►
From YouTube: The Baseline
Description
The weekly office hours for the Baseline Protocol open source community. Learn more at https://baseline-protocol.org.
A
Hey
everybody:
it's
that
time
against
the
baseline
protocol
show
our
our
office
hours
weekly
for
folks
that
are
involved
in
the
baseline
protocol
development
and
standards
process,
and,
if
all
that
that
I
just
said,
confuses
you
go
to
baseline
protocol.org
and
all
of
your
answers
will
be.
Our
questions
will
be
answered.
In
particular,
click
on
docs.baseline,
dashprotocol.org
and
you'll
you'll
read
all
the
details.
A
So
without
further
ado,
we've
got
a
great
crew.
Today,
consistently
lots
of
numbers
showing
up,
we've
got
and
more
coming.
We
have
folks
that
have
been.
We.
A
Here
we
have
some
core
devs.
We
have
standards
team,
so
lots
of
people
here
to
not
only
answer
questions
but
ask
them
once
again.
You
know
tyler
now
that
tyler
is
a
board.
Maybe
you
and
I
can
work
together
to
be
a
little
give
people
a
little
bit
more
advanced
warning
than
five
minutes
before
they
were
running
the
office
hours.
So
I've
been
terrible
at
promoting
that
stuff,
but
hey
at
least
I'm
showing
up.
This
is
my
55th
consecutive
week
that
I've
not
missed.
I
think
so.
A
Yes,
so
what
great
to
see
everyone,
by
the
way
for
anybody
that
any
of
the
baseline
community
folks,
which
you
can
get
to
by
going
to
baseline
protocol.org
and
clicking
on
that
fancy
slack
button
up
in
the
top
right
corner
and
you
can
get
into
our
well
over
1
000
people,
slack
channel
and
talk
to
a
bunch
of
friendly
faces
and
people
and
that
community
I
mentioned
a
previous
call
recently
if
anybody
in
the
community
wants
to
host
baseline
show
in
their
time
zone,
which
somebody
actually
did
respond
to
said
that
they'd
love
to
set
one
up
in
india
happy
to
help
on
that,
and
also
if
somebody
would
like
to
host
the
show.
A
I
don't
need
to
be
the
one
showing
up
every
single
time.
So
I'd
be
happy
for
other
people
to
host
the
show
and
we
can
figure
that
out
yeah.
So
that
said,
that
that's
not
a
signal
to
say
I
don't
want
to
do
the
show,
I'm
happy
to
do
it
forever,
but
I
also
want
to
share
the
share
the
fun
so
with
with
that
said,
we
have
a
group
here
and
we're
going
to
be
talking.
A
This
may
is,
is
all
about
v1
version
1
of
the
baseline
protocol,
which
we
aim
to
have
out
the
door
in
in
in
a
feature
complete
way,
with
good,
at
least
the
start
to
good
non-functional
requirements
in
the
summer
to
fall
time
frame
so
that
we
can
have
a
promulgated
standard
early
in
the
new
year.
It
takes
about
six
months
to
get
a
standard,
verified
and
and
ratified
by
the
standards
body
and
and
heading
over
to
iso.
A
So
for
we
have
two
threads
of
work,
one
is
the
standard
that
companies
can
use
to
make
sure
that
they
are
compliant
with
the
baseline
protocol
standard,
and
we
have
a
core
set
of
interfaces
called
the
core
that,
if
you
implement
them
correctly,
you
will
be
in
compliance,
that's
code,
and
so
we
have
coders
and
we
have
standards,
people,
that's
what
we
do
here.
That
said,
we've
got
andreas
frey,
we
got
jessie
linsley.
A
We
got
bob
gillan
good
to
see
you
bob
brian
fish,
newest,
head
of
engineering
here
at
at
on
my
team
here
at
nick
and
I
and
others
at
consensus.
Tyler
mcbride
also
inbound
bob
gillen.
I
said
luca
lucas
rodriguez
from
provide
previously
from
ernst
young
jack
leahy,
provide
ralph,
knoblock,
dhruv
malik
and
matthew
our
good
friends
over
sap,
sam
stoke
stokes,
mohan
and
nick
criticos
good.
To
see
you
all
at
least
those
of
you.
A
I
can
actually
see
some
people
are
hiding,
which
is
okay,
all
right.
So
let's
have
that
everybody
we've
got
we'll
see.
If
we
got
some
questions
coming
in
jack,
I
saw
that
you
guys
put
out
an
interesting
blog
post.
I
think
it
was
yesterday
so
good
on
you
on
that.
I
saw
a
lot
of
twitter
action
activity
about
that.
A
A
So
say
more
about
that,
I
mean,
like
you
know
how:
how
is
that
gonna?
A
How
do
you
imagine
you
know
where's
the
issue
in
in
in
inclusivity
we're
talking
about
more
smbs
being
able
to
to
get
access
to
getting
their
money
now,
rather
than
90
days
from
now
or
what?
What
does
that
mean?.
A
A
Hey
jack,
give
me
one.
Second,
I'm
hearing
I'm
seeing
a
comment
that
maybe
you
can't
be
heard,
which
might
be
a
setup
problem.
I
think
I
set
everything
up
right,
but
let's
see
I'm
gonna
just
let's
just
keep
talking
for
go
ahead
and
talk
for
a
little
longer,
but
I'm
gonna
hear
a
little
feedback.
While
I
check.
A
Oh
yeah,
now
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
restart
obs
and
see
if
we
can,
if
we
can
resolve
that,
so
give
me
one.
Second,
all
right:
everybody
on
on
live
stream.
You
might
discover
that
this
that
you
might
have
to
cut
over
to
a
different.
A
You
might
this
might
reset
and
take
us
over
to
another
another
instance
of
the
online.
This
hasn't
happened
in
a
long
time,
but
let
me
give
it
a
try.
Okay,
give
me
one.
