►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 92
Description
# Agenda
## Governance Segment
Richard Brown : General Q&A
LongForWisdom : Governance at a Glance
## MIPs!
- Charles St. Louis: MIPs Process Update
- LongForWisdom: MIPX: Protocol DAI Transfer, MIPX: Declarations of Intent
## Risk Segment
- Cyrus Younessi : TUSD Collateral Onboarding
- Lucas Vogelsang : ConsolFreight and Paperchain
## General Q&A
We'll open the floor for any questions about Scientific Governance and Risk.
Please join us and help shape the future of the MakerDAO.
## Links
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 1: https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/governance-risk-framework/part-one
Website: https://makerdao.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/makerdao
Forum: https://forum.makerdao.com/
Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/home
Email: info@makerdao.com
A
A
Currently,
the
only
governance
facilitator,
but
hopefully
not
for
long
we'll
be
talking
about
that
it
for
a
bit
today.
Our
agenda
includes
a
great
deal
of
things
to
go
over,
we'll
be
continuing
our
transition
from
old
world
to
news.
So
we
have
monetary
policy,
we
have
the
threads
and
we
still
need
to
tie
open
in
the
old
world
and
we'll
be
digging
more
and
more
into
lips.
As
that
process
gets
refined.
A
Long
for
wisdom
will
be
telling
us
a
bit
about
government's
at-a-glance
Charles
will
give
us
an
update
on
the
MIPS
process
and
what
that's?
Transition
from
old
world
looks
like
long
for
wisdom
will
give
us
a
review
of
two
nips
that
he's
submitted.
I'm
very
interested
in
getting
some
details
about.
Cyrus
will
give
us
a
recap
of
a
presentation
that
occurred
last
week
about
the
TSD
TUSD
onboarding
process,
Lucas
from
Center
fuchsias,
going
to
give
us
a
review
of
two
of
their
myths.
A
They
haven't
processed
one
for
console
fright
and
one
for
paper
chain
and
we'll
be
hearing
from
the
shesh
for
the
state
of
the
pig,
so
obviously
jam-packed
agenda
today,
I
might
be
attacking
people
on
the
shoulder
if
they
go
along
because
we
need
to
watch
our
time.
I
forgot
also
I
have
my
own
MIPS
responsibilities
that
need
to
be
taken
care
of
today.
A
So
as
we
start
to
figure
out
what
the
points
of
order
are
and
how
to
formalize
this
stuff
and
where
the
speech
is
going
with
when
the
Capitals
get
banged,
this
is
going
to
be
a
slightly
shambolic,
but
today
we
are
in
week
two
of
the
MIPS
process.
The
lateness
process,
Vegas
and
I
was
a
governess
facilitator.
A
It's
my
responsibility
this
week
to
review
the
inclusion
polls
from
the
previous
week
and,
as
this
is
sort
of
like
a
mock,
UN
version
of
the
mist
process
or
the
light
version,
the
only
myth
that
we
have
in
play
right
now
is
the
greatest
football
in
my
books
we've
ever
had,
and
the
only
one
is
the
inclusion
of
another
governments
facilitator
and
that's
the
inclusion
poll
for
our
Schaefer
camera.
I
can't
find
the
number
now,
let's
get
the
number
and
I'll
just
post
the
link,
so
people
can
review
it.
A
We
had
a
poll
to
determine
whether
the
community
had
an
appetite
onboard
long
for
wisdom.
This
is
an
interesting
poll
because
of
her
freedom
reasons.
One
is
the
first
time
that
we
have
a
default
inclusion
threshold,
which
is
an
interesting
developments
that
we
need
to
internalize,
which
means
that
it
requires
a
certain
amount
of
participation
for
poll
to
go
through.
So
in
this
poll,
the
default
threshold
to
have
a
satisfactory
yes
or
to
signal
that
consensus
was
achieved,
was
3000
maker
and
happily,
as
it
officially
ended,
no
officially
Hansen
35
minutes.
A
It
should
have
officially
ended.
So
good
news
is
that
long
for
wisdom
was
officially
included
in
this
next
week's
poll.
So
if
you
want
to
for
him
your
congratulations
with
a
whopping.
Ninety
three
point:
four
to
support
in
support
for
his
his
ratification,
but
it
provides
me
with
no
end
of
amusement.
Somebody
voted
no.
With
four
hundred
maker
a
couple
days
ago,
I
went
into
the
governance
portal
to
signal
my
support
for
his
proposal
and
I
thought
to
myself
how
amusing.
B
A
Would
be
if
I
just
put
a
single
maker
and
no
against
his
proposal
to
see
how
much
that
was
and
I
found
out
this
on
D
beat
me
to
it
where
we
were
your
jerk.
His
governance
in
action
I
think
that
at
this
point
we
might
keep
the
ball
rolling.
I
am
going
to
hand
it
off
to
you
long
to
government's
at-a-glance,
then
I'm
gonna,
head
up
to
somebody
else
and
I
can
hand
off
back
to
you
again.
So
this
might
be
a
bit
weird,
but
if
you.
C
C
C
C
C
Cool
okay,
so
active
discussions
on
the
forum.
This
week
we
had
a
threads
from
befits
and
piper
discussing
packs,
G
X
gold
as
I'm
CD
collateral.
We
still
yet
to
see
a
map,
six
application
from
XG
or
from
anyone
thanks
to
you
but
I
know
Ellen
has
been
around.
Who
I
think
is,
do
you
think
works
with
them,
so
they
are
aware
and
that
we're
discussing
it
I
think
see.
If
you
have,
you
have
a
strong
opinion.
So
thanks
G
go
discuss
some
threads.
C
C
Then
we
have
Kurt's
about
the
target
rate
feedback
mechanism,
which
is
actually
last
week
or
before
I
think
last
week,
but
that
sort
of
been
this
is
a
good
discussion
on
that's.
If
anybody
II
wear
for
the
TR
FM
is
and
how
it
works.
That
is
a
great
threat
to
start
with
and
then
finally,
we've
had
the
the
GSM
dry
and
dark
spell
social
layer.
C
So
the
idea
would
be
to
so
there's
some
guidance,
I
guess
for
the
dev
team
and
the
community
you
would
do
should
occur,
cool
all
right.
So,
on
seeking
consensus,
there's
been
any
new
signal
requests.
This
week,
we've
had
the
adjusting
WB
TC
debt
ceiling,
which
was
on
chained
and
finished
a
little
while
ago.
I
believe
does
anyone
know
the
outcomes
now
already
boy
after.
B
C
A
A
D
So
with
respect
to
the
MIPS
process
in
Clara,
onboarding
in
general,
and
also
be
posting,
this
as
a
forum
post
or
thread
like
I,
did
earlier
this
week,
I'm,
hopefully
I'll
get
it
a
tomorrow
as
opposed
to
the
next
Monday,
so
that
people
can
read
about
it
earlier
on.
But
in
terms
of
this
week's
activity,
I
mean
rich
and
long.
I've,
already
kind
of
briefly
spoke
about
it.
But
earlier
today
the
inclusion
pool
for
the
Corps
personnel
onboarding
of
long
for
wisdom.
D
So
we'll
kind
of
acknowledge
that
the
final
vote
would
be
ready
for
the
final
executive
vote
in
the
week
four.
