DK.
Oh, yes.
A wild DK.
In the wild.
Oh, we are live.
And we're all in the wild now.
In person.
Great to have you back.
It's been a minute, yeah.
Great to have you back, DK.
Thank you.
In a while, DK has been spotted.
Welcome to the Presidio Bitcoin Jam.
We're back.
Is this like number 63?
I wasn't counting.
I think it's around there.
Yeah.
How do you have this count?
You always seem to be quoting the numbers.
Oh, I don't know.
I just saw like I saw 61 at some point.
I think it's been two weeks.
So, 61 bluff, 2, 63.
He's got Oribot tracking.
But, I mean, that's like, we're over 100 hours of yapping away with each other.
So, that's pretty good.
Our Friday yap.
I love it.
You wanted to tell us.
I'm going to talk about these guys again.
The University of Iowa.
Why is it that we should be at Iowa?
Tell us.
I know.
Am I sure?
Oh, very well played, DK.
Beat Iowa.
I'm impressed.
DK interpreters.
Beat Iowa.
be at Iowa because he doesn't understand sports rivalries. But yeah, let's first start with this
shirt because like so many people don't understand the bitter rivalry between state schools like
Iowa and Iowa State. In a state like Iowa, there's no professional sports. So the whole, like if you
are a sports fan, you are the best games in town or Iowa State. And yeah, the state split. I mean,
If you go to, like, unlike the Bay Area, if you go to Iowa, you've got, like, flags in your yard.
Your whole car is covered with either Cyclones or Hawkeye emblems and logos.
Every article of clothing you wear is this.
Like, this is a daily wear shirt in Iowa.
Yeah, so, well, I went back in December.
I'm sure we talked about it.
Yeah, of course.
Back to Iowa.
Whirlwind tour.
We played Iowa.
Yeah.
I bought the Beat Iowa shirt for that game.
Yeah.
I'm wearing it now, though.
Because I'm getting a little nervous.
First of all, we have a huge game tonight.
You got Tennessee, right?
We got Tennessee.
Iowa State.
I'm from Tennessee.
I'm not a Tennessee fan.
I hope you guys just...
Good.
We'll take as many fans as possible.
We played Tennessee tonight in the Sweet 16.
Yep.
We won our first two games in the tournament last weekend by over 50 points.
Yeah.
We just demolished both teams, including Blue Blood, Kentucky.
We handed Kentucky the worst loss they've had in the tournament in like 50 or 60 years.
Yeah. To be fair, their coach is kind of suspect.
And we don't even have our best player.
Our best player got injured two minutes into the first round game,
which is devastating.
Yeah, that's crazy.
Iowa State is just like the epitome of bad luck.
Because we don't have a final four.
The epitome of great luck. You guys are awesome no matter what.
Well, we'll see as the competition gets better.
But we don't have a final four caliber team every year, right?
Maybe every decade.
About every decade we have that caliber of team.
2014, we have that caliber of team.
and George Niang, who's played in the NBA ever since then,
goes down to the first round with an injury
that put him out of the tournament.
And we still made it to Sweet 16,
but then we lost to the eventual national champion.
Let's hope that doesn't occur this year.
Let's win the Sweet 16.
Even more pressure on us
because the Iowa Hawkeyes played last night in the Sweet 16.
Oh, really?
They advanced to the Elite Eight.
Iowa?
Iowa Hawkeyes.
Damn, I thought they were pretty bad.
The Iowa Hawkeyes have not made the Sweet 16
since Bill Clinton.
30 years, yeah.
Bill Clinton was president.
As an Iowa State fan, we love saying that.
Yeah.
We love telling Hawkeye fans,
you have not been in the Sweet 16 since Bill Clinton was president.
Did they get a new coach?
Like, how did they do this?
They got a new coach.
So Fran McCaffrey was their coach for 15 seasons.
He won a total of four tournament games.
How the hell did he keep his job?
It was perfect as an Iowa State fan.
He was just good enough.
Yeah.
Just good enough.
They hired a new coach, Ben McCollum,
and like, gotta give him credit.
He's good.
They had a good season.
Like at the game I went back for,
like we barely beat them.
We were down by like 20 points to them.
So it was shaky, but we beat them.
And then Iowa upset number one seed Florida last weekend.
That's crazy.
And then they beat Nebraska last night.
And they're good too.
So the last thing I can possibly suffer
is like Iowa State not making the Elite Eight
and Iowa making the Elite Eight.
That was a disaster.
And we've not been to the Elite Eight
since the year 2000,
in which I went to that game
in Auburn Hills, Michigan.
So I'll be reading for you,
and not to bring up any potential bad news,
but what do you think of this talk
of Iowa State coach going to UNC?
Yeah.
Real?
TJ, our coach, shot it down,
but we'll see.
I don't think he'll leave.
Yeah.
Fingers crossed.
One time...
His wife is an Iowa State
Hall of Fame basketball player.
She also played basketball at my high school.
Well, if you're from the area.
And he's been a coach of some form at Iowa State for 13 years,
three different stints.
He loves Iowa State.
So the one time we had a great, great coach at Memphis
was under John Calipari.
And I have to say, for 15-plus years since he left,
it's all been downhill.
But I really didn't care for Coach Cal.
I had a lot of sort of animosity.
Now you love him.
This year, for the first time, I don't know what it is.
He came to an exhibition game in Memphis.
I'm feeling the Cal love also.
Memphis is so damn bad.
I got to root for somebody.
And I was like, you know what?
I'm just going to root for Cal.
And I've been enjoying the Darius Akev show last night.
I watched a little bit of that game.
That was bad.
Yeah, you picked Arkansas to win it all.
I know.
That didn't work out.
Now you got to see how good Arizona is.
And you can see why when Iowa State took them to a buzzer beater,
how good we had to play.
Yeah, exactly.
Arizona's dominant.
Yeah.
So, anyways.
Anyway.
DK, what are your thoughts?
Everyone needs to be rooting for Iowa State.
Yeah, point-based mortgages.
All right.
The good news for people who hate the Iowa State talk,
the worst case.
Do they exist?
The worst case is we make the Final Four.
You'll hear it one more time.
One more time and it's done.
Until next year.
Actually, if we win the national championship,
you're going to hear about it.
I guarantee it.
Every show we're going to talk about.
This shirt won't come off until June.
Anyway, but back to beat Iowa.
It is set up so we could potentially play Iowa
in the national championship game,
which would be like the rest of the nation.
It would be the worst TV ratings ever
because no one else would care.
But the entire state of Iowa would be rocking.
The entire audience of the city of Bitcoin Jam
would be there and ready.
Alive.
Alive, yeah.
Alrighty.
Do you want to talk Coinbase?
Coinbase loans.
We don't have to get right there.
That's a great transition.
Yeah, and we have no live audience chiming in either.
The lone fan of Iowa State and Bitcoin
is not listening to Bitcoin.
If you are, please chime in.
let us know
oh
that's pretty quiet
so far
podcast starts
on sports bill
it's
oh Vinny
Vinny
so you guys
leave us off
you guys should get
this kicked off
and then I'll just
wander in 10 minutes in
yeah
when I finally
we'll start the
Iowa State Talk
at 11.50
okay
exactly
okay so
this Coinbase
mortgages thing
I've seen it
all over the news
I've seen the headlines
but I haven't actually
read anything about it
But I think, Steve, you've got a better...
