,
but
I
don't
know
they're
just
trying
to
a
lot
of
the
same
ways
that
we
try
to
lower
that
barrier
of
entry
into.
You
know
baseline
protocol
ideas
and
whatnot
they're
doing
the
same
with
dkps,
and
you
know
enabling
developer
communities
at
least
that's
the
part
that
I
know
about.
There
may
be
other
stuff
that
other
people
got,
but
I'm
always
just
like
what
is
it?
What.
E
You
know
my
chain
over
here
in
my
enterprise
to
communicate
with
another
one
fence,
some
of
the
private
data
on
on
my
own
blockchain,
with
with
zkp's
and
then
interact
with
with
some
other
ones,
and
he
he
talked
a
lot
about
how
scaling
could
go
on
with
those
different
blockchains
and
and
the
enterprises
that
are
using
them,
but
there's
still
a
little
bit
of
a
way
to
go
and
a
lot
of
people
have
to
be
convinced
to
use
different
layer
ones
or
whether
they
want
to
use
layer
zeros
as
a
piping
between
the
different
block
chains.
E
That
was
that
was
a
big
theme
at
the
conference.
We
went
to
another
talk
that
had
the
co-founder
of
polygon
and
a
couple
other
people
who
were
talking
about.
If
it's
going
to
be
a
multi-chain
world
or
not,
the
polygon
co-founder
was
convinced
it
would
just
be
ethereum
and
then
the
other
two
thought
that
there
would
be
like
hundreds
of
thousands
of
chains.
So
there
there's
a
big
debate
going
on
about
what
what
that
ecosystem
is
going
to
look
like
in
the
course.
C
There's
a
question
there
right
is:
are
you
talking
about
is?
Is
everything
going
to
have
an
eevee,
an
ethereum
descendant,
evm
versus
a
single
state
machine
right
there
could
be
like,
like
polygon
and
ethereum,
are
different
state
machines
that
both
use
the
evm.
C
So
if
they're,
if
that's
that
seems
more,
you
know
plausible,
I
mean
you
know,
you
could
see
a
world
where
the
evm
ethereum
evm
standard
becomes
the
dominant
strain,
but
less
obvious
that
you
would
have
a
single
state
machine
running.
Everything
right
is
that
what
yeah.
E
They
were
talking
about
the
evm2
and
they
were
saying
that
the
evm
is
a
little
bit
of
a
headache
and
they
think
that
you
know
it
could
get
moved
away
from
in
the
future.
But
of
course
he
he
backpedaled
a
little
bit
and
thinks
it
would
be
a
much
longer
process
to
back
pedal
away
from
the
evm,
because
it
is
so
ubiquitous
right
now
in
development,
and
so
many
different
people
use
it.
D
C
D
Well,
I
mean
yeah,
it's
it's
not
something
that
that
is
going
to
happen
like
in
in
the
span
of
three
or
even
five
years
right.
It's
it's
it.
In
fact,
evm
is
becoming
more
ubiquitous
right.
You
have
zk
roll
ups
that
were
becoming
now
evm,
compatible
or
or
evm
even
evm,
equivalent,
because
the
developers
who
are
building
the
applications
for
the
end
consumer
are
just
used
to
writing
the
stuff
in
solidity
and
they
don't
care
if
it's.
D
If
it's
you
know
if,
if
the
underlying
state
machine
is
not,
is
not
that
that
great
it's
like
the
same,
it's
like
the
same
thing,
the
same
thing
that
we've.
C
Had
there
is
a
question,
though
I
mean
just
take
that
analogy.
A
little
further
you
know,
unix
was
was
always
better
and
and
in
it
it
did
not
go
away
it
would
you
know
it
wasn't
like
windows
made
unix
not
happen,
I
mean
you
know.
Anybody
with
a
mac
is
running
unix
and
unix.
Of
course,
on
the
server
side
is,
you
know,
almost
ubiquitous,
so
you
can
kind
of
co-exist
there.
The
question
so
that
that
would
be
an
interesting
question
is,
are?