Second,.
A
Up
all
right,
hey
everybody
can.
C
D
B
A
Jack
say
something:
hey
everybody,
okay,
jack
say
something
check.
E
A
C
A
A
C
Yeah,
I
can
be
a
little
bit
more
succinct
with
it,
so
yeah
I'll
just
be
quick
with
it.
So,
yes,
the
question
around
the
the
recent
blog
article
that
we
put
out
around
enterprise
e5
driving
financial
inclusivity.
C
As
we
see
what
we're
building
within
the
baseline
protocol
community,
this
open
source
community
is
well
within
the
provided,
stack
and
the
enablement
of
enterprise
synchronization.
C
We
see
that
this
kind
of
new
enablement
that
we're
creating
as
a
result
of
this
aligns
financial
incentives
amongst
the
participants
and
drives
financial
inclusivity
within
those
ecosystem
participants,
and
so
we
see
this
being
highly
beneficial
for
all
the
participants
within
the
overall
kind
of
ecosystems
that
we're
working
within.
So,
for
example,
you
know
as
it
relates
to
like
kona
or
servicenow
or
like
a
splunk.
For
example,
we
see
them
as
what
we
would
consider
the
ecosystem
operators
and
a
huge
value
to
them
is
that
they
continue
to.
A
You're
doing
it
kind
of
from
you're
majoring
on.
Presumably
you
don't
have
to
do
it
this
way,
but
your
use
cases
are,
are
you
know
you
have
an
anchor
kind
of
like
hyperledger?
Did
you
know
the
thing
with
walmart,
so
walmart
was
sort
of
the
anchor
or
maersk
was
for
shipping.
Congo
had
a
set
of
a
of
you
know
core
participants
that
sort
of
organized
this
consortium
type
of
approach
right.
A
You
have
a
group
of
counterparties
that
are
fairly
well
known
to
each
other,
and
you
set
them
up
together.
Is
that
that's
one
way
to
go
right?
Another
would
might
be.
I
can
imagine
in
the
future.
Any
sap
enabled
company
would
be
able
to
just
work
together
seamlessly
right
then,
so
that
would
be
more
of
a
horizontal
way
of
of
of
of
going
about
it
with
it
from
a
different
perspective,
one
that
you,
you
know
provide,
wouldn't
be
have
an
accident.
A
You
know
you're,
not
sap,
but
so
you
could
do
it
your
way,
that's
one-
and
I
mentioned
this
to
say
this-
is
what
we're
looking
for
in
terms
of
cases.
You
know
we
want
to
look
it
through
the
lens
of
what
you
just
said.
You
know
I've
got
you
know.
Koko
and
north
america
got
68.
A
I
think
bottlers
and
they've
got
a
bunch
of
suppliers,
they're
known,
and
you
want
them
to
be
able
to
be
set
up,
but
you
also
don't
have
a
lot
of
constraints
on
you.
You
know
you
can
you
can
do
that
integration
work?
A
platform
might
have
a
different
lens
on
that
problem
right
and
they
also
want
to
know
how
do
they
create
value?
How
do
they?
How
do
they
stay
relevant
to
their
customers?
A
That's
and
make
sure
that
baselining
does
no
violence
to
that
right
because
baseline's
going
to
go
nowhere,
if,
if
the,
if
the
vendors
can't
make
money
and
and
provide
value
to
their
customers
or
if
it
erodes
that
carl's
got
an
amazing
set
of
you,
know,
experiences
around
traditional
edi
and
and
supply
chain,
that's
a
you
know
that
there
you
have
value-added
networks
like
like
sterling
commerce
or
or
carl's
company
carl.
I
I
still
you'll
have
to
say
your
company.
A
I
I
don't
know
that
you've
given
me
permission
to
say
who
you're
from
I
try
to
be
careful
about
that
when
I
can
yeah.
C
C
This
is
kind
of
the
the
new
creation
of
what
a
modernized
treasury
operation
looks
like
in
the
age
of
digital
assets,
and
so
you
know
having
the
opportunity
to
actually
hold
crypto
with
on
the
books,
utilizing
it
as
an
appreciating
capital
asset,
improved
cash
flow
amongst
the
participants
of
this
process
that
we're
creating
and,
as
I
had
mentioned
a
little
bit
before
for
the
smaller
participants.
C
A
Say
more
about
that
one!
I
didn't
understand
that
one
quite
as
well.
I
understand
why
a
supplier
would
get
you
know
one
percent
discount
on
their
invoices,
but
you're
mentioning
like
six
percent
to
the
to
the
buy
side
in
revenue.
How
does
that
work?
A
That's
the
supplier
right.
So
if
I'm
a
supplier
you'll
give
me
99
cents.
C
That
that
is
correct,
so
the
suppliers
are
able
to
get
paid
immediately,
which
is
now
the
cr.
What
we're
able
to
do,
and
oh.
C
Which
is
a
one
percent
discount
on
all
the
invoices
or
up
to
six
percent
on
the
financed
amount
and
those
finance
invoices
are
securitized
for
up
to
for
about
180
days.
A
Cool
okay,
so
as
a
as
one
of
the
bottlers
say
one
of
the
68
bottlers
I
would
get.
I
would
be
able
to
get
my
supplier
paid
on
my
credit
and
I'll
I'm
going
to
give
up
about
a
buck
right.
A
And
but
it
yeah,
I
could
also
earn
six
percent
a
year,
so
so
50
cents
on
say
a
30
day
and
or
45
day
invoice
I
would
earn.
How
would
I,
how
would
that
work.
C
C
Yeah
that'd
be
accurate
and
then
we
work
with
financiers
to
actually
do
the
financing
of
that
of
the
to
actually
provide
the
financing
on
that
six
percent
to
provide.
A
That
makes
sense,
I'm
getting
there
I'm
getting
there.
That's
interesting.
