►
From YouTube: Filecoin Plus - September 19 Notary Governance Calls
Description
The eighteenth set of Notary Governance calls of 2023 September 19 to discuss the Filecoin Plus program.
Slides and Links: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12t3-4W2Eu2iR11AvA0o5HFJA91FuF6KnGke64bgwsuQ/edit?usp=sharing
Agenda
Notary
Events Update - Check out https://fildev.io/#iceland
Working Group Updates - None
Proposals Discussion
974 - DataCap removal bot
976 - AC bot
Community Issues
All LDN application presentations are a-sync will be discussed in #fil-plus-application-review SLACK
If you would like to attend these meetings LIVE, the Fil+ Notary Governance calendar is available at: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0/embed?src=c_k1gkfoom17g0j8c6bam6uf43j0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America%2FLos_Angeles
Follow Filecoin!
Website: https://bit.ly/3ndAg44
Twitter: https://bit.ly/3ObND0x
Slack: https://bit.ly/3HKfFy7
Blog: https://bit.ly/3HFZFNv
Reddit: https://bit.ly/39N4Jmv
Telegram: https://bit.ly/3bkP8Ly
Subscribe to our newsletter! https://bit.ly/3Oy8J9j
#filecoin #ipfs #libp2p #web3 #nft
A
A
First,
with
notary
issues,
we'll
walk
through
upcoming
events,
kind
of
give
you
a
feel
of
what's
to
come,
so
you
can
sign
up,
mark
your
calendars
and
look
out
for
talks
or
attend,
live
and
we'll
talk
about
some
of
the
past
events,
so
you
can
kind
of
get
a
feel
of
what
was
discussed
recently
at
the
Phil
Dev
Summits,
and
we
have
Casey
on
the
line
to
kind
of
give
us
a
summary.
Since
he
was
live
in
attendance
until
you
went,
you
could
do
to
find
the
links
and
watch
those
contents.
A
As
far
as
working
group
updates,
we
have
none
on
this
fall,
so
we've
dedicated
a
lot
of
time
for
the
two
open
proposals,
974
and
976.
What
we
have
set
up
for
these
is
three
parts
to
each
issue.
One
is
just
a
brief
summary
of
what
that
issue
is
Again
by
Phil
and
Simon.
Then
we
have
the
most
recent
threads
that
have
taken
place
in
GitHub
to
kind
of
catch.
A
You
up
and
familiarize
with
like
some
of
the
discussion
taking
place
and
then
ample
time
and
both
issues
to
kind
of
get
your
comments
and
discussions
for
some
of
the
key
issues
that
were
coming
out
of
this
to
make
sure
that
your
voice
is
heard
and
that
that
goes
into
the
proposals
at
the
end
of
the
call.
We
have
lots
of
time
set
up
for
discussions.
So
if
there's
any
points,
you'd
like
to
see
added
to
this
call
or
discuss
there'll
be
plenty
of
time
for
that
on.
The
call
so
today
is
the
19th.
A
Next
call
will
be
taking
place
on
the
3rd
of
October.
There's
a
friendly
reminder.
If
you
follow
the
calendar,
Linked
In
This
slide
deck.
You
can
go
ahead
and
grab
that
this
slide
deck
is
also
available
in
the
GitHub
comments,
as
well
as
the
slack
issue.
So
if
you
want
to
follow
along
or
get
any
of
that
slides,
that's
where
you
can
find
it
and
if
there's
any
points
that
you
want
to
see
in
future
calls
every
call
afterwards.
I'll
make
an
issue
in
the
GitHub
repository
for
file.
A
If
you
need
anything
at
all,
you
have
a
friendly
governance
team
to
back
you
up,
if
you're
not
sure
where
to
route
an
issue,
you
can
always
ping
me
and
I'll
be
happy
to
route
you
to
the
best
POC
or
make
sure
that
it's
bubbled
up
and
heard
and
discussed
and
get
you
an
answer
for
what
you're
looking
for
so
with
that
notary
is
big,
big
hello.
Let's
take
a
look
here.
A
Is
the
SLA
I'm
going
to
drop
this
here
and
chat
for
everybody
and
again
thank
you
for
signing
in
they
say
they
always
and
I'll.
Just
say
it
again.
Here
makes
it
really
helpful
to
kind
of
get
your
input
as
far
as
where
your
time
is
going
kind
of
measure,
participation
for
who's
in
the
program,
who's
contributing.
So
no
reason
the
call!
Thank
you
so
much
if
you're,
not
a
notary,
still
include
encourage
you
if
you're
watching
or
here
live
to
fill
this
out.
A
It's
a
good
way
to
just
kind
of
Mark
your
participation
as
well
as
like
Community
inputs.
It's
really
helpful
for
things
like
elections
and
kind
of
measuring
it.
So
thank
you,
everybody
for
filling
that
out
links
posted
in
chat
where
you
can
find
it
in
the
slide
deck
all
right.
So
we
just
had
two
big
events
that
took
place
in
the
Phil
Seoul
and
so
I'd
like
to
invite
KZ.
A
B
So
the
idea
was
in
the
first
sessions
to
there
were
specific
tracks
now
recovered
on
each
day.
So
there
was
focuses
on
SPS
in
terms
of
tooling
Business
Development.
You
know
really
helping
any
SPS
in
attendance
working
with
network
growth.
There
there
was
protocol
development
track.
There's
a
lot
of
discussions
about
the
protocol
itself.
B
B
You
know
falcoin,
plus
the
importance
of
Falcon
plots
block
rewards
going
to
deals,
so
it
was
really
good.
All
of
the
videos
are
recorded.