C
D
Well,
there
are
developments
going
on
where,
where
you
have
we
are,
we
are
running
different
type
of
state
machines
on
the
same
using
the
same
consensus
engine
right,
so
you
can
have
like
whatever,
like
dam
all
and
evm
and
and
you're
you're
you're
still
using
you
know
different.
You
know
the
same.
The
same
consensus,
slash
replication
mechanism
for
the
for
the
for
the
outputs
which
you
could,
if
as
long
as
you
ensure
is
that
they
is,
is
that
the
the
bytecode
output
is
the
same
right.
D
So
it's
it's
a
it's
a
question
of
of
of
compilers
and
and
and
agreeing
on
a
on
a
on
a
on
the
on
the
mechanism
at
the
at
the
byte
code
at
the
at
the
at
the
stack
level
right,
so
that
that's.
That
is,
if
you,
if
you
want
to,
if
you
want
to
go
down
at
one
point,
you
need
to
agree
on
the
byte
codes
and
what
they
mean
and
then
you're
you're
you're
good
to
go
right.
So
it's
like
you
can
have
multiple
funnels
going
into
that.
C
Did
you
guys
find
any
sessions
with
our
buddies
over
at
ey?
Did
they
show
off
ops,
chain
or
nightfall,
or
anything
like
that?.
A
I
heard
at
least
12
000,
I
heard
up
to
20
000.
The
city
was
just
flooded
with
everyone's
consensus:
badges
billboards
everywhere
advertising
everywhere.
It
was
the
thing
even
just
on
like
the
outskirt
streets
of
bars
and
restaurants.
They
were
all
consensus
themed
and
it
was
really
cool.
C
That
is
really
really
good
to
hear.
I
I
I
don't
mind
saying
earlier
this
year
I
mean
not
even
five
months
ago,
I
was
asking
around
to
say:
should
we,
you
know,
should
andreas
and
I
go
for
the
tree
trunk
thing
and
and
the
the
general
consensus
was
nah
it's
going
to
be
dead.
C
I
think
that
was
not
because
consensus
is
not
a
good
event,
but
because
we
were
still
waking
up
from
covid
and
it
was
moving
down,
and
the
general
word
on
the
street
was
that
people
weren't
going
and
I
think
it
must
have
just
flipped
in
the
last.
You
know
because
suddenly,
like
about
a
month
ago,
people
were
like.
Are
you.
C
You're
going
everybody's
like
going
so
interesting.
A
Yeah
I
was
so
well
organized
like
just
very
high
tech
everything
about
the
conference.
It
was
so
big.
It
was
at
the
austin
convention
center,
which
is
just
like
a
huge,
huge
ballrooms,
and
such
there
was
like
a
product
showcase
in
the
center
with
booths
everywhere.
But
everything
was
just
well
organized.
You
could
hear
well.
If
you
went
to
a
speaker,
you
could
see
well
and
also
just
so
many
companies
were
involved.
I
think
across
austin,
from
like
the
tech
and
business
space
as
well.
A
There
was
a
meetup
at
the
google
office
and
stuff
like
that.
Everyone
you
met
was
from
all
over
the
world,
so
it
really
brought
a
ton
of
people
into
town
which
was
cool
and
they
said
next
year.
They
will
keep
it
in
austin,
but
move
it
to
april
because
it
was
over
a
hundred
degrees,
maybe
like
100,
to
108
degrees
every
day.
So
people
were
shocked
if
they
were
not
from
the
area,
so
they're
going
to
move
it
to
earlier
in
the
year.
But
I
would
say
it
was
a
really
good
success.
C
True
story:
when
I,
when
I
worked
in
austin
at
ibm,
we
gave
our
intern
from
china
pneumonia
because
it
was
220
in
the
shade
during
the
summer
and
we
kept
the
lab
at
like
55
degrees,
constant
and
the
the
temperature
differential.
She
got
pneumonia
from
dealing
with.
D
B
Yes,
we
did.
Let
me
listen
to
a
whole
talk,
not
just
specifically
bridges,
but
it
was
the
whole
I
think
mark
talked
about
earlier.
Who
was
it?
It
was?