I
mean
I
just
want
to
give
you
a
chance
to
so
how
so,
where
is
baselining?
What
what
does
baselining
need
to
do
to
make
sure
in
v1
to
help
enable
that
process
I
mean
lucas.
I
know
you
guys
are
working
hard
on
that.
What
is
what
are
the
things
that
you
know,
features
and
non-functional
requirements
that
have
to
be
met
to
allow
you
to
go
to
production
confidently
with
with
you
know
such
a
major
operation
like
that?
A
What
comes
to
mind
we've
been
talking
about
that
a
couple
of
times.
You
know-
and
I
know
that
you
guys
especially
look
at
your
maintainer.
What
are
the
things
that
may
not
be
in
the
current
spec
that
need
to
be
there.
C
Lucas
from
a
standard
perspective,
is
there
anything
specific
that
you'd
want
to
comment
on
there.
Obviously,
the
the
continued
creation
of
the
baseline
standard
that
you
know
the
the
greater
group
here
is
collectively
working
on
that's
going
to
be
vital
to
continued
comfort
and
confidence
that
others
that
aren't
currently
working
within
this
would
have
to
move
forward
with
such
an
implementation.
C
But
I
think
the
further
demonstration
of
the
type
of
savings
that
we're
producing
for
a
company
like
kona
and
will
ultimately
do
for
a
company
like
servicenow
as
well,
will
really
be
the
proof
in
the
pudding
that
more
organizations
need
to
come
to
the
table.
But
lucas,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
speak
a
little
bit
more
concretely
from
a
technical
perspective.
There.
F
A
But
no,
let's
talk
more
in
general,
like
requirements
right
so,
for
example,
does
you
know
does
v1
need
to
have
more
ways
of
integrating?
Does
it
need
to
have?
You
know,
are
the
integration
hardpoints
that
are
on
the
standard
on
the
on
the
api
now
sufficient?
A
Does
it
support
what
you
need
to
do
well
enough
with
different
kinds
of
vendors
like
sap,
or
does
it
need
to
be
enhanced
on
the
standard
side?
Not
your
private
work
on
your
own
product,
but
you
know,
is
the
standard?
A
A
I
like
to
call
canonical
use
case
right
with
a
use
case.
I
think
of
is
like
I'm
in
the
oil
and
gas
business
and
I
need
to
do
xyz
specifically
with
these
other
counterparties.
A
canonical
case
is
yeah.
I
need
to
finance
my
invoices,
so
are
you
seeing
any
blockers
on
the
open
source
side.
F
I
honestly
think
that
at
some
point
considering
this
is
in
very
simple
terms:
d5
for
enterprises.
We
are
going
to
need
at
some
point
to
start
thinking
about
this
in
terms
of
credits
and
fico
scores
and
how
we
can
associate
on
chain
verifying.
F
Well,
not
verified
credentials,
but
an
open
source
or
smart
contract
kind
of
thing
where
we
can
do
pseudo-anonymous
credit
ratings
for
for
different
entities,
something
along
those
lines.
Again,
I'm
not
entirely
ready
to
discuss
all
the
details.
I
have
to
think
a
bit
more
about
it,
but
we
are
going
to
need
a
standard
for
credit
rating,
something.
A
Interesting,
okay,
so
that
that
has
not
been
that's,
not
an
issue
as
I
that
I've
seen
in
the
backlog.
Maybe
we
can
talk
more
about
that.
G
I
would
say
that
would
be
a
little
bit
further
down
because
at
first
what
you're
doing
the
financing
arrangement
only
involves
the
transaction,
not
the
entities
you're,
not
really
looking
so
much
of
the
credit
worthiness
because
you're,
you
already
have
an
offer
and
an
acceptance.
You
have
a
payment
instrument
already,
and
the
financing
portion
does
not
extend
beyond
that.
At
this
point,.
F
That
that
absolutely
you,
you
may
very
well
be
right.
I
haven't
honestly
explored
this
enough.
I
do
think
that
it's
something
that's
gonna
be
not
important
but
essential
as
we
move
further
along,
and
that
is
that
is
very
much
gonna
be
required
again.
It
is
further
down
the
line,
which
is
why
I
haven't
focused
on
it
yet.
But
but
I
do
agree
with
you
that
at
the
moment
is
very
much
not
needed.
G
Yeah,
I
mean
your
credit
worthiness,
I
think
really
kind
of
is
a.
You
know
a
further
down
the
line
concern
when
it
comes
to
enterprise
d5,
because
you
already
have
you
know
a
financing
arrangement
in
place
and
all
you
are
doing
is
base
using
baseline
to
actually
make
sure
that
that
arrangement
goes.
You
know
much
more
smoothly
and
a
lot
easier.
F
You
know
yeah
sure,
but
the
main,
the
main
thing
that
I'm
seeing
here
is
that
at
some
point
we're
gonna
want
this
is
this
is
an
open
financial
system.
So,
even
though
it's
designed
for
enterprises,
you're
gonna
want
individual
users
to
be
able
to
collaborate
and
participate
in
it.
Even
if
you
know
invoices
might
not
be
the
most
interesting
thing
for
your
average
show.
You
do
want
that
person
that
might
be
interested
to
be
able
to
participate
and
for
them
to
do
that.
Trustlessly.
F
We
are
going
to
need
some
sort
of
rating
system
that
gives
addresses
that
worthiness.
You
know
further
down
the
line
yeah,
I
think
it'll
make
sense
when,
when
we
get
there.
B
B
I
mean
much
more
much
more
than
than
the
credit
rating
system
is
is
is
the
issue
of
of
of
double
pledging
assets
that
needs
to
be
that
needs
to
be
addressed
and
needs
to
be
addressed
in
in
zero
knowledge
and
at
scale,
which
means
I
cannot
put
proofs
on
chains
that
are
that
are
megabyte.
That
are
because
I
have
they're
they're
they're.
