►
From YouTube: #271 Martin Köppelmann & Matan Field: How the dxDAO could become the world’s largest organization
Description
Support the show, consider donating:
BTC: 1CD83r9EzFinDNWwmRW4ssgCbhsM5bxXwg (https://epicenter.tv/tipbtc)
BCC: 1M4dvWxjL5N9WniNtatKtxW7RcGV73TQTd (http://epicenter.tv/tipbch)
ETH: 0x8cdb49ca5103Ce06717C4daBBFD4857183f50935 (https://epicenter.tv/tipeth)
The concept of DAOs has been captivating to many in the crypto space for years. When “The DAO” was created in 2016, in the few weeks of its existence and despite obvious flaws, it gather tremendous momentum and amassed 14% of the entire ether supply. Since then the technology has matured and Martin and Matan argue that the time for DAOs has finally arrived.
We were joined by DAOstack Founder Matan Field and Gnosis Founder Martin Köppelmann. We talked about the decentralized exchange protocol DutchX. We also talked about how the two projects together created the dxDAO, which will manage the DutchX protocol, but could go onto its own path. A path that could even lead to being the DAO for all of DeFi.
Topics discussed in this episode:
- The unifying vision behind the various Gnosis projects
- Why Gnosis decided to build decentralized exchange protocol DutchX
- DutchX's usage of batch auctions to provide good prices and liquidity for any market
- Incentivizing market makers with the Magnolia token
- Why the DutchX needs a DAO
- The role of Reputation in the dxDAO
- How Reputation will be distributed
- Why DAOs unlike companies could become more efficient as they grow
- How the dxDAO could become the biggest organization on earth in the next 10 years
- How one can get involved in the dxDAO
Links mentioned in this episode:
- dxDAO Website:
- Joint AMA: Martin Köppelmann & Matan Field - dxDAO:
- DAOtalk.org:
- Introducing the dxDAO:
- A brief discussion of the protocol governing the dxDAO:
- The DutchX as an Open Protocol:
Sponsors:
- Toptal: Simplify your hiring process & access the best blockchain talent – Get a $1,000 credit on your first hire - http://toptal.com/epicenter
This episode is also available on :
- Epicenter.tv: https://epicenter.tv/271
- YouTube:
- Souncloud: http://soundcloud.com/epicenterbitcoin/eb-271
Watch or listen, Epicenter is available wherever podcasts are distributed.
Epicenter is hosted by Brian Fabian Crain, Sébastien Couture, Meher Roy, Sunny Aggarwal & Friederike Ernst.
A
A
B
My
name
is
Brian
Furman,
crane,
I'm,
Sonny
Agarwal,
so
we're
here
today
with
Martin
Kerpelman
who's,
the
CEO
and
founder
of
Knossos
and
Martin
field.
The
CEO
and
founder
of
dollar
stack.
Both
of
them
have
been
on
the
podcast
before
and
today.
We're
gonna
speak
about
the
super,
exciting
experiment
that
they're
doing
together,
which
is
combining
it
DeSantis
exchange
and
a
doll
and
yeah.
It
was
a
great
conversation.
We
hope
we
enjoy
it
as
well.
So
let's
go
to
the
interview
so
we're
here
with
martin
cup,
lemon
and
martin
field.
B
So
both
of
them
are,
you
know
back
on
the
podcast
have
been
here
before
martin
actually
twice
so
your
third
time
here
and
martin
was
here
three
years
ago,
so
quite
a
long
time
ago,
to
speak
about
kenosis.
So
we're
gonna
speak
about
the
very
interesting
project,
which
is
the
dodgy
change
in
the
TX
style.
So
yeah
thanks
so
much
for
joining
us
today,
guys
no.
C
Yeah,
so
the
core
of
gnosis
is
is
bridge
market
and
British
market
platform,
and
we
see
prediction
markets
really
as
a
new
asset
class.
Basically,
we
recently
like
coins
the
term
conditional
tokens,
because
it's
really
a
lot
of
you
can
do
with
prediction
markets.
You
can
give
any
event
the
likelihood
or
might
make
a
market
for
the
occurrence
of
an
event,
but
you
can
do
much
more.
You
can
do
you
can
see
how
any
event
is
influencing
any
other
event.
So
how
is
one
event
happening?
C
Influencing
is
likelihood
of
another
event
happening,
but
it's
also
useful
for
stuff,
like
how
does
one
event
happen
happening
influence
the
price
of
off
of
any
asset,
and
that's
super
interesting
also
for
decision
making.
This
is
future
key
discussion.
How
does
this
decision
influence
stock
of
a
company?
Your
token
or
something
like
that?
So
we
say
that
those
conditional
tokens
and
and
that's
yeah-
we
provide
a
framework
for
for
those
to
really
create
a
new
asset
class.
C
Let's
create
part
of
Knossos,
then
we
have
a
trait
part
of
gnosis,
so
we
have
all
those
new
conditional
tokens
that
needed
to
be
traded
somewhere,
and
that
became
more
and
more
the
the
focus
of
gnosis
to
provide
efficient
trading
mechanisms
for
this
new
asset
class,
but
in
general
for
for
tokens.
If
you,
if
you
the
trading
mechanism,
you,
why
wouldn't
you
I
mean
you
would
allow
to
trade
anything
that's
from
a
technical
perspective.
It
doesn't
make
that
much
of
a
difference.
C
What
you
trade
there
so
create
trait,
and
the
third
thing
we
did
somewhat
Harvison
related
to
our
initial
vision
is
the
whole
part.
Create
trade
hold
a
little
bit
like.
Historically,
we
started
to
build
a
motorcycle
it
because
there
was
no
and
we
wanted
to
talk
and
say
all
so.
We
wrote
a
motifs
equality
that
was
able
to
hold
tokens.
That
became
almost
the
industry
standard.
Almost
every
I
cos
was,
is
using
it
and
we
realized
well.
C
We
we
should
like
continue
that
and
support
that
and
bring
that
that
additional
security
of
the
Melissa
quality
to
consumers
so
have
a
smart
contract
wallet
where
you
as
a
consumer,
use
a
modest
equality,
and
you
have
multiple
keys
right
now
on
the
first
setting,
that's
not
so
safe.
You
have,
for
example,
one
key
on
your
phone
and
one
key
on
your
computer
or
wherever,
and
it's
a
convenient
way
to
use
it.
So,
let's
enjoy
what
Nelson
is
currently
doing,
create
rate
and
hold
very.
D
Cool
that
actually
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
It
helps
be
like
that
puts
all
like.
You
know
your
major
projects
that
you
guys
have
been
working
on
in
like
context.
So
what
are
some
of
like
the
updates,
since,
like
the
last
time
you
were
on
the
last
time
you
guys
are
on
I
was
three
years
ago
summer.
2016
a
lot
of
stuff
has
changed
since
then.
C
Yeah,
well,
it's
quite
right
right
yeah,
you
think
you
mentioned.
Where
did
the
token
say?
It
was
obviously
a
well
changed
lot
before
the
token
say
we
were
like
a
company
of
where
we
were
still
part
of
consensus.
Until
today
we
are
a
company
of
50
50
people
working
on
those
three
big
big
big
topics
we
yeah
I
guess
we
were
lucky
was
a
token
say
it
was
a
timing,
he's
very
appreciating
selling
a
bit
it's
a
right
moment,
so
we
kind
of
are
in
a
good
position,
have
a
decent
runway
of
many
years.
C
A
C
D
E
E
Kind
of
like
make
it
way
more
professional.
So
these
eight
months
were
a
huge
amount
of
effort
to
bring
like
the
the
most
advanced
technology
on
top
of
the
blockchain
and
yeah.
It's
really
exciting,
and
now
we're
just
launching
that
and
the
X.
That
will
be
one
of
the
first.
What
what
maybe,
with
few
other
downs
that
we
will
launch
with?
Basically,
we
launched
the
basic
platform
I
mean
we
already
launched
it.
E
I,
don't
know
six
months
ago
on
the
minute,
with
an
alpha
version
which
again
was
kind
of
like
a
prototype,
but
now
in
q1
towards
the
end
of
q1,
we
were
launching
the
whole
system.