It
was
sandeep
and
moonbeam.
B
D
So
that
is
a
very
interesting
question,
because
the
same
thing
to
do
would
not
to
have
bridges
between
l1
chains,
because
that
because
because
you
know,
let's
imagine
you
bridge
your
bitcoin-
that's
actually
a
bad
example.
Let's
say
you
bridge
solana
right
to
polygon
and
then
you
bridge
it
to
ethereum,
and
then
you
bridge
it
to
avalanche
right
off.
D
D
It's
like
it's
like:
it's
like
it's
like
a
bank
going
down
right,
you
get
a
bank
run
right,
it's
like,
and
it's
now
other
banks
are
impacted
too,
because
you're
gonna
run
on
on
on
bank
one
to
get
to
bank
two
to
get
to
bank
three
to
get
the
origin
bank
right
so
that
that's
that
that's
the
that's
the
fundamental
challenge
of
l1
bridges,
now:
bridges
between
l2
that
are
sitting
on
the
same
l1.
That
makes
total
sense
right
because,
because
both
l2s
inherit
the
same
security
guarantees
from
from
the
l1
right.
D
So
so
so
you
can't
you
know
unless
that
l1
gets
compromised,
you
know
whatever
happens
on
the
l2
is
safe
right
it
just
it
just
it's
just
you
might
not
have
access
to
your
asset
for
for
for
for
a
while,
if
you
use
optimistic
roll-ups,
but
but
that's
a
a
fundamentally
secure
approach
now
the
question
is:
is:
is
people
are
not
net,
don't
necessarily
behave.
D
So
it's
it's
a
it's.
It
comes
back
to
my
to
my
old
saying:
it's
a
trade-off
right
and-
and
you
know
it's
like
people
can
apparently
live
with
live
with,
with
with
bridge
hacks
and
so
forth,
so
that
that
needs
to
you
know
that
requires
standardization.
D
That
requires
like
people
to
to
to
agree
on
on
security
standards
and
all
of
that
so
there's
stuff
going
on
within
the
ea.
There's
the
you
know
with
the
with
the
crosstrain
interop
working
group.
There's
you
know
the
the
l2
working
group
in
the
ea
communities
projects
is
also
has
is
also
looking
into
that
to
to
standardize
the
the
interop
interfaces.
D
B
D
Exactly
it's
it's,
but
it's
it's
it's!
It's
secured
it's
economically
secure,
right
and,
and
that's
that
that's
a
that's
the
whole
point
that
strong
security
guarantees
and
as
long
as
you
anchor
on
that
you're
good
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
fast.
The
point
is
in
fact
the
slower.
It
is
the
more
secure.
D
That's
why
bitcoin
is
so
is
so
it's
so
great
and
you're
willing
to
pay
pay
so
much
money
for
it
because
it
is
so
secure
and
because
why
is
because
it's
slow,
so
everybody's
willing
to
pay
premium
to
get
a
in
front
of
the
line?
Which
means
that
increases
your
your,
your,
your
your
take
out,
which
increases
the
security,
because
you're
willing
to
pay
more
equipment
to
to
increase
the
hash
power
to
increase
the
security.
D
F
How
do
we
see
the
merge,
impacting
throughput
architecture,
the
economics
of
the
settlements
and
the
things
that
are
coinciding,
that
we
need
to
be
considering
with
what
little
information
that
we
know
like?
How
are
you?
How
do
you
see
this
impacting
what
we've
done
so
far
and
you
know,
are
there
any
pivots
that
are
going
to
be
required?
Moving
forward
post
this.
D
C
Also,
anybody
that's
worried
about
crashes
and
crypto
from
a
baseline
perspective.
That's
just
a
a
reduction
in
a
in
a
distraction
right,
the
distraction.
Being
you
know,
people
thinking
that
blockchains
are
about
cryptocurrency.
You
know.
Obviously
you
need
cryptocurrency
to
to
because
you
need
some
way
of
paying
for
the
transaction
processing,
but
speculating
on
coin
go
up
is
not
useful
for
baselining
right.