You
know
I
have
like
10
million
assets
right
and,
and
they
suddenly
put
put
put
like
five
megs
and
on
a
on
on
on
chain
and
then.
A
B
No,
that
that's
that's,
that's
that's
fine,
which
means
you
need
to
you
need
to
what
would
you
that
also
has
to
do
then
also
with
with
credit
ratings
right,
because
you
want,
you
know
what
you
don't
want
to
do.
Is
you
want
you
don't
want
to
have
to
to
advertise?
B
You
know
what
your
credit
rating
exact
credit
rating
is
right,
that,
because
that
that
can
be
that
can
be
used
to
game
on
the
system
against
you
right,
you,
if
you
know
what
the
credit
rating
is
you
can
you
can
try
to
fake
transactions,
fake
financial
transactions
that
actually
impact
your
your
credit
rating,
so
the
more
your
credit
rating
is
anonymous
right,
the
better
it
is
against
against
outside
manipulation,
and
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
that
would
also
you
know,
cut
cut
down
on
on
identity
fraud,
if
that,
if
that
were
because
you
don't
know
what
you're,
what
you're
you
don't
impact
it
because
you
can't
prove
you
can
actually
prove
who
you
are
so
the,
but
the
key
thing
is,
you
will
have
millions,
tens
of
millions,
hundreds
of
millions
of
of
assets
that
are
being
pledged
right.
B
That
needs
to
be
done
in
a
way
that
is
both
succinct
as
well
as
efficient
in
in
its
verification.
This
is
technically,
very,
very,
very,
very
non-trivial.
F
Yeah,
oh
yeah,
yeah
and
sorry
sorry
to
cut
you
off
carl,
but
just
wondering
if
we
have
anyone
from
the
identity
team
from
microsoft.
Here
at
the
moment,.
A
F
Yeah
yeah,
absolutely
because
I
do
I
do
know
that
they
were
working
on
on
an
identity
system
that
were
kind
of
like
self-sovereign
identities,
with
some
sort
of
centralized,
centralized
connection
to
to
microsoft.
Servers
for
further
verification,
so
it
would
be
good
to
get
their
their
inputs
on
that.
A
G
C
B
Let
me
let
me
let
me
let
me
let
me
let
me
put
this
in
it
in
a
more
abstract,
generalized
way
in
a
in
a
in
a
statement
right.
I
know
I,
I
know
a
value
x
right,
which
fulfills
properties
a
and
b
and
it's
part
of
the
set
okay
right.
It's
like
that's!
That's
your
that's
your
generalized
key
requirement.
That
is
true
for
any,
for
any
for
for
any
for,
for
any
proof
that
you're
that
you're
putting
that
has
has
certain
that
has
certain
characteristics
and
then
you
will
need
to
prove.
B
Are
you?
Are
you
in
a
set
or
not
in
a
set?
And
that's
that's
and
then
you
need
to
update
that
step
right.
So
it's
like!
That's!
That's!
That's!
That's!
That's
again!
None
that's
again!
Non-Trivial
because
you're
you're,
just
you're
just
starting
to
spam
spam
the
chain
because
it
has
to
be
unchained
because
anybody
has
to
be
able
to
to
to
verify
it
and
it
has
to
be
publicly.
D
Yeah,
I
don't
know
if
credit
rating
is
I
would,
I
would
make
it
a
little
more
abstract
and
bring
in
a
concept
of
reputation
right.
What
is
a
reputation
of
a
counterparty?
It's
not
so
it
sidesteps
some
of
that
and
we've
done
stuff
with
reputation-based
identity
management
before
we've
experimented
right.
So
the
idea
is
that
if
I'm
carl
and
I
know
john
and
andreas,
then
I
I
may
be
aware
of
something
called
the
baseline
protocol
right.
There
are
some
inferences
that
can
be
made.
D
We've
we've
created
graphs
of
interactions
before
of
reputation,
you
know
subgraphs,
etc.
With
weighted
weighted
edges,
we
we've
we've
experimented
in
the
space
before
various
teams.
I've
worked
on
have
right.
I
I
think
the
concept
of
rep
a
reputation
based
identity
is
important.
It
doesn't
mean
that
it
in
it
represents
an
individual,
could
represent
an
entity
or
a
wallet
address
right.
D
If
the
wallet
address
keeps
doing
these
transactions
using
the
baseline
protocol
and
they
keep
failing,
they
should
get
a
reputation
for
they're
doing
something
wrong
right
now,
if
they're
they're
passing
the
zk
circuits
right,
then
reputation
should
increase
by
the.
I
look
at
something
like
the
baseline
protocol
as
guard
rails
right
once
you
execute
something
using
a
protocol
implementation.
D
It
should
just
work
right
if
it
fails
repeatedly
or
you're
trying
to
game
the
system,
then
you
should
have
a
reputation
hit
right
and
then
over
time,
yeah
you
can
throw
the
wallet
address
away
and
create
a
new
one
as
a
new
endpoint.
That's
fine
right
and
build
your
reputation
back
up
that
you
see
metaphors
of
that
in
in
real
life
right
with
with
people
going
through
bankruptcy
or
organizations
or
restructuring
right.
D
I
I
I
think
that
there's
already
a
lot
of
lessons
learned
right
in
industry
and
in
the
real
world
that
can
be
translated
to
a
protocol,
spec
right
and
especially
when
you're
talking
about
reputation.
If
you
get
so
esoteric
as
credit,
then
you're
going
to
have
a
bunch
of
regulators
you're
going
to
have
a
bunch
of
other
parties.
You
know
you're
going
to
have
a
a
lot
of
things
that
you
need
air
cover
for.
D
If
you
provide
guardrails
around
how
reputation
can
be
at
least
measured,
not
not
influenced,
because
you
know
the
negative
case
is
always
harder
right.