So
in
terms
of
week,
four
of
the
governance
cycle,
the
executive
vote
would
be
submitted
on
the
Monday
and
the
executive
out.
Details
would
have
kind
of
an
expiration
of
four
days
and
after
which
it
has
no
effect.
So
MIPS
and
sub
proposals
would
only
ever
move
to
the
acceptor
status
if
the
executive
vote
is
passed
and
and
is
within
those
four
day
limit.
So
the
executive
vote
fails
to
pass
within
the
four
day
limit.
D
In
terms
of
Clara
onboarding
in
the
governance
cycle
in
week,
four,
we
have
the
community
green
light
pole
to
give
direction
about
what
to
do
next.
Regarding
the
six
applications
that
have
been
proposed
in
the
forums
and
the
green
light
poll
will
be
posted
on
the
fourth
Monday
at
the
same
time
as
the
executive
vote
for
long
sir
proposal,
and
it
will
run
into
the
Friday
of
the
fourth.
D
On
that
thursday
of
week
for
the
governance
facilitators,
do
this
governance
cycle
review
type
meeting.
So
that
meeting
gives
the
opportunity
to
discuss
the
past
government
cycle
that
occurred
and
everything
that
would
happen
throughout,
as
well
as
discuss
any
upcoming
governance
cycle
and
potential
submissions
for
the
next
month.
So
in
other
news
in
terms
of
overall
collateral
onboarding
I
do
want
to
re-emphasize
that
we
are
still
in
the
transition
period
from
the
current
level
and
boarding
practices
that
we
know
to
the
the
MIPS
process.
D
So
during
this
period,
we'll
continue
to
use
the
weekly
cycle
format
that
we've
been
using
for
this
month
and
given
that
the
results
of
the
the
community
green
light
pole
in
in
week,
four
of
this
month
will
be
concluded
on
the
28th
of
May.
The
mid
twelve
proposals
with
the
domain
work
for
those
Clairol
assets
will
not
be
ready,
will
likely
not
be
ready
for
June's
governance
cycle.
A
And
thanks
Charles
for
the
recap:
I
guess
the
one
of
the
main
takeaways
is
that
obviously
MIPS
is
going
to
be
enormous,
the
useful
additions
or
arsenal,
but
it's
it's
going
to
take
some
muscle
memory
to
get
involved
or
get
it
fully
internalized.
So,
as
we
pass
through
at
this
month,
look
forward
to
having
more
and
more
integrations
next
in
the
following.
C
A
Yeah
well,
we've
had
some
discussions
about
this
internally,
so
there's
issues
at
play
here.
The
primary
issues
are-
and
this
is
interesting-
I
love
this,
because
it
always
allows
me
to
do
a
call
back
to
here.
It's
themed,
some
previous
meetings,
and
so
these
themes
are
in
tension
like
the
past
from
intention
to
implementation,
and
it
also
ties
back
into
the
theme
that
I
just
discussed
briefly
about
the
understanding
what
the
MIS.
A
What
each
one
of
us
individual
pieces
requires
in
order
to
put
into
play
and
dealing
with
the
level
of
work
we
have
on
our
plates
and
so
actually
there's
numerous
themes
here.
One
of
them
is
just
pure
bandwidth
issues,
and
so
the
MIPS
process
has
published
a
best-case
scenario
or
the
preferred
path
to
get
the
car
more
collateral
types
of
on-boarded.
But
there's
going
to
be
some
frictions
here,
and
one
of
those
frictions
we've
run
into
almost
immediately
is
that
the
volume
of
work
involved
with
these
collateral
onboarding
applications
is
significant.
A
A
We're
still
working
on
internally
how
to
coordinate
that
and
when
we're
gonna
have
that
work
prepared
and
how
to
communicate
it
back
to
the
mips
applicants
and
we're
not
there
yet
so
that
question
is
when
I'm
not
entirely
sure,
hopefully
we'll
be
able
to
get
with
the
mips
applicants
this
week
next
week
and
start
digging
in
through
the
application
process
and
figure
out
exactly
how
this
thing
works.
It's
my
expectation
that
there
will
probably
be
meetings
involved,
we're
sort
of
like
a
Q&A
session
between
the
domain
teams
in
the
mid
Barbican.
A
So
we
can
establish
some
baselines,
because
this
is
the
very
first
kick
of
the.
Can
we
don't
completely
understand
all
the
moving
pieces
example
is
the
last
time
when
we
did
WB
TC
internally.
That
was
something
that
was
like
potentially
expected.
That's
a
it's
a
project
that
we're
familiar
with
at
least
tangentially
in
the
ecosystem,
and
it
still
took
a
fantastic
amount
of
highly
focused
work
across
12,
possibly
different
departments
of
maker.
To
make
that
happen,
and
so
we're
trying
to
figure
out.
How
do
we
do
that
with
the
mips
applicants
in
the
forms?
A
A
F
C
So
it's
fairly
kind
of
like
like
low-level
sort
of
core
infrastructure
and
sort
of
aim,
it's
kind
of
able
to
be
very
generic,
so
there's
sort
of
limited
requirements,
since
it
I
mean
II.
Like
you,
a
reason
like
I
was
written
right,
but
there's
like
there's
no
sort
of
ownerÃs
requirements,
it's
just
kind
of
like.
C
For
example,
like
we
probably
build
things,
build
things
like
all
sort
of
more
complete
solutions
in
the
future,
for
like
a
treasury
management
and
like
thank
you,
but
all
this
other
stuff,
and
so
we
have
that
we
can
kind
of
fall
back
on
this
and,
if
there's
any
light
edge
cases
in
the
future,
what
we
need
to
do
weird
payments
that
kind
of
aren't
covered
by
other
lips,
then
this
is
something
that
that
could
be
fooled
by
like
good.
We
could
fall
back
on
that's
kind
of
the
tension
behind
that
one.
A
Yeah,
if
they
don't
have
questions
now,
there
will
be
questions,
so
there's
I
think
that
maybe
it
hasn't
sunk
in,
because
this
the
implications
of
this
is
fairly
earth-shaking.
Is
that
overstatement
so
you're
proposing
a
mess,
but
well
you
have
a
tldr
so
like
essentially
you're
proposing
a
method
where,
for
the
first
time,
the
community
we're
talking
about
that
transfer
right
yeah.
If
that
the
first.
C
A
A
How
do
you
ensure
that
this
is
one
of
those
things
where
the
questions
sort
of
become
endless,
but
the
intention
behind
the
myth
is
very
compelling,
so
here's
one
of
the
issues
is
that
the
the
protocol
and
the
foundation
or
the
foundation
is
responsibility
is
to
bootstrap
the
protocol
and
then
hand
it
off
to
the
ecosystem.
We
do
that
by
creating
reference,
implementations
and
software.
A
We
do
not
be
facilitating
different
roles
in
ecosystem
funding
them
until
it
becomes
self-sustaining,
but
ultimately
there
is
no
true
autonomy
and
nuts
in
that
model,
until
empowered
actors
have
access
to
their
own
funding
sources,
we
can
make
our
best
efforts,
but
ultimately
it's
just
not
possible,
and
so
having
a
mechanism
like
this
in
place.
Really,
it
changes
the
fundamental.
D
Yeah
I
just
want
to
add
that
I
mean
these
proposals
are
very
fresh
and
I'm
sure
many
people
haven't
had
the
chance
to
read
through
them.
