►
Description
Rune continues to present the Endgame Plan v3, which is the latest iteration with major tokenomics simplifications, new terminology and new details around aspects such as how to respond to government crackdowns in the Endgame with Phoenix Stance.
https://forum.makerdao.com/t/wednesday-and-thursday-endgame-dvc-meetings-presenting-endgame-v3/17144
A
A
A
But
with
that
basically,
then,
the
next
phase
is
to
actually
move
to
to
to
voting
right.
So
I'm
still
considering
how
exactly
to
put
up
the
votes
for
the
indian
plane
and
sort
of
activate
it
right,
because
the
first
stage
is
a
kind
of
preliminary
vote
that
isn't
actually
binding
towards
you
know
creating
the
metadows
or
activating
the
the
metadata
in-game,
basically,
but
simply
give
sort
of
the
mandate
to
the
coordinates
to
work
to
work
towards
creating
that
proposal,
which
then,
in
its
final
form,
when
all
the
work
is
done.
A
A
You
know,
cut
all
complexity
and
just
turn
into
this
very
simple
autonomous
protocol
right
and
yeah
and
of
course
the
metadata
in
game
is
the
more
the
more
attractive
because,
among
other
reasons,
it
actually
has
an
answer
to
regulatory
crackdown
and
all
these
risks
that
now
exist
with
tornado
cash
right,
where
that's
a
big
downside
of
symbol
die.
Is
that
it's
simply,
it
has
no
possibility
of
like
accumulating
the
the
eth
necessary
to
to
actually
become
proper
resistant
to
to
physical
attacks
yeah,
but
so
so
what
I'm?
A
Basically,
what
I
want
to
do
to
aim
for
is
that
this
stuff
can
become
like.
I
mean
these
points,
basically
on
this
on
this
sheet.
Right
I
mean,
then
we,
you
know,
first
of
all,
the
sheet
itself
I'll
keep
working
on
that
improve
that
basically,
but
then
also
this
forum
post,
as
I
talked
about
and
then
I'll,
do
more
sort
of
broad
outreach
related
to
explaining
the
end
game
plan
and
then
yeah
make
some
kind
of
a
technical
like
some
kind
of
proposal.
A
That
would
then
end
up
going
up
for
a
vote.
I
mean
going
yeah
going
for
a
vote
in,
let
me
think
in
october
and
alongside
that,
there's
also
a
bunch
of
other
sort
of
restructuring
proposals
that
I
plan
to
do
to
basically
try
to
really
sort
of
clean
up
a
lot
of
stuff
altogether
in
sort
of
a
single
kind
of
a
round
of
like
all
the
heavy
hitting
stuff,
which
would
then
be
the
moment
of
truth
when
it
comes
to
the
end
game
and
also
comes
to
to
dealing
with
a
lot
of
the
problems.
A
A
Now,
there's
a
lot
of
active
clusters
right,
a
lot
of
people
actually
working
on
metadose
and
and
sort
of
very
invested
in
trying
to
make
it
reality,
because
they
kind
of
see
it.
It
becomes
increasingly
likely
that
this
is
the
only
way
for
for
the
workforce
to
really
retain
its
current
size
right.
So
that's
the
way
to
do
that's
the
way.
A
Coindesk
live
tomorrow
because
apparently
it's
a
media,
they
they
lurked
in
discord,
and
they
quoted
my
comments
saying
something
like:
if
the
government
nukes
us,
we
won't
survive
or
something,
and
then
it's
making
the
rounds
in
the
crypto
news
and
then
I'll
have
to
sort
of
you
know
clarify
that.
I
guess.
A
Okay,
all
right,
but
then
let's
talk
about
the
target
collateral
portfolio
in
phoenix
dance.
This
is
kind
of
exactly
what
I
talked
about
last
time.
Right
I
mean
it
is
also
really
the
key.
I
mean
phoenix
stance,
isn't
really
like
the
central
center
piece
so
much,
but
the
target
collateral
portfolio
is,
you
know
talking
a
lot
of
portfolio.
Is
you
know
it's
like
the
absolute
centerpiece
and
then
the
phoenix
stance
is
very
related.
To
that
reason.
A
A
Oh,
I
can't
really
do
that.
There's
actually
some
of
this
that's
outdated
compared
to
the
forum
post,
okay,
but
so
okay,
how
are
the
metadows
seated
in
terms
of
capital?
I'm
the
first
man
that
I've
seen
in
terms
of
right,
so
there's
three
proof
of
concept.
Metadatas
right.
Let
me
see
where
we
have
some.
A
A
But
still
you
know,
gonna
have
plenty
of
power
right,
because
we're
gonna
launch
three
tokens
in
like
simultaneously
are
very
close
to
each
other
and
they
would
be
backed
by
basically
by
the
equivalent
of
you
know.
So
it's
a
basically
half
of
the
full
false
of
the
of
the
metanomics
right,
so
it'll
be
25
000
mk
per
year
running
for
for.
A
So
it's
not
just
going
to
be
like
an
obvious
like
arbitrage
right,
it's
going
to
be
it's
it's
going
to
be
more
than
that,
where
the
people
that
I
will
actually
be
farming,
these
proof
of
concept
metadata,
there's
a
like
it's
a
high
likelihood.
Rather
it's
like
a
high
probability
that
I
mean
the
grand
scheme
of
things
so
like
something
in
terms
of
how
this
normally
works
right,
there's
a
high
probability
that
many
of
those
people,
some
of
those
people,
will
then
actually
themselves
cluster
with
these
metadata
as
well.
A
A
A
There's
some
place
where
I
have
oh
great,
okay,
I
just
have
the
right,
but
there's
like
this
m0
right,
which
is
the
creator,
so
it's
sort
of
decentralized,
focused
right
and
then
there's
m1,
which
is
protector,
so
that's
rwa
and
then
there's
m2,
which
is
the
protector.
So
that's
also
right,
and
so
the
reason
why
there's
a
creator
sm0,
that's
because
that's
kind
of
like
the
most
arc,
typical
and
and
also
the
simplest
metadata,
and
that's
just
a
place
to
put
a
bunch
of
technical
like
like
kind
of
the
potential.
A
We
have
a
technical
innovation
right.
So
in
the
past
I've
mentioned
deco
right.
That's
a
perfect
example
of
something
that
first
of
all
can
sort
of
like
provide
value
to
m0,
potentially
right,
because
it's
a
it's
kind
of
this.
It's
something
that
doesn't
fit
with
make
a
call,
but
it
could
fit
perfectly
well
with
the
metadata,
but
also
things
like
oasis
or
defy
saber
actually
could
you
know
could
could
like
participate
in
m0
or
even
just
be
sort
of
the?
What
do
you
call
it?
A
The
victim,
the
the
target
of
just
the
fork
right
copy
paste?
Basically
of
so
that,
because
the
centerpiece
of
a
metadata
is
its
metaverse,
essentially
right,
which
is
a
big
part
of
that,
is
the
front
end,
and
so
that's
a
really.
The
number
one
question
is
like:
what's
the
front
ends,
the
metadata
is
going
to
look
like,
and
how
do
we
create
something
that
can
be
replicated
a
lot
and
it's
highly
secure
right
and
and
that's
what
mc?
That's
the
sort
of
these
really
absolute
basics?
A
That
m0
will
establish
right,
so
m0
will
maybe
start
with
like
a
small
amount
of
cash
from
the
service
buffer.