There's
a
link
on
this
slide
here.
So
Juan
gave
sort
of
an
introductory
talk,
almost
reintroducing
the
idea
behind
filecoin
the
mission
importance
of
filecoin
plus
and
the
rest
that
talk
is
is
linked
for
now.
B
The
rest
of
the
talks,
I
believe,
will
be
updated
in
the
near
future,
but
I
think
the
idea
was
coming
into
Singapore
and
heading
into
Iceland.
You
know
to
start
discussions
and
work
on
some
of
the
protocol
and
changes
needed
and
then
continue
those
discussions
next
week.
So
there
will
be
a
a
separate
series
of
talks.
B
I
think
a
lot
of
it's
focused
on
retrievals
they'll,
be
continued
talks
about
Phil
plus
allocators,
this
idea
of
having
different
Pathways
to
data
cap.
So
right
now
we
all
are
familiar
with
the
large
LDN
pathway,
e-fill
plus
well,
Juan
was
proposing.
You
know
anyone
with
other
ideas
for
Pathways
we're
happy
to
to
have
you
bring
those
to
the
table,
design
something
build
it
out
and
receive
a
small
amount
of
data
cap
tested.
B
So
they
really
want
to
continue
those
discussions.
I
think
that
should
be
hopefully
an
exciting
part
of
the
the
topics
there
yeah.
So
that's
pretty
much
it.
Okay
right,
it
was
overall
productive,
a
lot
of
the
same
faces
from
from
other
events
for
sure,
as
good
to
see
people
and
collaborate
in
person.
C
B
D
B
And
he
really
dove
into
that.
So
I
would
definitely
watch
his
his
session
and
he
had
a
really
good
one.
On
the
third
day
he
came
into
the
Phil
plus
governance
track
and
gave
a
talk
more
about.
You
know,
abuse,
finding
ways
to
mitigate
people
that
are
trying
to
manipulate
the
system
and
and
I
think
those
discussions
were
will
continue
in
Iceland.
A
Thanks
for
that
Danny,
maybe
that's
a
good
segue
into
upcoming
events,
so,
as
Casey
just
mentioned,
the
next
event
is
next
week
it's
taking
place
in
Iceland
from
the
25th
through
the
27th
There's.
The
link
here
that
has
the
full
agenda
of
the
talks,
the
speakers
and
the
content.
That's
going
to
be
uploaded.
These
sessions
won't
be
broadcast
live,
but
they
will
be
recorded
and
posted
to
YouTube.
So
on
the
next
governance
call
I'll
make
sure
to
share
those
links
as
well
as
put
them
in
the
public
fill
slack.
A
So
anybody
who
can't
make
the
trip
to
beautiful
Iceland
you'll
be
able
to
watch
all
the
content,
talks
and
kind
of
digest,
what's
being
discussed
around
the
ecosystem
and
Community.
For
that
and
then
coming
up
in
November
is
a
big
event.
It's
the
filecoin
network
base.
It's
the
lab
week
taking
place
in
Istanbul,
so
friendly
update.
If
you
want
to
Mark
the
calendars
and
make
a
trip
out
to
Turkey,
that's
taking
place
from
the
14th
through
the
16th
and
then
before
that
in
October
is
the
Phil
Vegas.
A
So
this
is
organized
by
the
PowerPoint
foundation
and
it
kind
of
covers
a
high
level
of
like
the
developer,
Summits
very
similar
to
what's
taking
place
in
Iceland
and
Singapore,
but
really
deep,
diving
into
like
storage
provider
content
and
really
what's
going
on
in
that
Community
to
get
involved.
So
the
links
are
here
in
the
slide
deck
if
you're
Keen
to
see
what
the
talks
are,
whether
to
attend,
live
or
be
on
the
lookout
for
when
those
are
posted,
all
right,
so
diving
into
the
two
issues
that
we
have.
A
E
K
Ray
hi
everyone
just
to
give
a
quick
recap.
This
proposal
stemmed
off
of
the
notary
governance,
call
discussion.
We
had
on
August
22nd,
2023
and
iterated
off
of
proposal
967.
this
proposal,
basically
States.
Three
main
topics
on
data
cap
removal,
the
first
one
being
that
after
28
days
of
no
activity,
meaning
no
comments,
the
application
will
close
and
the
ditto
cap
that
was
allocated
to
that
application
will
be
removed.
E
Second,
if
a
client
requests
to
self-close
or
to
remove
data
cap,
for
example,
a
mistake,
the
bot
will
remove
the
data
cap
as
well.
Lastly,
would
be
clients
only
posting
comments
to
keep
the
application
active
and
not
using
data
cap
after
an
additional
four
weeks,
so
eight
weeks
in
total
would
have
the
data
cap
removed
as
well
Terry.
Can
we
go
to
the
next
slide
please?
E
So
the
proposal
has
been
out
for
about
like
a
little
bit
over
two
weeks.
I
believe
there's
been
a
lot
of
community
members
providing
input.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
that.
I
saw
one
from
d-store
providing
options
with
different
timelines
on
the
right
side
of
the
slide,
and
so
a
lot
of
comments
with
choosing
specific
options,
but
without
any
reasonings.
So
please
provide
those
reasonings
we're
going
to
close
this
proposal
either
end
of
this
week
or
early
next
week
again,
so
please
provide
your
input
with
reasonings.
E
E
The
people
who
raised
the
concerns
on
the
actual
proposal
itself,
whether
it's
six
months
three
months,
two
months,
I,
don't
know
we
can
make
it
a
little
bit
like
a
time-bounded
experiment.
Try
it
out
for
about
like
four
weeks.