You
know
in
fact
the
less
speculation
the
better,
because
then
the
the
you
know,
the
pricing
of
the
of
the
transaction
processing
is
sane
and
not
stupid.
Right.
F
C
Yeah
I
mean
I
was
on
a
yeah
on
twitter
earlier
this
week,
and
somebody
said
you
know
somebody
was
like
web3dude,
because
web3
will
release
us
from
the
overpricing
of
clouds.
Clouds
are
owning
your
life
man
and
I'm
like
over
pricing
from
cloud.
So
you
want
to
move
all
of
your
compute
to
a
blockchain,
because
that
will
reduce
your
pricing.
C
Volatility
and
marginal
cost
versus
fixed
cost
right,
and
you
know
the
idea
you
know
cloud
I
mean
cloud
was
a
stupid
branding
of
what
I
would
call
server
farms
running
kubernetes.
You
know,
but
you
know,
but
it's
it
clouds
or
you
know
server
farms.
C
Modern
server
farms
are
useful
because
they
spread
load
and
reduce
costs.
You
know
basically
reduce
the
amount
of
unused
cycles.
The
computers
are
running.
You
know
I
get
why,
while
I'm
not
running
hardcore
hard
or
pro
you
know,
charles
your
system
might
be
so
and
vms
made
that
all
work.
C
So,
if
you
do
not,
you
know,
I'm
pretty
sure,
that's
still
a
useful
thing
and
I
still
think
that's
probably
the
least
expensive
way
you
get
to
run
really
heavy
loads
at
internet
scale
and
you're
not
going
to
run
those
loads
on
any
kind
of
blockchain
ever
ever
right.
So.
F
Right
right-
and
I
think
that
that's
you
know-
hopefully
what
we
can
do
here
is
the
group
with
office
hours
in
the
show
is,
you
know,
I
think
it's
important
to
address
these
concerns
that
are
probably
toying
with
people's
decisions
as
to
whether
or
not
or
how
standards
like
baselining
would
fit
into
their
architecture
and
their
strategies
moving
forward.
Like
there's
a
lot
of
noise
out
there,
john,
I
mean
like
sometimes
it's
hard
for
us
to
separate.
What's
fact
versus
fiction.
C
I
hundred
percent
believe
that
the
whether
it's
called
baselining
in
the
end,
10
years
out,
maybe
20.,
just
kind
of
like
http
it
just
bubbles
up.
It
becomes
a
it's
sort
of
this
osmotic
thing,
you're
not
going
to
get
like
the
c-level
executives
at
disney
saying
we
must
baseline
right.
That's
not
what
you
do,
they're,
not
even
going
to
know.
In
fact,
cio
might
not
even
know
it's
going
to
be
a
pretty
low
level
design
pattern.
That
just
says
yeah,
so
you
know
yeah.
C
We
need
to
anchor
some
sometimes
between
between
platforms
and
it's
going
to
be
as
simple
as
that.
It's
going
to
it's
going
to
dominate
with
no
fanfare.
There's
there
won't
be
a
headline
yeah.
It's
not
like
time's
going
to
make
baseline
the
the
person
of
the
year.
You
know
it's
not
the
way
this
works.
F
You
know
the
there
probably
was
a
lot
of
angst
around
the
forecast
ability
around
the
merge
and,
what's
that's
really
truly
going
to
do
to
having
a
more
fixed
fee
structure?
Did
you
guys
capture
any
real
sentiment
from
anybody
that
had
valid
credentials
to
really
provide
some
assurances
to
that?
For
you
know
what
the
purpose
is
going
to
be
for
the
ethereum
network
moving
forward
under
a
proof
of
of
of
stake
and
a
proof
of
work
model,
because
you
can't
just
go
all
in
on
one
and
not
the
other
like
how
do
we?
F
How
do
we
keep
the
speculative
market
on
the
the
the
currency
and
still
have
the
infrastructure
operating
model
without
it
being
too
closely
tied
to
a
certain
percentile
of
the
the
operating
model?
I've
heard
conversations
from
folks,
even
at
consensus,
talking
about
this
where
they're
saying
hey
it
could
be
about.