But
it's
not
really
it's
not
really
justifiable
to
to
put
a
lot
of
cash
into
m0,
so
they'll,
basically
because
it's
the
main
thing
we
want
to
see
from
zero
is
that
it
can
throw
by
itself
right.
A
So
it
kind
of
in
a
way
it
almost
defeats
the
purpose
to
push
put
cash
in
there
because
it
just
sort
of
dampens
the
signal
of
whether
it
can
it
can
grow
on
its
own
right,
and
it
also
doesn't
need
it
because
it
has
ways
to
it
doesn't
require
a
creator
down,
doesn't
require
capital
to
to
function
basically,
but
then
we
have
the
so
I
mean
so
just
do
a
little
bit
of
the
question
right.
So
let's
say,
let's
just
say
like
500k,
you
know
right
I
mean
that's
it
that's.
A
Obviously
this
all
has
to
be
decided
right.
This
has
to
go
into
not
the
the
vote.
That's
coming
up
in
october
right,
but
rather
this
would
go
into
the
vote.
That
would
happen
sometime
next
year
after
a
long
period
of
preparation
right
so
there'll
be
plenty
of
time
to
figure
out.
What's
the
actual
number
right.
A
A
You
know
strategy
in
my
opinion.
At
this
point,
right
is
requires
metadata
to
be
metadials
to
be
viable,
so
so
rejecting
the
metadata
end,
game
and
or
the
amount
and
gave
failing
right
will
completely
reject
real
assets
in
the
current
way
we've
seen
them
so
far,
right
and
and
and
in
symbol
die.
Real
assets
are
purely
these
ultra
ultra
simple,
short-term
bond
things
right
and
basically
we
would
do
rebel
assets
in
a
mirror
of
how
usdc
does
its
collateral
right.
A
So
so,
basically,
it
makes
sense
to
to
shoot
the
shot
immediately
right,
because
otherwise
rival
assets
would
just
be
in
limbo
for
no
reason
right
and
instead,
basically,
we
start
off
with
doing
doing
the
rebel
asset
metadas
and
then
let
them
basically
see
whether
it
can
work
or
not
and
there's
two
of
them,
because
I
mean,
as
we've
seen,
there's
crazy
drama
with
rebel
assets
right,
there's,
crazy
potential
for
a
little
drama
and
politics
way
more
than
any
other
part.
Of
course,
there's
potential
for
that
in
any
anything
in
design.
A
And
so
that's
you
know,
there's
just
a
big
upside
to
having
two
of
them,
because
that
means
first
of
all
that
means
I
mean
I
mean
that's
the
whole
point
of
this
clustering
concept,
right
that
it
means
that
people
can
go
and
work
with
the
people
they
have.
They
have
sort
of
a
compatible
culture
with
right.
A
So
by
having
two
of
them,
then
we
can
create
these
two
distinct
groups
and
then
we
can
really
minimize
the
chance
that
there'll
be
people
with
a
friction
in
the
same
group
and
then
and
then
there's
also
the
chance
that
well
even
then,
maybe
something
still
blows
up,
but
if
there's
two
of
them
then
well,
one
of
them
can
blow
up.
They'll
still
be
the
other
one
right,
so
there's
a
much
greater
likelihood
of
realization,
because,
basically,
ultimately
I
think
that's
that's
the
way.
A
I
view
real
assets
and
making
them
viable
in
the
metadata
end
game
is
that
they
require
such
a
level
of
alignment
and
such
a
challenging
and
sort
of
rare
and-
and
you
know
difficult-
I
mean-
maybe
not
rare,
but
I
mean
it's
so
challenging
and
ultimately
you
know
it's
like
a
challenge.
You
just
can't.
You
can't
guarantee
to
solve
it
because
you're
talking
about
trying
to
fix
or
sort
of
solve
or
analyze
or
deconstruct
human
psychology
right,
which
is
impossible
right.
A
So
basically
we
have
to
resort
to
evolution
and
and
the
survival
of
the
fittest
right.
So
so
the
go.
You
basically
make
a
bunch
of
them
and
then
see
which
ones
develop
positive
matter
that
that
can
survive
and
then
the
ones
that
don't
they
basically
die
off
and
you
just
make
new
ones
and
the
new
ones
can
then
kind
of
then
evolve
and
you
know
learn
from
the
ones
that
were
successful
right
and
then
that
way
we
can
do
real
assets.
It
can
be
scalable,
it
can
be
decentralized.
A
Okay,
but
then
the
point
is
they
need
a
whole
bunch
of
capital
to
work,
so
that
was
actually
the
question
right.
But
now
I
just
introduced
the
proof
of
concept
metadows
in
order
to
talk
about
the
the
capital
right,
so
they
need
a
ton
of
capital,
because
the
whole
point
is
that
what
protectorate
house
do
the
real
asset
metadas
right?
What
they
do
is
they
offer
what
I
call
liquid
filler
collateral,
so
I've
used
different
words
such
as
backbone
collateral
as
well.
A
For
that
in
the
past
and
liquid
filler
collateral
is
the
kind
of
stuff
that's
similar
to
like
mip
65
right,
it's
also
the
stuff
that
we
would
use
if
we
don't
do
metadata
at
all
right,
so
the
same
type
of
collateral
that
usdc
uses
right
and
it's
stuff.
That
is
like
it's
so
straightforward
that
there's
actually
no
real
risk.
There's
only
like
liquidity
to
consider
not.
A
You
know,
like
government
bonds
right,
like
u.s
government
bonds,
they
don't
go,
you
know
they
don't
default
right,
and
so
so
so
that's
really
the
liquid
filler
collateral.
That's
really
easy
and
it's
something
you
can
basically
do
unlimited
amounts
of,
and
then
the
approach
to
that
is
just
anything
in
excess.
Like
all
stable
coins,
we
have
in
excess
right.
So
all
your
cc,
we
have
sitting
around
and
it's
just
pointless
having
it
sit
there
with
blacklist
risk
and
earning
no
yield.
A
But
then
the
other
category
of
realizes
is
clean
money
available
assets
right,
so
so
clean
money,
real
estate's,
that's
the
stuff,
that's
intrinsically
tied
to
the
metadata
end
game
and
this
goal
of
controlling
the
the
meta
right
augmenting
the
matter
and
making
the
project
stronger
by
basically-
and
you
know,
creating
a
very
strong
and
powerful
context
around
it
right.
So
it's
actually
collateral
that
we
wouldn't
financially
there's
no
reason
to
do
complicated
rival
assets
for
a
stable
point.
A
We
just
I
mean
we
always
that
was
always
the
path
we
went
down
in
the
early
days
of
maker,
but
we
just
didn't
understand,
understand
what
we
were
doing
and
we
didn't.
I
mean
we
didn't
understand
the
problem
of
the
overhead.
Basically,
you
know
the
more
complex
your
collateral
is,
the
more
overhead
you
got
right,
but
the
upside
of
doing
complex
mobile
assets.
A
It
allows
you
to
like
target
the
kind
of
stuff
you
want
to
see
right,
so
things
like
mass
funding
of
solar
energy
or
wind
energy
or
energy
infrastructure
or
sustainable
agriculture
or
resilient
assets
in
you
know,
climate
resilient
nations
that
you
know
may
have
to
be.
You
know
maybe
sort
of
the
some
of
the
only
places
where
civilization
will
survive
as
the
world.
You
know
inevitably
collapses
right
over
the
next
couple
of
decades,
and
but
this
stuff,
like
I
said,
has
a
lot
of
overhead.