I know a little bit about it.
Yeah.
Okay, tell us.
Well, I mean, the eye-popping thing about...
I mean, Coinbase already supported loans,
and there's a zillion other lending companies.
We've talked about many of them on the show.
What was eye-popping about this is
it's a Bitcoin collateral,
you know, Bitcoin-backed loan.
But if the price of Bitcoin goes down,
you don't have to pony up more Bitcoin.
Yeah, that's a pretty big deal.
That's the eye-popping thing.
So the volatility, then you're insulated against the volatility.
Yeah.
So my understanding is the only way you lose your Bitcoin
is if you don't pay the loan back.
And I think if you're 60 days late or something like that,
that's when you could lose your collateral.
But otherwise, you're not going to get margin called.
And my understanding, and again, I just was kind of reading the headlines
plus a little bit of detail, but maybe you can set up,
how does this product work?
I thought it had some mix of traditional down payment
or your Bitcoin is used as down payment but collateral
for the rest of the value?
What's the sort of mix?
One question is how can they tolerate that risk?
And the LTV is I think like 40%.
So if you want $200K, you've got to put up $500K of Bitcoin.
So that's probably how they calculated like,
Okay. I mean, it's actually a really interesting position for Coinbase to take, which is they're basically saying we don't think Bitcoin price is going to dip more than that much. And so I think that's a pretty interesting risk-adjusted decision by them.
I've seen mortgages before. I think Ledin or some of these other companies had some sort of mortgage products where you take the value of the home and you deposit the same value of the home in Bitcoin. So you basically have the full value of the home as collateral and the full value of Bitcoin as collateral. And then I think they gave good terms. Is this similar?
One thing I don't know yet is if Coinbase and their lending partner,
which I think was named Better,
I don't know if they take a lien against a home or not.
I don't know if it's strictly Bitcoin or both.
And I also don't know how that works if you have two lenders
both with liens against a home.
Do you know how that works offhand?
No, so I actually have a bit more context on this.
I was talking with Claude quite a bit about this
because I'm actually, as you guys know,
potentially one day thinking getting
a house. I'm actually very curious about how this
works.
My understanding is there's a few innovations here.
I think the way the loan works is the better
or whatever the name is, better home, is that's
the home loan. Coinbase is doing a Bitcoin
loan. I don't know. My understanding
was better had the home lien, but
I don't know how Coinbase gets
their backing on that. But the interesting innovation
to me was there's a 40% LTV,
so you can't get liquidated
or margin call. That's interesting. Someone's eating that risk.
But what's also interesting to me, the real, real breakthrough is these loans can be purchased by Frannie Mae.
And so that is big because that's government-backed.
Fannie Mae.
Yeah, sorry.
Or Freddie Mac.
Fannie Mae.
Freddie Mae.
It's 2026.
They've now merged.
You know, it's confusing these days.
Their gender and all that.
But anyway.
It's conforming only, right?
No, it's Fannie Mae.
Fannie Mae.
And so that's effectively government backstop.
So that's a really big deal
because they're not really taking the risk.
At some level, I don't know exactly how the contracts
and the status lien, but at some level,
if the loan fails, including if Bitcoin goes to zero,
it's effectively a government bailout,
is the way I read it.
Which is huge because the government thinks Bitcoin's going to zero.
I had a conversation with our friend Nisha about this.
He helped me understand it better.
But one thing I was trying to figure out is like,
who's the customer of this, right?
And the knee jerk is like,
well, if you have a bunch of Bitcoin,
then you'd be a customer.
But where I got to is that it makes sense for,
it makes sense to do it for a down payment,
but not for the rest of the home.
And I say that because it is more expensive.
It's not like a crazy high interest rate.
It's actually like quite compelling interest rate,
but it is higher than you can get with a traditional loan.
With a traditional loan, if I can get a cheaper traditional loan,
which is based on home collateral and my income stream
or the belief that I'm going to keep making money,
why wouldn't I do that?
So maybe one, if you don't have a job,
like you have wealth,
but you don't have any kind of evidence of income stream,
like home lenders usually freak out about that
because it's relatively rare.
So that would be one reason.
Or if you have a job and maybe you have, well, you don't have, the only money you have for a down payment is your Bitcoin and you don't want to sell it.
That's obviously a reason too.
And a lot of Bitcoin holders would be more than happy to pay a point and a half more to not pay taxes on their Bitcoin holdings, but also have exposure to Bitcoin.
They think it's going to appreciate more than the extra interest they're paying.
Yeah. I mean, I think my understanding was this was specifically targeted for that down payment use case.
like, you know, maybe you put 20% down.
And I think, yeah, I mean, to me,
I think it probably makes sense for people that are,
I mean, like if anyone's like completely living
on a Bitcoin standard or something,
they don't want to sell their Bitcoin,
they want to, you know, get a down payment.
And perhaps, you know, if for the very, very high end,
I think you can already get some of this lending
against your Bitcoin, like you're saying,
but this is probably targeted towards that mid stage
where they probably don't have enough cash
to buy the whole house of cash anywhere.
If they do, that's like, that would be a stretch.
But the down payment, okay.
you want to sell your Bitcoin, this allows me to get started.
And are you using that as the Bitcoin with the 40% LTV is being used as effectively the down payment?
It's a collateral for the down payment.
It's collateral that gets you cash that you then use as the down payment.
So yeah, to make the math easy, you can buy a million dollar home,
you need to put a $200,000 payment down.
You would need to put up $500,000 in Bitcoin as collateral.
You get $200,000 cash, which pays that low.
I see. And then that $500,000, if it were to drop to $100,000, you can't get called.
Yeah.
Which is actually, it's very reasonable.
Well, that's the big aha moment.
And then also just a competitive rate, too.
Right.
And that rate will come down because to me,
so the two big ahas are that
and the fact that Fannie Mae is underwriting these loans.
Because that means the government is effectively taking a position
of Bitcoin's not going to zero.
And if it does, we're going to bail you out.
That's a really big deal.
So that means they've also just stamped this.
And, you know, Coinbase products is the first one.
But, like, I would expect to see, you know, a lot of these products.
It's also kind of saying we don't believe the real estate market will drop by more than 20% or something, right?
Because ultimately, the house is still a piece of collateral.
The biggest piece.
Yeah.
So.
So, but does Coinbase face risk there?
Or is it just better slash Fannie Mae taking that risk?
That's a good question.
I don't know how that structure.
Like let's say Bitcoin appreciates, but real estate plunges, then who's winning, who's losing?
That's a good point.
Who's holding the bags?
Well, the loan is probably from Better that gets bought by Fannie Mae, so their backstop
Better is.
The down payment came from Coinbase.
I guess if Coinbase holds that loan, or I don't know if they're able to offload that
one, the Bitcoin one or not, but if they hold it, they have a risk.
Right.
So I guess if I'm the homeowner, I have this million dollar home in this example, and let's say that $500,000 of Bitcoin goes to like $2 million, but the home price goes to $200,000 or something crazy.