You
can
see
the
results
iterate
from
there
but
curious
on
what
people's
thoughts
are
here.
F
F
The
thing
I'm
worried
about
and
I'm
worried
about
everything
on
the
proposal
side
is
that
a
lot
of
the
abusive
accounts
comments
and
there's
a
multitude
of
them
there's
way
more
bad
ones
than
good
ones,
unfortunately,
and
they
keep
voicing
their
disapproval
of
proper
ideas
without
any
real
comments
or
or
or
arguments,
so
I'm
quite
annoyed.
If,
if
you
read
through
your
proposal,
it
seems
like
70
is
against
and
30
is
in
favor,
but
I
believe
the
real
scale
is
completely
different
than
that.
So
how
do
you
manage
that
expectation.
E
Yeah
I
agree
and
thanks
for
flagging
that
I
do
agree
with
you.
There's
a
lot
of
comments
and
I
think
that's.
Why
we're
pushing
for
more
comments
from
people
to
provide
reasonings
I
know
with
the
options
that
was
provided
by
these
store.
People
were
just
trying
to
choose
c
without
providing
any
input
so.
B
E
F
Yeah,
well,
my
honest
opinion,
for
this
is
28.
Days
is
more
than
enough.
If
people
only
comment,
adding
four
weeks
is
more
than
enough,
and
if
we
stop
in
90
of
abusive
applicants
who
try
to
gain
the
system
with
this,
and
only
10
of
Republicans
are
slightly
harmed
by
needing
to
reopen
a
new
one.
I
think
it's
completely
worth
it.
I
shouldn't
stop
this
proposal,
because
maybe
one
or
two
applicants
are
in
a
different
boat
where
they
need
an
additional
four
or
eight
weeks.
I
think
we,
we
should
see
goodlip
implementations
and
a.
C
F
E
Good
point
I
think
yeah,
something
like
you
said.
Maybe
we
can
start
with
this
and
if
you
know,
there's
always
ways
we
can
go
around
this
and
make
discussions
if
clients
actually
provide
good
inputs
and
status
updates
on.
Why
might
take
longer,
let's
say
than
for
28
days,
we
can
just
like
take
it
from
there,
but
thanks
today,
Danny
I
see
your
hand
up.
C
Yeah
I
I
would
I
was
just
gonna,
initially
underline
what
Harry
said
and
then
what
you
said,
which
is
yeah.
There
are
a
lot
of
new
GitHub
accounts.
I,
know,
I,
don't
think
it's
surprising
if
we
have
a
A
system
that
that
it's
abused,
that
the
people
abusing
it
will
advocate
for
it
to
be
kept
the
way
it
is
there's
no,
despite
the
appearances,
there's
no
reason
why
you
know
it's,
not
it's
not
a
vote.
I
could
see
people
saying:
oh,
we
need
to
call
a
vote.
There
is
no
such
thing.
C
Yeah
and
I
guess
I
mean
the
couple
of
things
I
have
which
is
like.
We
can
move
this
up
and
down.
If
we
really
do
feel
that
there's
some
of
the
legitimate
people
getting
caught
in
it
initially
we
can.
We
can
change
and
respond
to
that
and
also
I
think
that
that
it's
it's
worth
considering
that
when
people
really
do
complain
like
this,
it's
a
positive
signal.
E
If
you
could
provide
your
input
on
as
to
why
you
would
want
to
move
the
to
extend
the
28
days
to
make
it
more
I
know
there
were
some
people
who
commented
that
the
onboarding
projects
could
take
a
lot
longer,
just
because
of
unforeseeable,
like
problems
that
come
up,
which
totally
makes
sense
but
curious
as
to
and
want
to
hear
from
others
on
this
I
don't
want
to
call
out
their
names.
But
if
you
could,
please
provide
your
input.
That'd
be
great.
E
G
E
A
Wonderful
well
Danny,
thanks
for
the
question
on
that
Simon
thanks
for
the
overview.
If
anybody
on
the
call
wants
to
kind
of
comment
again
on
the
timelines
for
this
or
what's
the
kickoff,
please
make
your
voices
heard
of
the
issue
and
it
sounds
like
it
will
be
ended
the
week
before
this
kind
of
moves
forward.
So
we
have
a
few
more
days
and
I'll
post
this
video
tonight.
So
everyone
has
a
chance
Simon.
H
Yeah
sure
so
the
AC
bot
was,
we
announced
this
last
governing's
call
AC
stands
for
aggregation
and
compliance.
The
point
of
this
bot
is
to
aggregate
all
the
different
data
sources.
We
have
all
the
stuff
we
have
currently
retrieval
Bots.
Here,
you
Checker
all
the
checks
that
we
do
basic
checks
that
we
do
on
your
your
client
application
and
then
in
the
future
there
will
be
other
checks,
such
as
data
from
the
SP
working
group
and
then
also
data
from
maybe
Falcon
green.
H
We
can
compile
this
data
and
then
use
that
to
enforce
compliance.
What
does
that
mean?
So,
let's
say
if
your
retrieval
score
is
below
a
certain
amount.
We
could
remove
your
data
cap,
slash
CID,
Checker
below
certain
amount
move
your
data
cap.
If
and
then
in
other
cases,
if
you're,
not
using
enough
SPS
or
your
data
is
not
as
distributed
or
we
see
CID
abuse.
H
So
all
of
these
are
different
thresholds
for
metrics
we
can
put
to
to
show
to
kind
of
increase
the
standards
of
our
clients
in
our
Network.
This
is
all
these
metrics
are,
are
meant
to
increase
distribution
as
well
as
Integrity
in
the
system
overall.