A
So
it
requires
junior
capital
right
and
it
requires
junior
capital
at
the
arrangement
level,
but
it
also
requires
junior
capital
at
the
metadata
level
and
that's
how
it
becomes
feasible
to
even
do
for
maker,
because
we
now
have
two
layers
of
highly
sort
of
trustworthy
as
a
reliable
and
provable
junior
capital.
So
it's
become
so
kind
of
like
the
risks
that
it
now
becomes
possible
to
do
this
kind
of
stuff.
And
then
it's
not
that
make.
A
It
will
get
a
big
upside
in
terms
of
return,
but
rather
that
make
it
will
get
a
big
upside
in
terms
of
the
intangible
value.
So
like
the
the
benefit.
This
provides
to
the
meta,
the
overall
ecosystem
right
and
things
like
the
like.
Second
order
effects
like
reducing
the
likelihood
of
corruption
in
the
system.
Right
because
you'll
have,
like
you
know,
climate
climate
warriors
right
sitting
on
dvc's
volunteering
to
spend
their
time
to
look
through
inconsistent
budget
statements,
because
they're
motivated
by
the
fact
that
if
the
project
runs
well,
then
it
generates
these.
A
You
know
positive
externalities
for
for
the
climate
and
the
world,
and
obviously
not
just
climate
either
right
like
it
could.
Really.
It
really
is
any
kind
of
of
positive
externality
that
you
know
you
can
you
can
affect
through
the
power
of
money
right,
okay,
so
the
bottom
line
is
they
need
the
journey
capital
to
work.
We
have
a
bunch
of
deals
like
that
already.
You
know
we
have
something
like
hvb,
which
is
so
it's
not
a
cl.
A
It's
not
really
a
clean
money
deal,
but
it's
a
complex,
real
asset
feels
it's
like
a
precursor
to
the
ability
to
do
like
the
real
deals
like
this
that
we
want
to
do
with.
That
gives
us
the
upside
that
actually
sort
of
makes
it.
That
makes
sense
right,
and
so
these
deals
that
we've
already
done
like
this,
such
as
hvb
right
they're.
A
The
main
reason
why
we
need
surf
like
why
we
need
capital
in
maker
right,
so
the
main,
the
it's
the
real
assets
that
are
the
main
sort
of
risk
in
maker.
Basically,
and
as
a
result,
it's
justifiable
to
basically
transfer
a
huge
amount
of
of
cash
to
the
protected
house
if
we
also
transfer
the
rebel
asset
balls
to
them
right
because
we're
giving
them
the
risk
and
then
we're
also
giving
them
the
capital
that
we
needed
to
deal
the
risk
in
our
own.
A
You
know
maker
itself
at
first
right,
so,
given
that
my
suggestion
is
that
they
get
10
million
each
right,
so
so,
basically
10
million
die
to
each
of
them
right.
So
we'd
spend
20
million,
basically
just
on
launching
these
metadows,
and
then
we
would
remove
risk.
I
mean
we
remove
all
real
asset
risk
from
the
product
from
from
make
a
call
right,
so
so
that
would
sort
of
unencumber
much
more
than
20
million
in
the
long
run
right
and
then,
of
course,
there's
a
whole
question
of
like
what
happens.
A
A
A
Think
no!
Okay!
I
can
still
see
that
because
they'll
see
the
question
okay,
so
I'm
worried
about
hardwired
metadata
classes.
What,
if
somewhat
likely,
we
learned
from
practice
that
a
different
structure
would
work
better,
so
I
mean
so
like
in
terms
of
metadata
being
able
to
do
sort
of
other
stuff
right
so
like
they
can
they
you
know,
so
all
metadatas
actually
can
actually
do
whatever
they
want
externally
right,
so
the
classes
only
basically
speak
to
what
does
a
metadata.
A
So
so,
and
that
could
be
again.
That
would
be
for
anything
right.
Of
course,
the
creator
dials
and
then
they're
more
specifically
set
up
for
that,
whereas
the
protectors
and
the
governments
are
a
bit
more
like
they're,
more
a
bit
more
focused
on
their
on
their
interaction
with
major
call
and
there's
also
supposed
to
be
a
lot
more
created
out
than
than
the
governors
and
protectors
right.
A
A
A
A
So
so
this
there's
just
no
kind
of
like
there's
no
kind
of
way
out
of
that
problem
other
than
basically
in
the
very
very
early
stages,
really
trying
to
to
figure
out.
Is
there
some
core
logic,
some
kind
of
core
reasoning
that
that's
missing
right
because
of
course
like
super
early
on
it
can
be,
it
can
be
changed
right,
especially
before
the
launch,
but
I
mean
theoretically,
even
after
the
launch,
if
there's
some
like
really
really
sort
of
obvious
insight
that
that
is.
A
A
A
A
Was
it
I
think
yesterday
right
that
this
concept
of
like
in
a
in
a
in
a
dow
there's
no
such
thing
as
fiduciary
duty
or
you
know,
shareholder
protection
or
minority
rights
or
any
of
that
stuff.
But
you
can
kind
of
actually
engineer
that
you
know
like
something
that
that
has
an
equivalent
function.
You
could
sort
of
engineer
that
you
know
with
blockchain
technology,
and
you
know
meta,
engineering
and
so
on,
and
and
so
that's
what
the
governor
basically
is.
A
And
so
that's
really
that's
sort
of
the
explanation
for
for
for
for
the
classes
right-
and
I
mean
and
and
the
basic
thing
is
also
like-
you
could
like
a
very
logical
way,
like
a
sort
of
a
logical
first-person
way
to
approach.
Metadatas
could
be
to
say:
look,
they
should
just
all
be
like
blank.
Slates
right
should
be
completely
kind
of
metadata.
A
It
just
does
whatever
right
and
can
do
anything
right,
and
so
the
classes
also
really
defined
like
actually
not
so
much
by
what
they
do,
but
in
a
sense
by
what
they
don't
do
right.
So
it's
like
you,
don't
want
the
governor.
That
runs
the
decentralized
management
you
don't
want
them
to
be
doing
any
kind
of
sort
of
actual
sort
of
you
know,
like
you
know,
sort
of
what
do
you
call
that,
like
actual
operational
work
operation?
Isn't
the
right
word
right?
A
We
don't
want
to
actually
be
doing
any
kind
of
real
work
out
there,
because
they
have
to
be
a
check
on
that.
So,
if
they're
doing
that
themselves,
then
of
course
that's
just
like
I
mean
it's
conflict
interest
and
just
obviously
bad
right,
so
you
want
the
governors
to
be
separate
from
the
creators
and
protectors.
So
you
have
a
sort
of
separation
between.
I
mean
it's
kind
of
something
like
separation
of
power.
A
Right
up
like
you've
got
that
decentralized
management
and
you've
got
the
decentralized
workforce,
doing
stuff,
right
and,
and
then
creators
and
protectors
are
basically
like
I
mean
you
really
want
to
know.
Do
you
have
decentralized
exposure?
Do
you
have
centralized
exposure
right?
So
basically
the
creators
are
not
allowed
to
touch
centralized
stuff
stuff,
basically,
and
then
the
protectors
they're
allowed
to
touch
centralized
stuff.
But
then
there's
a
bunch
of
like
sort
of
specific,
like
special
defensive
measures
in
place.
A
That
means
that
they
really
that's
really
the
the
only
thing
that's
viable
for
them
to
do
right.