I'm still obligated to pay back the loan, and I am in a position to do it.
So I assume they can, if I'm not making my payments,
then they'll take the Bitcoin and they're fine.
Exactly what the agreement is between better and Coinbase is unclear,
but I assume it's not like one wins and one loses.
Right.
I'm also curious, one other question I have is in that world,
let's say the Bitcoin price goes up dramatically,
so they're not going to margin call you, but can you withdraw Bitcoin?
So let's say Bitcoin jumps from 70 to 140K,
can you take out
half your stack.
That's interesting
because if you can't
then they
have this way
excess collateral
thing they can play with.
Yeah,
that was my first thought.
Financial engineering
with that extra value.
And that seems like
probably a way
we get into
some shenanigans.
And then was it stated
like who
is Coinbase
costing
the Bitcoin
and like
control
like you can't
withdraw it
or you can't go
you can't sell it
you can't withdraw it
you can't use it in any way.
You can keep it in a Coinbase Prime account or wallet.
Yeah.
It sounds a little bit,
I mean,
I'm just thinking about it related to like MicroStrategy
because MicroStrategy has
very different types of products and offering
but kind of similar beliefs,
which is like,
you believe Bitcoin is going to go up
kind of indefinitely,
then you can pay some people
11% or 11.5% yield
and you can kind of capture the excess,
remove it around
and shift that to,
you know,
common stockholder or something.
So it feels like you kind of,
This is a little bit of like that same shifting around, you know, the yields and the balance expectations if you kind of believe that Bitcoin is going up relative to the dollar.
Austin asks if it's just Bitcoin only.
I believe they also stated USDC, but I don't really understand that, to be honest.
The whole thesis we just laid out for why it would make sense for certain customers with Bitcoin.
It's premised on you believe Bitcoin is going to appreciate.
and with USDC,
it's not going to depreciate
and the only thing it could do
is go to zero in some tail risk scenario,
unlikely tail risk scenario.
Well, they get better than market interest rate.
If the market rate is whatever it is,
5% or 6%,
then they get 6.5% or 7%.
But why would you do that?
Why would the customer?
Well, if the customer happens to hold a bunch of USDC.
Why would this converge in dollars?
Why not just use that to pay the down payment?
You're assuming everybody's rational.
I don't see the...
When I talk with Claude, I don't know if this is real,
but it suggests that you could still get 80% of the value at USDC.
So it's strictly worse.
It's like I post $100,000 in USDC and get $80,000 in cash.
I don't know.
This is converting USDC to old school dollars.
Is that a taxable amount?
Well, there's no gains.
That's what I'm saying.
So that just frankly makes zero sense to me.
I don't think that would be that.
I assume you could use treasuries as collateral
and get almost 100% loan-to-value on it?
Potentially.
But I mean, that's obviously higher end.
I think that's what they're saying.
They're trying to democratize a lot of these lending practices.
And I think eventually it mentioned that they were going to try
and start moving beyond Bitcoin to things like,
yeah, like whatever tokenized crap.
It's interesting they didn't choose to use ETH or something.
Well, obviously.
Well, not so obvious.
I think it's very interesting, right?
Especially, well, like, the further out you go on the altcoins.
Risk spectrum.
Fartcoin is not legitimate collateral for 20 men?
The less surprising it is.
But Ethereum is one that you can certainly make the case
that you believe in its...
People talk about it as if it's a blue chip.
Including Brian Armstrong.
Blue chip and that the price isn't going to fall out from under it.
So it's very interesting that it chose not to support Ethereum
or Solana or any coin like that.
Obviously, we would not want to do that
if we were running the company or that or a similar situation.
So it's just, it's actually,
I think the most interesting thing
is their endorsement.
Their Coinbase's endorsement
and the government's endorsement
of Bitcoin and not other coins.
I agree.
Like, Bitcoiners should just be jumping
all over that.
It's huge.
Singing from on high about how,
what a powerful message that is.
I mean, it shows, right?
Like, follow what people do,
not what they say.
Like, Brian Armstrong may talk about
ETH and shitcoins all day long,
but when it comes to like,
oh shit, am I going to bet my company
on this thing going down?
Bitcoin's the only one.
It's also really nice to see
a more sustainable
quote legitimate use case of
buying a home. This really seems
like a credible product for people to buy
homes and not just get loans
to go trade meme coins.
Which is, you know,
I'm not going to shit on that use case.
People like to gamble. I don't have an issue
with gambling and it also can bootstrap new
stuff. It's just nice to actually see stuff
being bootstrapped now that is
a little bit more positive
for society, I think.
What if they took out
a loan against their Bitcoin
to bet on Iowa State?
I don't do sports funding.
That's good.
In fact, Iowa State got...
You really want me to go
on Iowa State again?
We had a huge sport
gambling scandal
a few years ago
and our starting quarterback
got kicked off the team.
Anyway.
You were asking about
who's the customer.
That makes me wonder,
does this generally compete
with customers
for some of the...
What were those other
home lending?
Yeah.
I wanted to bring that up too.
That's a great question.
Yeah.
I mean, our friend Sanjay has one of them.
And then our friends who have spent some time
at Presidio Bitcoin have another.
Yeah.
So I think those two companies definitely need
to be analyzing this situation
because while it's not a direct competitor,
it has a lot of similarities.
You know, someone who fits a profile of
they own some Bitcoin or they want to own some Bitcoin
and they don't want to have
all their wealth tied up into home equity.
Or they want at least some of what notionally
would have been in home equity in Bitcoin.
And you can achieve that two different ways now.
Yeah, I think there's also just people
that maybe frankly, you know,
don't want to deal with like figuring out,
like there's, it's complex.
If you've got Bitcoin and it's, you know,
self-custody or it's in one exchange
or another exchange and you have to fill it
with the capital gains tax and tracking,
it's just like a pain in the ass.
And I don't know.
I think a lot of people are probably just trying to kick that can down the road.
One interesting stat, I think in one of these articles we said,
is that the better lenders estimated that they had lost some huge amount,
like $40 billion in generated volume from not offering a Bitcoin backbone.
How they got those numbers, I don't know.
Oh, I didn't.
Yeah, but it's clear.
$40 billion?
I think so.
I think it was huge.
I mean, whatever.
Don't quote me on that.
That sounds almost too good.
That's like a missed revenue opportunity?
Yeah, basically.
$40,000 million home.
I guess, yeah.
Wow.
I don't know if that's true, but it seems reasonable.
I guess it works out.
If there 100 million American to own Bitcoin and maybe or so obviously there a range of how much those people own
but 40,000 is a small percentage of...
Is that the generally accepted
or expected number right now?
About a million?
Or a million Americans?
So a third American in Bitcoin.
I think it's even more.
Really?
Yeah.
I didn't realize it was that high.
Yeah.
Wow.
Where does that come from?
How do you...
my blockchain analysis
Steve analysis
yeah exactly
well I mean
like Coinbase accounts
Cash App accounts
like that's two big drivers of it
right
I'll be curious to see if other people
I mean
I forget the exact sources but certainly Coinbase is one source
but there's others as well I think it's a credible
I think it's a credible number
because you can imagine how you can
just adding up Coinbase and Cash App
gets you a long ways there.