So
this
kind
of
mention
is
an
idea
of
initiating
the
conversations
to
begin
kind
of
formally
reviewing
in
the
forums
and
discussing
there,
and
it's
not
necessarily
needed
to
have
like
full
kind
of
commentary
on
it.
Now.
G
Have
just
like
one
small
comment
which
is
misplaced
after
what
Charles
said
perhaps,
but,
like
I,
think
that
it
is
worth
bringing
up
on
these
sort
of
calls.
You
know
long,
you
make
a
good
points.
That's
an
executive
early
in
week,
four
of
this
month
for
the
proposal
to
add
you,
as
the
governance
facilitator.
G
You
know
it's
a
it's
a
complicated
question,
but
our
ratifying
process
in
MI
peace
without
requiring
executive
votes,
so
that
we
don't
end
up
in
a
situation
where
you
know
we've
got
an
executive
early
in
the
week.
That's
gonna
be
difficult
to
get
past
and
in
terms
of
this
mi
px
descent
die
anyway
that
you've
submitted.
G
You
know
I
strongly
encourage
people
to
go
into
the
forum,
since
I
could
look
particularly
at
the
technical
aspects
about
whether
you
know
sucking
die
from
the
vats,
initiates
the
flop
auctions
immediately
or
not.
There
seems
to
be
some
unresolved
debates
about
that
at
the
moment,
and
perhaps
you
know
the
the
Oracle
himself
Kurt
scan
can
help
us
clear
it
up,
because
if
we
were
sucking
died
directly
from
the
protocol
and
initiating
flop
auctions
immediately,
that
would
be
a
bit
of
a
problem
in
my
opinion.
So
it's
just
to
two
minor
points.
G
C
Yeah,
so
this
is
something
that
we
were
kind
of
looking
at.
That
three
is
something
I
commented
on,
which
is
that
obviously,
don't
technically
need
it
like
an
executive
vote
for
like
non
technical
changes,
but
in
the
end
we
decided
that,
like
yeah,
it
should
pass
an
executive
vote.
I
guess,
for
the
reasons
of
like
you
need,
like
I
guess
for
the
maker
staking
reasons
right
like
you
have
to
stake.
If
you
take
the
maker,
it's
not
any
more
durable
than
just
like
polling,
I
suppose
so
as
written
them.
C
G
D
G
In
favor
of
it
at
the
moment,
you
know
I,
don't
see
a
better
solution,
but
I
think
that
this
is
clearly
a
part
of
the
map
process
that
can
be
iterated
on
and
improved
in
the
long
term,
and
it's
worth
sort
of
bringing
it
up
to
the
surface
now,
so
that
the
people
are
aware
like
hey.
If
you
can
submit
submit
a
map
to
improve
the
voting
on
processes
for
maps,
you
know
not
only
would
that
be
super
meta.
It
would
also
be
deeply
appreciated.
D
So
that
was
another
point
of
consideration
during
this
like
initial
kind
of
decision,
but
yeah
you're,
very
much
right
that
D
I
mean
a
core
principle
of
MIPS
is
that
they
can
be
iterated
upon
over
time
and
made
amendments
through
it.
So
there's
a
lot
of
consensus
by
the
community
on
changing
this
process
versus
technical
met
life
cycle,
then
it
will
eventually
kind
of
get
voted
in
and
yes,
yeah.
E
E
Instead,
the
government
executive
votes
have
this
kind
of
inherently
conservative
quality,
where
there's
a
very
high
barrier,
so
I
would
say
that
that's
worth
taking
into
account
and
that's
quite
an
important
aspect
of
deciding
on
process,
because
if
you
do
come
up
with
some
process
MIT,
which
is
then
passed
in
low
turnout,
you
know,
and
the
governance
polled
and
you'll
have
someone.
You
know
later
point
to
it
and
say:
look
we've
decided
on
this
aspect
of
process,
but
it's
not
really
going
to
be
legitimate
because
everyone
will
just
say
well.
This
is
ridiculous.
E
There
was
only
one
thousand
MKR
voting
for
it.
There's
nothing
or
like
I
never
even
saw
that
poll
or
something
like
that,
which
you
can't
really
say
for
a
fray
for
an
executive,
something
that
passed
an
executive
vote,
so
you're
kind
of
I
think
you're
kind
of
shooting
yourself
in
the
foot
of
you.
If
you
try
to
pass
processed
nips
on,
you
know,
lower
turnout,
governance
polls,
because
it's
easier,
but
later
you
might
have
the
ground
disappear
from
beneath
you
when
you
realize
that
like
no
actually
believed
it,
because
it
was
some
very
quiet.
E
E
E
I,
don't
know
if
it's
what's
happened
before
I
assume
that
if
a
governance
poll
was
published
with
the
with
the
typo
or
some
kind
of
error,
then
it
could
be
edited
and
I'm
not
aware
of
a
process
by
which
I
can
check
that
what
was
the
wording
of
a
of
a
poll
and
it
was
warned
it
was
voted
on
this
is
this
is
a
side
problem,
but
I'm
just
I
think
it's
a
lot
of
sense.
What
you're
saying
correct
yeah.
A
F
A
A
C
C
So
it's
again,
this
is
one
of
those
cases
where
this
is
kind
of
a
specialization
of
the
whole
protocol.
Don't
transfer
thing
and
that's
specifically
if
governments
want
to
incentivize
people
to
do
stuff
that
the
protocol
wants
done
then
so
we're
doing
that
and
there's
sort
of
a
place
of
how
to
sort
of
revoke
these
and
change
these
and
accept
work.
That's
been
completed
and
stuff
like
that.
C
A
Doesn't
feel
like
it,
but
this
with
the
previous
myth
I
can
guarantee
that
there
will
be
numerous
questions
once
people
familiarize
themselves
with
it.
So
thanks
a
lot
for
listening
for
filling
into
fairly
significant
holes
in
the
government.
Ecosystem
will
be
interesting
to
see
how
this
thing
shakin
all
right.
Next
up,
Cyrus
I'm,
going
to
turn
it
over
to
risk.
F
Okay,
cool
yeah,
we're
gonna,
we're
gonna,
redo
last
week's
TUSD
presentation
because
it
got
cut
short
a
little
bit
and
we
don't
have
any
time
to
chat
afterwards
regarding
it
and
then
afterwards
also
want
to
briefly
discuss
the
option
for
a
second
u.s.
DC,
vault
type,
which
is
been,
which
has
been
discussed
in
the
forum
for
the
past
two
weeks
now
and
maybe
discuss
how
we
can
make
that
a
an
additional
proposal
that
can
be
added
along
with
TUSD
later
this
month.
H
H
I
F
Communication
is
provided
for
informational
purposes.
Only
the
views
expressed
here,
those
of
the
individual
maker
foundation
personnel
quoted
or
who
present
said
materials
are
not
the
views
of
maker
or
its
affiliates.
This
communication
has
been
prepared
based
on
information,
including
market
prices.
Data
and
other
information
from
sources
believed
to
be
reliable
maker
has
not
independently
verified.
Such
information
makes
no
representations
about
the
enduring
adequacy
of
information
or
its
appropriateness
for
the
given
situation.
This
content
is
provided
for
informational
purposes
only
and
should
not
be
relied
upon.