So
you
know
that
when
you
putting
money
into
protector,
it's
going
towards
centralized
real
asset
stuff
and
when
you're
putting
money
into
creator,
you
know
that
it's
it's
decentralized
and,
and
you
create
kind
of
firewall
right
where
you
don't
have
a
chance
of
this
kind
of
you
know
slippery
slope
creep
where
suddenly
over
time
a
creator
starts
dabbling
in
real
assets.
A
So
there's
no
such
thing
as
like
there's
no
external.
Like
I
mean
in
the
past,
there
was
this
idea
like
decos
metadata
or
something,
but
that's
completely
wrong,
and
and
even
the
clusters,
which
I
now
talk
about
right
like
so
these
groups
that
basically
sort
of
they're.
Basically
you
know
like
they
sit
sort
of
you
know
you
can
have
like
an
internal
cluster
that
basically
sort
of
sits
on
the
sidelines
and
and
looks
at
a
spot
where
eventually
a
metadata
will
emerge,
and
then
they
prepare
to
attempt
to
get
onboarded
into
the
internal.
A
So
what
that
means
is
there's
really?
No,
you
actually
can't
know.
Who's
gonna
run
the
metadata
until
the
tokens
are
distributed.
Then,
of
course,
in
practice
like
you
can
have
a
very
high
likelihood
of
like
good
clustering
right.
So
you
basically
get
basically
such
a
critical
mass
of
people
in
advance.
Agreeing
on
this
particular
setup
is
is
a
is
a
good
setup
right,
but
it's
still
gonna
be
like
it
will
won't
actually
happen,
and
it
won't
be
be
done
until
the
metadata
has
been
created
right.
A
So
there's
no
one
to
bring
the
capital
basically
right.
There's
there's
only
maker
and
then
the
the
the
beneficiaries
of
the
yield
farming,
which
is
basically
made
here
right,
the
mkls
directly
and
then
ethan
and
and
die
holders
which
then,
which
basically
are
customers
of
maker
and
then
by
providing
the
tokens
maker,
can
do
value
preservation
and,
basically
you
know,
increase
fees
essentially
on
on
east
vaults,
right
and
as
a
result,
sort
of
recover
like
hand
out
metadata
tokens
and
then
recover
cash
in
return.
And
that
way.
A
A
Right
so
you
basically
have.
The
meta
now
is
created
with
two
billion
metadata
tokens,
and
so
this
is
always.
This
has
to
be
totally
standardized
right,
like
permanent,
totally
standardized,
it's
kind
of
like
the
classes
right
where
like
it,
could
be
changed
early
on,
but
like
very
quickly,
it's
fully
ossified
and
unchangeable,
and
then
it's
just
permanent
and
and
always
exactly
the
same
for
every
new
metadata
and
so
yeah.
A
And
what's
what's
written
right
now
in
this
forum
post
that
I'll
put
up
on
the
forum
right
that
really
provides
all
the
details
in
one
place.
Is
that
there's
a
two
billion
two
billion
metadata
tokens
that
then
go
into
this
sort
of
genesis,
distribution,
right
and
they're
then
distributed
over
a
period
of
ten
years
where
basically
one
billion
is
distributed
over
the
first
two
years
and
then
half
a
billion
over
the
next
two
years
and
then
quarter
billion
over
the
next
two
years?
A
And
then
the
final
quarter
billion,
adding
up
to
a
total
of
two
billion,
is
over
the
last
four
years
right.
So
so
yeah
year,
yeah
right!
So
that's
ten
years,
though,
and
then
the
main
thing
to
sort
of
we
should
focus
on
and
think
about
is
just
the
first
two
years
right
because
that's
gonna,
I
mean
that's
what
the
that's,
what
will
be,
in
effect
during
the
proof
of
concept,
phase
right,
and
so
that's
a
billion
tokens
distributed
out
by
maker
to
these
farms
in
this
way
right.
A
A
So
that's
all
removed
now
and
it's
just
replaced
by
this
symbol,
metadata
token
farm
for
mkr
and
it
and-
and
this
is
all
right-
and
this
is
a
voting
incentive
so
like
you-
can
only
get
it
if
you're
actively
delegating
and
so
that's,
where
40
of
the
terms
go
and
and
the
reason
why
it's
40
is
because
basically
this,
because
this
is
the
only
incentive
that
exists.
This
is
the
only
yield
that
exists
for
npr
now
and
then
game
plan.
A
A
So
that's
why
it's
40,
basically
it's
high
as
possible,
but
crucially
it
has
to
be.
You
know
it
has
to
be
the
case
that
all
new
metadatas
can't
have
their
like
their
governance
can
be
run,
can
become
like
a
carbon
copy
of
major
governance
right,
so
it
can't
go
higher
than
40,
because
then
it
starts
to
approach
a
single
majority,
in
which
case
it's
just
gonna.
A
It's
gonna
lose
a
lot
of
the
benefits
that
you
get
from
the
from
a
fresh
metadata
right,
so
the
other
60
goes
to
basically
the
sort
of
the
more
wide.
Let's
spread
out
ecosystem
of
customers
rather
than
empire
holders
and
yeah,
and
then
it
goes.
This
is
called
the
farm
balancing
lever
and
that's
where
it's
all
about
you
know:
that's
the
phoenix
stands
and
the
target
portfolio.
A
You
know
screwed
towards
eath
farming
right.
So
in
practice
it's
it's
given
the
you
know.
So
there's
this
thing
called
the.
I
think
I
called
the
the
base
rate
also
and
then
like
the
fbl
base
rate
right,
so
the
fpl
base
rate
is,
and
so
this
is
what
in
most
cases
will
be
in
effect
right.
The
fbl
phase
rate
it's
five
percent
for
the
diaphragm
and
the
95
for
the
east
farm.
A
A
A
570
million
and
then
400
million,
and
that's
how
the
tokens
are
distributed
across
these
three,
assuming
kind
of
like
we're
in
this
sort
of
base
line
situation,
and
this
of
course
is
like
I
mean
so,
then
I
mean
that's
a
lot
going
to
just
boosting
youth,
but
that's
for
with
a
good
reason
right,
because
who
knows
when
you
know
there
will
be
some
regulatory
action
or
something
right.
So
it's
very
it's
powerful
to
have
a
lot
of.
A
If
it's
really
you
know,
so
it's
the
future
of
defy
and
everything
it's
just
who
can
accumulate
the
most
ease.
So
that's
that's
one
of
the
first
things
I
always
say
about
the
indian
plane
right
that
it's
like
a
big
part
of
the
plan.
It's
just
turning
on
every
single
trick
in
a
book
to
try
to
just
accumulate
eath
as
collateral.
A
And
then
someone's
asking
lt
is
asking:
each
metadata
will
have
its
own
token
and
yes,
that's
right
and
that's
a
fundamental
cornerstone
of
the
plane
right,
because
tokens
are
these,
like
ultra
powerful,
what
I
call
metamagic
right
like
this
thing,
that
sort
of
completely
shapes
you
know:
human
behavior
and
culture,
and
so
on.
Right
yeah,
I
mean
well.
I
could
just
start
rattling
off
examples
of
things
like
back
bias
and
whatever
right,
but
but
it's
also
just
that
it's
a
it,
creates
a
decentralized
governance
layer
right,
so
you
can
have
you.
A
Can
you
can
parallelize
governance
right?
So,
instead
of
just
having
a
single
voting
system,
we
can
have
10
or
20
or
30
voting
systems
that
can
vote
on.
So
we
can
just
have
so
many
things
being
determined
through
decentralized
voting
without
it
clogging
up
the
system
and
being
totally
unrealistic.