So
by
being
more
retrieval,
it
shows
that
you
actually
storing
data
that
can
be
retrieved
by
not
having
CID
abuse.
H
Ecosystem,
that's
why
we
believe
that,
like
this
is
necessary,
we
also
think
that
it's
going
to
be
more
neutral
and
more
less
bureaucracy
more
objective.
Now
we
don't
have
to
rely
on
notaries
to
have
the
data
cap
removal
process.
It
will
just
be
automatic
now,
since
we're
removing
datacap
the
rules
that
have
to
be
set
and
the
thresholds
and
the
parameters
that
have
to
be
set
have
to
be
very
well
set
or.
G
G
H
If
we
were
to
implement
the
threshold,
so
coming
up
soon
would
be
another
proposal
following
this
up
and
that
would
have
more
finalized
parameters
and
those
parameters,
I
think,
would
be
supported
by
data
and
I.
Think
that's
going
to
be
the
way
we
implement
it
and
we
can
discuss
that
in
that
proposal.
H
H
F
H
F
So
my
suggestion
would
be
random,
CID
downloads,
the
full
package
and
linking
them
to
the
LDN
application,
and
then
everybody
can
see
it
and
if
someone
says
it's
storing
cat
pictures
and
we
actually
see
CCTV
footage
of
a
garage,
you
know
what
time
it
is.
So
that's
like
the
the
that's
a
an
idea.
I
want
to
see
implemented.
H
Of
this
is
the
AC
bot
is
flexible,
it's
more
about
collecting
different
data
sources
and
then
using
that
to
actually
acting
on
it.
So
then,
like
in
an
automatic
process,
so
I
think
hitting
your
idea
of
like
putting
doing
a
full
retrieval
and
then
putting
the
CID
on
the
on
on
the
on
the
actual
application
for
notoriously
check
yeah
like
one
piece
of
data
right
and
I.
Think
like
it's
not
really
automatic.
H
F
No,
but
that's
the
reason
why
we
have
notaries:
it's
the
do,
not
trust
the
clients,
do
not
trust
a
minor
but
verify
the
data.
And
yes,
that
is
work
for
no
reason,
but
it's
an
easy
check
if
everything
is
by
the
bot.
That's
a
few
minutes
per
lbn
per
notary
so
that
she
shouldn't
be
too
much
of
work.
Yeah.
H
H
A
B
But
what
we
found
is
you
know
we
can
hold
clients
accountable
to
State
SPS
entities,
locations
and
then
actually
make
deals
with
those
SPS
because
what's
happening
on
majority,
they
list
some
SPS
and
then
they
make
deals
with
other
SP
minor
IDs
things.
Change,
I
know
that
that
might
not
be
exactly
how
you
planned
it
initially,
but
you
know
we
were
able
to
come
up
with
some
clear
requirements
that
will
make
clients
make
sure
they
have
the
SPs
that
are
going
to
be
following
the
rules
making
retrieve
retrievables
available
and
if.
G
A
C
I
this
isn't.
This
is
an
observation
less
about
the
bot,
which
sounds
great
and
more
about
kind
of
the
social
reaction
to
the
bot,
which
is
one
of
the
things
I've
noticed
with
a
couple
of
the
basically
partners
of
ffdw,
which
is
the
501c3.
That's
the
sister
organization
to
the
Falcon
Foundation,
it's
a
it's
a
non-profit,
so
one
of
the
things
it
does
is
is
encourage
other
public
good,
producing
orgs,
to
store
data
on
filecoin
and
so
I've
been
shepherding.
C
Some
of
those,
and
one
of
the
challenges
is,
for
you
know,
for
instance,
they're
applying
for
data
caps
so
that
they
can
go
to
SPS
and
say:
hey,
look.
We
have
data
cap,
please
store
our
data
cheaply,
but
there's
a
chicken
and
egg
thing
there
where
people
are
obviously
going
well,
who
which
SPS
are
you
going
to
store
it
as
I?
Don't
think
this
bot
changes
any
of
that
I
think
it's
just
a
note
that
that
all
of
this
stuff
is
kind
of
advisory.
C
So,
as
as
as
as
was
said,
you
know
if
the
SPs
do
change,
I.
Think
if
there
are,
there
can
be
good
reasons
for
that.
There
can
be
reasons
why
the
compliance
bot
highlights
something,
but
it's
it's
perfectly
innocent
and
I
just
want
to
like
here.
They
say
that,
like
the
notary
has
to
make
the
decision
in
the
end.
H
H
H
H
H
A
H
Yeah,
so
first
I
guess
like
I'm
guessing
these
are
just
discussion.
Points
provided
like
I
think
these
are
like
aggregated
from
comments
in
the
application
itself.
So
firstly,
it's
like
how
the
overall
design
of
the
bot
it
may
be
somewhat
controversial,
because
it's
the
first
time
we're
creating
an
automated
way.
H
A
H
H
E
H
A
H
I
E
F
D
B
D
B
Yeah
I
understood,
and
so
the
KYB
requirement
as
well
would
be
would
be
enforced
for
the
for
the
business
and
then
it's
up
to
the
notaries
up.
Until
this
point
there
hasn't
been
any
of
these
use
cases
that
have
actually
been
approved,
so
I
I
think
this
is
something,
and
maybe
this
can
come
up
next
week
in
Iceland,
or
we
can
set
up
further
calls
to
sort
of
think
about.
You
know
Pathways
and
on-ramps
for
for
isvs,
specifically
for
the
case
where
we
won't
know
the
data.
B
B
I
So
this
is
this
is
where
what
we
really
want
to
see
is
those
you
know:
service
providers
applying,
as
quote
unquote,
notaries
themselves
in
the
next
round.