F
This
content
is
not
directed
at
nor
intended
produced
by
the
maker
community
may
not
under
any
circumstances
be
or
a
lot
of
fun
when
making
a
decision
purchase
any
other
digital
asset
reference
Europe,
the
digital
assets
reference
here
and
currently
faced
an
uncertain
regulatory
landscape
and
I
know
in
the
United
States,
but
also
in
many
foreign
jurisdictions,
including,
but
not
limited
to
the
UK
European
Union
Singapore,
Korea,
Japan
and
China.
The
legal
and
regulatory
risks
inherent
in
reference.
Digital
assets
are
not
the
subject
of
this
content
for
guidance.
F
Regarding
the
possibility
of
said
risks,
one
should
consult
with
his
or
her
own
appropriate
legal
and/or,
regulatory
counsel,
charts
and
graphs
provide
everything
are
for
informational
purposes
only
and
should
not
be
relied
upon.
Making
any
decision
clinton
speaks
only
is
that
the
date
indicated
any
projects,
estimates
forecast,
targets,
prospects
and
her
opinions
expressed
in
these
materials
are
subject
to
change
without
notice
and
may
therefore
be
contrary
Tinian
to
express
what
others
thank.
H
You,
okay,
so
first
because
through
USD
is
a
staple
coin.
I
want
to
talk
about
why
we
added
US
DC
in
the
first
place,
so
basically
USD
see
a
world
type
was
introduced
together
with
other
parameter
changes
as
an
emergency
implementation
during
event
of
Black,
Thursday
and
basically
Black
Thursday
was
significantly
severe
price
drop
in
crypto
history.
H
Then.
In
addition,
crypto
was
more
or
less
only
present
during
general
economic
expansion,
when
Bitcoin
was
launched
in
2009.
Most
of
the
economic
areas
around
the
world
already
started
to
pick
up
so
basically
like
crypto
did
not
really
experienced
bad
times
yet
in
like
full
meaning
and
this
might
occur.
Now
then,
in
addition,
in
crypto
asset
class,
we
had
Bitcoin
Calvin
recently,
which
is
generally
a
positive
event,
but
in
short
time
periods
it
definitely
increases
the
uncertainty
and
basically
USD
ca.
Volts
type
was
primarily
added
to
to
serve
as
a
emergency
liquidity
source
for
auctions.
H
Sorry
I
I
forgot
to
mention
this.
During
the
Black
Thursday
inside
the
defi
space,
we
experienced
this
severe
die
in
the
quiddity
crunch
because
of
people
hedging
their
portfolios
because
of
people
deleveraging
die
depth
inside
maker,
compound
dy/dx
and
also
other
protocols,
and
also
because
keepers
were
allocating
died,
liquidity
for
upcoming
auctions
and,
basically
primary
role
of
USD,
see
a
vault
type
served
as
an
emergency
liquidity
of
die.
H
If
there
would
be
such
a
needs
for
option
participation,
while
the
die
premium
was
like
the
the
second
reason,
which
was
least
important
for
us
DCA,
basically
to
lower
the
premium
to
some
reasonable
level
and
given
that
die
is
a
soft
packed
currency
and,
given
you
know
extremely
uncertain
situation,
we
can
expect
some.
You
know
deviation
from
the
back.
H
So
I
mentioned
that
die
is
a
soft
back
currency.
What
I
mean
by
this
is
in
the
context
of
stable
coins
present
in
crypto
is
that
we
have
mainly
two
types.
One
is
centralized
want,
one
backed
by
you
know
underlying
asset
and
basically
in
in
this
kind
of
system,
there
is
a
direct
arbitrage
between
primary
and
secondary
markets.
H
Basically,
if
there
is
a
premium
on
an
open
market,
they
can
just
issue
you
currency
and
if
there
is
a
discount
theoretically,
anybody
can
purchase
it
and
then
redeem
the
underlying
asset
at
the
primary
market
and
I
like
in
comparison.
We
have
slightly
similar
mechanism
in
entire
monetary
system,
but
the
main
difference
is
that
in
dye
we
always
need
to
have
a
world
owner
which
will
have
to
increase
his
leverage
either
for
consumption
or
maybe
for
buying
more
crypto.
But
if
there
is
no
appetite
for
leverage
there
will
be
no
issuance.
H
H
The
other
good
things
are
that
we
will
potential
increase
the
issuance
and,
of
course,
potentially
increase
the
you
know
the
size
of
our
community.
Then
the
bad
things
are
that
we
might
unknowingly
just
be
increasing
risk
because
it
is
really
hard
to
understand
counterparty
risk,
and
then,
additionally,
we
will
have.
You
know
like
additional
overhead
and
I'm,
not
speaking
only
about
direct
stake
holders
in
maker
now
and
talking
about
Vidor
defy
ecosystem
because
make
a
Dow
is
like
layer,
1
application
in
the
defy
stack.
H
So
stable
coin
specific
risks
and
their
potential
for
diversification.
Basically,
the
first
risk
is
counterparty
risk.
It
is
probability
that
your
counterparty
will
not
serve
their
liabilities
in
the
context
of
central
stable
coins.
This
is,
of
course,
redeeming
the
underlying
asset.
Now
the
counterparty
risk
is
divided
in
to
to
risks.
H
The
second
stable
core
specific
risk
is
regulatory
risk,
which
is
a
probability
that
legal
system
will
change
in
a
way
that
will
impact
an
asset
or
an
industry,
or
even
why
the
market
and
true
USD
is
operated
by
true
coin
limited,
which
is
incorporated
in
Delaware.
This
entity
is
owned
by
trust
labs,
which
is
also
incorporated
in
Delaware,
and
both
of
these
entities
have
branches
in
California.
Now
USD
field
is
operated
by
a
group
called
Center,
which
was
founded
by
circle
and
coinbase.
H
H
In
next
comparison,
we
compared
trading
volume
market
share
on
centralized
exchanges.
We
only
considered
like
markets
in
which
we
trust
for
us
DC
we
picked
by
Nance
and
coinbase
and
for
pixel's
and
trust
us
deal
with
piqued
by
Nance
and
okx
also,
and
what
we
can
see
is
that
US
DC
is
definitely
dominating.
You
know
trading
volume
on
st.
isaac's
changes
over
time.
H
Texas
is
like
definitely
losing
market
share,
but
is
still
hanging
corn,
while
true
USD
is
losing
it.
This
is
the
same
data
just
present
that
in
absolute
numbers
we
can
basically
see
the
same
thing.
U.S.
DC
is
very
strong,
while
true
USD
is
not
very
strong
in
this
next
comparison,
we
compared
trading
volume
on
etherium
layer
applications
like
trading
venues
and
like
first
thing
here,
this
number
shouldn't
be
summed
together,
because
Khaybar
sometimes
uses
Eunice
WAP,
but
still
these
numbers
are
good
for
comparison,
and
we
can
see
that
US
DC
is
definitely
the
dominant
one.
H
Peg
sauce
is
also
present,
but
less
than
true
USD,
actually,
just
in
in
the
recent
week
curve
a
that
affects
USD,
sorry,
just
like
pegs
pool,
which
includes
specs,
but
it's
not
included
here
but
like
what
is
a
bit
boring
for
pecs
here
is
that
trading
volume
in
Eunice
4
is
so
low,
and
this
is
worrying
because
unit
swap
is
just
such
a
fundamental.