You
know
from
from
the
bottom
end
of
the
blockchain
contracts,
all
the
way
to
the
interface,
and
there
are
few
layers
in
between
so
the
whole
system
will
be
launched
in
public
data
and
the
DX.
That
would
be
one
of
the
first,
probably
the
first
big
Dow
on
top
of
the
platform.
B
C
Are
first
because
we
needed
a
place
to
trade
predictions
simple
as
that,
so
so
the
prediction
market
obviously
is
a
place
where,
where
it
already
includes
the
word
market,
so
I
guess
the
next
question
could
be.
Why
wouldn't
we
use
one
of
the
existing
market
mechanisms,
and
that
is
that
is
because
we
believe
there
is
a
need
for
fully
decentralized
market
market
mechanism,
and
most
of
the
decentralized
exchanges
right
now
are
I
would
call
them
non-custodial,
centralized
exchanges.
So
that
means
yes,
they
are
not
non-custodial.
You
you
you.
C
C
There
are
like
some
that
are
fully
decentralized,
so
unit
swaps,
for
example
one
and-
and
there
is
well-
you
can
also
do
a
full-on
chain
order
book
or
girls
doing
that
wisest
X
is
doing
that,
so
those
are
basically
the
two
or
the
three
only
fully
digitalized
exchanges,
I'm
aware
of
all
of
them
have
unfortunately,
significant
game.
Theoretic
problems
around
front
running
around
being
able
to
provide
enough
liquidity,
because
the
costs
are
quite
high
to
provide
enough
liquidity
of
those
mechanisms.
C
So
the
bottom
line
is,
we
are
really
into
building
something
that
is
a
fully
decentralized
market
mechanism
is
fully
decentralized,
is
reasonable
or
is
efficient
as
possible,
of
course,
and
doesn't
have
any
like
game
theoretic.
The
tech
vectors
like
mine,
yeah,
minor
front
running,
is
a
big
one.
So.
D
Could
you
go
ahead
and,
like
maybe
walk
to
us
a
little
bit
about
how
the
dutch
axis
stem
works
and,
like
you
know
the
mechanisms
of
this
have
change
and
how
you
know
I
feel
most
people
might
if,
when
they
think
of
exchanges,
they're,
probably
moat,
usually
thinking
of
order
book.
So
that's
why
what
most
people
are
familiar
with.
So
how
does
this
compare
to
a
traditional
order,
book
mechanism
right
right.
C
So
it's
kind
of
just
there
to
to
preface
that
the
data
exchange
is
yeah.
I
would
make
the
claim
it's
right
now.
The
only
fully
decentralized,
a
mechanism
that
doesn't
that
cannot
be
attacked
by
was
front
running,
especially
from
from
from
miners
so
and
we
had
to
do
like
compromises
for
that.
So
how
does
it
work
yeah?
It
uses
the
Dutch
auction
model.
So
let's
say
something
you
want
to
sell.
What
tokens
do
you
want
to
sell?
C
C
Let's
say
and
roughly
the
system
starts
every
six
hours
in
option,
so
there
is
a
period
before
the
auction
where
everyone
who
wants
to
sell
maker
tokens
like
puts,
puts
their
maker
tokens
in
this
pot
and
at
some
point
is
the
auction
start
and
basically
the
auction
mechanism
is
now
trying
to
sell
all
those
maker
tokens
that
are
all
in
one
pot
for
as
high
price
as
possible.
So
what
it
will
do
is
it
will
start
a
Dutch
auction.
C
C
You
then
eventually
get
the
final
price
and
the
clearing
price
is
the
price
where
there's
enough
by
demand
at
that
price,
to
clear
the
the
full
auction
and
the
pricing
function
goes
like
after
six
hours,
so
it
like
it's
a
1,
1
/
X
function
after
6
hours.
It
reaches
the
previous
price
in
the
goes
all
the
way
to
zero.
So
after
24
hours
it
basically
goes
to
zero.
So
then
they
will.
We
definitely
expect
that
they
will
then
be
shortly
before
there
will
be
a
buyer.
C
C
More
or
less
every
six
hours,
so
so
once
once
the
as
the
options
cleared,
there's
just
a
15
minute,
fifteen
minute
like
delay
period,
and
if
then
there
is
enough
volume
and
in
the
current
design
enough
volume
means
at
least
$1,000.
The
next
option
would
start
immediately
so
on
a
liquid
on
a
somewhat
liquid
pair.
That
has
enough
demand
for
$1,000
trade.
Every
six
I
was
at
least
yeah.
It
would
more
or
less
every
six
hours
have
a
cycle
and.
B
C
C
One
for
just
very
illiquid
for
for
for
illiquid
tokens
where
you
hardly
have
a
market
at
all
so
they're
there.
The
order
book
is
like
where
they're
like
finding
price.
Every
six
hours
is
already
like
good
enough
for
liquid
tokens.
Why
would
you
use
the
Dutch
exchange
for
liquid
tokens?
I
would
say
you
would
only
use
it
for
large
or
you
would
only
want
to
use
it
for
a
large
volume
large
enough
volume,
so
that
on
on
the
competing
liquid
market,
you
would
already
move
the
price
significantly
there,
because
there's
yeah
slippage.
C
So
one
experiment
we
are
doing
just
the
ten
days
before
the
DX
Dow
will
start
to
demonstrate
this
claim
we
will,
for
ten
days
each
day
put
$100,000
die
order
in
so
so
we
are
each
day
selling
or
it
kind
of
buying
ether,
so
selling
die
for
ISA,
so
gnosis
will
basically
just
buy
some
more
either
with
die
and
yeah.
We
are
very
curious
what
what
the
final
price
will
be
and
how
how
how
the
final
price
will
will
compare
to
well
to
the
market
price
at
the
time,
so
our
claim
would
be.
C
There
is
no
decks.
Currently
that
can
handle
$100,000
market
order,
so
dodge
X
should
be
one
that
can
do
that
and
roughly
the
reason
is
because
because
it
basically
gives
market
makers
the
perfect
the
perfect
setting
to
do
to
do
arbitrage
or
to
to
kind
of
well
trade
on
all
on
everything
where
they
can
get
liquidity,
because
it's
totally
predictable
so
like
this
orders
coming
in,
you
can
see
this
hundred
thousand
dollar
it's
starting
at
this
high
price
and
they
see
over
six
hours.
C
They
slowly
see
it
coming
and
and
during
this
time
they
can
do
all
the
market
makers.
All
the
arbitrage
people
can
like
compete
against
each
other
to
to
to
give
this
to
to
give
that
order.
The
best
price
compare
that
to
a
two.
If
you
would
just
put
it
the
market
order
on
a
normal
exchange,
then
you
only
get
the
price
that
is
available
at
that
moment.
So
so
so
here
the
market
mega
connect
after
they
see,
or
it
has
the
guarantees
that
this
volume
is
incoming.
D
That's
really
cool.
So
a
few
weeks
ago
we
actually
had
James
Prestwich
on
with
he
works
on
a
project
called
Summa
one,
and
so
they
were
actually
using
sort
of
cross
chain
touch
options
where
they
were
selling
ether
in
exchange
for
Bitcoin,
and
so
it
was
actually
very
interesting
to
see
that
on
all
of
their
auctions,
that
they've
been
running,
they've
been
doing
something
similar
where
they've
just
been
putting
up
their
own
ether
and
everyone,
that's
always
been
being
sold
almost
up
like
a
10
to
20
percent
discount.
D
Every
time
I'm,
like
you,
know
the
market
price
on
like
centralized
exchanges.
So,
like
you
know
out,
while
reading
through
your
documentation,
I
read
about
this
like
Magnolia
token
and
stuff,
looks
these
things
that
will
help
extend
to
buy
liquidity.
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
these
mechanisms
are?
Yeah.
C
So
now
you
can
think
all
right
from
each
option
the
fraction
is
is
taken
in
the
in
the
order
of
magnitude
of
0.5%,
so
in
something
that's
somewhat
comparable
to
fiy.
0.5%
is
taken
out
of
this
option
and
it's
like
put
into
the
next
option
as
an
incentive
to
start
this
option.
So
so,
basically,
this
is
this.