How
do
you
prevent
people
from
destroying
somebody
else's
reputation,
other
endpoints
reputation,
there's
a
this
is
a
whole
academic
discussion,
but
I
think
it
is
very
important
to
account
for
reputation-based
transactions.
A
Yeah,
let
me
let
me
suggest
a
summary,
a
summary
of
that
and
in
a
more
so
we've
taken
it
from
a
highly
specific
thing
to
a
little
more
generalized
with
reputation.
Take
it
even
further.
The
canonical
case
would
be.
I
need
to
be
able
to
to
assert
something
in
order
to
do
some
for
to
be
allowed
for
the
guard
rails,
to
permit
a
another
thing
from
to
happen
or
to
allow
the
proof
to
be
to
proceed
right.
A
A
You
know
I'm
on
you
know,
pick
your
arb
ap
system
and
you
know
the
buyers
on
some
erp
system
and
they're,
not
on
the
same.
You
know
platform,
but
I
can
still
know
that
the
buyer
that
my
my
platforms
customer
is
billing
is
you
know
not
only
pays
their
bills
to
this
guy,
but
to
everybody
without
them.
Sending
me
the
information
onto
my
platform
that
I
shouldn't
have
about
them
right.
A
That
should
stay
on
their
platform
or
perhaps
even
just
you
know
in
their
own
company,
but
I
I
but
I
I'm
gonna,
give
them
a
better
credit
rating
or
I'm
gonna,
give
them
a
better
deal
on
something,
whether
it's
invoice,
financing
or
something
else.
I'm
gonna
give
them
better
terms,
because
they,
because
they
were
able
to
assert
a
thing,
whether
that's
a
moody's
report
or
whether
it's
a
reputation
or
whether
it's
just
yeah
out
of
a
thousand
invoices,
they
paid
all
a
thousand
of
them
on
time.
Yeah
right,
you.
D
A
But
you
know
to
be
able
to
do
that
under
zero
knowledge
and
for
the
circuit
that
governs
that
particular
work
step
to
be
able
to
and
take
that
in
and
and
and
and
and
generate
their
appropriate
constraints.
Andreas
you're,
the
most
generalized
thinker
I
know,
does
that.
Does
that
comport
with
your
thinking.
B
Yeah,
the
big
the
big
challenges
is
so
anything
that
you
say
if
you,
even
if
you
call
it
reputation,
it's
like
with
securities
right.
Oh
my
token
is
not
a
security.
Well,
it
talks
like
a
duck.
It
walks
like
a
duck.
It
is
a
duck
well
yeah.
So
a
particular
company.
A
B
What
you
do,
what
you
do
is
you,
you
have
a
you,
have
a
your
you're,
most
generally
you're
proving
set
membership
in
zero
knowledge,
where
the
set
has
certain
characteristics
or
is
defined
by
certain
things
right,
whatever
they
may
be
right,
they
they
may
be
that
you
are
have
value
that
that
you
are
that
that
value
x
is
is,
is
has
a
characteristic
to
be
in
a
value
range,
a
to,
b
and
c
to
d
right
for
two
for
two
different
characteristics
of
that
of
the
particular
value
right
you
can
you
can
you
can
create,
sets
like
that.
A
B
A
A
Do
we
have
that
or
do
or
you
know,
folks,
some
of
the
maintainers
on
the
call
sam
sam
you've
been
working
on
this
problem
with
double
what
what
are
we
missing
in
v1
in
the
current
roadmap
or
anything
or
or
do
you
think
that
we
have?
If
we
go
on
current
course
at
speed,
we
will
we
be
able
to
allow
a
company
like
provide
or
another
one
to
or
a
platform
to
be
able
to
implement
that
constraint
service
that
says
yeah
you
have
to
be.
E
Are
you
asking,
what
are
we
missing
specifically
for
double,
spin
protection
or
well?
That's
one.
A
Of
them-
and
I
know
that
that's
part
of
you
know-
we've
already
discussed
double
spin
protection
so
that
one's
already
in
the
can,
but
if
you
want
to
reiterate
it,
that
would
be
good.
In
fact,
we
talked
a
little
bit
this
morning
about
maybe
do
you
have
any
updates
on
your
thoughts
about
double
spin.
E
No
updates
compared
to
a
week
or
so
ago,
but
I
don't
know
if
I've
shared
the
thoughts
here.
But
the
summary
is
pretty
much
that
we
that
we
implement
in
the
shield
contract
the
the
pattern
of
using
a
genesis
commit
in
the
data
structure,
where
you're,
storing
all
these
commitments
or
hashes.
E
So
you
use
a
genesis,
commit
that
includes
information
that
helps
you
kind
of
anchor
where
you're
putting
your
hashes.
So
it
would
include
the
smart
contract
address
and
probably
whatever
layer,
one
network
id
you're
using.
So
then,
all
subsequent
hashes,
you're,
storing
in
that
location,
are
kind
of
tied
to
that
one
smart
contract.
E
So
any
any
signatures
that
you're
making
are
all
kind
of
linked
to
that
one
location.
So
a
combination
of
a
genesis
commit
and
then
like
an
exit,
commit
that
kind
of
locks,
your
data.
So
once
once
you
make
the
decision
that
your
workflow
is
completed,
you
can
add
a
add,
a
final
commitment
and
that
that
exit
commitment
can
include
information
like
which
financing
facility
you're
intending
to
use.
E
A
This
would
allow
you
to
as
long
as
nobody
was
stupid
enough
not
to
buy
an
invoice
from
somebody
without
a
without
a
baseline
proof
of
this
type.
A
They
would
you
know
or
following
the
standard
right
you
we
could
go
around
you
know
and
and
kind
of
in
in
a
marketing
sort
of
way
make
sure
that
everybody's
hey,
if
you're,
buying
invoices
from
people?
Don't
don't
do
it?