You
know
trading
venue
in
until
you
mind
if
I
and
basically
signals
that,
like
most
likely,
doesn't
have
large
presence
in
in
different
applications.
H
H
Basically,
we
took
a
snapshot
of
total
supply
in
the
protocol
and
total
bar
hope
and
interest.
We
can
see
that
us.
This
is
definitely
dominating
this
space
for
through
USD.
We
can
see
that
they
are
present
in
other
and
in
Newark
now
for
NOAA
I
am
not
really
sure
what
is
going
on,
but
with
other.
They
have
like
this,
a
bit
more
aggressive
strategy
compared
to
compound
where
they
have
higher
risk
tolerance
for
collateral
assets.
H
What
is
also
interesting
here
that
out
of
this
900k
deposited
in
other
about
75%,
is
deposited
due
to
curve
protocol
and
like
curve
protocol
is
a
little
bit
sophisticated,
which
indicates
that
only
about
200k
is
deposited
in
away
from
like
everyday
users.
We
just
want
to
have
some
yield
on
their
stable
coins.
H
H
In
next
comparison,
we
have
balances
in
centralized
lending
services.
These
addresses
are
just
like
when
own
label
two
dresses
on
either
scan
and
like
we
can
see
that
us
disease
once
again,
dominating
Pegasus
is
present
in
quite
some
of
the
centralized
menus
and
also
has
larger
balances,
then
through
USD
also
true,
is
through.
Usd
is
not
really
present
on
on
many
such
values.
H
In
this
comparison,
we
looked
at
the
holder
structure.
It
is
not
nothing
really
in-depth.
It
is
just
like
addresses
labeled
on
either
scan
through
USD
has
about
of
36%
deposited
on
centrist
exchanges
and
about
1.1
of
the
supply
in
different
services.
These
services
also
include
centralized
lending
platforms,
and
only
0.8
percent
is
deposited
in
defy
a
patient's,
and
this
includes
other
and
unis
work.
H
We
did
some
quick
on
chain
activity
analysis.
Basically,
we
took
number
of
holders
number
of
token
transfers
and
days
in
existence.
This
in
existence
is
defined
by
number
of
days,
since
the
token
was
launched
on
minute,
and
when
we
divide
this,
we
basically
get
this
metric,
which
shows
us
how
many
holders
or
transfers
did
they
add
on
average
per
day,
and
we
can
see
that
USD
see
has
the
highest
growth
rate.
Paxos
is
also
growing.
At
some
rate,
went
through,
USD
is
definitely
much
lower
than
both
of
them.
H
This
is
another
on
chain
activity
matrix.
It
is
basically
a
transaction
count
birthday
over
time.
This
chart
is
borrowed
from
some
past
edition
of
our
network
from
token
analyst
and
Purple
Line
is
true
USD
and
basically,
we
can
see
it
is
not
as
active
on
chain
as
some
other
of
this
coin.
Sir,
and
finally,
we
come
to
conclusion.
H
Basically,
if
the
start
I
said
that
there
are
some
positives
which
we
can
get
the
first
and
most
important
is
of
course,
risk
diversification.
Now
there
is
some
potential
for
counterparty
risk
diversification,
but,
like
I
said,
we
would
need
to
conduct
in-depth
financial
analysis
of
this
company.
Since
you
know
their
operations,
so
we
would
need
to
analyze
both
center
and
true
coin
and
all
the
entities
involved
and
basically
determine
is
there.
You
know
annalistic
potential
for
counterparty,
is
diversification
or
is
it
not
for
regulatory
risk?
H
If
the
governor's
decides
to
include
true
USD,
considered
consider
a
depth
ceiling
limit
allocation
to
central,
stable
coins
and
in
current
States,
this
would
mean
a
slight
decrease
for
the
epsilonc
on
US,
DC
and
slight
increase
in
depth
ceiling
for
true
additional
liquidation
should
be
disabled
at
least
initially,
and
other
bad
parameters
can
be
equal
to.
You
is
the
same.
I
Thanks
for
that
amazing
presentation,
marker
so
yeah,
we
can
open
up
for
discussion
or
any
question.
The
feedback
now
also
obviously
can
continue.
The
discussion
in
the
chat
and
the
forum
host
I
posted
in
the
chat,
but
yeah
I
posted
the
risk
parameter.
The
proposed
risk
parameters
in
the
chat
as
well
I
think
maybe
maybe
the
more
fruitful
part
of
the
discussion
would
be
the
debt
ceiling
discussion,
especially
how
it
relates
to
the
other
stable
points
that
are
currently
in
the
system.
So
right
now,
the
u.s.
I
DC
debt
ceiling,
I
believe,
is
20
million,
and
the
idea
is
that
we
could
maybe
put
a
cap
on
this
class
of
stable
coins.
So
if
we
were
to
try
to
put
TUSD
in
with
say
two
million
dollar
debt
ceiling,
then
then
we
could
consider
reducing
u.s.
DC
as
well,
and
then
additionally,
I'd
like
to
tie
into
the
conversation
allocations
for
a
US
DC,
V
volt,
which
would
be
used
for
emergency
liquidity
purposes
for
auctions.
I
B
Though,
like
wasn't
the
recommendation,
though,
that
that
TUSD
provides
little
diversification
in
terms
of
regulatory
risk,
it
doesn't
seem
like
anyone's
gonna
mint
die,
I
kind
of
thought
that
the
position
was
that
maybe
there
you
know,
maybe
there
are
better.
You
know
centralized
stable
coins
that
governance
should
be
focusing
on,
as
opposed
to
kind
of
like
shedding
around
something
that
we
don't
all
feel
very
enthusiastic
about
unless
I
miss
something
I.
I
Yes,
I
mean
when,
when
we
put
out
proposals
for
parameters,
governances
is
more
than
welcome
to
vote
no
on
it,
but
I
I
mean
I.
Think
we
reflected
that
that
lack
of
interest
with
fairly
low
debt
ceiling
right,
two
million
I-
think
it's
the
lowest.
That's
ever
been
proposed
for
a
collateral
type,
almost
like
a
bare
minimum
but
yeah.
If
that's
even
that's
too
high,
then
your
voice
heard
for
sure
I
mean.
B
I
guess
the
yeah,
the
frat
BTC,
though
I
mean
that
actually
did
happen.
Like
someone
went
out
and
minted,
you
know
a
thousand
rat
BTC
and
wrap
BTC
I
think
it's
like
it's
kind
of
a
newer
idea,
but
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
we
should
kind
of
just
be
focused
on
it's.
Just
like
governance
fatigue.
Right,
like
you
know,
should
make
our
shots
count,
especially
when
we're
talking
about
like
adding
you
know
new
collateral
types,
because.
B
I
I
Yeah
I'd
be
I'd,
be
interested
in
hearing.
If,
from
a
risk
standpoint,
even
an
even
lower
debt
ceiling
would
make
sense
what
I
would
say
at
that
point,
probably
not
so
I
think.
Maybe
the
primary
argument
that
Chris
is
making
it's
about
overhead
and
kind
of
just
adding
to
governance
overhead,
but
I,
don't
see
how
that's
something
that
we
can.