You
know
a
10
to
20
of
whatever
eath
is
trading
at
well.
If
eath
is
trading
at
20
000
a
token,
that's
still
rather
expensive,.
C
I
always
liked
ethereum
even
from
the
beginning,
because
it
did
a
job
right.
It
wasn't.
You
know
a
one-trick
pony
that
that
was
only
for
speculating
on
whether
this
thing
went
up
or
down
right,
which
is
just
a
the
ultimate
expression
of
what's
happened
in
c
in
in
centralized
finance
right
I
mean
yeah.
How
many
show
me
a
company
whose
stock
is
actually
well
tied
to
their
fundamental
analysis?
C
You
know
it's
it's
it's
all.
It's
all
just
guessing
games
now!
So
that's
fine!
That's
where
we've
we!
You
know.
Idiocracy
has
arrived
several
centuries
earlier
than
the
movie
predicted,
and
here
we
are,
but
I
think
that
I
always.
I
still
liked
theory
always
liked
ethereum
better
than
the
alternatives,
because
it
did
a
job
and
you
could
pay
for
it.
You
could
pay
for
that
job.
C
Clearly,
the
price
is
reflecting
a
lot
more
than
just
the
utility
of
that
job
right
now,
but
I
I
assume,
that's
not
financial
advice.
I
don't
know
about
this
stuff,
don't
don't
ever
take
my
and
you
know
if
you
want
to
know
how
to
lose
money
to
find
out
what
I'm
investing
in.
That's
a
pretty
good.
D
Yeah,
but
so
I
think
the
the
so
the
the
beauty
of
it
right
is
that
the
the
the
there's
there's
so
much
you
know
so
many
intelligent
people
investing
and
or
not
investing
their
time
and
effort
to
to
to
innovate
and
and
create
new
things
and
trying
out
new
things.
That
will
you
know
eventually
we'll
we
will.
We
will
find
what
the
what
the
what
the
right
way
is
forward
and
the
right
way
forward
might
be
the
wrong
way
long
term,
but
it's
the
right
way,
short
term
right.
So.
C
It's
like
speaking
of
innovations,
andreas.
What?
What
is
your?
What
can
you
tell
folks
about
your
experience
recently
and
doing
off
chain
zero
knowledge,
recursive,
zero
knowledge
I
mean,
like
you've,
been
doing
some
pretty
industrial
strength,
zero
knowledge,
implementation
work
and
without
going
into
any
of
the
details
about
the
the
actual
project.
C
What
can
you
tell
us
about
what
you've
learned?
What
what?
What
surprised
you
in
trying
to
actually
implement
multi?
You
know
recursive,
zero
knowledge
proofs
off
chain
on
on
aws.
D
So
so
what
surprised
me
was
the
or
what
was
the
was,
the
the
the
the
size
of
the
data
that
is
required
to
carry
along?
D
If
you,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
reduce
like
if
you,
if
you
want
to
reduce
the
time
it
takes
to
to
generate
a
proof
right,
because
recursive
proof
means
that
you,
you
carry
basically
all
the
other
proofs
with
you
and
all
the
all
the
circuits
that
you
have
all
the
all
the
all
the
polynomial
representations
that
that
came
before
it
right
you
carry
along
with
it
and
you're,
adding
you're,
adding
new
stuff
to
it.
D
Every
single
time
and
then
you're
talking
with
the
type
of
prover
system
that
is,
is
currently
predominant,
is
you're
you're
you're,
generating
a
lot
of
data,
so
we're
talking
about
gigabytes
and
the
more
recursive
steps,
you're,
adding
you're,
adding
like
almost
you
know,
on
on
the
order
of
a
few
hundred
megabytes.
Every
single
time
you
know,
depending
on
the
prover
system,
can
be
a
little
bit
more.
It
can
be
a
little
less,
but
it's
it's!
It's
not
insignificant.
D
So
if
you
want
to
do
this
at
industrial
scale
right,
you
have
a
you,
you
have
a
problem
of
not
necessarily
being
able
to
do
it
in
parallel,
because
we're
really
good
at
that,
but
is,
is
to
provisioning
the
data
that
you
keep
around
for
for
storing
for
people
storing
it
well,
the
storage
cost
is
like
relatively
not
the
not
the
biggest
cost
driver.