I wouldn't have guessed that
because I mean
there's how many?
330 million Americans or something?
Something like that.
And you know
not all adults
so like
are we getting to the point
where like 50%
of adult Americans
own Bitcoin?
That would be crazy.
I mean because
I would have a hard time
believing that.
100 million.
Alright.
I'll look it up.
100 million is a big number.
I'll bet that it's at least 50 million.
Anyone in the chat?
What are your guys' numbers?
How many?
I mean, if I had not been influenced,
I would have guessed 10, 20 million.
I would have guessed probably like 50, 50 million.
Okay.
But like there's how many kids are there?
How many under 18, you know?
How many of them are using MDK?
How many?
Like 20, I don't know, 20%, 25%.
Yeah.
Okay.
So you're cutting down 330 million.
So it's like 270 million or something adults.
Yeah.
And so if you're 100 million, you're like approaching.
Yeah.
Kind of crazy if that's true.
I mean, I remember the study that showed like it was huge ownership in the South.
28% Americans own Bitcoin.
I mean, if that's true, like over the third.
330, 160, 80 to 90 million.
Wow.
Well, here it says implies 55 million.
And this is everything.
Like, this is ETFs and stuff like that.
I'm sure it's all.
Yeah, I mean, it includes people with $5 of a coin in a cash app account, too.
So it's not like there's 60 million Americans who have $500,000 of Bitcoin to take a loan for a million dollar home.
But getting back to, is it credible that there's 40,000, they lost out, better lost out on 40,000 homes?
Probably.
Yeah.
Reasonable, yeah.
It does.
It doesn't seem outlandish.
Yeah.
So huge market.
I'm curious if other people, like startups
or even other companies, like a company like A River
or something will offer something like this,
or if this is going to be the kind of thing where,
yeah, I mean, it's like if you don't have that relationship
with like Frannie Mae,
but I guess they're just a regulatory agency,
but it's going to be very kind of like, you know,
a few big players get to eat.
Also, I think it's just,
your example was a million dollar home,
but I think the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
is only for conforming, which doesn't include Jumbo.
I think that's somewhere in the...
$750,000 is it?
Is it that high?
I thought it was even lower.
I thought it was $500,000 or something.
But it's a conforming loan, not a jumbo loan.
What's the difference?
Conforming just means it's a lower threshold of value of the home.
Got it.
So a million-dollar home probably would require a jumbo loan
compared to like a $500,000 home or something.
Right.
It would be conforming.
But I also wonder, we talked about those two.
home equity Bitcoin startups,
but also all the Bitcoin lending companies.
Oh, yeah.
It's like lava.
I mean, I'm curious they're thinking about this.
And Surge, and there's, you know,
maybe like other bigger Bitcoin companies
are considering lending or whatever,
like River, Block, or...
Like Square?
Fidelity, et cetera.
So I just wonder what startups
and the bigger Bitcoin companies are evaluating.
I expect everybody knows, I think we've said a couple times here, I think both JP Morgan and Schwab have come out saying they're going to let you custody Bitcoin natively on those platforms.
And I think this year, Schwab, I think, said first half of this year, which is like within the next three months.
Once they do that, that becomes another form of collateral that's in the TradFi system.
You can actually hold native Bitcoin in a TradFi type account.
Yeah.
So things are happening.
yeah so I think it's
I think that's great
also a quick
update on de minimis tax
but that continues to be
unclear
the future of that
regulation seems
to be headed to where they'll only do
de minimis tax for stable coins
which
since stable coins don't gain or
appreciate
there might be some
esoteric
accounting reason
or something. Because the stable coin
can go to
0.99956
and 1.00.
So maybe they want to have
clear language there so that there's not
this ridiculous accounting overhead
of tiny
fractions.
Maybe that's the rationale for that.
But obviously
the real hope
and expectation is that Bitcoin
would be covered so you can make Bitcoin purchases
without this
massive overhead and
annoyance or whatever.
And so I think
there's an event
by Bitcoin Policy Institute
this week or it's coming up
where I think it just happened
yesterday. But Block
is part of it, Coinbase is part of it,
and a few others. It's good to
see unity
among different crypto.
I guess you'd expect Block
to do it.
Block's very, I mean,
they enabled Bitcoin payments
in Square.
That's, you know,
that's only going to take off
if you don't have to pay capital
to gain taxes on your payments.
It's nice to see Coinbase
at the table, too,
and being...
Do you have any sense
of when we might hear
this gets passed
or, like, when this could become law?
Hopefully this year
before, like,
midterm elections, right?
So, I don't know.
I'm still a pessimist, but we got to hope and push for it.
But why before midterm?
What is that?
How does that impact it?
I don't know.
I mean, politics are always like,
like America goes, you know, blue, then red, then blue, then red.
So I just expect a switch from red to blue.
This, uh...
But meaning you need that type of thing to happen before midterms because...
Because, well, Republicans control Congress right now.
So by a thin margin.
But so if they lose seats...
If they lose it, then...
then it's harder to pass things.
Now, but I've also been told that for this specific issue,
that there's a path to doing it just from the administration itself.
To the degree that's true and possible,
well, then there'd be at least two years left to do it.
But like the Clarity Act,
I think there's maybe even more urgency to pass that before the midterms.
And it sounds like Clarity is,
Coinbase is not supporting it right now because they don't like the way.
I don't know the latest. I mean, I think Brian Erbstrag stated that maybe a month ago or something.
I don't know where he and Coinbase sit on it now.
I mean, it might have just been like negotiating tactic or whatever.
And I don't know if they're back at the table and supportive again.
But that is all about the stablecoin interest.
Right. Being able to share the yield.
Which my limited understanding here.
So the Genius Act, which it did pass, explicitly doesn't allow the stablecoin issuers who are holding the treasuries and earning interest, it does not allow them to directly pay that as interest to their customers.
And you can imagine banks don't like that because then that's very competitive too.
Okay, so I want to actually pose a question to you guys about this because I, before, as you guys know, I've had a weird last couple of days with some dehydration stuff. But before that, I was at a friend's wedding and visiting with a friend, an entrepreneur that I backed. And we were discussing, you know, he's building, basically connecting all the different settlement systems in Latin America.
I think there's this opportunity in lots of regions of the world.
And then I think someone like LightSpark or a lot of other people that are working on Bitcoin payments
see this opportunity to eventually connect all of those with Bitcoin, be the internet, ink them all up.
We were chatting about different opportunities and it just hit me while we were chatting.
And something I've been thinking about for a lot of my portfolio companies
and something I want to explore with them.
Why haven't we seen more people, particularly with these regional regulatory, whatever,
they've already got the licenses and what they need to do,
issuing stretched-back stablecoins.
I mean, I think we just saw that BUCK token, right?
I haven't seen anyone else launch.
Maybe there have been other ones.
But like, to me, I think...
I think Saylor told us a few others.
But there are even like...
There are more.
Didn't you mention like...
Well, more.
I mean, they're even more...
They're even like tinier than BUCK.
There's no major players.
So I kind of wanted to pose this question to you guys.