I
A
I
J
J
J
So
I
I'm
gonna
talk
about
a
very
big
topic
which
is
bringing
real
world
assets
into
MCV
and
and
given
given
the
time
that
we
have
I
will
brush
over
a
lot
of
things
and
I,
maybe
just
want
to
set
frame
frame
the
conversation
a
little
bit
and
I
hope.
We
can
turn
this
into
as
much
of
a
discussion
and
so
I
will
go
over
Glosser.
A
lot
of
the
technical
details
and
other
stuff
and
I
just
want
to
refer
to
the
community
calls
we've
done
the
recordings
we've
done.
J
The
forum
threads
for
going
into
those
details
and
I'll
share
some
of
this
information
as
well
later,
but
I'll.
Nevertheless,
I
think
I
need
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
background
on
what
centrifuge
is
and
what
we
do
and
why
I
want
to
speak
to
you
today.
So
when
centrifuge
is
doing
decentralized
asset
finance
for
what
we
call
some
people
in
the
air
called
real
world
assets
for
sort
of
allowing
businesses
that
have
assets
that
exist
in
the
real
world,
be
that
invoices
some
sort
of
tax
for
the
value.
J
But
you
could
extend
it
to
like
real
estate
or
really
anything
that
sort
of
that
you
would
might
want
to
use
to
borrow
against,
and
so
we
we
allow
asset
originators
who
have
these
assets
to
tokenize
them,
bring
them
on
chain
and
pull
them
so
pull
these
portfolios
of
individual
loans
and
then
issue
in
an
ER
C
20
token
against
that
allows
different
investors
to
invest
in
these
pools.
We
have
two
asset
originators
so
in
in
the
mid
6000
process
paper
chain
and
console
Freight.
Both
we
both
submitted
proposals.
J
I
can
just
give
you
a
quick
overview
of
who
they
are
and
what
they
do.
Paper
chain
is
maybe
what's
best
described
as
a
streaming
revenue
analytics
company
that
allows
music
labels
to
see
sort
of
how
their
music
is
performing
on
the
different
streaming
platforms,
such
as
Spotify,
Apple,
music,
Google
and
so
on,
and
they
want
to
as
part
of
their
business.
They
want
to
offer
these
music
labels
to
borrow
money
for
the
revenue
that
Spotify
is
generating
and
other
other
streaming
providers.
J
J
J
Maybe
what
we
can
say
is
about
the
back.
What
stage
you're
at
their
console
Freight
lasts
about
10
days
ago,
start
created
its
first
securitization
of
bundling
and
initial
49
loans
worth
a
total
of
287
8,000th
I
and
sold
those
to
10
different
investors
that
now
own
NERC
20
token.
That
is
generating
a
yield
on
on
these
in
on
these
individual
invoices,
and
as
these
individual
invoices
are
paid
back,
the
the
drop
token
holders,
as
we
call
them
get,
can
redeem
their
token
for
dye,
which
is
a
principal
plus
interest.
J
So
just
maybe
sort
of
in
the
most
abstract
weight
and
how
you
can
sort
of
think
of
this
system
is
that
you
have
these
individual
loans,
that
sort
of
are
non
fungible
tokens
and
I'm.
Maybe
I'll
try
to
monitor
a
child
and
concern
questions
yeah,
so
you
have
individual
loans
that
were
presented
by
n
of
T's
that
the
a
storage
in
a
native
brings
in
and
then
actually
we
do
something
that
is.
J
That
well
so
me
definitely,
and
so
what
we
do
then,
is
we
create
you
actually
not
just
issue
one
so
your
seat.
When
you
token
that
represents
an
interest
in
this
entire
pool
of
collateral,
but
we
use
what
in
structured
finance
is
called
a
senior
and
junior
tranche
two
different
tranches,
where
the
drop
token
is
actually
insured
by
the
tin
token,
where
that
means
that
you
have
two
classes
of
investors:
the
tin
token
investors
get
a
potentially
larger
upside,
but
also
take
any
losses.
J
First
and
the
drop
token
holders
get
a
fixed
interest
lower
and
fixed
interest
rate,
but
are
insured
for
any
losses
up
to
whatever
that
the
tins
thin
token
percentage
investment
is
so
you
can
think
of
what
we
did
with
console
freight.
They
had
two
hundred
and
seventy
eight
thousand
died
in
in
in
loans
of
that
actually
tin,
token
holders
invested
twenty
eight
thousand
died
and
drop.
J
Token
holders
invested
the
remainder
two
hundred
fifty
thousand
died
that
mean
so
as
long
as
his
portfolio
of
invoices
returns,
the
250
plus
interest
in
die
drop
token
holders
will
will
not
see
a
loss
if
it
returns.
Two
hundred
sixty
thousand
it
means
that
the
tin
token
holders
will
face
a
significant
loss
if
it
returns
anything
more
than
then
the
initial,
the
original
investment,
and
once
they
dropped
open
holders
that
haven't
paid
out
and
then
that's
where
it,
where
the
tin
token
holders
get
to
see
any
any
money.
J
So
the
reason
we
have
to
have
these
two
different
tokens
is
because
we
want
to
create
a
an
asset
that
is
much
more
stable
and
has
some
sort
of
insurance
that
can
be
used,
that
it
sort
of
is
the
liquid
more
scalable
asset
versus
the
dropped
open,
the
tin
token,
we
see,
as
we
sort
of
we
call
this.
The
the
underwriter
token
are
so
the
token
that
the
asset
originator
uses
to
have
its
have
some
skin
in
the
game,
so
the
in
the
instance
of
of
console
Freight.
J
Actually,
the
tin
token
holders
were
50/50,
centrifuge
and
and
console
Freight
itself,
putting
up
a
small,
a
small
stake
guaranteeing
for
the
performance
of
the
of
this
portfolio
of
loans,
and
it
just
addressed.
The
question:
is
this:
which
structure
normal
for
receivables?
Financing
know
is,
is
this
displayed
structure
is
definitely
used
in
all
sorts
of
debt
financing,
even
in
other
kinds
of
fencing,
but
it's
I
think
it
makes
an
interesting
case
for
for
maker
and
interest
of
in
general
lenders
that
want
to
have
a
very
stable
asset,
because
you
can
now
change
this.
J
I'll
highlight
a
few
of
these
points
and
then
I'm
what
most
just
like
to
see
what
what
kind
of
topics
you
want
to
tackle
first,
but
I
think
I
can
and
I'll
start
obviously,
with
the
positive
things
I
think
like
what
we
have
with
with
these
kind
of
assets.
Is
that
actually
an
asset
originator
like
paper
chain
or
console
Freight,
has
a
know
they
have
an
own
demand
for
capital.
So
we
just
had
the
question
of
how
much
TUSD
would
actually
be
used
to
generate
em
die
or
how
much
bat
is
used
to
generate
die.
J
That
is
it's
very
different.
It's
a
very
different
use
case
for
me
as
a
bad
token
holder
to
go
in
and
say,
I
want
to
possibly
March
and
trade,
bat
or
use
or
sort
of
use.
That
is
that
bad
as
collateral
to
get
some
some
security,
get
some
safety
by
by
buying
die
by
borrowing
die
right,
like
the
difference.
J
What
we
have
to
be
aware
of
is
that,
if,
in
in
the
like
supply
chain
in
supply
chain
finance
to
across
the
trade
finds
sort
of
type
of
collateral,
like
you
very
often
see
advanced
rates
of
like
ninety
ninety
five
percent,
so
with
so
that
what
that
means
for
maker
is
that
we
have
to
start
being
much
more
comfortable
at
pricing.