A
Unless
you
see
this,
then
you
then
you
we
would
ameliorate
the
potential
for
somebody
to
sell
their
invoice
twice
unless
they
were
colluding
with
the
buyer
right
because
the
if,
unless
the
you
know,
if
the
buyer
and
the
supplier
create
a
new
and
two
or
three
new
invoices,
then
you
got
a
whole
different
kind
of
problem.
But
if
the
supplier
tries
to
sell
the
invoice
twice,
the
second
one's
gonna
fail
right
or
as
long
as
somebody's
checking
the
proof.
E
A
And
is
that
function
well
articulated
in
our
roadmap?
Do
you
think
or
do
we
need
to
add
something
there
for
v1.
E
A
E
You
implement
it,
there's
no
real
current,
I
guess
instruction
or
or
indication
of
how
you
should
use
a
genesis
and
exit
commit.
So
those
are
two
changes
I
just
proposed.
I
think
the
maintainer
that
I
think
I
I
owe
a
better
articulation
and
a
more
formal
proposal
for
those
ideas
and
hopefully
the
maintainers
team
could
come
to
an
agreement
on
that.
So
hopefully,
hopefully,
on
monday
on
our
next
meeting,
we
can
come
to
some
sort
of
agreement.
B
So
the
the
the
proofs
need
to
be
publicly
verifiable
by
anyone
at
any
point
in
time
right,
so
it
can't
be
in
the
sheer
contract
because
I
don't
have
access
to
that.
Anybody
from
the
outside
needs
to
be
able
to
do
that
because
you
don't
know
who
holds
the
token
that
the
that
that
the
the
that
the
proof
refers
to
as
collateral
right,
I
have
potentially
several
million
of
them
right.
A
B
So
not
only
be
small,
I
I
need
to
be
able
to
verify
them
in
in.
If
I,
if,
if
I
can't
verify
them
fast,
then
I
then
I
then
I
I
I
have
then
I'm
spending
a
lot
of
compute
and
especially
if
I
need
to
verify
it
on
chain.
Then
that's
a
that's
a
that's
a
that's
a
that's,
a
significant
cost
factor
so.
A
Again,
those
of
us
who
are
working-
we
can't
do
that
right,
so
so
determining
what
the
actual
nfr
would
be
non-functional
requirement
for.
That
means
you
know
those
of
us
who
are
working
in
that
space
have
got
to.
You
know,
look
into
what
we're
doing
and
say
yeah
our
our
clients
or
our
solution.
Our
use
case
needs
to
be
able
to
calculate
that
in
under
five
seconds,
otherwise
machine
x.
Will
you
know
time
out
or
something
like
that
right?
So
the
question.
B
B
The
problem
is
that
that
that
I'm
royally
screwing
any
any
implementer
because
because
they
need
to,
they
need
to
go,
go
back
to
school,
to
learn
about
about
rsa
accumulators
and
and
and
pre
preprocessing
snarks,
and
things
like
that.
So
it's
it's
it's
it's
highly,
not
it's
highly
non-trivial
to
to
to
implement
this
in
a
way
that
is
a
compliant
and
b.
You
know
again
does
not
does
not
does
not
screw
you
either
cost
wise
or
or
or
as
I
like
to
to
say,
break
mainnet.
A
D
Random
question-
and
it
got
me
thinking
right
so
I
mean
one
of
the
they're
they're.
I
have
a
handful
of
tenants
that
I
do
you
know
when
I'm
working
in
security.
There's
certain
things
you
don't
do.
One
of
the
top
ones
is
roll
your
own
crypto
right
and
I'm
from
a
logistics
standpoint.
Does
it
make
with
the
baseline
project,
do
like
a
git
coin
grant,
maybe
for
a
reference
implementation
of
that.
You
know
that
that
functional
component,
so
that.
A
A
D
A
Me
add
a
little
psa
here
for
the
for
the
viewers.
If
you
didn't
know
what
we,
if
you
didn't
know
already,
we
have
a
a
very
generous
grant
from
the
ethereum
foundation
for
one
hundred
thousand
dollars
that
we
have
to
spend.
You
know
sometime
this
summer
on
r
d
code
and
enablement
projects
that
you
can
propose.
A
We
can
do
bounties
and
we
can
do
grants
straight
up
grants
there's
already
three
or
four
that
have
been
awarded
and
you
can
be
the
next
one
go
to
baseline,
dash
protocol.org
and
you
can
you'll
see
the
link
right
there
to
to
get
into
the
process
and
propose
a
project
and
carl.
If
you
wanted
to
write
that
one
up
as
a
bounty,
I'm
you
just
reminded
me,
there's
another
one
in
the
hello
world,
one
that
I
wrote
that
we
have
to
ratify
in
the
dsc
and
and
get
out
there.
D
A
Okay,
so
let's,
let's,
let's
peek
on
those
things
mohan,
I
think
you
had
a
question
earlier.
Does
that
do
you
feel
like
you
still
want
to
ask
it.
H
Yeah,
well,
I
guess
it
was
it's
more
about.
You
know
the
imperium.
You
know
and
in
terms
of
you
know
how
they
were
looking
at
off-chain
arm
chain,
and
you
know-
and
you
know,
one-way
proofs
and
kind
of
lifting
the
burden
of
proof.
You
know
off
the
main
of
the
on-chain
and
it
looked
like
there
was.
It
was
sort
of
it
was.
It
was
like
coming
towards
baseline
as
this
baseline
was
kind
of
interfaced
with
the
theory.
H
B
So
there
was,
there
was
just
a
hackathon
around
around.
It's
called
the
merge,
so
you're
you're,
you're,
you're,
merging
eth1
and
eth2
you're.
Doing
a
merge
mining
approach,
so
you're
still
doing
you're
still
doing
for
for
for
so
one
node
runs,
runs,
runs
both
right
and
you
can.