So imagine you're a fintech that speaks Bitcoin,
that has, you know, relevant licensing
or could get relevant licensing
in different regions of the world,
so, you know, say in the Philippines
and Brazil and Central America,
what would be your dream way
to launch these stretch-backed stablecoins?
Ideally, you know, they could be chain agnostic,
and so, you know, if they want to move it on a solid base, fine,
but ideally to get Lightning hooked in there as well,
and, you know, maybe perhaps
that's the way Lightning payments take off.
Yeah, well, I mean,
I'm a fan of stretch-backed stablecoins.
And you all heard it here first in the show.
That concept.
Nine months ago.
And literally, Max brought it to everyone
right when they announced that.
Yeah.
So, well done.
But, I mean, one challenge for anyone issuing it
is just interoperability with others.
Like, you issue that,
like no one else is going to accept that stablecoin.
Right.
So then you have to do a bunch of work.
Right.
You have to convince Stripe and the bridge team.
will you please swap our Zablecoin pair?
And then you have to convince
a gazillion financial institutions
and wallets to accept and receive.
So I know better than anyone,
I know very well how hard it is
to get people to adopt new payment protocols
or new monies.
Yeah.
So even if you're like a big dog exchange
and tiny little country.
You don't really have a whole lot of muscle
to get the world to adopt.
But you don't need the world to.
This is kind of my point.
Imagine for a minute,
let's say you're the big dog exchange
in Vietnam or something.
Oh, you're thinking of the savings use case.
Yeah, absolutely.
It's okay.
We're going to issue this.
But as part of the savings use case,
people convert to that
because with this you get whatever 5%.
I agree with that.
And you're saying because
it may be disallowed or unclear yet,
we don't have clarity.
Right?
So it's not clear how to do it here,
but you're saying abroad.
Doesn't matter in the United States.
Yeah, totally.
I'm saying like literally,
if you've already got the kind of like,
but holy, this is the main,
like the more I talk about,
I'm like, this is a really fucking good idea.
Yeah, your port codes are all around the world.
Okay.
We'll see what I'm doing next week.
I do agree.
The strategy should be,
use strategies, stretch,
but focus on the savings use case for your customers.
Right.
And your customers might not have good options
to hold dollars.
This gives you dollars in a very novel way with stretch.
And then over time, there'll be more and more connection points to do transfers.
The network will grow over time.
I'm not sure I fully understand what is disallowed by clarity.
Like, if you can't give yield.
Genius.
So, Genius passed last year.
Okay.
it does not allow the
or this is my
I've not read the actual language
so this is my interpretation
I think broadly speaking
it doesn't allow
like a
like Circle or Coinbase
to
directly give their
customers
interest on their
like if I deposit
dollars into
Coinbase
and now I have
you know
a thousand dollars
of USDC with them
they can't pay me
three percent interest
or some
interest on that. That's not allowed
by the GeneSac.
But what
I think is happening is
other ways are found
to give me rewards.
I get rewards some
other way. Or they could have another
partner
actually give me interest.
And I think that's happening,
but there's not clarity.
There's not clarity on it.
It's gray, unclear
how the government would view that.
So I think that is like the battle with the Clarity Act to get clarity on that, that that is acceptable.
That meaning these other forms of giving rewards to customers to share some of those profits is my understanding.
And then with, and there's also not clarity on stretch backed stable coins in the US either.
I don't believe there's an existing stable coin in the U.S.
The more I think about it, the more it's an insanely good opportunity.
More to come.
Lexi.
Should we talk about Lexi?
We're actually talking about Bitcoin stuff.
We've been AI-pilled recently.
Anthropic?
Yeah, Lexi is a startup that operates out of preceded Bitcoin, literally sits right next to me.
I've known those guys for three to four years now as they've been building out their solution
because it's based on Lightning Development Kit, which my team works on.
And so I've known for a long time how awesome their technical approach to this is.
what sets them apart is that they're running lightning nodes in the cloud,
but they're doing it in trusted execution environments using Intel SGX.
So for every user's wallet, whether it's an agentic wallet
or a mobile app on your phone,
each wallet has its own LDK instance in the cloud,
but it's run in a TE.
So Lexi does not have access to the private keys to your wallet.
So it's a pretty good trade-off on security and usability.
Good in the sense that it's pretty close to not your keys,
or your keys, your coins.
You're trusting the trust model of Intel SGX,
which does have some vulnerabilities,
but it's much, much stronger assurances
than if it just ran on Lexi's servers themselves.
without a secure enclave.
So it's good security assurances,
and it definitely addresses
some of the UX challenges of Lightning.
One is receiving payments offline.
Your node would be running,
have a persistent internet connection in the cloud
so you can receive payments.
A normal thing people would expect.
And just a bunch of other UX challenges.
Being able to have multiple applications
or multiple devices access your wallet.
it's like very easy to do if your node's running in the cloud.
Right.
So it's a really sound technical solution.
I've been using their mobile wallet,
and I don't know if you guys have either,
but I mean, for a long time.
And their SDK.
Yeah.
And their SDK, right.
That's right, yeah.
So they've had a mobile wallet,
like beta for, you know, at least six months.
It's one of my, right.
I mean, now with Agentec payments,
I'm doing payments like on a definitely weekly,
if not daily basis of Bitcoin.
which is great.
I mean, just toying around.
How can I meet you?
Like I bought a,
I used Ori to,
we got to get our MDK
comment in for the episode.
I bought a pencil with Ori
because Ori,
they launched
unhuman.shopping, is it?
It's like an Amazon wrapper.
So I bought a pencil with Ori.
All right.
Did you get it?
It's going to be delivered here.
Okay.
I'm excited.
So we'll see.
And I told you.
It's supposed to be delivered
to Presidio Bitcoin.
I told you guys,
I did unhuman.coffee where I used Ori to purchase coffee for a friend and arrived at his office.
He was thrilled.
It actually worked.
We did Bitcoin payments from an agent in WhatsApp or Telegram to receive real world coffee.
So people have been asking, when can we buy coffee with Bitcoin right now?
That's great.
But anyway, so I am doing more Bitcoin payments now.
It's still mostly tinkering, but there's definitely way more fun stuff to tinker with,
which is better than not having anything fun to tinker with.
We've gone from like, can't do it at all,
to like, not fun stuff to tinker with.
So now we have fun stuff to tinker with,
and then eventually they'll actually be useful stuff.
We're getting there.
But yeah, Lexi, Phoenix, and Cash App
are my three primary Bitcoin wallets.
I like all three.
They're all very good experiences.
Can I share sort of my experience with Lexi?
Please.
I want to give a little bit of the layman's intro to it
because I think what you just described is true technically,
but I think if you haven't messed with a lot of these wallets,
you may not be as familiar with all the problems.
So if you just, you know, previous to Lexi,
if you were to just go to the app store and download a Lightning wallet,
we know Lightning is fast,
but it depends on somebody running a Lightning node on your behalf.
And so if you download that on your phone,
you can't run the Lightning node on your phone, right?
because your phone sometimes is asleep and not on and stuff.
You need that running somewhere at all times,
but you need something that you control, right?