These
assets
not
or
giving
sort
of
risk
parameters
that
reflect
that
can't
compete
in
this
market
in
the
in
the
real
world
asset
class.
J
Another
thing
is
that
sort
of
what
what
centrifuge
has
focused
on
when
we,
when
we
think
of
real-world
assets,
our
short
term
short
term
debt.
That
means
trade,
finance
assets
are
really
interesting
category
because,
like
if
you
have
a
loan,
that's
you
in
120
days
it's
much
easier
to
it's
much
easier
to
price
it
just
because
the
maybe
the
macroeconomic
circumstances
don't
change
quite
as
much
over
those
120
days.
J
There's
no
there's,
there's
not
really
a
market
for
for
frayed
invoices
that
we
could
just
tap
into
and
use
as
price
Oracle's.
So
what
you
do-
and
this
is-
and
the
credit
industry
in
the
traditional
financial
world
does
that
too
right
is
for
for
these
kind
of
assets.
You
use
pricing
models
that
factoring
credit
risk
by
different
lenders
and
sort
of
you
arrive
at
a
at
a
net
asset
value
of
a
portfolio
that
doesn't
rely
on
on
prices
cover
in
the
market.
But
it's
just
based
on
some
agreed-upon
model.
J
That's
that's
one
of
the
sort
of
the
things
that,
as
as
the
maker
community,
we
can
start
thinking
about.
Okay!
Is
that
something
you
want
to
incorporate,
or
do
we
want
to
insist
on
on
there
being
a
market?
How
do
we
feed
Oracle's
when
we
know
that
a
price
of
an
invoice
realistically
doesn't
change
for
for
most
part
of
the
of
the
time
it's
it's
active?
Maybe
it
changes
once
it
goes
into
default,
but
but
sort
of
it
it's
a
it's
a
very
different
asset
and
then
I
think
keepers
is
sort
of
the
last
thing.
J
I
want
to
just
start
start
discussion,
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
how
much
time
you
want
to
give
me
rich,
but
keepers,
the
kind
of
keepers
we'll
have
to
bring
into
into
MCD.
It's
gonna
be
different.
They
exist
in
the
real
world.
There
are
destroyed,
distressed
debt,
buyers
that
that
specialize
in
buying
underperforming
pools
of
loans.
There
are
different.
J
What
I
wanted
to
sort
of
propose
to
the
community
is
just
a
starting-off
dialogue
around
around
some
of
these
topics.
I.
What
we
have
been
doing,
as
has
been
hosting
calls
that
we
opened
up
to
whoever
wanted
to
discuss
how
how
these
assets
work,
we
could
form
working
groups,
I'm,
obviously
open
to
just
working
with
domain
teams
I'm
and
depending
on
how
much
time
you
want
to
give
me
rich
I
would
I
would
open
it
up
for
questions
and
feedback
yeah.
A
H
A
A
J
Here
miss
asking
for
an
invite,
for
these
calls
so
send
new
future
has
been
hosting
their
own
calls
that
we
sometimes
announce
on
the
maker
forum,
and
actually
we
have
done
what
we
so
far
called
a
an
open
collateral.
Onboarding
call
that
was
here
that
we
plan
on
doing
every
two
weeks.
The
last
one
happened
last
Wednesday
and
I
think
we'll
do
one
again
on
Wednesday
yeah.
They
are
just
posted
the
thread
I'm
so
happy
to
also
take
the
conversation
there.
If
people
are
interested.
J
J
I
think
the
the
most
the
really
the
the
place
that
the
question
I'd
like
to
get
feedback
from
from
all
the
people
in
the
room
here
is:
do
you
think
that
maker
should
offer
a
lending
product
I
made
them
mmcd
should
offer,
should
be
the
primary
lender
for
these
assets
and
I
I?
Think
that
is
a
question
that
will
come
up
because
acid
originators
will
want
to
borrow
directly
and
they'll
and
and
of
course,
maker
has
a
very
interesting
proposition
to
them.
J
B
B
Your
proposal
is
fantastically
interesting.
I
have,
however,
struggle
a
little
bit
with
the
pricing
of
these
of
the
collateral
and
I
know
you're.
You
saying
this
is
a
very
stable
collateral,
but
you
know
we
have
to
take
into
account
how
we
sell
this
if
the
if
the
the
vault
ever
goes
under
and
as
far
as
I
understand
from
your
application,
you
are
relying
on.
H
J
We
we
have
when
you
think
of
our
of
our
er
C,
20
tokens,
tin
and
drop.
They
are
a
fraction
of
a
portfolio
of
loans,
these
loans
of
our
legal
documents
that
we
bring
on
change,
has
n
FPS
and
that
are
priced
and
underwritten
by,
of
course,
as
many
diversify
sort
of
Oracle's
or
testers,
you
could
call
them,
as
you
can
think
of
right,
so
you
might
have
this
NF
t
might
be
attested
by
and
auditing
firm
financial
audit
firm
to
say
that
the
paperwork
is
correct.
J
If
there
is
credit
scoring
information
available
on
these
different
assets,
you
can
you
can
read
out
what
the
credit
score
is
this
individual
ender
right
and
then,
and
that
will
give
you
a
risk
rating
on
the
individual
asset,
then
the
invoice
tree,
which
will
which,
which
tin
leg
that
our
contracts
will
use
to
determine
what
the
interest
rate
and
the
advance
rate
for
this
asset
is
so
so
at
that
point
now
we
have.
We
have
a
price
that
is
determined
for
this
asset,
then
what
we
then
do
is
we
actually
calculate.
J
Then
the
nav
net
asset
value
of
the
portfolio
which
looks
at
these
different
invoices
calculates
expect
expect.
The
cash
flow
calculates
the
probability
of
default
and
comes
out
with
with
a
number
of
what
is
what
this
asset
now
should
be
valued
as
on
the
book
and
and
the
process
I'm
describing
here.
B
J
J
J
C
You
had
a
related
question
which
was
like
what
are
things
gonna
look
like
in
terms
of
volts
air,
like
a
centrifuge
gonna
make
like
one
giant
volts
at
which
it
finances
these
companies.
Out
of
are
they
were
gonna,
make
individual
volts
like
it,
cuz
I
miss
it.
When
are
your
free
enough
to
like
look
if
we
would
have
to
liquidate
things?
What
we
have
to
liquidate?
One
box,
like
like
one
jungle
and
like.
D
C
J
J
That
means
I
think
the
the
the
opportunity
to
offer
a
credit
product
on
the
primary
market.
To
these
a
storage
inators
is
very
interesting,
but
that
does
mean
that
yes,
yes,
originator,
would
create
one
giant
vault
for
their
category
of
drop
and
in
fund
that
with
Oracle
analyze
that
with
their
drop
and
then
start
drawing
die
from
it,
and
if
and
there
wouldn't
really
be
different
vault
holders
that
use
different
collateralization
ratios
and
different
and
microdata
at
different
times
right.
J
So,
like
the
entire
asset
class
would
then
behave
very
similar
with
what
you
could
be
just
looked
at
as
one
one
position
on
the
on
the
balance
sheet
or
like
one
one
item
in
of
collateral,
because
yeah
like
it
should
be,
should
be
much
more
stable.