This
is
something
that
probably
like
a
year
and
a
half
ago
with
Estuary,
we
were
working
with
them
as
well
kind
of
testing
out
as
a
proof
of
concept.
Should
they
be
their
own
kind
of
large
data
set
notary?
Should
they
just
be
a
client
address?
How
do
we
track
the
flow
of
data
cap
to
their
Downstream?
I
Clients
like
there
were
all
these
kind
of
implementation.
Questions
fundamentally,
in
my
mind,
I
think
that
projects
like
that,
where
it
is
a
data
on
board
or
a
data
prepare
of
some
capacity,
it
would
be
great
for
them
to
function
as
notaries
themselves,
and
they
would
say
here
is
how
we
will
do
diligence
on
our
clients.
Here
is
the
type
of
clients
we're
going
to
work
with.
I
This
is
the
type
of
data
we're
going
to
work
with,
and
then
the
onus
would
be
on
that
data
preparer
to
say
we
set
out
a
plan
for
how
we
would
perform
diligence,
how
we
would
do
the
bookkeeping,
how
we
would
hand
out
data
cap
what
our
allocation
strategy
would
be,
and
then
the
community
could
look
at
that
application
and
say
this.
You
know,
let's
try
it
for
you,
know
15
pibs
and
see
how
they
award
that
15
Pips
to
their
clients.
I
How
quickly
does
it
land
on
chain
how
many
clients,
how
many
SPS
does
it
work
with?
Are
they
meeting
their
bookkeeping
and
allocation
strategy
that
they
proposed,
and
so
then
it's
letting
in
in
this
example
Banyan,
but
others?
You
know
Estuary
last
week
when
I
was
in
Singapore
I
met
with
a
group
called
Lighthouse
they're,
making
a
desktop
client
for
end
users
to
you
know,
drag
and
drop
files
that
would
then
be
onboarded
to
filecoin.
Could
they
be
their
own
notary?
I
Where
that
Lighthouse
team
has
their
own
amount
of
data,
cap
and
they're
handling
sort
of
that
back-end
allocation
to
their
specific
clients,
but
then
the
community
could
come
and
say
hey.
We
know
that
this
address
is
The
Banyan
notary
address,
and
it's
where
worked
with
these
100
clients
and
those
100
clients
all
turned
around
with
you
know
only
one
SP
ID
that
doesn't
meet
their
allocation
strategy
or
whatever,
and
then
we
could
say:
hey
Banyan
you're,
not
you
know,
meeting
your
allocation
strategy,
you
need
to
change
or
we're
going
to.
I
You
know
revoke
your
notary
status.
So
in
this
way,
what
we're
really
kind
of
hoping
to
move
towards
is
those
programmatic
notaries
where
Banyan
or
like
I
said
Lighthouse
or
any
other
group
could
propose
and
say
Here's
how
we
will
perform
diligence.
Here's
how
we
will
choose
clients,
here's
how
we
will
answer
the
question.
Is
this
a
real
client
with
real
data
engaging
in
real
distributed
onboarding
and
those
are
sort
of
the
questions
that
we
care
about?
Danny.
I
Yeah
right
so,
if
they're,
if
they're
a
service
provider
where
they're
going
out
and
doing
Biz
Dev
and
finding
real
clients
they're
providing
a
service
to
those
clients,
their
onus
is
on
them
to
do
the
diligence
on
those
clients.
How
do
they
know
the
clients,
aren't
Bots
or
malicious
actors
or
engaging
in
illegal
data?
So
in
that
way,
that
is
another
client,
and
then
the
onus
would
be
on
this
notary
Banyan
to
say
what
storage
providers
are
you
going
to
work
with?
How
do
you
know
your
storage
providers
are
distributed
and
Performing?
I
I
Yeah
that's
one
way
and
then
Downstream
quantitatively
we
could
do
public
retrieval.
There
are
other
things
we
could
do
where
if
they
say
we're
going
to
use
a
third-party
kyc
service,
we
could
say
great
make
those
kyc
records
available
on
demand
as
part
of
a
requirement
of
their
bookkeeping
strategy.
So
what
I
would
love
is
for
us
to
say?
Okay,
if
someone
like
Banyan
is
going
to
apply
to
be
a
notary,
what
questions
do
we?
I
The
existing
governance
and
notary
Community,
need
to
ask
of
their
application
so
that
upfront
qualitatively,
we
think
they're
Gathering,
the
right
information
and
then
Downstream
quantitatively,
we
could
verify
it.
So
maybe
it's
not
full
retrieval
by
a
bot,
but
maybe
it's.
We
need
to
be
able
to
do
random,
retrieval
testing
or
spot
retrieval
sampling.
Maybe
that's
a
thing
that
needs
to
be
baked
in.
Should
that.
E
D
D
I
I
Kyc
is
a
way
for
us
to
use
a
service
to
gain
some
amount
of
information
about
a
client
and
reduce
some
types
of
civil
attacks.
Kyc
is
not
a
blanket
requirement
for
all
of
the
pathways,
and
kyc
does
not
have
to
be
a
requirement,
for
you
know
a
different
aggregator
notary
if
they
apply,
and
they
say
here,
is
how
we
will
perform
diligence
and
they
say
we're
not
going
to
use
a
third-party
kyc
service
that
you
know,
then
the
question
is
okay.
Well,
then,
how
do
we
know
that
you
are
using
separate
clients?
I
How
do
you
perform
intelligence?
If
you
don't
do
kyc,
so
it
isn't
a
requirement.