Well,.
C
D
D
Yeah
I
mean,
but
it's
like
it's
like
it's
like.
If
you're,
if
you're
you
know,
until
you're
hitting
petabytes,
it's
not
really
you're
you're,
not
really
really
getting
into
into
significantly
meaningful
numbers,
but
you're
getting
into
significantly
meaningful
numbers
much
earlier.
If
you're
trying
to
provision
a
lot
of
data
in
a
very
short
period
of
time,
because
then
you
are
really
asking
networks
to
push
a
lot
of
data
through
very,
very
fast,
so
then
you're,
basically
becoming
the
equivalent
of
netflix
for
for.
C
D
Right,
so
if
you,
if
you
look
at
so
so
so
we
need
to
remember
that
that
that
they've,
that
this
field
of
of
of
zero
knowledge,
proofs
that
carry
significant
business
logic
right
that
that
allow
to
implement
business
logic
is
new,
is
relatively
new.
It's
just
a
few
years
old
right.
I
mean
I
remember
very
well
when,
when
andrew
andrew
andrew
miller
and
his
phd
students
created
hawk,
that
was
in
2015
using
using
using
zk
snark,
they
wrote
lip
snark
right.
C
D
This
is
different
right
yeah.
So
what
you're,
seeing
right
as
the
as
the
as
the
science
is
evolving?
The
science
is
evolving
rapidly,
so
you
went
from
you
know
nothing
much
when
they're
innovative
and
for
about
four
years
and
then
in
2019
you
saw
an
explosion
that
has
continued
in
in
innovation
around
zero
knowledge
proof
systems.
D
I
and
the
the
key
thing
is
that
that
that
that
that
this
is
done
on
a
map.
So
the
interesting
thing
is
that
this
is
done
on
a
math
basis.
That
is
then
translated
into
code,
it's
not
as
if
you're
you're,
you're
you're
witnessing
moore's
law
in
action
in
in
mathematics,
which
is
which
is
kind
of
like
in
interesting.
Why?
D
Right
so
it's
like
it's
a
big
difference,
if
you,
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
you
know
only
if
you,
if
you
can
do
recursive
recursive
proofs
in
it
in
on
the
order
of
a
few
hundred
milliseconds
versus
tens
of
seconds
and
the
the
amount
of
data
required
goes
down
from
gigabytes
to
to
to
a
few
megabytes.
C
I'd
say
my
brain
would
have
to
spend
so
much
less
time
cleansing
itself
every
night
from
just
the
ravages
of.
If
the
world's
websites
had
you
know,
were
trending
towards,
I
company
x,
a
zk
company
rather
than
a
blockchain
powered
company.
I
mean
I'm
so
sick,
like
oh,
it's
blockchain
powered.
No,
it's
powered,
I
mean,
I
know
a
bunch
of
projects
where
it's
powered
by
and
they're
dropping
hashes
on
a
blockchain,
a
private
one
at
that
right
and
I'm
like
well.
C
You're,
just
marketing
dummies,
you
know
I
I
when,
when,
when
is
zero
knowledge,
gonna
be
the
marketing
buzzword?
That
would
be
more
sane
to
me,
I
think,
than
where
we
are
right
now.
D
F
Yeah
very
greedy,
to
quote
a
famous
saying
in
the
news
right
now:
there
is
no
there
there
right
it's
hard
to
see
it
actually
working
right
like
so.
It's
like
believe
me,
trust
me.
It's
working!
So
it's
going
to
take
time
undressing!
I
completely
agree
for
people
to
actually,
fundamentally,
you
know,
rethink
how
things
can
actually
work
and
fundamentally
trust
that
things
are
working
in
a
you
know,
a
permissionless
and
trustless
way
when
warranted,
but
yet
be
permissioned
and
trusted
when
it
needs
to
be
well.
D
Look
at
this
way
like
people,
don't
understand
public
key
cryptography
but
they're
using
it
every
single
day,
yeah
right.