B
You
can
reuse
your
your
your
evm
for
for
for
contracts
on
on
on
the
shard,
and
then
your
your
you're
finalizing
your
your
these
two
blocks
on
beacon
or
on
and
on
the
shards
and
doing
it
on
on
eth1.
But
then
eth1
can
be
defined
just
as
an
execution
framework
on
on
the
beacon
chain,
and
it
can
then
run
a
cross
shards
or
just
one
shard.
B
So
it's
it's
it
that
that's
what
what
eventually
is
going
to
happen,
so
you
still
have
sort
of
like
eth1
as
its
own
chart,
so
to
speak.
That
is
still
chugging
along
and
then
people
as
because
you
reuse
the
evm.
B
You
know
as
people
people
want
to,
they
can
just
simply
switch
over
to
to
to
eat,
to
eat,
to
eat
too
at
their
at
their
own
timeline.
So
that
that's
that's
the
that's!
The
current
current
current
direction
and
there
there
was
a
ultra
short-lived
test
net
how
that
works
and
that
you
know
found
that
it
still
needs
a
lot
of
work,
but
it's
kind
of
works.
B
So
that's
that's
a
that's
a
good
thing,
so
everything
is
moving
in
the
right
direction,
but
everything
in
ethereum,
albeit
moving
in
the
right
direction,
takes
takes
it's
sweet.
It
takes
so.
B
B
B
Right
exactly
so
so
so
it's
it's
that
so
so
l2s
work
very
well
and
gonna
gonna
work
very,
very
well
whether
you
know
it's
like
on
on
on
the
hybrid
on
the
merge
piece
or
just
on
on
e2,
and
you
can
actually
then,
because
of
the
merge
you'll
be
able
to
to
smoothly
migrate.
B
Your
your
baseline
baseline
baseline
stack
over
to
to
e2,
and
if
you
really
want
to
be
really
cool,
then
you
run
then
you
run,
then
your
baseline
stack
also
runs
east
to
e2,
validators
and
full
nodes,
and
then
you
can
do
atomic
atomic
transactions.
A
A
A
Double
pledge
this
came
up
earlier
today
on
another
call,
you
know
it
kind
of
is
related
to
this
e2
thing.
If
you
say
the
world,
does
you
know,
there's
two
ways
this
could
go
right.
Ethereum
mainnet
becomes
the
place
that
you
go
looking
for
the
the
proof
that
you
know
so,
if,
if
I
said
you
know,
if
I
went
out
there
to
everybody
and
said
don't
be
dumb,
don't
ever
buy
an
invoice
from
anybody.
A
Unless
you
see
this
proof
somewhere
now,
if
ever,
if
all
of
those
were
as
a
standard
put
on
the
ethereum.
B
A
Net
say,
then:
we
all
know
where
to
go.
We
all
won't
know
where
to
look,
but
what,
if,
as
often
happens,
you
know
different
interests,
try
to
put
it
on
different
state
machines,
and
now
I've
got
those
proofs
all
over
the
place,
I'm
back
to
balkanization
and
it
is
a.
A
How
would
we
as
a
protocol,
deal
with
that
and
allow
for
the
benefit,
which
is
very
quick,
not
you
know
being
able
to
quickly
ascertain
whether
or
not
that
invoice
has
been
sold
to
somebody
else
yet
and
it
would
that
be
yep
yeah
we're
gonna
all
have
you
know,
as
I've
said
in
the
past,
as
a
pundit
at
some
point,
we're
going
to
need
to
decide
which
state
machine
is
the
ultimate
arbiter
or
do
we.
A
You
know
the
internet
of
hashes,
as
I
like
to
say,
or
or
is
it
that
we
have
to
do
something
more
like
it
did
where
you
know
it's
fine,
it's
discoverable,
it's
it's
resolvable
and
maybe
even
it's
off
of
my
did
duck.
That's
I
mean
andreas.
What
would
you
do
there?
Do
you
think.
B
You
cannot
you
can
so
I,
the
analogy
is,
is:
is:
is
counterfeit
money
right?
It's
like
it's
like.
If
someone
gives
you
a
20
bill
right,
you
have
two
options
right.
Are
you
trusted
that
it's
it's
it's
it's
a
it's
a
real
one
or
you.
You
have
the
equipment
to
check
that
this
is
fake
right.
The
good
thing
is
all
the
all
the
information
that
you
need
to
ascertain,
whether
it's
fake
or
not,
is
in
one
place
right
in
that
20
dollar.
Dollar.
Dollar
bill
right.
B
A
Convert
the
would
we
want
to
convert
what
sam
you
know
that
sam's
exit
proof
into
some
kind
of
a
verified
credential,
where,
if
you're
putting
it
on
ethereum
or
you're,
putting
on
something
else,
your
verified
credential
that
you
send
to
somebody?
That's
you
know
when
somebody
says
I'll
buy
your
invoice,
but
I
got
to
see
that
credential.
B
But
I
I
don't
I
can't
I
can
create
a
proof
using
a
different
circuit
that
looks
completely
different,
so
based
on
based
off
of
the
the
exact
same
record
right.
So
it's
like
how
do
you
know
you
can't
it's
like
it's
like
it's
like.
It's
just
simply
not
possible
right.
It's
like
it's
like
you,
you
you,
you
can
never
prevent
someone
of
of
of
of
taking
that
real
world
invoice
and
baselining
it
twice
or
three
times
or
four
times
using.
You
know
in
their
different
circuits.
A
B
B
Why
you're
pledging
you're
you're
pledging
your
your
invoice,
you're
selling
it
to
quote-unquote
you're
you're
selling
it
to
to
an
entity?
I
can
run
my
own
baseline.
I
can.
I
can
run
my
own
baseline
stack,
tokenize
it
and
then,
and
then,
and
then
push
it
out
of
out
on
on
on
a
d5
platform
right,
it's
like!
Oh
look
here,
it's
double
it's!