It's
just
a
type
of
information
that
we
can
gain
the
front
and
then,
as
far
as
like
e-fill,
yes,
the
original
intent
of
e-fill
was
for
encrypted
data.
So
what
I'm
saying
is
that
right
now,
Banyan
is
applying
through
an
existing
pathway.
What
I
would
like
is
to
channel
that
energy
into
a
more
appropriate
pathway
of
them
being
their
own
kind
of
allocator,
their
own
notary
format,
yeah.
D
I
I
How
are
you
doing
bookkeeping
and
then,
when
questioned,
how
can
you
present
quantitative
evidence
to
demonstrate
that
you
knew
that
it
was
a
real
client
with
real
data
engaged
in
real
distributed
onboarding
it
could
be
encrypted,
it
could
not.
It
could
be
retrievable,
it
could
not.
But
what
are
the
different
ways
that
we
can
check?
You
know
using
existing
tools
like
the
CID
Checker
bot,
new
tools
that
we
need
to
develop
like
various
randomized
retrieval
sampling.
I
You
know
is
that
something
that
we
need
to
invest
in
a
tool
in,
because
that
would
work
as
a
catch-all
for
lots
of
these.
These
types
of
aggregators
I
don't
know,
and
so
that's
where
we
want
to
say
what
are
the
different
Pathways.
We
could
test
that
these
other
teams
want
to
build,
because
the
thing
is
like
the
governance
team,
we
don't
have
the
bandwidth
of
the
resources
to
build
a
service
that
Banyan
is
building
right.
I
So
we
want
to
empower
them
to
build
that
service,
but
we
want
to
say
what
are
the
checks
and
balances,
and
one
of
those
checks
and
balances
is
also
the
amount
of
data
cap.
15
Pips
of
data
cap
across
six
months
a
year
is
that
the
biggest
threat
risk
compared
to
not
trying
this
pathway
and
continuing
with
the
ones
that
are
existing.
I
In
my
opinion,
15
pivs
is
a
really
good
test
size
and
if
five
different
teams
around
the
world
propose
five
different
types
of
onboarding,
Partnerships
or
pathways,
and
they
each
get
15
pids
and
we
test
them.
That's
not
to
say
that
we're
going
to
wait
until
they
run
out
of
15
Pips
to
check
on
it.
But
that's
just
to
say
that
in
the
grand
scope
of
the
you
know,
11
12,
exabytes
of
storage
capacity,
15
Pips,
is
not
the
biggest
Threat
Vector.
So
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
shouldn't
be
mindful
at
these.
I
I
Well,
that
is
a
different,
unique
value
prop
right,
like
if
Banyan
says,
here's
our
list
of
SP
Partnerships
and
we
have
exclusive
agreements
with
them
and
here's
where
they're
located
and
here's
the
KYB
that
we
did
on
those
SP
Partnerships
and
here's
the
list
of
of
minor
IDs
and
again
I'm
I'm,
not
saying
this
is
what
Banyan
is
doing.
I'm
saying
this
is
a
way
for
us
to
push
back
on
these
to
understand
how
they're
going
to
function
and
then
to
hold
them
accountable.
I
I
Do
you
see
what
I
mean
so
I,
and
this
is
where
I
want
this
to
be
generative
and
kind
of
what
are
the
blind
spots?
What
can
we
test?
Let's
bias
towards
trying
something
with
checks
and
balances,
so
one
of
the
checks
is
just
the
volume
of
data
cap,
but
that's
not
sufficient.
So
what
are
the
other
questions?
We
need
to
ask
of
Banyan
to
hold
them
accountable
at
the
front
and
again
of
anyone
who
submits
an
application
like
this.
In
the
coming
notary
election
cycle,
foreign.
C
Sometimes
we
get
kind
of
locked
into.
What
is
the
we
think
is
the
existing
pipeline
now.
So
we
talk
right
now.
A
lot
about
the
characteristics
of
ldns
and
ldns
have
a
large
fraud
profile
and
like
a
lot
of
data,
because
you
get
a
lot
of
data
cap
in
one
go.
We
have
all
these
other
routes
right,
like
the
the
GitHub
route.
We
should
have
more
so,
and
we
have
a
huge
amount
of
flexibility
we
could
mess
around
with
a
multiplier.
C
C
Know
so,
anyway,
the
point
here
is
that
one
of
the
so
one
of
the
bits
of
feedback
I've
had
in
sort
of
trying
to
see
with
clients
whether
they
want
to
go
through
the
LDN
process
for
large
data
or
working
with
web
3
storage,
or
something
like
that
is
where
three
storage,
because
they
have
a
bunch
of
of
data
cap,
have
to
do
it
all
through
their
wallet
right
or
their
their
address.
So
maybe
there's
a
streamlined
system
that
we
create
for
intermedia
is
where
intermediate
and
I
think
this
fits.
C
What
you're
describing
Galen
right,
where
the
intermediary
is
allocating
data
cap
on
a
per
wallet
basis,
so
you
can
have
individual
actors,
be
the
the
the
holders
of
their
own
wallet
and
the
whole
data
cap,
but
but
that
also
gives
some
external
oversight
right,
because
you
begin
to
see
the
patterns
of
that
kind
of
thing.
So
I
just
wanted
to
say,
like
we
can
do
any
number
of
programs
and
I
really
think
we
should
it's
kind
of
early
days
yet
on
how
we
we
structure
this
program.
A
G
G
A
I
Had
one
thing
real,
quick,
yeah,
sorry
I
was
I
know
we're
kind
of
running
over
it.
There
was
a
question
in
there
about,
like
staking
I
just
wanted
to
like
touch
on
this
I
think
that
staking
similar
to
kyc
is
a
possible
way.