They
don't
even
know
that
they're
using
it
right,
it's
like
it's
like,
but
they're,
using
it
right,
you're,
you're
you're,
if
you're,
if
you're
digital
certificates-
that's
it
that's,
probably
key
cryptography
yeah.
D
So
it's
it's
it's
it's
that!
That's
that's!
That's
it!
So
if
you
are,
if
we
get
to
the
point
where
it
is,
it
is
employed
by
trusted
organizations
that
are
handing
it
to
the
that
are
exposing
the
benefits
of
it
to
to
to
the
end
consumer.
The
end
consumer
doesn't
care
the
end.
Consumer
doesn't
care,
it
doesn't
even
doesn't
understand
the
internet
right,
but
it's
it's.
It's
provided
by
trusted
organizations,
your
isp,
your
your
your!
You
know,
google!
You
know
it's
like
a
t
right.
D
Those
are
trust
anchors
and
therefore
people
are
using
the
internet
if
it
were,
if
you
didn't
know
who
your
isp
was
and
you
just
paid
them,
you
were
like
that's
kind
of
like
weird,
so
it's
it's
it's.
We
need
the
same
thing.
It
goes
for
the
internet.
It
goes
with
blockchains
and
goes
goes
with.
Their
knowledge.
Proof
goes
with
all
innovations
that
are
fundamentally
shifting
perspectives
and
and
and
approaches
they
need
to
be
anchored
and
and
utilized
by
by
institutions
that
that
people
trust
otherwise
it's
it's.
Otherwise
they
will
all
question.
D
What
is
what
is
what
is
going
on,
so
you
need
to
get
you
need
to
get
create
the
trust
and
the
trust
anchors,
and
then
the
broader
public
will
adopt,
because
it's
going
to
be
wrapped
into
into
services.
That
are
that
that
these
trust
anchors,
you
know,
provide
to
their
to
their
consumers
that
the
consumers
go.
Oh
wow.
This
is
awesome.
D
This
is
great
right,
it's
like,
if,
if
you
have
someone
providing
basically
a
mouse
over
that
says
whether
this
this
this
image
is
authentic
or
or
has
been
copyrighted
fringe
or
or
something
like
that
right,
then
people
go
like
wow.
This
is
awesome,
but
if,
if
that
someone
is
not
google
or
facebook
or
another
trusted
household
name,
they're
gonna
go
like
really.
B
Yeah
and
another
philosophical
thing
that
you've
got
to
actually
deal
with,
is
you
know
just
the
general?
You
know
human
factor
to
where
it's
like?
How
can
you
prove
something
to
me
without
letting
me
see
it
without
showing
it
to
me?
It's
like.
Well,
you
know
right
now.
I
can't
show
it
to
you
because
of
security
or
because
I
don't
know
you
well
enough
or
because
my
data
privacy
won't.
Let
me
do
it,
but
I
can
give
you
something.
That
is
the
next
thing.
F
To
take
time-
and
I
think
that's
that's-
why
it's
profoundly
important
the
work
that
the
baseline
community
is
doing
to
to
change
the
perceptions
and
to
help
people
figure
out
and
understand
that
there
are
alternate
methods
to
what
is
readily
available
today
and
andres.
As
you
so
well
pointed
out,
the
concepts
of
cryptography
have
been
around
for
a
very
long
time
and
have
been
commercially
viable
for
a
very
long
time
and
people
have
been
using
it
for
quite
some
time.
This
is
taking
that
to
the
next
level,
so
guess
what
back
off
the
ledge?
F
C
D
C
Way
to
a
good
way
to
take
us
out
sonal
do
you
agree.
A
I
do
thank
you
all
for
joining
this
live
studio
audience
and
our
discussions
about
consensus.
It
was
cool
to
flesh
out
some
of
those
topics
we
learned
about,
and
we
will
also
be
doing
some
outreach
to
the
companies
that
we
connected
with
and
pitched
the
protocol
to,
and
with
that
we
will
see
you
all
next
week
on
our
baseline
show.
Thank
you
so
much.