If
we
just
have
tons
of
token
distributions
that
are
aligned
with
maker
and
then
they
also
have
like
tokenomics,
that
tie
them
to
maker,
basically
and
clear
some
mechanisms
that
make
these
different
distributions
ultimately
aligned
in
their
purpose.
A
There
was
some
other
point
I
want
to
make,
but
I
forgot
yeah.
Let
me
see
the
next
so
yeah,
I'm
realizing
now,
I'm
like
reading
through
the
questions
that
were
like
prompted
by
my
initial
rambling.
Basically
so
now
we're
getting
to
the
clean
money
part.
So
I
guess
I
haven't
gotten
so
far
through
it.
Okay,
so
issues
with
the
clean
money
vision,
one
little
agreement
on
what
clean
money
is.
People
can
all
agree
to
clean
money
vision
and
still
have
different
visions,
two
no
clear
standard
for
when
the
vision
is
being
met.
A
But
then,
of
course,
the
question
is
like
how
the
do
you
define
negative?
How
do
you
measure
negative
personality
and
so
on
right?
So
you
can't
like,
even
if
you
have
this
sort
of
theoretical,
simple
definition
of
saying
collateral
that
doesn't
produce
negative
externalities.
It's
of
course
not
that
simple.
But
the
point
is
that
we
can
hire
people
that
that
that
can
help
define
this
stuff
right
and
and
then
another
thing
is
a
big
part
of
this
is
not
just
it's
not
just
you
know
the
actual
effect.
A
A
So
there's
a
so
so
what
that
means
in
practice
is
like
my
guess
is,
but
this
would
all
require
essentially
experts
to
to
figure
this
out
right
and
that's
a
part
of
the
in-game
lineup
like
how
to
actually
organize
that
you
have
people
figuring
this
stuff
out
right,
but
basically
that
I
wouldn't.
So
I
think
things
like
you
know
really
focusing
on
like
energy
generation,
in
particular
solar
and
wind.
A
There's
I
mean
that's
the
kind
of
of
sort
of
tangible
stuff
where
you
can
really,
if
you
can
basically
show
people
and
to
prove
it
by
letting
them
track
it
directly
in
the
blockchain
right
that,
if
you're
holding
your
money
in
this
currency,
then
that
results
in
the
financing
and
construction
of
you
know
new
solar
panels,
new
solar
farms
generating
clean
energy.
That's
you
know,
powering
the
economy
and
in
a
sustainable
way.
Right,
that'll
keep
going
forever
and
and
and
that's
something
you
can
actually
explain
to
people
right
and
they
will
understand.
A
It
will
be
relevant
to
people
that
don't
care
about
crypt
right.
It
would
be
relevant
to
like
politicians
right
that
currently
have
zero
reason
to
not
just
destroy
crypto,
because
they
don't
see
any
kind
of
benefit
for
them
right,
and
so
I
think
that's
and
then,
of
course
the
question
is
like:
is
it
even
you
know?
A
You
know
the
idea
is
basically
that
okay,
I
guess
the
best
place
to
yeah.
So
basically
the
way
that
the
workforce
is
supposed
to
work
in
the
endgame
right
is
that
yeah
you
have
this.
You
know
you
can
set
up
yeah,
I
mean
actually
maybe
the
best
place
to
start
is
you
got
the
basically
governance
right,
which
is
basically
the
voters,
the
delegates
and
then
the
governors
essentially
or
more
specifically,
the
councils
inside
the
governors,
which
are
really
like
the
advisors
that
work
directly
with
voters
they.
A
So
they
come
up
with
this
broad
kbi
framework.
Essentially
that
determines
what's
clean
money.
What's
the
stuff,
that's
very
clean
and
sort
of
the
really
beneficial
stuff-
and,
what's
you
know,
so-so
and
depending
on
sort
of
a
transition
period
could
be
could
be
still
be
scalable
in
the
short
run
in
order
to
get
the
ball
rolling
right
and
then
the
so
so
that's
sort
of
the
framework
and
the
kpis
basically
right
and
then
the
protectors
that
actually
execute
on
this.
A
They
then
sort
of
extrapolate
or
sort
of
interpret,
follow
this
framework,
essentially
in
taking
action
and
then
allocating
capital
through
their
ranges,
and
then
it
there's
this
feedback
loop,
essentially
where
based
on
their
their
activity,
then
every
quarter
or
something
like
that.
There's
like
a
review
and
then
in
that
review.
That's
basically
where
providing
new
debt
ceiling
is
is
done
if
it's
possible
to
do,
and
you
know
if
the
performance
has
been
right
right.
A
They
are,
then
the
ones
that
get
the
that
sort
of
get
the
top
up
on
the
debt
ceiling
right,
but
get
the
the
in
a
sense,
win
right.
The
competition
and
then
benefit
by
getting
more
capital
to
allocate,
and
if
someone
is
just
sort
of
like
you
know
like
pushing
the
limits
of
the
definitions
and
and
basically
just
trying
to
exploit
it
and
figure
out
how
to
make
the
greatest
short-term
gain.
A
Well,
then
they
don't
get
to
scale
right
so,
and
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
things
that
really
shows
the
benefit
of
metadose
right.
That
maker
suddenly
gets
to
sit
and
really
kind
of
like
decide.
Things
retroactively
right
and
it's
up
to
the
meta
house
to
basically
try
to
extrapolate,
try
to
sort
of
read
the
minds
of
them
care
holders
and,
and
then,
if
they
figure
out
how
to
do
it,
the
right
way,
then
there's
a
huge
upside
to
them
and
and
then
and
practically.
A
I
need
another
place
to
where
there's
some
detail
about
this
behind
the
box
thing
right,
then
you
basically
have
the
so
you
have
these
things
called
the
councils,
so
the
governance
right
they
operate
councils
and
so
all
governors
they
all
operate.
One
count
like
they
all
have
all
you
know
have
the
representatives
on
a
single
council
for
each
sort
of.
A
You
know
like
upside
for
the
for
the
ecosystem
and
then
so
so
and
then
based
on
that
the
coordinates
big
proposals
to
make
a
governance
to
then
do
these
like
large
scale.
Adjustments
to
the
the
to
the
protected
house
right
and
and
their
rwa
bolts
that
are
done
through
are
initially
done
through,
what's
called
rwa
vault
adoption
right,
which
just
means
that
they
basically
are
sort
of
tied
to
particular
vaults
on
the
on
the
maker
protocol
that
they
kind
of
like
control
with
their
own
governance.
A
And
here's
like
down
here.
It's
like
these
are
all
the
scope
maps
right.
So
each
of
these
are
basically
there's
one
council
for
each
of
these
things
and
then
for
some
of
them,
they're,
not
just
the
council,
but
also
co-units,
there's
like
yeah.
Actually
I
used
to
have
yeah,
maybe
I'll
make
a
little
boundary
here.
A
So
this,
like
the
the
top
five,
are
like
the
primary
scopes,
which
just
means
that
there's
a
bunch
of
stuff
in
them,
they're,
very
big
and
deep
and
and
they
have
a
lot
of
coordinates
and
a
lot
of
budget
and
then
the
bottom
five
are
supporting
so
they're.
Basically
quite
lean,
and
they
actually
they
don't
have
coins
at
all.
They
only
have
the
council,
then
the
councils
also
act
as
coordinates
and-
and
I
yeah,
I
call
them
executive
councils
at
one
point,
but
I'm
not.