It's
just
another
pathway
for
the
like
people
in
the
community
to
demonstrate
alignment.
A
client
could
be
required
to
stake
an
amount
of
money.
I
A
notary
could
be
required
to
stake,
an
SP
could
be
required
to
stake
and
the
rules
of
how
that
stake
is
held
or
when
it
is
slashed
or
how
it
could
be
split
and
distributed.
All
of
those
are
implementation.
Details
that
we
could
figure
out
and
they
don't
have
to
be
one
size,
fits
all
I
think
that
sometimes
we
get
sometimes
mired
in
this
idea
of
well.
I
I
A
A
All
right,
well
Caitlin,
thank
you
for
that
comment
on
staking
everyone.
Thank
you
for
your
time
to
join
this
call.
The
second
call
will
be
taking
place
at
zero.
100
UTC,
coming
up
appreciate
everyone
for
joining.
You
guys
have
a
great
night
great
week,
we'll
see
on
the
next
column
inside
cheers.
Everyone.
A
Well,
hello,
welcome
all
to
the
second
notary
governance
call
of
September
19th
on
the
agenda.
The
calls
broke
into
three
parts.
Part
number
one
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
recent
events
that
took
place
in
Singapore
and
Seoul.
Point
you
to
Links
summarize
the
talks,
then
we're
going
to
show
you
what
talks
are
upcoming,
the
conferences
on
September
October
November.
The
two
proposals
on
the
agenda
today
are
carry
forwards,
which
means
we
spoke
on
these
on
the
last
governance
call.
This
is
a
second
opportunity
for
discussion
or
input
and
we'll
go
through
those
two
topics.
A
A
If
there's
anything
you
want
to
add
or
discuss.
This
is
a
great
way
for
you
to
bring
topics.
Anything
you
want
to
see
come
up
on
future
agendas.
You
need
help.
This
is
the
friendly
governance
team,
if
you're
not
sure
who
to
ping,
you
can
always
reach
out
to
me.
Kevin
FFF,
USA
I'm,
also
on
slack
and
I,
can
help
route
you
to
who
you
need
to
go
to.
A
So,
let's
take
a
look
at
the
notary,
SLA,
so
I'm
going
to
post
a
link
here
in
chat,
make
it
a
little
bit
easier
for
all
of
you
to
get.
Thank
you
so
much
for
taking
the
time
as
I
always
say
so.
I'm
just
going
to
put
this
right
here
and,
as
always,
you
don't
have
to
be
a
notary
to
sign
in.
If
you
were
a
member
of
the
community
storage
provider
curious
to
get
involved.
A
This
is
a
great
way
just
to
kind
of
show
that
you've
been
involved
going
forward
all
right
recent
events,
so
we
had
two
big
events
that
happened
in
the
last
couple
of
weeks.
The
first
one
was
Phil's
soul
and
the
second
one
took
place
last
week,
and
that
was
this
filled,
Dev
Summit
that
you
see
if
you're
Keen,
to
watch
the
talks.
Some
of
them
are
on
YouTube
and
the
majority
of
them
should
be
online
later
this
week.
Early
next,
if
you're
curious,
what
those
talks
are
I'm
going
to
load
up
the
screen.
A
That
shows
exactly
what
those
talks
took
place.
This
way,
you
can
kind
of
get
a
sense
of
like
what's
coming
up
at
some
of
the
next
conferences.
So
these
are
the
field
Dev
Summits.
These
are
going
to
happen
coming
up
next
week,
it's
taking
place
in
Iceland
if
you're
going
and
we'll
just
do
a
quick
hands
on
that
later.
If
you
come
to
this
site,
this
Phil
Dev
dot,
IO
I
post
this
here
and
chat
for
everyone
as
well.
A
This
will
give
you
a
list
of
all
the
talks
that
happened
in
the
past
as
well
as
that
are
upcoming.
So
if
you
take
a
look
at
what
took
place
in
the
last
session,
this
was
the
Phil
silson
Phil
Dev
Summit
excuse
me
that
took
place
in
Singapore.
So
all
of
these
talks
we'll
have
the
speaker
what
the
topics
were
and
really
the
main
focus
of
what
Phil
Singapore
was
was
like
discussion
number
one
on
issues
to
help
developers
and
devs
as
they
participate
in
the
ecosystem
and
help
rapidly
scale
for
them.
A
So
a
lot
of
talks
in
here.
If
there's
anything
that
you
wanted
to
see
again,
the
link
is
in
chat.
You
can
go
through
it.
The
next
set
of
events
coming
up
is
going
to
be
taking
place
in
Iceland
next
week,
and
this
is
the
second
field
Dev
Summit
that
builds
off
the
Singapore
that
happened
last
week.
This
came
up
in
the
morning
call
where
folks
were
curious,
who
else
from
the
community
was
going?
A
D
A
Iceland
is
quite
a
journey
I'm
also
not
going
to
be
there
as
well.
So
if
you
wanted
to
see
what
talks
were
taking
place
for
Iceland
same
thing
here
on
this
page,
if
you
click
Iceland
after
each
one
of
these
talks,
they'll
record
the
videos
I'll
be
sure
to
put
this
in
the
slack.
So
you
can
see
them
as
well
as
put
on
the
next
governance
call,
but
essentially
what's
taking
place
in
Iceland
is
kind
of
a
building
block
of
again
what
took
place
in
Singapore
and
then.
A
Lastly,
we
talked
about
Phil
Vegas,
that's
organized
by
filecoin
foundation
and
the
Istanbul
taking
place
in
November.
So
coming
up,
we
have
the
data
cap,
removal
bot.