Liquidity
contribution
is
put
into
the
next
option
and
will
be
distributed
among
those
who
participate
in
this
option.
B
C
Correct
so
the
fee
is
yeah,
your
effective
fee
is
basically
the
fee
rate
or
the
liquidity
contribution
you
are
paying,
or
it's
plus
the
average
liquidity
contribution.
Everyone
else
is
paying
and
if
everyone
else
pays
a
higher
liquidity
contribution,
you
are
a
net
gainer
off
of
that
fee.
So
you
you
pay
a
negative
fee.
She
wants
it
that
way.
What.
D
C
We
come
for
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
need
to
go
so
yeah,
so
only
anyone
can
add
any
token
to
the
Dutch
exchange
protocol
any
time,
but
only
whitelisted
tokens
will
generate
Magnolias
for
specifically
that
reason.
Otherwise
you
create
your
sunny
token
and
you
have
hundreds
and
supply
of
it
and
you
make
a
lot
of
fake
fake
trades
exactly
and
that's
why
the
we
need
to
doubt
to
curate
such
a
whitelist,
but.
B
C
Sure
I
mean
as
soon
as
you
use
the
real
token
or,
but
when
token
that's
white
listed,
you
can
of
course
well
put
it
on
the
sell
side,
but
also
put
it
on
the
buy
side.
The
thing
or
also
I
mean
yeah,
you
put
it
up
for
sale,
and
then
you
participate
yourself
during
the
auction.
The
thing
is
that
doesn't
hurt
the
Dutch
X.
C
It
would
even
benefit
the
Dutch
X
because
you're
nevertheless
providing
real
liquidity
because
or
at
least
some
extent,
so
in
an
order
book
you
can
specifically
fill
your
own
order
and
then
you
I
mean
then
you
can
even
fake
it
by
pretending
or
in
some
models.
You
can
fake
it
by
pretending.
You
broadcast
this
order,
but
in
reality
you
didn't,
then
you
just
like
matches
yourself
and
you
can't
compete
completely.
It's
completely
completely
worthless
to
the
exchange.
However,
here
remember
you
are
always,
or
all
funds
are
pulled
together
into
into
an
option.
C
So
unless
like
there's
no
activity
and
there's
the
only
one
putting
funds
up
for
sale,
if
you
then
participate
as
a
buyer,
you
also
have
to
well
give
everyone
else.
Basically,
in
this
auction
that
price-
and
if
you
want
to
make
sure
that
you
don't
lose
funds,
the
bottom
line
is
every
trading
activity,
provides
real
acridity
for
those
who
who
just
want
to
trade
right.
B
A
C
You
put
in
one
500,000,
that
means
I
or
random
trader
can
like
easily
put
in
10,000,
and
you
are
very,
very
much
incentivized
to
do
not
like
keep
surprise
dropping
too
much,
because
you
risk
your
500,000.
So
so
you
are
like
very
much
committed
to
give
the
10,000
that
that
kind
of
piggybacked
on
your
500,000
order,
a
very
good
price
and
because
otherwise,
you
risk
that
others
can
buy
your
500,000
below
below
market
price.
C
D
D
C
So
that
is,
diffusion
diffusion
exchange
its
own,
it's
a
whole
topic
in
a
way,
so
the
Dutch
eggs
should
really
be
seen
as
demonstration
and
it's
life
now
and
everything
to
to
say
it's
possible
to
do
something
fully:
decentralized
and
game.
Theoretically
sound,
but
it
well
I
mean
six
hours
days.
Of
course,
there's
a
big
trade-off.
A
Hiring
is
stressful,
let's
face
it.
It's
a
long
process
of
sifting
through
resumes
and
interviewing
candidates
without
any
guarantee
of
quality,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
be
this
way.
Companies
all
over
the
place
are
experiencing
a
new
way
of
hiring
with
top-down.
If
you
go
to
their
Trustpilot
page
you'll
see
that
of
the
hundreds
of
people
that
have
left
reviews
over
ninety
eight
percent
were
four
or
five
star
ratings,
including
one
guy
who
wants
to
give
his
developer
a
bear.
A
Hug
that
says
a
lot
topped
I'll
gets
all
this
great
feedback
because
they
focus
on
their
clients
and
their
top
priority
is
quality.
They
only
accept
the
top
three
percent
of
applicants,
including
highly
skilled
blocks
and
engineers.
One
of
these
engineers
is
Radek.
Ostrovsky
Roddick
has
experience
as
a
lead
software
engineer
and
data
scientists
for
Sony
and
Expedia.
Then
he
discovered
blockchain
and
he
became
totally
consumed
with
aetherium.
He
worked
as
a
consultant
for
the
firm
start
on
chain
and
his
time-locked
app.
A
When
the
top
quarter
consensus
you
port
and
identity
blockchain
hackathon,
then
he
expanded
his
reach
through
top
towel.
He
worked
with
a
bunch
of
clients
on
projects
such
as
smart
contract
development
and
a
POC
that
leverages
blockchain.
If
you
want
to
hire
engineers
like
Roddick
for
your
team,
go
to
top
tail
comm,
slash
epicenter
for
a
Norris
trial,
a
top
tile
director
of
engineering
will
deliver
your
next
hire
in
as
fast
as
48
hours
and
you'll
get
$1000
credit.
When
you
decide
to
hire
we'd
like
to
thank
top
towel
for
their
support
of
epicenter
well,.
C
C
So,
for
example,
many
many
smart
contract
systems
need
at
some
point
the
ability
to
just
simply
exchange
one
token
for
another
or
convert
say
they
get
some
income
in
some
token
and
they
want
to
convert
it
in
another
token
and
and
the
Dutch
eggs
should
be
a
mechanism
also
for
smart
contracts.
To
do
that.
So
remember,
for
example,
smart
contracts.
They
can't
sign
an
order.
C
They
can't
have
a
spread
g44
for
to
kind
of
to
participate
on
an
order
book,
so
they
need
such
a
simple,
simple
way
and
they
still
want
to
get
a
fair
price
and
so
on.
So
it
should
be
a
infrastructure
component,
and
if
it's
a
smart
contract,
this
smart
contract
can't
easily
upgrade
itself
or
change
itself.
So
so
the
Dutch
X
needs
to
provide
a
high
level
of
reliability
extremely
high
level
of
reliability.
C
Ideally,
you
would
have
the
guarantee
that
if
you
kind
of
use
it,
you
have
the
the
very
very
high
guarantee
that
in
the
next
10
years,
ideally
in
the
next
hundred
years,
you
can
just
use
that
thing.
And
now
you
are,
of
course
you
you
can
do
a
trade
off,
so
it's
either.
You
make
it
completely
unchangeable
with
no
upgrade
functionality
whatsoever.
You
just
deploy.
C
The
contracts
are
immutable,
which
of
course,
has
the
disadvantage
that
you
can't
prove
it,
and
you
can't
and
like
everything
you
every
parameter,
you
said
mean
evils
things
like
this
whitelist
everything
has
to
be
like
correct
in
the
first
first
try
and
then
you
can
never
do
anything
about
it.
The
alternative
is,
of
course,
your
centralized
entity
that
can
make
an
upgrade,
but
then
you
also
lose
this
strong
guarantees,
because
you
now
dependent
on
this
central
parties.
C
It
has
the
keys
to
do
it,
so
we
think
now
is
very
reasonable
or
it
is
the
most
reasonable
middle
ground
between
it
can
still
provide.
Given
that
the
Dow
is
widely
distributed
and
has
like
10,000
reputation
holders,
it
can
provides
those
strong
guarantees
that
you're
not
reliant
on
a
single
entity
and
a
single
point
of
failure.
If
you
want
so,
but
it
still
is
agile
and
then
and
can
make
upgrades
and
improvements
and
yeah
and
provide
a
better,
better
system.
B
C
When
we
deployed
to
dodge
X,
we
we
well
threw
away
the
key
or
that
there
is
no
way
to
upgrade
it.
So
the
Dutch
X
instance,
that
is
life
right
now
and
main
that
will
be
in
the
in
this
form
as
long
life
on
May
night
as
long
as
main
it
exists
and
maybe
storage
rent
will
eat
it
at
some
point.