The
price
it'll
be
slower
moving,
and
so
you
won't
have.
You
won't
have
this
behavior
that
you
have
today
where
today
we're
an
eighth
margin,
trader,
collateralize,
Azure
vault
up
up
to
what
they
think
is
a
reasonable
limit.
But
then
what
would
get?
J
What
essentially
would
be
a
margin
call
they
would
actually
like.
Actually,
what
would
happen
is
as
long
as
this
portfolio
of
assets
is
performing
as
expected,
the
liquidation
would
be
a
very
unlikely
scenario
if
just
to
give
you
a
bit
of
an
idea,
an
ID
on
these
assets,
like
we're
talking
about
like
b2b
invoice,
spend
there's
a
less
than
I.
Think
a
crop
like
the
the
default
rates
on
these
assets
are
like
in
the
like,
depending
on
industry,
in
the
last
lesson,
1%
and
actually
like.
J
If
you
look
at
credit,
if
you
look
at
credit
funds
for
for
for
factoring
they
they,
like
you
look,
you
know
you
have
like
a
deep
like
you:
have
a
fraud
risk,
that's
probably
the
biggest,
but
the
fact,
but
like
these,
these
assets
rarely
sort
of
have
these
crashes
that
we
see
in
in
in
crypto
on
a
day-to-day
basis.
So
the
question
of
how
we
make
them
stick
around
I
think
that
this
will
need
work
by
the
community
to
get
them
familiar
with
the
system
and
and
also
do
this
sort
of
at
a
slower
pace.
J
C
But
there's
one
large
vault
then
either
like
you
know,
the
whole
thing
is
liquidated,
or
none
of
it
is
right.
So
so
would
keep
us
like
stick
around
just
for
like
the
chance
that
everything
falls
apart.
One
day,
like
that's,
there's
kind
of
a
big
ask
right
like
at
least
with
one
or
at
least
but
like
with
these
faults
and
things
like
this
relatively
frequent
liquidations,
because
there's
a
bunch
of
different
bolts
with
different
ratios.
J
Yeah
but
then
the
your
you
have,
you
have
a
few
days
right
to
to
liquidate
this
portfolio.
You
don't
have
minutes
and
keep
her
still
need
to.
Keepers.
Have
a
different
kind
of
a
different
kind
of
time
span
that
they're
working
on
because
you're
not
trying
to
offload
your
asset
as
soon
as
possible
on
the
next
exchange
to
get
really
acquitted.
The
is
designed
so.
J
B
I
mean
you
could
just
put
the
obligation
on
the
issuer
to
find
you
have
to
contract
with,
like
keepers
to
the
liquidate
their
their
collateral.
I
mean
there's
a
lot
like
normal
contracts
flying
around
right.
Sure
like
that,
can
just
be
seen
as
an
obligation.
For
you
know
real
world
asset
collateral.
Is
that,
like
one
of
the
burdens
of
proof
should
be
like?
You
know,
like
we're,
gonna
make
sure
that
there
are
people
around
to
bite
this
when
it
goes
underwater.
E
E
B
J
I
think
cassandra
is
on
the
call.
Maybe
you
want
to
talk
about.
Console
trade
paper
chain
has
been
developed
with
together
with
us
for
over
a
year
now,
actually
like,
we
make
your
foundation
financed
a
sort
of
a
first
pilot
transaction
where
he
went
through
this
entire
chain
of
bringing
in
acid
on
chain
securitizing
the
collateral
and
selling
it
at
that
point.
Mcd
wasn't
life,
and
none
of
this
was
done
in
maker.
Dow,
just
be
very
specific.
J
B
J
Think
both
consult
rate
and
paper
chain
are
bringing
you
from
want
to
use
maker
as
a
as
one
of
their
first
backers,
console
Freight
has
done.
The
has
gone
live
last
week
with
their
first
first.
Disposition
of
assets.
Paper
chain
has
not
has
as
a
track
record
of
working
with
labels,
offering
them
off
from
them
analytics
products,
but
it's
not
has
not
done.
There's
not
offer
finance
product
outside
of
it.
J
B
F
We,
our
company,
was
established
in
2016
and
mainly
as
asked
Lucas
mentioned,
was
the
details
asian
of
a
free
fourteen,
unrealistic
processes
and
from
there
actually
was
starting
to
grow
more
and
more
into
the
supply
chain
find
inside
yeah.
We
have
Explorer
actually
a
another
avenues
and
to
get
funding.
Also
a
us
Lukas
mention
as
well
use
when
live
in
a
year.
We
were
exploring
similar
type
of
services
with
American
companies
just
before.
Actually
the
co
819
situation
that
we
have
to
put
on
hold,
but
a
our
our
eyes.
J
J
We're
able
to
to
cut
out
a
slew
of
middlemen
and
sort
of
established
parties
in
the
financial
system
that
we
see
today
by
being
a
primary
purchaser
of
of
debt.
If
you
would
well,
if
you
want
to
call
it
that
or
compared
to
that
I
think
that's
the
opportunity
we
have
to
generate
an
interesting
yield
on
relatively
stable
assets.
There's
definitely
the
the
the
downsides
that
come
with
with
not
just
being
not
just
trading
highly
liquid
assets,
but
that,
hopefully,
will
be
the
the
the
opti.
J
This
is
a
revenue
that
is
already
realized
by
the
supplier
and
it's
just
waiting
for
payment,
and
so
these
it's
not
it's
not
assets
where,
of
course,
the
the
cash
that
are
the
money
that
you
give
these
lent.
These
borrowers
is
used
to
grow
the
business,
but
you're,
not
borrowing
against
a
an
expectation
that
the
that
the
business
will
have
a
long-term
success
and
growth
in
revenue.
B
Currently,
seeing
to
the
risk
parameters
that
we
got
into
the
make
very
consistent
days,
it's
usually
there's
no
kind
of
maturity
to
the
death
that
we
that
we
have
in
the
echo
system.
So
there
would
be
a
little
bit
of
a
change
as
well
if
we
were
actually
defining
that
shorter
maturity
for
for
the
debt
financing
from
the
investors
on
the
maker
slide.
J
Yes,
no
I
think
I
think
we're
sort
of
reaching
the
time
limit
and
I
want
to
I.
Don't
want
to
get
you
to
everyone
around
for
too
long
we
have
it.
Charles
is
asking
to
move
this
discussion
to
the
mips
channel
on
rocket
chat.
We
are
gonna,
do
a
collateral
call
next
Wednesday
I
think
it's
at
7:30,
European
Time,
that's
10:30,
Pacific
time
and
18,
no
I'm,
sorry,
1730
1700
hours,
UTC
that
we
can
discuss
this
as
well
and
yeah.
J
J
A
I
think
slickers
have
left
to
ingest
their
the
overlap
between
I
cook.
The
world
in
the
real
world
is
going
to
be
a
fascinating
once
known
facts.
Thanks
for
the
presentation,
thanks
everyone
for
staying
long,
we
had
a
lot
to
regroup
over
considering
we've
missed
a
call
last
week,
so
I
appreciate
the
endurance
and
the
attention
to
everybody.
Please
join
us
in
the
forums
and
in
the
rocket
chat
and
continue
evolving
the
government's
ecosystem.
All
right
thanks.
Everybody
see
you
next
week.