And so if you download something from the App Store,
you don't really control it or depend on somebody else
to run that lightning node for you.
And the magic of Lexi, when he first showed it to me,
I couldn't believe how easy it was,
is you download this thing from the App Store.
It was the test flight at the time.
And when you kind of set up your wallet,
it just has you connect your Google Drive
I think is one of the options, maybe a Dropbox.
And then it puts those credentials
onto your Google Drive automatically,
those credentials that allow you to control
the Lightning node. So they're running
the Lightning node, like Steve said,
execution environment in the cloud, Intel SGX.
But as a user, you don't really notice that.
You just say, I download the thing,
I connect my Google Drive.
Now, it stores away the credentials, I control them,
they don't. But now I have my wallet
and it's fully self-custodial and
it's running the Lightning node in the cloud
for me without me having to really like
set it up or think about it or understand
all the details of running a lightning node
but I now have my own lightning node running
without having to worry about it. That's I think
in a sense from a user
experience what feels like a big breakthrough to me.
Yeah, I agree.
Just to be clear, you can run a
lightning node on your phone and have good user experience.
Phoenix has a lightning node running
on the phone.
Just saying that's possible.
To be clear on that,
they have the keys for signing
on the phone, right?
Yeah, the rest of the day is split off.
No, it's on the phone.
So if I have it on my phone.
And LDK has also been structured to do that as well.
If I have it on my phone and my phone is run out of batteries, let's say, worst case, right?
It's definitely not internet connected.
Then you try to send me a payment.
How does that work?
Yeah, well, in that case, you wouldn't receive the payment.
Now, there's a async payments protocol that's been developed by the Spiral team
that would hold the payment until you come back alive.
Where does it hold it?
it actually
like if I'm sending you a payment
it would be held by the node
my wallet is connected to
it would wait until it hears from the node
that your wallet is connected to
and then once it
wakes once you wake up and
you're active you meaning
your node and your wallet
then the payment
would be initiated
it's the you've heard of
hodl invoices and I think we probably even
talked about on the show because I'm like, oh, it's hostile
to the network.
This kind of sounds like that, no?
But without the hostility.
Because the HODL invoices
don't require any protocol changes.
But if I'm sending you a payment,
instead of the first hop
holding it, it's the last hop holding it.
So like the node that your wallet
is connected to. And then when
it waits for you to wake up and then
it completes the payment.
And it does it in a trustless fashion.
The hostility comes in because the whole
route from me to that last hop gets that liquidity gets tied up so none of the nodes in in the route
like that because their money is just tied up and can't be used for future or any future payments
until the payment's completed and you might not receive that payment for hours or days um you might
not ever wake back up and then it like times out after what a week or two weeks or whatever so
that's why it's hostile the async payments protocol does sort of the opposite where it's held
from the sender side, not the receiver,
doesn't tie up liquidity,
but still completes the payment.
So it's definitely better, a better protocol.
It just, like all these protocols,
has to be adopted.
Yeah.
Could we zoom out on the Lexi announcement?
I'm really excited.
I mean, obviously, I'm a big fan of this team,
also invested in this team as well.
One question I'm curious y'all's thoughts,
I mean, I've kind of been pushing Max and Phillip,
that the user experience for the phone wallet is amazing.
You've played a little bit more with the SDK.
I think one thing that I've been trying to better think through is where,
where does this experience you know enable I don know orders of magnitude new usage like what new opportunities does this open up Are there specific things I don know from your experience with an SDK that you think it particularly well for
I don't know, like a vision you would love to see them explore,
experiments or, you know, beyond like,
obviously people that want to make Bitcoin payments, amazing,
but that's still a small market, so.
I've used it, I mean, last, when I was using it
was probably six months ago or so,
so it's probably a bit dated.
But what I was saying is like,
I was, I want to make a new website
that accepts Bitcoin payments.
I think I first made like a snake game
and I made Mika and stuff.
I made a bunch of little fun web apps
just to get, exercise the muscle
of making something that can receive Bitcoin.
And so for that, there's just,
in the sidebar of Lexi,
there's a little, you know,
SDK, create a SDK key or whatever.
And I can like easily use that
and drop it into my sort of vibe coded game.
And then I can start accepting payments right away.
And that worked amazingly well.
Very simple.
It was easy.
I've got my wallet right there.
I can watch the value go up as I get payments.
So to me, that was very clear and easy.
I don't know if that experience has advanced a lot
in the recent six months or so
since I was messing with it more.
And then as much as I'm excited about MDK
and big Ori user,
I haven't actually built anything using MDK yet.
So I'm wondering,
have either of you guys explored the edges
of what maybe MDK is better at?
Just a little bit.
So I'll speak to it a little bit.
But I want to play, I mean, we should all play with it more
and elaborate more on future shows.
But I think MDK has been designed to be like the stripe for payment.
So it's designed around accounts and customers and checkouts.
And receiving.
And those APIs, it's sort of at that conceptual level
and not at a lower level.
Whereas Lexi's, their API doesn't have that
and it's a more lower level.
So if you want to customize the payment flows more, Lexi allows you to do that.
And I don't think MDK does.
So it's for someone who wouldn't find the MDK checkout flow works for them.
They wanted to do something else.
They need more flexibility.
Then Lexi, I think, fits those needs.
As far as what they should go after, I don't really know offhand.
but certainly one thing we should encourage them to do
is find another gear in terms of velocity.
One thing we've loved about the MDK team
is just how quickly they're experimenting.
None of us know yet what's going to grow
and be a winning formula,
but certainly the more at-bats you get,
the higher chances you're going to find that thing.
So I'm really bullish on MDK having a higher probability of finding stuff.
Now, if they do find it, others can copy, of course.
But if you've been in the grind every day finding it,
you're going to be in a nice position to have good instincts.
And you have internal data that you probably see it before everybody else.
It doesn't need to be.
I literally, on the way over, I was just on a call with Nick the whole time over.
And I was telling him, hey, great, lots of experiments.
But I think you get like 10x the number of experiments you're doing.
like brainstorm with ai you've got like the coffee thing you know there's like the the amazon buy
you know like buy a pencil on amazon thing those are great but i think if you i think if you want
to win you can't be general you have to be specific so i think coffee specific you know pencils pencils
are specific amazon's a little more general potatoes specific yeah potatoes are very specific
it's great but then create like 50 of your top ideas yeah and just do them all yeah because you
don't know you're not gonna be able to pick in a sense as a type of content versus a technology
bet yeah but do all 50 of them you know and have a ai can actually help you generate all 50
prioritize them implement them yeah like it doesn't just do everything you have to work with it and
orchestrate it right but um i think more shots on goal even though i think mdk is doing a great job
with shots on goal i think they could still 10 exit yeah i think lexi could definitely you know
10x or 100x kind of their their effort at shots on goal but the the one thing i said to them on
to launch.
I said,
he's giving sports.
Yeah.
I said,
congrats on the launch.
Keep launching.
Yeah.
Meaning,
yeah,
this isn't just a one and done.
This is like every day launch something new.
So we should definitely encourage,
I mean,
every team to be doing that,
including Lexi.
And then,
but they don't have to do
the same experiments as MDK.