But
whatever
we
have
to
deploy
new
one,
we
have
to
deploy
a
new
version
of
the
Dutch
exchange
which,
as
owner
and
the
Dow,
will
obviously
be
the
owner
and
the
owner
has
yeah.
D
C
I
think
I
think
that
would
be
a
sensible
strategy
if,
if
that
thing
would
be
its
own
like,
like
Depp
and
and
end-users,
would
directly
like
trade
on
it
and
then
the
end
users
could
just
decide
to
switch
to
the
new
version
or
or
like
stay
on
the
old
version.
However,
if
you
really
want
to
build
many
layers
on
top-
and
you
see
this-
this
exchange
more
is
again
infrastructure
component.
You
want
to
build
all
the
defy
decentralized
finance
applications.
They,
for
example,
those
those
things
are,
the
all
the
margin
trading
that
leak
needs
needs.
D
The
other
hand,
though,
isn't
this
also
can
be
seen
somewhat
as
a
security
security
vulnerability
as
well,
which,
like
you
know
when
we're
doing
like
programming,
like
you
know,
if
you're.
This
is
why
you
do
package
locking
we're
like
you,
don't
want
your
your
underlying
library
should
just
like
to
swap
out
from
under
you
break
interfaces,
etc.
Of
course,.
C
Of
course
I
mean
absolutely
so.
The
DX
tau
is
the
radical
experiment
and
it
has
to
prove
itself
that
it
can
can
provide
this.
This
level
of
reliability-
and
it
has
proof,
has
to
prove
itself
on
many
levels,
so
it
has
to
prove
itself.
The
DX
tower
has
to
prove
itself
on
a
like
technical
level.
The
contract
needs
to
be
need
to
be
need
to
be
but
secure.
Obviously,
it
has
to
prove
itself
on
a
on
a
like,
yeah,
social
or
or
on
a
game
theoretic
level.
C
That
kind
of
the
the
the
actions
of
the
towers
value
system
of
the
Dow
yeah.
There
are
many.
There
are
many
isn't
and
things
that
first
need
to
be
proven,
but
eventually
I
would
say:
Dow
might
be
able
to
to
provide
those
strong
guarantees
that
it
that
it
like
keeps
keeps
things
going.
Does
updates
does
like
stays
on
top
of
the
total
on
top
of
the
most
recent
technology,
but
doesn't
yeah.
But
but
again
you
are
not
dependent
on
a
single
actor,
but
on
this
collective
this
is
10,000
people
or
maybe
more
maybe.
E
Maybe,
to
add
add
some
thoughts
on
this,
so
basically
well
for
cruise
is
good.
So
first,
two
things
for
cruise
is
one
only
good
for
upgrades,
but
it's
not
good.
For
you
know
many
other
kind
of
decisions
that
I
can
make,
so
it
down
can
make
many
decision
at
the
fork.
A
rule
cannot
make
but
I
think
more
for
cruel
is
good
as
a
focal
is
a
great
governance
actually
mechanism,
it's
the
best
centrist
mechanism
for
decision
that
are
very,
very
infrequent.
E
So
if
you
need
to
make
a
decision
once
in
a
year,
I
would
say
that
probably
for
cruel
is
probably
the
best
governance
mechanism,
but
is
but
but
once
you
want
to
make
many
many
small
decisions,
and
now
we
can
kind
of
like
enter
like
what
card
is
in,
including
in
the
in
the
upgrade
situation.
We,
what?
What
do
we
call
upgrade
token
whitelisting?
Is
talking
whitelisting
an
upgrade?
Do
you
want
to
fork
every
time
you
know
the
crowding
decide
about
whether
to
you
know
to
list
a
token
or
not?
E
So
once
you
are
starting
to
speak
about
tens
and
hundreds
and
eventually
thousands
and
tens
of
thousands
of
decisions
a
year,
then
fork
will
just
make
absolutely
no
sense
and
you
will
have
to
have
it
out
to
make
collect
decisions
at
scale
when
I'm
saying
about
at
scale.
I
means
s
scale
in
terms
of
throughput
of
decisions,
but
then
scale
of
throughput
of
decisions
correlate
with
scale
natural
scale
of
the
hotel.
So
if
you
have
you
know
thousands
of
people,
they
will
have
thousands
of
ideas
to
execute
on
and
that's
something.
That's
simply.
D
Like
yeah
I
think
that
it
kind
of
actually
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
So
I've
had
this
just
like
similar
discussion.
A
lot
with
will
Warren
from
zero
X
about,
like
you
know,
does.
Does
your
X
protocol
really
need
a
governance
mechanism
and
because
my
you
know,
I
was
kind
of
making
a
similar
claim
there
saying
that
okay,
look,
you
can
upgrade,
you
can
just
launch
your
xv2
and
then
all
of
the
real
Ayres
who
are
like
you
know
can
just
point
to
0
x,
v2,
but
I
guess
like
sort
of
the
big
difference
here.
D
Is
that
work
and
my
perception
of
that
works
for
0
X,
because
it's
centralized
real
layers
and
they
can,
like
individually,
just
choose
to
point
to
the
new
version
of
the
0
X
contract,
but
if
you're
really
trying
to
focus
more
on,
like
the
whole,
a
larger
decentralized
finance
ecosystem,
its
kind
of
hot,
you
know
who
knows
what
the
up
like
you
know.
It
might
not
be
centralized
three
layers
who
are
pointing
at
at
the
X
tau
at
dr.
X.
It
could
be
like
you
know,
other
decentralized
apps
that
are
pointing
at
it.
E
I
mean
I
I
I
would.
I
would
even
are
try
to
argue
that
even
in
0x
I
mean
the
minimal
feature
that
you
need,
which
is
maybe
an
upgrade
once
a
year,
yeah
I
would
say,
yeah
I
agree
with
you
like,
like
fork,
is
just
just
as
good,
but
if
it's
also
think
that
for
0x
you
couldn't
think
of
many
more
things
that
you
could
do
in
the
Sandra's
fashion,
and
for
these
you
need
those
as
well.
So.
B
Martin
you
mentioned
this,
you
know,
is
ultimate
ambition
right
that
something
fdxtra
could
make
ten
thousand
decisions
a
year
or
maybe
more
and
I.
Guess
that
ties
into
very
much
what
we
spoke
a
few
last
time
right,
so
holographic,
consensus
and
sort
of
you
know
the
mechanisms
of
tau.
So
can
you
explain
a
little
bit?
How
is
that
gonna,
work
and
and
I
was
specifically
curious.
Also
about
you
know,
reputation
right.
There
is
this
thing.
Called
reputation
was
just
gonna,
have
a
key
role
in
the
TX
tau
sure.
E
Yeah
so
so,
firstly,
reputation,
I
mean
it's,
it's
it's
a
sensitive
word
and,
and
you
know,
some
people
interpret
it
differently
and
even
more
so
and
when
you
compare
it
with
rep
a
fogger.
So
let's
just
clear
the
definition.
When
we
say
reputation,
we
simply
mean
voting
power
like
you're.
The
weighting
of
the
weight
of
your
voting
is
your
reputation,
it's
just
a
number,
and
but
the
way
that
this
reputation
is
is
is
you
know,
is
allocated
to.
E
E
The
second
thing
about
reputation
is
to
say
so
often
people
talk
when
they
talk
about
reputation.
What
do
you
mean
and
again
that's
very
different
from
the
rep
token
of
augur?
What
they
mean
is
that
reputation
is
not
transferable.
Now
it
is
partially
true,
but
then
we
need
to
decide
what
we
mean
by
transferrable,
but
I
think
there
is
what
people
usually
not
speak
about
is
a
more
important
feature
of
reputation,
which
is
relation
is
slash
about
it's
reductive.
E
All
so
I
can,
in
fact,
while
in
the
contract
of
like
the
reputation
country
itself,
it
is
non-transferable.
So
you
cannot
transfer
your
petition
directly
from
an
address
to
an
address.
You
can
do
that
indirectly,
so
I
can
hold
my
reputation
in
a
smart
contract
and
then
have
a
token
owning
that
smart
contract
and
then
I
can
transfer
that
the
ownership
token
to
another
address
and
indirectly
transfer
the
reputation
to
a
different
owner
so
but
still
my
reputation
score.