A
I
think
I
would
like
to
find
a
better
word
than
that
and
yeah,
but
so
that's
the
same
way.
It
works
actually
everything
right
what
counts
as
decentralized
collateral
right.
What
what
we're
going
to
see
with
that?
And
what
do
we
see
with
our
infrastructure?
And
what
do
we
want
to
see
from
marketing?
And
what
do
we
want
to
see
were
peg
and
liquidity
and
so
on?
A
Right
and-
and
this
all
starts
with
scope
map
and
then
it
sort
of
trickles
down
through
the
workforce
from
this
from
the
scope
map,
which
is
ultimately
decided
by
the
voters
in
broader
communities
right.
So
actually
this
a
call
like
this
right
I
mean
this
is
supposed
to
morph
into
eventually
dbc
meetings
right
where
the
voters
sit
and
ultimately
the
discussion
should
be
about.
A
Yeah,
so
like
yeah,
so
this
thing
about
carbon
reductions
like
the
thing
is
that
there's
no
like
the
problem
with
climate
change
is
that
it's
dominated
by
this
source.
Basically,
this
like
scheme
of
like
carbon
reduction
or
like
that
you
can
do
business
as
usual
and
then
just
like
do
some
green
washing
and
then
it's
fine,
but
unfortunately
like
on
a
global
scale.
It's
the
economy
itself
must
change
right.
So
that's
actually,
why
maker
is
so
uniquely
powerful
for
this,
because
and
and
that's
a
complex
real
assets,
that's
a
unique
problem.
A
You
know
being
sustainable
basically
and
yeah.
Like
I
mean
a
good
example
is
like
you
can't
like
it's
not
cheaper
to
burn
a
bunch
of
gas
or
coal
and
then
suck
the
carbon
out
of
the
air.
Again
that
I
mean
some
people.
Might
some
of
you
might
think
that
this
sort
of
the
free
market
or
something
economic
equilibrium
ensures
that
the
pro
cost
of
burning
coal
and
then
sucking
the
c2?
Are
there
again
that's
the
same
as
just
having
solar
panels
and
batteries
or
nuclear
power
plants?
A
Something
like
that
right,
but
even
though
yeah
right
I
mean
even
though
sort
of
the
system,
the
the
way
the
financial
system
allocates
capital
gay
sort
of
put
those
two
things
pretty
much.
Equally,
I
mean.
Actually,
I
guess
even
renewables
are
getting
cheaper
at
this
point
right,
but
but
the
reality
is,
if
you
really
count
all
the
costs
and
not
just
the
cost,
to
you
yourself,
but
you
sort
of,
and
then
you
sort
of
dump
the
carbon
reduction
or
whatever
out
to
to
the
abstract
like
there's
it's.
A
You
know
the
value
of
of
doing
the
right
investments
with
the
right
like
considering
their
externalities.
It's,
like
you
know
it's
it's
infinitely
more
powerful
than
green,
washing
in
fact
like
greenwashing.
Actually
is
it
simply
it
doesn't?
It
doesn't
do
anything
like
it
really
is
it.
It
is
just
unbiable
because
you
just
like
they're,
just
types
of
activity
that
that
occurs
today
that
cannot
be
made
sustainable.
No
matter
like
you
can't
sort
of
economically
make
it
make
it
work.
A
Basically,
so
you
know
so
that's
what
I'm
saying
like
it's,
not
a
you
know,
yeah
like
it's,
it's
you
can't
think
of
it
as
like.
You
dump
some
stuff,
and
then
you
remove
it
back
out.
You
have
to
think
of,
like
you
need
to
do
business
in
a
way
so
you're
not
even
dumping
anything
that
needs
to
be
removed
in
the
first
place,
which
is
not
simple.
A
To
be
clear,
I'm
not
saying
it's
like
a
good
vision.
I'm
just
saying
it's
a
like
clear,
enforceable
one.
Just
as
like
an
example
of
this
is
something
you
could
do
and
say:
we've
actually
done
it
and
I
have
proof,
we've
done
it
versus
you
know
like
clean
money,
it's
kind
of
hard
to
say,
have
you
done
it
or
not?
A
Yeah,
I
mean
that's
a
good
one
right
and
I
think
one
thing
another
point
just
to
talk
about
a
little
bit
more
right
is,
of
course,
is
g
frameworks
right.
So
there's
like
what,
like
you
know,
esg
is
like
a
huge
thing
and
there's
like
tons
of
all
these.
Like
esg
frameworks
and
big
problem,
I
mean,
and
they
kind
of
take
this
approach
of,
like
you
know
like
doing
investments,
that's
totally
no
negative
externalities
or
whatever
right,
and
the
problem
is
of
course
like
most
of
them
are
like
scams.
A
Basically
right
like
and
and
totally
opaque
and
and
there's
no
people
don't
like
you
know,
no
one
really
takes
it
seriously
or
many
people,
don't
we're
gonna,
say
most,
don't
really
take
it
seriously
and
it's
sort
of
a
predatory
thing
almost
right,
which
then
has
eroded
confidence
in
the
whole
thing
right.
But
but
I
think
ultimately,
it
is
sort
of
the
right
way
to
think
about
it
and
I
think
the
right
place
to
start
basically
right
is
to
just
look
at
what
are
the
actual
I
mean.
So
I
don't
know
about
this.
A
We
need
to
hire
experts
and
you
write
higher
council
that
could
actually
like
probably
look
at
what
is
the
sort
of
the
strongest
esg
framework
that
actually
approaches
this
level
of
you
could
do
this
forever
and
it
will
keep
working
right.
I
mean
which
is
really
that's
in
the
end.
What
I
would
say
is
like
the
definition
of
clean
money.
Is
it's
a
monetary
system
that
doesn't
destroy
itself
right
like
so,
we
don't
have
to
like
be
all
about.
A
I
mean
it
doesn't
have
to
be
some
kind
of
of
you
know
like
I
don't
know
what
you
know
socialist
thing
or
whatever,
how
some
people
would
think
of
environmentalism
right
as
being
like
totally
heavy
socialism
or
something
right.
It's
really
about
survival
right,
because
the
monetary
system,
especially
like
a
world
currency
right,
ultimately
has
exposure
to
the
world.
I
mean
at
a
certain
at
a
high
enough
scale.
You
the
externalities,
become
internalized.
A
So
the
question
is:
can
you
create
a
currency
that
doesn't
you
know,
destroy
itself
by
killing
itself
through?
You
know
negative
externalities
that
itself
creates
and
again
yeah.
So
now
that
that's
like
super
clear
right,
you
would
need
a
whole
set
of
scientists
and
experts
and
so
on
right
and
ultimately,
there
need
to
be
this
council
of
people
that
could
tap
into
all
those
resources
to
try
to
iterately.
A
You
know
over
a
long
period
of
time
right
with
lots
of
input
from
the
community
and
also
considerations
of
things
like
pr
and
meta
and
all
that
stuff
to
try
to
build
this.
So
it's
not
easy,
but
but
on
the
other
hand,
it's
like
yeah,
I
mean
it's
basically
necessary.
If
we
want
to,
you
know,
want
to
prevent
total
extinction
and
try
to
at
least
you
know,
latch
on
and
hold
on
to
some
of
the
some
of
human
civilization
that
can
still
be
saved.
A
Okay,
so
would
d3m
implementation
fall
into
a
metadata
or
be
part
of
the
government,
so
d3m
implementation
is
make
a
call,
meaning
it's
not
even
in
a
governor,
it's
not
in
a
metadata,
it's
actually
a
part
of
like
the
real
maker
right,
and
so
what
that,
what
defines
make
a
call
is
that
well,
first
of
all,
there's
no
people
right,
so
it's
just
a
technical
system
only
and
then.