They do different experiments, right?
Especially because they do have
a different API,
a different architecture.
Exactly.
I mean,
there's some overlap
with the solutions, but they are different.
And with their security model too,
what are the different experiences
where people want to take advantage of that?
And this is what I was trying to get at,
is they're going to find a different niche.
Think about how big commerce online is.
There's Stripe, there's Audient, there's PayPal,
and that's going to probably 100x or 1,000x from here.
When I think about, what I'm trying to better understand is,
my understanding is that MDK, at least the SDK,
is set up for receipt payments like Stripe.
Now, clearly Nick has payments working sending as well in OriBot.
But MDK, do you guys know, is it architected for sending as well?
Because I assume Lexi is easy to do, receive and send.
I mean, yeah, you can send payments.
Well, I mean, Ori is using MDK.
But is that like a first-class citizen in there?
Because I'm thinking with Lexi, there might be more cases where people are doing more.
It's not just like I'm receiving payments, but like, I don't know, I've got a bot playing a game.
but I guess Nick has that working too
but I almost feel like if you're
Lexi and you've got this more
flexible atomic
payment material you should
almost like demonstrate
like I can understand what that means but I don't
I don't have an example that comes to mind of what
Lexi can do that MDK can't
not that they should focus all of their experimentation there
but I as you know somewhat
friendly with each team I can't
articulate what that is I can hear from you that that's
the case but I'd like to see an example of
what are the cool things that you can only do with Lexi?
Yeah. Agreed.
That's exactly the question I'm trying to ask.
And maybe it has to do with the privacy as well, the SGX piece.
Yeah. Well, I mean, at least myself and probably several of us
will chat with them next week or in the coming weeks.
Hopefully we'll learn or encourage them to explore that and learn,
and then we can come back and chat about it here.
For now, it's awesome to launch that.
I was also very pleased to see this was at the top of Stacker News.
A lot of stackers I really respect
seem extremely excited about it.
So the big brains on stacker news
seem to think this is an excellent solution.
So that was nice.
Great.
What do we got next?
What do we got about clients?
It's tough.
That was like a seed for AI.
You want to talk about that a little bit?
Yeah.
Well, just, you know,
I was in New York a couple weeks ago
and gave a presentation about agentic payments.
But during the course of that,
I don't know how I was not thinking this,
but I was informed that Coinbase base doesn't have privacy.
It's a public blockchain.
What?
And this goes back to last fall,
I discovered that LightSparkSpark,
it's not a public blockchain.
Spark is not.
But they had a policy,
LightSpark's entity or Spark entity
would publish all transactions publicly.
And I thought that was just absolutely ludicrous
because while most human beings don't care
about the levels of privacy
that a lot of Bitcoiners get worked up about.
Yeah, they don't want their whole financial thing
broadcast the internet.
Most humans are accustomed to your bank
or your cash app or PayPal or whatever,
knowing your transactions
and maybe that gets shared with the government or whatever.
That's sort of like what normal people's expectations are for today.
But they don't expect all your neighbors
to be able to see your wallet and your transactions
and your balance and anyone in the world.
But LightSpark has since fixed that, though.
So then LightSpark did, they heard feedback
and they responded to feedback
and they added an API option
so that if you're like a Breeze SDK
or a wallet using Spark,
you can disable that publication of transactions.
Now, just the other day though,
someone, a guy on Twitter,
posted an example though
where there is apparently still leakage of privacy.
Like even with that disabled,
he was able to send a payment to someone
and then discover their wallet.
Because the wallet he is using
exposed some ID
from their side and he's able to
then go look it up on Spark Explorer.
That needs to be
investigated a little more to see
is it true and
what's the blast radius of that.
But back to
stablecoin stuff. I don't know why
I never realized
or I guess
I knew base was a public blockchain,
but I just didn't realize all this
USDC on, this
whole push of all your payments
being done on base, all your payments
in your wallets would be public.
I think that's crazy.
Public tied to like a
cryptographic key or a hash
or something.
Yeah.
But you know, but again,
if you pay the person at the farmer's market
or your friend or even someone
or a stranger, then they can just
look up your balance.
Right, which is kind of how core level one Bitcoin works, right?
Yeah, but that's not used for payments.
Yeah.
I mean, it doesn't scale, right?
Like normal people are not using on-chain Bitcoin to do payments today.
Only like Bitcoiners.
And I think people that did in the early days are probably like kind of horrified later on, you know, 15 years later.
Yeah, so that's actually, that's a very common response though is like it works just like Bitcoin.
But normal people aren't using Bitcoin for payments, and they never will because it doesn't scale.
It does seven transactions per second.
It doesn't scale.
So it'll never be used for payments for normal people.
It has to be done at another layer like Lightning.
And guess what?
Lightning has much better privacy properties.
But it's just crazy to me that anyone you pay with USDC base, that they can see your balance and your entire transaction history.
Account-centric style, where you sort of have all of your USDC on base is in a single address?
Yeah.
Okay.
Tempo is the same way.
Now, Stripe's website says privacy coming soon.
They claim that they're working on a Zcash-like shielded privacy solution, which will be opt-in.
but with regulatory hooks, compliance hooks.
So now that would solve the problem.
I mean, I think the most egregious problem
is if the whole world can see your wallet
and your payments.
And you pay someone and they're snooping on you.
That just seems completely unacceptable.
So if Tempo or Base were to add
compliance-friendly privacy solutions,
then it at least addresses the egregious part.
It's back to being on par with the current banking system.
So now why they're saying it'll be opt-in, I don't know.
Why not just be on?
Probably because the defaults matter.
Yeah, because most people don't.
Most people don't care.
But why do they want that data out there to forever walk?
But who would want it to be public?
It seems like, I mean, the only argument I've seen is like the DGens who are doing meme coin trading, they love to like look this up or whatever.
So that's like part of the culture.
Okay.
For them, so maybe, so it seems to me like it should be, it should be opt out, right?
So like if I have a DGEN wallet and that's my, my customer's thing is to look up everyone's money and wallet or whatever they've done, then great.
I'll turn that on for my wallet.
But for normal people's wallets and balances and accounts, I don't know why you would not default to.
It just preserves privacy.
To be fair, I mean, so someone in that sort of crypto world that was looking at these sort of Bitcoin payments told me,
he's like, oh, yeah, it's like one of the greatest things of all the crypto is like the social features you get with seeing how people spend.
I was like, that's really weird, number one.
Number two, though, is, you know, I always thought it was strange.
I haven't used Venmo in over a decade,
loyal cash app user,
but also because I got locked out of Venmo
when I was living in Mexico.
And it always showed like your social graph
of who's paying who.
And I thought that was super bizarre as well.
So I don't know if it's like,
I mean, there's like clearly levels.
There's like the whole internet,
no one, government,
and then like people you opt in to see your own feed.
But personally, I don't know what you guys feel,
but I thought that was just,
and maybe it's a cultural thing.
I'm a boomer now,
but like the idea of,
I don't want to see what my friends are paying other people.
Yeah, here's my history on that.
When it first launched,
I thought it was interesting.
And I thought maybe there's an interesting social case,
but I've never learned what that is.
And then now I think it's ridiculous.