That
is
tied
one
to
one
and
solidly
to
this
address.
E
In
this
case,
the
smart
contract
address
can
be
deductible
by
the
owner
of
the
reputation
system,
which
in
this
case
is
the
Dow.
So
if
I'm
making
something
which
is
socially
unacceptable,
the
Dow
can
decide
to
slash
my
reputation
and
that's
in
fact
that's
a
critical
element.
I
would
even
say
boldly
that
I
think
that's
the
only
way
to
fight
with,
for
example,
on
chain
bribery
attacks.
So
this
is
a
this
is
roughly
about
the
reputation
and
maybe
just
just
really
quickly
about
our
graphical
sensors
I
mean
the
whole
problem
or
the
whole.
E
Well,
basically,
you
get
into
a
into
a
scalability
problem
right
from
the
game:
justice
justice
just
as
much
as
you
get
to
scalability
problem
with
consensus
protocol
with
blockchain
in
the
same
way,
in
fact,
brilliant.
Obviously,
you
get
a
scalable
scalability
problem
with
the
centralized
governance
and
you
cannot
really
it
seemed
naively
okay,
you
cannot
make
many
decisions
that
are
also
resilient.
E
C
That
may
be
also
one
element
that
brought
our
two
projects
together
is
that
that
is
used
through
that
this
is
the
chief,
more
or
less
through
prediction
markets.
So
so
you
have
like
prediction
markets
for
the
proposals
that
ask
this
question:
will
the
proposals
will
that
proposal
be
yea
accepted
by
the
by
the
vote
and
that
curves
in
way
as
a
filter,
or
you,
oh
yeah,
as
a
way
to
to
prioritize
or
like
boost
boost
proposals?
C
A
E
People
have
realized
that
governance
systems.
You
know
the
regular
notion
of
governance
system,
you
know
voting
with
static
reputation,
they
are
relatively
resilient,
but
are
very
not
scalable
and
the
same
time.
Markets
are
usually
no
more
effective,
but
they
are
very,
not
resilient.
You
can
easily
manipulate
them,
so
the
solution
eventually
was
to
actually
combine
the
two,
so
the
decisions
are
made
by
voters
by
reputation
holders
only,
but
then,
in
order
to
scale
their
capacity.
There
is
another
system
in
market
prediction,
market
of
people
who
only
make
predictions.
They
are
not
making
decisions.
E
B
I
have
a
question
here
now:
Martin
right
like
no.
This
is
all
about
creating
markets
for
like
everything
and-
and
you
guys
made
the
point
that
you
know
reputation
can
be
sort
of
transferred
right
like
it
can
be
hope
by
the
smart
contract
and
then
maybe
that
controls
reputation.
Then
you
could
sell
kind
of
shares
in
the
smart
contract.
I
mean
why
not
just
make
reputation
like
fully
tokenize
and
transferable.
B
E
I
mean
I
mean
the
point,
so,
firstly,
the
again,
the
important
point
is
less
whether
it's
transferable
non-renewable
and
as
I
said
in
some
sense,
it's
indirectly
transferable,
so
I'm
admitting
that's
a
conversation
Martina
and
I
had
like
for
the
past
three
years,
so
it
is
transferable
and
but
but
it's
it's
deductible
and
that's
really
what
matters
it
less.
So
it's
true
that
making
it
unchanged
just
like
directly
transferrable
in
a
way
kind
of
I,
just
open
it
up
more.
E
You
know
maybe
potentially
more
opens
up
more
problems
and
we
see
we
don't
see
the
reason
to
do
it
to
do
that.
But
it's
not
the
main
point.
The
main
point
is
the
deductible
and
we
I
would
say
that
you
probably
can
transfer
and
then
you
can
sell
your
application
in
a
very,
very
small
scale
like
maybe
to
your
brother,
but
you
would
not
be
able
to
scale
ibly.
You
know
have
it
like
an
on
chain
marketplace
where
you
can,
you
know,
buy
as
much
reputation
as
you
want
or
as
much
as
purchase
one.
E
So
so
that's
it's
similar
to
this
situation
where,
for
example,
off
chain
you
know
people
talk
about
bribery
in
those,
so
often
bribery
is
not
is
not
I
would
not
call
it
an
attack
vector.
So
often
bribery
is
something
that
is
very
it's
very
hard
to
coordinate
and
scale
up,
but
on
chain
robbery
is
super
attacker
like
it's
a
huge
attack
vector,
so
you
you
want
to
make
sure
this
thing
are
not
scalable
and
on
chainable,
if
I.
D
Why
not?
You
know
we
have
a
similar
problem
as
well
in
the
proof
of
snake
world,
and
we
solve
this
using
on
bonding
periods
where
why
not
have
a
system
where
you
know
it's
untrue?
If
you
want
voting
power,
you
have
to
bond
the
tokens
and
then
you
have
to
go
through
a
long
on
bonding
period,
but
once
they
go
to
the
unbounding
period,
then
they're
transferable,
again,
as
isn't
that
also
a
potential
solution.
This.
E
Is
this
is
an
equivalent
solution
and
I'm
just
work
representing
is
just
just
more
generic
than
that,
so
basically,
one
of
the
way
so
in
fact,
they're
actually
the
relevant
way
the
relevant
way
for
the
X.
Now,
but
more
generally,
one
of
the
way
to
have
reputation
is
indeed
locking
some
tokens.
So
you
look
some
tokens
and
then
reputation
story
is
simply
the
number
that
reflects
how
much
voting
power
you
got
from
locking
the
tokens
and
and
then
you
can
actually
you
can
play
with
it
with
a
formula
much
more
generally.
E
For
example,
it
can
be
the
amount
of
tokens
that
you
locked,
but
it
can
also
be
the
amount
of
tokens
that
you
locked
time,
the
time
that
you
lock
it
for
or
many
other
formula
and
more
generally,
you
can
also
have
reputation
system
that
are
not
coming
from
tokens.
So,
yes,
the
answer
is
that
it
is
equivalent,
but
much
more
general
than
that
and.
C
Well,
maybe
to
jump
there
in
that
is
actually
one
of
the
one
of
the
main
mechanisms
how
the
reputation
of
this
DX
tau
will
be
distributed.
So
one
thing
that's
super
important
to
us:
is
we
fed
up
or
we
we
tried
to
set
up
the
the
the
initial
distribution
of
of
this
reputation
or
the
ownership
or,
if
you
undertake
holder
ship
of
the
Dow
to
be
really
broad
and
to
be
kind
of
this,
a
fair
decentralized,
no,
no,
no
pre
mine
or
no
no
kind
of
pre
allocation
to
gnosis
or
to
to
Dallas
Texas.
C
Two
things
or
three
things
you
can
do
so
one
is
trade
on
the
Dutch
exchange
and
earn
those
manolio
tokens
that
will
distribute
50%
50%
of
the
reputation
roughly
30%
will
just
not
graffiti
exactly
30%
will
be
given
to
those
who
lock
down
tokens
and
that
will
be
all
tokens.
So
we
expect
a
currently
a
number
of
like
50
years,
see
20
tokens.
It
will
be
whitelisted
on
the
Dutch
exchange,
so
any
year
see
20
tokens
it's
wide
listed
and
traded
on
the
Dutch
exchange.
C
Holders.
Of
this
token
can
just
like
lock
down
this
token
for
up
to
a
year
and
depending
on
how
much
values
they
lock
for
how
long
they
will
get
fraction
of
that
30
percent.
Eight
percent
to
10
percent
to
ether
the
same
for
just
locking
down
ether
and
the
last
10
percent
will
be
auctioned
off
for
Gen
tokens.
That's
the
the
Dow
stack
tokens,
so
the
Dow
will
start
having
those
gent
oaken's
and
they
are
used
to
kind
of
subsidize
governance
mechanism.
D
There
a
cap
to
the
amount
of
reputation
like
so
what
is
the
initial
supply
of
reputation,
because
it
seems
that
to
me
that,
like
the
50
percent,
that's
distributed
by
Magnolia
as
well
as
the
30
percent,
that's
distributed
by
locking
ERC
20s
both
require
the
whitelist.