This
was
issue
974,
and
this
has
had
a
lot
of
comments.
So
this
is
the
next
three
slides
before
I
kind
of
go
into
this.
Let
me
kind
of
summarize
what
this
issue
is.
So
essentially
what
974
is
looking
at
is
once
data
cap
has
been
granted.
A
How
do
we
get
it
back
so
right
now
there
are
three
parts
of
this
part
number
one
is
that
you
see
the
28
days,
which
means,
after
an
issue
has
been
open
for
a
period
of
time,
had
no
comments.
How
long
does
it
take
for
that
data
cap
to
be
removed?
The
second
is:
if
a
notary
or
a
client
wants
to
come
back
later
and
say
there
was
an
error.
A
How
does
that
process
for
removal
work
on
the
technical
side,
and
the
third
is
applications
that
only
had
a
comment
and
they
were
never
used
after
a
certain
period
of
time,
so
three
very
clear,
distinct
use
cases
for
data
cap
removal
and
that's
what
this
is
so
in
the
chat
of
this
issue.
A
lot
of
discussion
has
taken
place
so
on
the
call
this
morning,
Simon
flagged
that
if
you
look
here,
some
proposals
were
raised.
A
Hey
we'd
like
to
see
it
at
two
weeks,
open
and
two
weeks
additional
after
closing
and
then
you'll
see,
options
like
hey
the
data
cap
should
always
be
available
once
it's
issued
or
D
there's
unrestricted
and
a
lot
of
people
left
comments
like
hey,
C
or
D.
What
Simon
is
asking
for
so
they
can
scope
this
properly.
A
Is
that
if
you
pick
C,
if
you
pick
D,
if
you
pick
a
list
of
reason,
why,
like
I,
think
it
should
be
D
because
there
might
be
an
issue
with
issuing
or
coming
for
whatever
it
may
be,
facilitate
that
into
the
conversation,
because
if
it's
just
a
letter,
it's
very
difficult
to
weigh
in
what
should
kind
of
be
built
into
this,
then
there
were
two
specific
questions
that
he's
looking
to
gather
from
notaries
from
Storage
providers
from
people
in
the
ecosystem
and
Community.
The
first
one
is:
how
should
this
process
happen?
A
Should
this
be
an
automatic?
Should
this
be
ping?
Should
this
go
out?
So
if
you
have
any
thoughts
on
that,
but
the
main
question
really
is
is:
what's
the
timeline
can
essentially
that
data
cap
should
it
be
removed,
if
not
used
in
28
days?
Is
that
28
days
in
unreasonable
number
should
it
be
longer?
So
these
are
the
topics
that
they're
looking
to
get
input
for,
and
this
is
where
we'll
turn
it
open.
So,
if
anybody
has
any
thoughts
or
comments,
this
would
be
a
great
time
to
share
it.
A
All
right,
we'll
just
keep
it
in
the
issue
then,
and
then
the
next
one
coming
up
was
the
aggregator
and
compliance
bot.
So
essentially,
what
this
aggregation
will
be
doing
is.
If
we
look
at
that
removal,
is
there
a
way
to
remove
humans
from
the
process?
Reduce
bureaucracy
just
make
it
standard,
and
if
we
make
it
standard
for
removing
Bad
actors
or
erroneous
data
that
might
get
put
into
it,
how
does
that
process
look
into
issues
and
how
does
it
take
it
into
account?
So
that's
what
this
AC
bot
is
doing
so
you'll.
A
Take
a
look
and
they're
really
taking
comments
on
this
middle
part
is
what
are
the
thresholds
that
it
should
run,
and
so
what
this
is
really
doing
is
right.
Now
we
have
tools
like
the
retrieval
bot
or
the
CID
checker,
as
we
need
new
tools.
What
should
they
be?
What
should
we
be
considering
what
should
be
taken
into
account?
So
that's
what
this
issue
is
really
diving
into.
A
It's
that
how
do
you
measure
that,
like
level,
that
should
be
automated
to
remove
the
humans
from
this
process
and
really
put
it
forward
as
we're
going
to
go?
So
if
you
have
thoughts,
they're,
really
kind
of
looking
at
this
learnings
that
would
take
place
and
one
of
the
key
things
that
came
up
and
like
how
do
we
make
this
bot
automatic
is
over
the
summer
time,
KZ
RG,
some
of
the
teams
they
went
through
and
they
looked
at
a
large
chunk
of
LDN
applications
and
they
would
see
okay.
A
What
kind
of
Trends
are
we
seeing
from
misallocated
data?
What
can
we
see
from
like
the
CID
Checker
or
the
retrieval
bot
and
So
based
off
those
learnings?
That's
what
factored
into
this
aggregation
bot
issue
and
that's
where
we're
looking
for
your
input,
if
you
have
any
on
how
this
thing
should
be
structured.
So
if
you
have
any
thoughts
on
like
what
should
go
in
to
automated
data
removal,
what
is
the
design
feature
or
what
are
the
thresholds
like
if
a
CID
cannot
be
checked
if
the
data
can't
be
retrievable?
A
A
C
A
All
right:
well,
this
will
be
super
quick,
I'll
kill
the
call.
If
there's
anything
that
comes
up,
please.
Let
us
know
I'm
going
to
post
this
to
YouTube
with
the
translations
as
quickly
as
possible.
So
you'll
see
this
on
YouTube
with
the
closed
caption
translations,
probably
in
a
few
hours
of
going
forward.
So
if
anything
comes
up
after
reviewing
that
translation,
please
let
us
know
otherwise.
Thank
you
all
so
much
for
coming
guys
have
a
great
night
cheers
everyone.