Secondly,
it's
like
very
simple
stuff,
like
these
very
basic
things
right,
it's
sort
of
it's
the
so-called
trinity
right.
A
A
Yeah
and
d3ms
actually
fall
under
that
right,
so
you
can,
you
can
set
up
a
d3m,
you
can
activate
it
and
then
it
can
actually
just
keep
running
forever
the
one.
But
then
the
question
is
who
like
builds
the
d3
implementation
and
that's
actually.
So
that's
a
that's
like
a
little.
It's
a
little
strange
like
a
unique
case
right
because
in
the
long
run
every
time
a
new
metadata
launches.
A
A
That
would
sort
of
be
tasked
with
doing
the
work
of
like
setting
up
these
pieces
to
to
launch
the
new
metadata
and
it
would
fall
under
actually
the
ecosystem
scope,
so
the
ecosystem
scope.
So
basically
the
bottom
here.
This
thing:
that's
the
one
that's
like
responsible
for
building
new
metadatas,
so
so
they
would
basically
be
the
one
they
would
have
some
of
the
budget
they
would
use
to
whatever
every
year
or
every
two
years
or
whenever
the
a
new
meta
that
launches
they
would
sort
of
sit.
A
So
eventually
it
would
be
done
by
like
the
magic
engine
fully
so
like
this
sort
of
super
algorithmic
machine
right,
so
that
thing
would
actually
be
able
to
it
like
it
does
the
countdown
to
like
deploy
the
metadown
and
but
then
you
could
also
like
deploy
the
metadata
landing
engine.
If
it's
fully
you
know
now.
This
is
how
it's
done
and
we're
not
going
to
change
how
we
do
it.
So
then
you
deploy
it
and
then
you
can
even
hook
it
up
with
the
d3m
as
well,
and
and
so
you
actually
wouldn't
even
yes.
A
A
A
Yeah
I
mean
I
can
do
literally
whatever
it
wants
and
it
doesn't
even
require,
like
capital
reserve
requirements
as
long
as
it's
doing
stuff.
That
is
not
related
to
its
class
right.
So,
like
a
creator
dial,
that's
like
doing
nft
trading
or
something
can
completely
do
that.
However,
it
feels
like
and,
however,
like
the
whole
tokenomics,
like
the
capital,
like
basically
the
so
this
thing
of
like
the
capital,
the
tokenomics
and
the
cash
flows
of
a
metadata
is
like,
is
heavily
sort
of
controlled,
basically
by
the
system
right.
A
It
goes
to
the
metanomics,
so
that
goes
towards
this
eth
like
phoenix
either,
which
is
like
a
heath
accumulation
or
alexia,
which
is
basically
also
east
accumulation
and,
like
you
know,
liquidity
position
like
accumulation
and
and
so
that
stuff
it
can
never
touch
so
so
just
can't
even
touch
it.
So,
basically,
there's
no
sort
of
risk
of
doing
something
wrong
with
it,
because
it
just
can't
even
do
anything
with
it,
but
the
other
30
then
goes
to
the
treasury
and
that's
kind
of
like
play.
A
Money
in
a
sense
right
so
especially
for,
like
creators
like
I
literally,
I
hope,
almost
right
that
that
I
mean
I
think
yeah
like
like
that
you
will
have
metadata
that
will
buy
nfts,
because
they
will
attempt
to
see
if
they
can
use
that
to
to
alter
their
meta
right.
So
so
the
token
will
become
more
valuable
because
the
community
gets
this
sort
of
intangible
benefit
out
of
owning
a
bunch
of
rare
nfts
that
they
want
to
own
or
other
weird
stuff.
A
A
A
A
Because
this
is
this
is
like
how
we
can
do
it
like
right
immediately,
and
then
you
can
translate
this
into
the
the
same.
Like
the
you
know,
you
can
use
this,
you
can
yeah.
You
can
translate
the
way
this
works
into
how
you
set
the
parameters
for
the
d3m
right,
but
so
basically
it's
it's
like
the
way
it
works
is
that
metadials
can
like
adopt
vaults
that
sit
on
the
maker
protocol.
Okay,
I
just
realized.
This
slide
is
totally
useless,
but
so
so
that
would
be
something
like.
A
Let's
say
that
one
of
the
new
m1
or
m2
right,
one
of
the
real
acid
metadios,
adopts
the
hvp
bolt
right,
and
so
what
that
means
is
well
actually
before
they
can
do
that.
First,
they
need.
You
know
a
debt
ceiling
right,
like
a
d
like
so
before
they
can
start
spending
money
like
spending
money
out
of
the
metadata
engine.
They
need
some
money
to
go
into
the
d3m
first
right
so
and
so
in
the
bolt
adoption
paradigm
right,
the
oil
driven
mechanism.
This
is
stuck
through.
A
It's
called
a
vault
adoption,
mip
and
so
the
vaulted
option.
Mip
is
like
the
equivalent
of
the
d3m,
so
it
basically
determines
in
in
sort
of
the
conditions
in
which
maker
will
provide
capital
to
the
metadata
to
use
with
its
own
internal
governance
right
and
so
the
vault
adoption
basically
has
two
components
it
has.
A
So
every
quarter
you
sort
of
look
back
at
the
performance
of
the
last
quarter
and
then
you
change
the
cost
of
capital
and
you
change
the
the
debt
ceiling
based
on
the
less
than
the
older
performance
right,
and
that's
then,
like
that's
done
by,
like
you
know,
that's
done
by
a
core
unit
that
operates
based
on
the
scope
map
created
by
a
council
together
with
voters
and
delegates
and
and
then
the
metadows.
They
have
full
access
to
that.
So
they
can.
A
They
know
which
actions
should
we
take
so
that
when
they
do
the
review
we're
going
to
get
the
higher
that's
right
and
yeah?
So
that's
that's.
Basically
it
and
the
same
thing
works
for
decentralized
collateral
as
well
right
so
for
creator
dials,
it's
the
same
thing
where
there's
basically
like
they
can.
They
can
run
vaults
on
the
on
the
maker
protocol
and
they
can
have
up
to
x
debt
ceiling
like
so
you
have
to
you
sort
of,
would
you
know
so.
A
You
know
like
apecoin,
vault
right
or
something
some
weird
stuff
they
and
and
and
then
they
can
give
each
of
those
two
bolts
dead
ceilings,
but
the
total
debt
ceiling
of
all
the
vaults
they've
adopted
cannot
exceed
the
debt
ceiling
described
in
the
vault
adoption
mip
right,
which
again
is
equivalent
to
the
parameters
of
the
d3m
and
then
the
the
sort
of
the
yeah
and
then
the
way
it
works
is
well
the
cost
of
capital.
The
term
described
in
the
mip
determines
how
much
of
the
stability
fees
of
each
of
these
adopted.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
then
do
asks.
Would
this
split
be
adjusted
and
we're
talking
about
the
the
you
know,
the
target
collateral
portfolio
so
what's
down
here
right,
like
50
to
70
percent,
each
15
percent
cash
like
10,
clean
money,
10
self
globalized
and
yes
and
and
then
last
week
I
talked
about
58
42
and
now
I've
already
changed
that
to
60
40.,
so
that
can
totally
change.
But
but
of
course
again,
this
is
only
possible
because
we're
still
in
the
pre-game
right
so
like.