But
it
seems
that
the
whitelist
doesn't
exist
until
the
DX
now
exists.
So
it
seems
to
be
like
a
circular
yeah.
C
C
Maybe
we
can
extend
it
200
tokens
and
if
anyone
wants
to
be
on
the
list,
they
can
contact
us
and
then
we
will
make
sure
that
it's
also
added
but
I
mean
we
we
have
to
like
it
just
it
just
worked
for
us,
because
we
have
to
evaluate
each
token
and
is
there
is
there?
Is
it
actually
a
real
token
in
the
sense
that
I
mean
it
took?
It
is
in
some.
C
E
Yeah,
if
you're
going
to
put
your
sunny
token
and
then
control
the
sunny
economy,
then
you
you
you
you,
you
maliciously
generate
a
lot
of
magnolia
and
basically
wipe
up
the
value
from
no
Lia,
so
so
that
yeah.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
no
sunny
tokens
on
the
at
the
beginning
and
then
that
that
will
be
the
guard
for
later
on.
Yeah.
E
Actually,
this
is
really
interesting
because
it's
it's
you're
just
now
seeing
how
two
systems
use
each
other.
So
one
system,
you
a
system,
a
uses,
B-
and
this
is
B-
uses
a.
But
this
is
just
the
beginning.
We
already
have
in
mind.
You
know:
I
have
three
four
five
systems
that
we
would
like
to
attach
to
that,
and
we
already
see
like
the
bi-directional
interdependence
of
them
and
that's
that's
really.
E
B
C
B
C
She
doubts
are
really
probably
the
next
year.
The
next
big
big,
like
step
forward
in
in
in
ways
how
humans
organize
so
I,
like
this
quote
that
dows
might
be
as
important
as
the
invention
of
the
firm
in
the
16th
17th
century,
because
they
they
are
yeah
in
my
expectation
or
our
expectations.
The
old,
the
only
mechanism
that
allows
coordination.
C
Strong
coordination
between
10,000
up
to
millions,
millions,
millions
of
people,
and
so
we
think
those
are
significant,
be
significantly
more
efficient
in
in
in
in
decision-making
in
in
processing
processing
input
from
from
yeah
10,000
1
million
members
in
in
coming
to
decision.
So
this
may
be
overused
term
of
collective
intelligence
and
stuff,
like
that.
C
So
that's
I
mean
probably
talk
about
more
about
that,
but
that's
roughly
the
general
idea
that
there
is
a
good
chance
or
it's
small.
Its
I
mean
it's
still
a
small
chance,
but
there's
a
good
chair
is
a
chance
that
the
doubt
will
really
be.
The
next
evolution
in
will
replace
firms
is
kind
of
the
most
powerful
things
for
for
humans
to
organize.
Now
we
can
talk
about.
C
Why
might
sadik's
now
have
a
chance
to
to
be
the
first
style
that
kind
of
achieves
that
scale
or
it
kind
of
makes
those
through
puts
those
large
achievements,
and
we
would
say
the
timing,
finally
might
be
right,
so
I
think
with
the
doubt.
Two
and
a
half
years
ago,
we
already
got
got
an
idea
of
like
how
things
can
explode
and
go
wrong,
of
course,
but
but
but
I
mean
this
beside
that
kind
of
going
wrong
part
it
already
for
those
who
were
close
to
it.
It
was.
C
It
was
magical
kind
of
what
what
happened
one
once
this
was
what
style
was
created
and
suddenly
all
teams
in
the
space
were
like
looking
at
this
Dow
and
trying
to
interact
with
us
down
and
become
part
of
the
style
make
proposal
supposes
down
it.
Was
this
huge
magnet
for
I
mean
this
was
really
just
a
period
of
five
weeks,
I
believe
already
right,
I
recall
it
correctly,
but
again
it
gave
already
an
idea
of
what
what
what
would
might
be
possible
and
yeah
the
dick
style
in
a
way.
C
Does
the
more
conservative
some
somewhat
more
conservative
approach
in
the
sense
that
it
doesn't
like
start
with
a
big
token
sale,
but
it
starts
with
this
yeah
big
reputation
and
distribution
period,
but
it
is
I
mean
it
might
decide.
Well,
it
will
be
up
to
the
tower
to
decide
to
to
do
a
token
sale
or
other
forms
of
rate
raising
capital
once
once
its
life,
so
it
has.
The
DX
now
has
a
full
power
to
do
anything.
C
C
There
is
not
much
more.
The
style
can
can
take
all
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
smart
contract
systems
that
that
are
developed
are
open
source.
It
could
deploy
them
it
could
it
could
mine
I
mean
projects
could
decide
to
on
purpose
handover,
upgrade
ability
to
the
style
because
they
want
to
give
up
their
centralized
control
they
they
they
often
do
have
so
yeah.
There's
very
few.
E
E
They
claim
the
bold
claim
about
doubts
or
expectation
is
that
they
can
be
sort
of
like
super
scalable
organization.
So
the
problem
of
centralized
organizations
is
really
that
they
they
do
not
scale
well,
meaning
that
they
can.
They
can
scale,
but
when
they
scale
become
less
and
less
effective,
so
less
and
less.
If
you
wish
effective
per
person
and
this
decay
factor
is
really
you
know,
it's
really
strong,
and
you
know
every
time
that
you
invent
new
technology.
E
You
kind
of
like
allow
to
stretch
somewhat
that
factor,
and
then
you
know
we
went
from
firms
to
AmeriCorps
/
Asians,
but
still
the
pay
that
you're
paying
for
scanning
is
very,
very
big.
So
very
big
organization
are
very
ineffective
and
we
believe
that
thou,
the
centralized
organization
actually
can
keep
effectivity
when
they
grow,
and
maybe
we
don't
know
we
will
see,
but
maybe
they
can
even
increase
effective
it.
E
Just
like
network
effect,
they
can
increase
the
effective
ET
per
person
as
they
grow,
and
if
that
is
true,
then
those
two
corporations
will
be
the
same
thing
that
network
effect.
You
know
in
the
early
internet
days
where
two
previous
apps
so,
for
example,
a
network
effect
based
social
media
to
previous
old
media.
They
just
took
over
because
they
become
more
effective
as
they
grow
and
they
completely
become
pre-madonna
dominant
in
there.
E
So
there
is
expectation
the
Dow's
will
basically
in
a
way
eat
up
the
domain
of
production
in
some
sense,
and
then
the
second
thing
to
identify
is
that,
because
of
this
exponential
network
effect,
I
think
then
there
is.
There
is
just
a
enormous
advantage
for
early
movers,
so
basically
that
that
is
to
say
that
the
first
dial
that
will
be
successful
in
that
sense
that
it
can
super
scale
itself
effectively,
will
probably
be
the
biggest
eventually
at
least
biggest
in
its
own
domain.
E
Of
course,
we
don't
know
and
that's
why
you
know
that's
why
Martin
is
saying
just
1%
there's,
so
many
things
can
get
wrong,
but
we
want
to
say
that
the
technology
has
matured
so
much
in
the
last
few
years
that
there
is
some
chance,
some
non-negligible
but
small
chance
that
things
are
ready
to
scale
up
without
a
major
breakdown.
And
if
that
happens
in
the
premise
that
those
super
are
super,
scalable
will
just
see
that
the
first
Dow
basically
eating
up
its
own
domain,
and
then
you
can
ask
god.
E
But
what
is
this
domain
so
I
would
say
that
the
DX
now
is
really
deify.
Now
it's
decentralized
financed
ow.
That
check
is
just
you
know
its
first
products
first
asset,
but
there
are
so
many
tools
that
you
want
to
decentralize.
That
can
be
decentralized,
financial,
financial
tools
and,
if
DX
Dow
succeeds,
I
would
I
would
expect
it
to
be
the
basically
the
the
largest
financial
organization
in
the
planet.
You
know
without
some
of
course
everything
is.
You
know
these
are.
E
B
This
is
a
super
fascinating,
so
thanks
so
much
for
explaining
this
now
in
in
the
traditional
financial
world,
where
we
have
banks
right,
banks
can
get
to
a
certain
size
or,
like
you
know,
different
companies
can
get
to
a
certain
size
and
I
guess
the
biggest
companies
you
know.