It's
pledge
pledge
protection
boom.
B
How
do
you
know
I
can
you
know
it's
like
you
can't
right,
because
it
because
it's
going
to
look
different,
the
proofs
are
going
to
look
different
right.
It's
like
there's
no
way
to
to
to
to
to
know
it
will
come
back
to
you
know
who
are
trusted.
Trusted
trusted
baseline,
baseline
baseline
operators.
So,
if
a
base,
if
microsoft
operates
a
baseline
baseline
stack
for
clients?
B
Yes,
if
that,
if,
if,
if
that,
if
that
proof
of
that
commitment
that
you
know
comes
from
from
a
from
a
from
from
an
address
that
is,
is
associated
with
an
you
know:
a
contract
address
system,
a
smart
contract
system
that
is
associated
with
with
a
with
a
microsoft
baseline
stack.
You
would
say
yes,
I
can
trust
that
right.
That
is
just
that
is
exactly
like
the
20
bill
that
you
know
looks
like
a
20
bill
and
and
and
and
holds
up
to
to
scrutiny,
but
I
think.
A
I'm
gonna
have
to
I'm
gonna
have
to
I
don't
know
about
anybody
else,
but
I'm
gonna
have
to
go,
go
and
watch
the
game
tape
on
this
one
and
replay
a
couple
of
times
and
it
might
sink
into
my
head,
but
I
think
it's
good
mon.
Oh,
let
me
just
give
a
quick
shout
out
to
mr
biggles
on
on
the
on
the
youtube
channel,
sending
saying
love,
wonderful
things,
love
his
comments
or
their
comments
and
yeah.
I
can't
wait
for
the
the
ernst
young
summit.
A
I
think
they're
bringing
up
yeah
that
is
coming
up
and
we'll
all
be
there
with
belzon
john.
A
Yeah,
mohan,
and
also
I
you
know,
drew
you.
I
saw
your
comments
in
the
in
the
about
bls
signatures,
et
cetera.
That's
that
was
pretty
interesting.
Go
ahead.
Mom.
H
Yeah
with
respect
to
this
dollar
bill
right,
I
mean
in
terms
of
how
do
you
kind
of
verify.
You
know
that
it
it's
either
either
trusted
it's
it's
real
or
not,
but
to
verify
that
you
know
that
it's
it
is
real
or
not.
You
have
certain
attributes
right
of
the
physical
dollar
is.
Is
it
possible
to
sort
of
have
a
uniform
encoding
model
like
you
know,
56
bits
and
that
encodes
the
name
space
and
then
in
this
particular
case
of
the
dollar?
H
The
dollar
is
a
is
a
particular
kind
of
entity
and
it
has
a
particular
way
of
of
of
proving
that
it
is
so
and
and
therefore
it
you
as
a
looking
at
it
anonymously,
you
sort
of
say
well,
this
particular
token
happens
to
be
a
token
in
this
name
space.
Therefore,
I
kind
of
understand
what
it
is
and
if
it
is,
if
it
has
certain
properties
validated,
which
I
understand
that's
encoded
in
a
certain
way,
then
I'm
ready
to
accept
that
it's
right
or
not
so
is.
H
Is
there
a
way
to
kind
of
take
in
the
domain
model
namespace
into
a
into
like
a
vector
that
that
so
you
can
kind
of
have
domain
knowledge
as
part
of
the
hash
I
mean
I'm
just
it
may
be
a
you
know,
wild
thought,
but
is
it
make
sense.
A
I'm
working
on
it,
let's
bring
that
up
next
time
I
mean
that's,
there's
a
lot
in
there,
but
I
think
you
know
and
we're
at
the
top
of
the
hour.
So
let
me
say
this:
this
is
what
we
were
designing.
A
That's
why
it's
so
great
to
have
these
calls
it's
great
that
we
have
this
every
week,
it's
so
wonderful
to
have
so
many
people
showing
up
on
them
and
and
it's
great
to
be
able
to
pack
in
something
that
we
would
have
had
to
have
another
meeting
about
you
know
into
this
public
forum
really
encourage
everybody.
That's
out
there
yeah
be
thinking
about
what
you
want
to
use
all
this
stuff
for
we've
been
talking
about
it
for
over
a
year.
We,
you
know
at
this
point:
it
should
be
no
secret.
A
That
baselining
is
about
reducing
screw-ups
between
legally
separate
entities
and
their
systems
that
have
to
talk
to
each
other
in
a
standardized
way
that
reduces
the
need
for
standing
up
new
silos
of
integration
buses
every
time,
and
when
you
play
that
that
story
out
into
specific
uses,
we
need
to
be
sure
for
v1,
which
we're
going
to
be,
which
we're
accomplishing
this
year,
that
that
v1,
you
know,
is
useful
for
these
key
kinds
of
cases,
and
so
we'll
we'll
be
continuing
these
conversations
until
the
end
of
may,
at
which
point
we're
going
to
lock
in
write
down
the
roadmap
and
and
complete
the
work
and
then
release
it
so
and
then,
and
so
it's
it's
really
important
that
we
catch
all
the
edges.
A
That's
what
this
this
call
is
all
about,
and
I
I
think
you
know
we
wander
around
a
little
bit.
I
thought
we
had
some
really
interesting
conversations
and
I
hope
that
they
lead
to
and
I'll
encourage
you
all
to
think
about
what
was
said
today
and
does
it
you
know
if
it
you
know
it's
taking
a
shower
and
some
point,
and
you
say:
aha
that
led
me
to
you
know:
we
need
a
thing
that
we
forgot.
A
That's
the
goal,
hey
we.
We
need
a
thing
that
we
forgot.
We
we
need
to
put
the
requirement
in
that
we
did
not
write.
The
goal
is
to
have
all
is
the
best
set
of
requirements
in
by
june
so
that
we
can
really
work
confidently
from
there.