A
I
think
I
ultimately
think
that
60
40
is
like
a
really
good
spot,
so
I
mean
the
reason
why
I
went
from
58
42
to
60.
40
is
simply
because
it's
like
similar
to
like
it's
sort
of
this
I
mean
I,
I
ultimately
chose
42
in
the
first
place
because
of
this
problem
of
like
this
is
the
only
way
in
calculus.
This
is
where
the
employers
get
their
whole
upside.
A
For
this
whole,
the
entire
tokenomics
right,
not
the
only
one
I
mean,
there's
an
internal
there's,
a
metanomics
in
the
metadata
as
well,
but
like
it's
a
it's,
an
explicit
place.
Where
that
I
get
something
explicit
right.
So
so
I
thought
42
was
like
the
absolute
limit
of
like
how
far
I
could
go
before
you
start
having
the
risk
of
you
know,
if
you
assume
a
higher,
you
know
a
higher
kind
of
likelihood
of
of
the
other
types
of
farmers,
just
like
forgetting
their
tokens
or
something
right
compared
to
employers.
A
A
So
this
person
here
right
that
attempts
to
become
a
facilitator
of
an
administration
team
which
is
kind
of
like
the
the
center
piece
of
metadata
and
they
are
elected
by
the
metadata
holders.
So
there
they
can
only
be
elected
once
the
metadata
is
launched
and
the
tokens
have
been
distributed
and
some,
like
short
amount
of
time,
has
passed
so
that
there's
some
level
of
real
distribution
out
there.
So
a
vote
can
be
had
without
immediately
being
overturned
but
maker.
A
I
mean
I
think
we
could
consider
having
some
kind
of
endorsement
almost
process
right
where
maker
holders
can
basically
sort
of
show
their
support
for
a
particular
cluster.
So
you
can
just
cluster
it
more
tightly
and
have
a
greater
likelihood
that
the
metadata
token
builders
will,
like
the
metadata
governance,
will
sort
of
accept
this.
Like
complete
team
and
complete,
you
know
business
model
envision
on
a
silver
plate
right,
but
it's
still,
it
has
to
be.
A
Okay,
so
how
the
team's
elected
incentivized
with
meta
tokens,
we're
made
out
of
talking
bonuses
and
care
bonuses
yeah.
So
this
is
the
thing
where,
like
in
the
very
early
stage,
right
like
in
the
proof
of
concept
phase,
basically
and
and
and
also
the
like,
the
first,
also
beyond
the
proof
of
concept,
it
was
on
the
launch
phase,
which
are
the
first
six
metadatas
during
this
phase.
All
these
metadatas
would
mainly
be
populated
with
people
from
the
these.
A
A
So
you
get
your
you
keep
your
pay
for
maker
for
two
years,
but
then,
if
you
get
on
board
into
a
metadata,
then
you
also
start
getting
metadata
tokens
as
a
bonus
right.
So
you
actually
get
cash
from
maker
mpr
for
maker
and
metadata
tokens
from
the
metadata
and
then
after
the
full
two-year
period
is
over,
which
would
then
be
sometime
in
the
like,
and
the
three-year
period
would
begin
in
october
right.
So
the
vote
in
october
would
would
start
the
ticking
clock
basically
for
the
two-year
period.
A
So
basically
in
october
you
know
2024,
then
it
would
run
out
and
then
the
metadata
would
have
to
pay
takeover
and
pay
the
cash
themselves.
And
then
there
would
be
no
more
mpr
bonuses
at
that
point
and
then
that
would
also
be
around
the
time
that
we
would
then
see
new
metadata,
hiring
really
like
beginning
to
hire.
People
outside
you
know
from
the
outside
right
and
the
metadata
would
sort
of
have
stabilized
and
then
begin
to
do
this
process
of
growth
of
really
just
like
bulking
up
the
whole
ecosystem.
A
A
A
Okay,
I
think
the
most
interesting
is
the
l2
question
right,
so
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
l2
stuff
in
in
game
plan,
and
but
I
mean
the
most
important
l2
sort
of
piece
of
the
game
plan
is
simply
it's
not
even
the
metadata
game,
but
simply
in
the
in
the
symbol,
diane
game.
The
part
of
the
trinity
right,
so
basically
multichain
bolts
right.
So
this
has
already
been
worked
on
by
the
protocol
engineering
right
which,
in
the
endgame
plan,
are
basically
considered
the
core
development
team
right.
A
So
that's
like
a
core
feature:
that's
been
built,
no
matter
what,
but
with
metadows
we
can
just
supercharge
it
a
little
bit
more
right.
So
not
only
would
we
do
shot
at
vault
engines
and
vaults
on
l2s
right,
but
we
would
also
do
l2
farms
right.
So
the
magic
engine
is
basically
sort
of
this
if,
like
it's
sort
of
taking
the
like,
the
taking
of
the
symbol,
die
taking
what
I
call
the
trinity
engine
right.
So
the
trinity
of
these
these
call
features
and
then
slapping
the
the
metamagic
on
top
of
it
right.
A
A
So
the
whole
idea
is
that,
because
I
mean
one
of
the
things
we
ran
into
when
we
started
doing
l2
work
was
that
there's
all
these
opportunities
on
all
the
different
tools
right,
all
the
different
multi-chains
and
so
on,
right
partnerships
and
and
the
token
incentives
and
all
this
stuff.
But
we
just
have
makers
so
freaking
slow
that
we
have
no
possibility
of
like
engaging
with
them
and
doing
anything
and
interacting
with
them
meaningfully.
So
that's
the
whole
idea
of
like
the
creator
now
that
they
each
get
this
thing.
A
I
call
the
home
base
so
kind
of
like
each
creator,
maps
to
one
sort
of
domain
or
shot
right,
one
particular
l2
or
or
a
blockchain
and
and
then
the
reason
the
way
they
do,
that
is
that
they
actually
have
an
upside
in
the
shot
at
vault
engine
on
that
l2
right.
So
there
will
be
like
so
maybe
like
so
m0,
for
instance,
will
get
to
pick
if
they
want.
A
You
know
optimism
more
arbitrarily
or
stocknet,
because
those
are
the
places
where
we
will
have
shadowball
engines
in
the
short
run
right
and
then,
if
whatever
they
pick,
will
be
the
home
base
and
then
what
that
practically
means
is
they
get
like?
One
percent
of
all
the
net
income
maker
earns
on
that
shot,
or
something
like
that
right.
A
So
they
have
some
small
upside
in,
like
makers
call
bases
in
that
in
that
place,
and
what
that
means
is
then
suddenly
they're
fully
incentivized
to
first
of
all
build
out
their
own
stuff
there,
but
also
make
sure
that
maker
is
getting
adopted
right,
because
they
also
really
have
that,
like
permanent,
forever
upside
right,
that
kind
of
moat
that
they
they,
where
they
benefit.
If
that
shot,
the
shot
itself
grows
and
it
makes
adoption
and
that
shot
grows
right.
A
All
right,
let's
call
it
here,
but
I
think
this
is
really
great.
All
these
questions
like
it's
clearly
that
we're
starting
to
get
a
little
bit
more
concrete
on
all
this
stuff
and
we'll
just
pick
it
up
tomorrow,
and
maybe
we
could,
like,
I
don't
know,
talk
about
it
in
the
forums
I
mean.
Have
some
consider
talk
about
questions
and
events
on
the
forum
I
will
I'll
pop
in
on
the
thread
and
and
basically
keep
it
going
there.