Maybe
they
have
like
a
million
employees
who
had
something
like
Walmart
now,
you've
made
the
point
right
that
the
effectivity
to
some
to
some
extent
decreases
right.
B
So
this
tends
to
be
this
kind
of
limit
like
we
don't
have
companies
of
like
super
enormous
or
you
know
much
more
enormous
size
and
then
the
other
thing
is.
We
have
things
like
antitrust,
law
and
and
some
government
regulations
that
say:
okay,
we
actually
have
to
make
sure
that
no
company,
you
know
totally
dominates
a
market
now
with
what
you're
saying,
if
what
that's
true
right,
that
actually
there
are
network
effects
around
the
dow
and
the
efficiency
increases
as
it
grows.
I
mean,
what's
the
ultimate
outcome
here
is
the?
E
So
I
want
to
clarify
something:
I
mean
the
problem,
so
yes,
one
problem
of
companies
that
they
cannot
grow
above
a
million
people,
let's
say,
but
the
problem
is
harder.
If
the
problem
is
that
not
only
they
I
mean
even
in
million
even
in
100,000,
they
are
not
not
not
effective
and
they
are
not
effective
because
the
interest
incentives
are
not
lying,
so
the
incentive
of
the
owner
of
the
company
or
the
you
know
other
influencers
of
the
company.
E
E
Some
some
some
of
these
huge
companies
actually
controlled
by
a
single
person,
and
then
it
leads
to
a
such
a
distort
of
alignment
of
interest
of
1/2
billion,
a
literally
1
2
billion,
and-
and
here
we
have,
if,
if
we
are
right
in
our
you
know
in
our
wild
guess,
then
then,
basically
that
that
that
body
can
take
over
the
market,
but
in
a
way
that
maintains
the
line
of
interest
of
all
of
those
billion
people
involved.
So
you
don't
need
to
worry
about
the
trust
laws.
You
basically
get
what
you
get
at
the
end.
E
D
Like
you
know,
in
modern
most
companies
today
like
no
don't
employees
also
have
like
a
lined
interest.
Usually
they
have
stuff
like
options,
agreements
and
whatnot
or
and
even
like
you
know
something
that
things
that
aren't
even
traditional
companies
I
got.
You
know
there
was
some
news
last
year
about
like
uber
and
airbnb,
trying
to
distribute
equity
to
like
what
are
currently
they're
contractors.
So
you
know,
could
we
could
it
don't?
We
already
see
this
shift
to
words
like
especially
in
the
90s.
D
What
you
know
with
the
big
thing
that
happened
in
the
90s
was
like
executives
started,
getting
paid
compensated,
primarily
in
equity
rather
than
salary,
and
so
we
or
do
we
not
already
see
sort
of
this
shift
towards
incentive
alignment.
Even
in
traditional
companies
or
you
know,
21st
century
companies
like
uber
and
airbnb.
E
Absolutely
I
mean
absolutely
I
mean
it's
just
actually
strengthening
our
claim.
This
transition
from
centralization
to
decentralization
this
transition
from
a
huge
distortion
of
US
interest,
a
lot
of
interest
into
more
equitable
or
I,
don't
know
balance
or
whatever
you
call
it.
Alignment
of
interest
is
evolution.
E
It
is
absolutely
an
evolutionary
transition,
it's
the
it's,
the
devil,
mystic
evolutionary
transition,
and
we
see
that
transition
happening
for
decades,
and
the
only
thing
is
that
each
time
it
new
technology
is
coming
in,
it
enables
you
to
set
up
a
you
know,
a
higher
level
of
that
coordination
and
installation
alignment.
But
we
also
experience
that
the
human
grid,
you
know
wherever
there
is
a
way
to
take
over
power.
E
You
know
so
you
had
like
system
that
kind
of
like
started
in,
in
course,
of
the
centralization,
but
then
some
there
was
some
power
construction
that
could
resent
relies
them,
and
we've
seen
that
over
and
over
again
and
I.
Think,
and
in
that
sense,
I
think
the
blockchain
has
really
changed
the
rules
in
the
sense
that
it
allows
for
technology
that,
in
a
way,
maybe
cannot
be
captured,
I
mean,
of
course,
we
we
need
to
worry
a
lot
about
that
and
make
of
the,
and
that's
all
that's
one
of
those
things
that
can
go
wrong.
E
D
Another
question
I
have
really
quickly
about
the
reputation.
Token
is,
you
know,
doesn't
the
non
transferability
in
in
a
way
maybe
limit
the
potential
future
decentralization
of
the
system?
Because,
like
you
know,
a
lot
of
tokens
today
are
like
pretty
centralized
in
their
distribution.
But
the
idea
is
that
over
time,
market
mechanics
will
help
decentralize
them,
but
if
we
don't
allow
reputation
to
be
bought
and
sold
on
like
public
markets,
how
do
we
expect?
What,
if
the
initial
distribution
that
comes
out
next
month
is
like
super
centralized?
What?
What
is
the
mechanism
for
resolving
that.
C
Evenly
so,
first
of
all,
I
would
say
if,
if
we,
if
we
don't
achieve
like
at
least
a
sufficient
level
of
decentralization
and
I,
would
say
that
you
can,
for
our
eternal
goals,
at
least
that
1000
participants,
ideally
10,000
participants.
Well,
the
Dow
will
not
be
interesting.
It's
one
element.
The
other
element
is
if
it
gets
like
this
sufficiently
decentralized
initial
distribution.
Of
course
it
needs
to
like
have
much
more
reputation
holders
over
time,
and
there
are
already
ways
built
in
that.
Of
course,
new
reputation
is
issued.
C
C
C
Correct
I
mean
well,
it
could
do
that
or
I
mean
it
could.
It
could
also
just
decide
to
continue
like
incentivizing,
like
trading
on
the
Dodge
X.
If
it
says
okay,
there's
not
enough
liquidity,
then
it
will
just
do
whatever.
Whatever.
Whatever
things
is,
is
useful
to
grow
the
Dower
to
grow
the
ecosystem,
it
will
control
over.
E
E
So
if
that
is
true,
then
if
the
Dow
will,
even
if
even
if
it
is,
you
know,
that's
say
that
if
the
first
phase
of
distribution
was,
you
know,
just
mildly
successful,
and
rather
than
the
expected
one
thousand,
you
know
reputation
holders
we
just
have
100,
but
the
things
that,
if
those
100
believed
in
that
the
end
of
the
Dow,
if
they
believe
that
this
centralized
is
good,
they
then
have
the
incentive
the
interests
to
keep
on
this
reputation.
So
they
can.
E
Secondly,
there
is
also
the
mechanism
of
delegation
and,
of
course,
is
another
way
to
kind
of
like
you
can
have
it's
kind
of
like
a
mild
form
of
transfer
ability
of
reputation
that
can
be
retractable
or
not
retractable,
depending
on
the
conditions,
so
yeah
just
to
say
that
definitely,
this
in
translational
rotation
is
important
and
we
more
so
we're
saying
that
it's
evolutionarily
advantageous
and
and
thus
will
happen
and,
if
not
in
the
first
Dow
in
the
second.
Now
that
will
make
it
better.
B
C
We
are
not
yet
going
all
in
on
the
hundred
the
DX
now,
but
if,
if
it
would
like
turn
out
to
be
a
diode
that
gives
kind
of
the
guarantees
like,
we
will
trust
the
doubt
that
it
would
make
reasonable
decisions.
Then,
of
course,
if
we
have
any
smart
contract
system
that
that
needs-
or
that
needs
to
have
some,
maybe
parameter
change
upgrades,
we
would
probably
always
give
that
power
to
to
the
yeah
to
the
dig
star,
because
again
we
we
think
platforms
are
more
attractive
if
they
are
decentralized,
it's
more
attractive
to
build.
C
B
C
So
you
can
pay
part
of
this
liquidity
contribution
and
also
roughly
that
means,
if
you
have
to
you,
know,
and
all
you
kind
of
get
the
slight
advantage
similar
like
you,
can
get
the
advantage
with
Magnolia
and
will
be
super
interesting
to
see
what
what
the
dow
does
with
that.
So,
in
theory,
the
dow
could
fog
out
gino.
E
Just
to
say,
just
to
be
precise,
I
mean
work
out
in
the
sense
of
luck.
Check
not
even
I
mean
that
we
don't
we
want
that,
would
I,
wouldn't
it
wouldn't
even
to
change
the
whole
contract.
It
can
just.
It
has
the
ownership
in
an
ability
to
change
the
logic
and
basically
kick
out.
Do
you
know,
but
then
we
also
believe
that
there
is
actually
advantage
of
the
Dow
to
maintain
it.
Maybe
and
we'll
see
how
it's
for
fun.
C
So
kind
of
the
the
the
the
way
we
envision
it
is
that
there
will
be
those
those
many
or
reputation
holders
offices.
There
will
be
token
holders
to
start
to
do
a
larger
extent
of
of
all
the
different
token
projects
and
they
kind
of
prove
that
by
locking
down
token,
so,
ideally,
the
DX
tile
will
have
like
part
of
the
knows
community.
Apart
of
this,
your
X
community,
a
part
of
the
whatever
call
them
I,
don't
know
status
and
many
others.
C
So,
ideally,
the
the
Dow
will
have
shared
interests
with
those
groups
and
we
would
see
gnosis
as
a
company
as
like
someone
interacting,
was
this
Dow
and
and
probably
once
in
a
while
and
making
proposals
to
build
stuff
for
that
Dow
and
ideally
that
I
would
see
that
as
valuable
and
therefore
not
don't
fork
out.
You
know,
but
it's
it's.
That
is
definitely
in
the
risk.
I
guess
we
are
taking.
B
B
Remember
that
you
know
incredible
momentum
and
excitement
around
that,
and
certainly
it
so
we
saw
obvious
back
then,
even
though
this
was
such
a
primitive
attempt
of
the
incredible
power
that
does
have
so,
if
you
know
finally
we're
at
the
point
where
this
is
kind
of
coming
back
and
maybe
if
a
much
different
level
of
maturity,
that's
something
incredibly
exciting.
Now
we're
gonna
have,
of
course,
links
to
a
bunch
of
different
stuff,
but
probably
some
listeners
do
want
to
get
involved
and
you
know
participate
in
the
doll.
B
E
C
C
So
with
gnosis
we
made
we
obviously
yeah.
Obviously
gnosis
in
the
obstacle
like
kicking
off
is
Dow,
but
it's
really
important
to
us
to
to
make
tears.
This
is
not
an
Aussie
style,
so
we
already
made
the
the
pre
commitment
and
we
will
make
this
announcement
a
few
times.
We
will
burn
all
bridges
on
April
early
April.
So
basically,
once
this
once
this
initiation
period
is
over,
we
will,
we
will
basically
say
gnosis
involvement
is
over.
For
now.
Gnosis
is
often
is
over.
C
Maybe
eventually
we
will
then
start
again
like
in
interacting
with
Dao
as
described
before,
but
at
that
point
we
will
basically
say
either.
This
thing
develops
its
own
life
and
kind
of
does
something
out
of
its
own
or
it
will
die
and
we
will
have
to
die.
We
won't.
We
won't
do
anything.
So
we
will.
We
will
close.
Our
github
repository
will
look
closed
kind
of
the
communication
channels
and
we
really
want
to
make
it
should
develop
its
own
like
ways
where,
where
does
it
communicate?
How
do
people
coordinate
that?
C
E
Maybe
to
add
so,
of
course,
as
Marty
says,
like
dog
stuck
in
osseous
channels
are
are
open
and
although
it
is
like
I
said
we
were,
you
know,
Bernie
goes
all
bridges
and
and
and
now
second
doses
will
not,
you
know,
will
not
drive.
We've
just
been
exist,
knowledge,
but
will
not
drive,
not
drive
the
Dow
once
it's
alive.
It
has
a
life
of
its
own,
but
there
are
some
places,
I
mean
so.
Firstly,
there
is,
there
is
a
forum
that
we're
setting
it
up
for
that
and
again
we're
not.
E
We
don't
want
to
have
any
ownership
of
that
forum.
What
we're
setting
up
a
forum
where
people
can
speak.
So
it's
it's.
The
dow
talk,
not
org
when
you
can
already
go
there,
dow
talk
dot,
org
and
right
now.
Well,
of
course,
right
now
it's
not
live.
So
there's
no,
no
discussion,
but
we
you
know
people
can
decide
on
their
own
to
have
a
discussion
there.
Secondly,
you
know
we're
building
the
whole
stack.
E
So
in
that
sense
you
know
we
will
the
contracts
and
the
protocols-
and
you
know
in
more
layers
of
technology,
but
at
the
end
of
that
stack,
there
is
an
interface
which
is
called
alchemy,
which
is
right
now
under
the
domain
alchemy
note
down
stuck
at
I/o.
So
that's
an
interface
that
could
be
you
which
you
can
operate
and
participate
in
in
the
dow.
E
But
again
we
have
no
wish
to
have
a
control
in
that
interface
and
in
that
sense,
there's
there's
already
a
bunch
of
other
alternative
interfaces
by
independent
actors
that
are
being
built
up
to
also
serve
as
gateways
to
the
dow.
But
anyway
you
can,
you
could
define
you
can
participate
in
that
dow
through
that
interface
and,
of
course
they
participate
in
the
reputation
bootstrap
period
to
get
reputation.
Yeah.
C
Maybe-
and
it's
super
interesting
already
to
see
or
to
feel
like
it,
it's
developing
its
own
life,
it's
developing
its
own
rules,
its
developing
its
own
value
set,
and
you
can
there
yeah
it's
a
simpler
and
earlier
version
of
the
protocol,
but
you
already
can
get
a
sense.
How
the
dig
style
then
might
look
like
right.
E
So
if
you
go
right
now
to
alchemy
no
Taoist,
Aikido
I
hope
you
need
will
find
the
genesis
top
right.
Now
there
is
only
one
doubters
Genesis.
Now
it
operates
in
under
the
alpha
version
of
this
stack
and
the
interface
and
the
protocol.
Everything
it's
clunky,
it
is
slow.
It
is,
you
know
it
has
a
bad
UX.
It's
you
know
everything
that
you
wouldn't
like
for
a
product
and
yet
you
know
we
just
launched
it
completely.
Annoying
just
like
completely
quietly
with
50
people,
and
now
you
just
grow
225
and.
E
Produce
200
proposal,
out
of
which
I
think
60
something
has
passed
almost
sounding
proposal.
There
were
documents,
few
interfaces,
modules
browsers
three
meetups
like
thing
that
we
haven't,
you
know
suggesting
Rosalee
we
haven't
thought
about,
and
we
know
we
could
not.
You
can
definitely
not
I,
guess
it's.
It's
surprisingly,
an
effective
way.
We
kind
of
like
fueled.
We
funded
that
Dow.
It
wasn't
enough
experiment
and
I
think
it
was
a
super
effective
way
to
together
return
on
that
on
that
fund.
E
So
this
is
just
the
sandbox.
It's
a
prototype,
and
very
soon
in
this
q1.
Before
even
the
DX
now
launches,
we
will
launch
the
the
system
in
beta.
It
will
be
completely
different
world
different
application.
Much
you
know
much
more
slicker,
fast
design,
many
more
features
and
so
on
so
forth.
So
but
yeah
so
we
are,
we
are.
We
are
waiting
for
the
beta
cool.
B
A
Thank
you
for
joining
us
on
this
week's
episode.
We
released
new
episodes
every
week
you
can
find
and
subscribe
to
the
show
on
iTunes
Spotify,
YouTube
SoundCloud
or
wherever
you
listen
to
podcasts
and
if
you
have
a
Google
home
or
Alexa
device,
you
can
tell
it
to
listen
to
the
latest
episode
of
the
epicentre
podcast
go
to
epicenter
TV
slash
subscribe
for
a
full
list
of
places
where
you
can
watch
and
listen
while
you
there
be
sure
to
sign
up
for
the
newsletter.
So
you
get
new
episodes
in
your
inbox
as
they're
released.