And the thing, because I'm like,
yeah, I make payments with Venmo all the time
to tennis instructor or whatever, stuff like that.
You got to get a cash app.
Well, yeah.
That's what I do.
I always say, hey, it's cash app or nothing.
But when I open it up, I see this feed
and I see these people that I literally have not spoken to
for 20 years
and I'm seeing them
make these payments
I'm like
I don't think they want me
seeing these payments
or they're certainly
not related to me
so then
sometimes
if I actually know
the person
I'll like
I'll
message them
making a joke
about this payment
they made
and they have no idea
how I know this
they have no idea
so then they
completely forgot
that this was
it is
it was
when I used to
and it really
it really freaks them out
that I
know that.
I think that's the base play too.
I turned it off, but I had to turn it off.
But why doesn't Venmo make it private by default
and then you can opt in?
They've also been sued and stuff.
They probably think there's some social hook in there.
I think there probably is.
I've heard especially younger demographics,
maybe non-boomers,
enjoy it and they joke with each other about it.
Well, anyway, I have no issue
with the product doing that.
And if people like to do it, great.
But for most use cases,
that's not the expectation.
And it would be just like very harmful to a lot of people.
So anyway, so as far as like why Bitcoin versus stable coins for payments, I mean, one is
like just, I mean, usually when you say, oh, because of privacy, people go in their head
to like, oh, it's just this like crazy Bitcoiner who's like worried about the government maybe
seeing a $10,000 transaction or something.
And it's like, no, this is your neighbor or the person, anyone you pay, you don't want them to see your balance and all of your other, you know, more seedy payments or whatever.
Steve.
Yeah.
What kind of seedy payments are we talking about?
I don't want to out David.
Oh.
Tennis coach.
Mika Chad.
Heavy air clothes on the tennis coach.
So, balls in your court.
Yeah, exactly.
Anyway, but
so I think there's a strong argument
for Bitcoin and again,
not on-chain because no one's going to do
payments on-chain. On Lightning.
Lightning has good privacy.
Relatively good
privacy. You don't have to opt in either, right?
It just works that way.
Yeah, it just works.
Anyway, I do
expect Coinbase and Stripe to eventually
add some compliancy,
friendly privacy solutions
and this goes away, but
unclear if it's going to, it doesn't exist today.
Could take many, many years.
So while that window's open, I think a strong argument
should be made for using much more private Bitcoin payments.
Speaking of privacy, there is this news item I thought
I saw today, this morning.
You see this thing about Hong Kong?
Oh, yeah.
They can require you to give you your phone number, right?
Like, yeah.
They can require you to decrypt.
Unlock your phone.
more than that
decrypt
like decrypt
any app
in your wallet
wow
like you
have to turn over
your decryption keys
so you have no privacy
at all
and they can take
all your money
so just to clarify
when you come
into the US
if you have
your iPhone locked
they can't force you
to unlock it
right
and there's like
case law around this
this one
yeah
and it's been
prosecuted
they've gone through
the process
they've decided
that's not allowed
if you have your
Mac
you open it up
has a password
they can't force you
to type that password
right
in Hong Kong
they can
but it's more than that
right
I didn't read all the details
but my understanding is like
it's not just
access to the device
but
they can
request keys
yeah
wow
so if you had a Bitcoin wallet
in there
and then if you refused
like you could be jailed
because it's illegal
damn
like I literally
won't travel to Hong Kong now
no way
I just literally won't go there
Even passing through the airport, they can do this.
Oh, really?
Yeah.
So you can't even use it as a hub anymore.
Wow.
I did not know that.
Yeah.
And especially, I mean, I wonder...
That'll be interesting to track.
How flight patterns and capital changes.
You know, I'm curious on that because...
So I was actually there briefly in 2019,
visiting another Bitcoiner when there was the protest.
That was a crazy experience, by the way.
but I given how much the protests were going off at that point I can't imagine this won't like
incite a whole new like wave of that I mean the whole deal was everyone was using cash that was a
big thing people were wearing masks when they were going to the ATMs it was like that like everyone
that was out there that was like part of the culture so I can't imagine that people in Hong
Kong like lasers everywhere right well there was tear gas it was a while it was very well
but I can't imagine uh yeah I can't imagine the people of Hong Kong are just gonna like take that
So it'll be interesting to see what the response is.
I feel like I just saw this this morning or something.
This is brand new.
This past week, a couple days ago.
Crazy.
Do you guys want to talk a little bit about open source?
I'm curious to hear how y'all's thinking has evolved.
We can a little bit.
Actually, related to that, there's this Stripe.
We were just talking about Stripe a little bit with Tempo you mentioned.
Oh, yeah.
Stripe had an open source.
That's right.
I don't know.
a project product that was just launched this week
that tries to do a bunch of orchestration
around using AI agents,
but I think it's all kind of closed source
on Stripe's platform.
And I think we were...
This was the MPP that we talked about, no?
Well, MPP is like the payment protocol,
but I think they had more of like
an agent orchestration thing
that happens through their platform.
And I shared out in the group,
like, don't we need like an open one of this?
I think somebody had tweeted something
and I shared that with,
I don't know if you, have you looked into that at all?
Nope.
Okay, we'll do it next week.
I mean, I saw your message.
It seems like a good, you know, we've been sort of asking the questions like,
how should the open source AI ecosystem evolve?
And this seems like...
But what is, I mean, there's already like, I mean, how does that compare to Conductor
and there's an even Goose and there's others as well.
What is it doing that they don't?
Yeah, I guess we'll have to...
Yeah.
It's more for the next time.
Get deeper on this, yeah.
Well, specifically, I mean,
I meant that you had posed the sort of prompt
that you were thinking about more open source
in the case of Spiral.
I don't think we talked about it
because I think it was after our show,
but Jack had a really interesting tweet
that I've been thinking a bit about
where he basically said, you know,
open source code is no longer where the value accrues.
It's going to be data, provenance, protocols,
evals, and weights in that order.
Now, that was like a pretty interesting take.
I don't know if you guys saw that
or thought about it yet.
curious if you, what you think he means
number one and if you agree with it or not.
Or if you have a different, yeah, different team.
I know you've thought about this.
Steve.
Yeah, I
spoke into him about it. I think
it's less about, or
it's not like FOSS
no longer has value. It's just these other
attributes are increasing in value.
FOSS just changes what is FOSS.
And so what does that
mean? And what does that mean for
people working on open source and organizations
working on open source, including Spiral.
I think if you just
evaluate off still,
it still matters.
The free part is having permissive
license and making it
accessible to others to use and you can
build on other people's shoulders
and bigger and better things.
Whether an AI is doing that or
humans, it doesn't matter.
There's value
to it being free.
And then being open, making it auditable, transparent,
like independently verifiable, reproducible builds,
all that matters, probably even more so in an AI world.
Well, I think that's where he's getting out with the providence,
to see who actually publishes.
So I think those two things still are true and matter,
and it doesn't matter who or what is generating code.
But yes, providence, I think, is extremely important.
And if you think about models themselves,
what does it mean to be open?
I mean, the frontier models are not open.
A lot of Chinese models are open.
I don't exactly know where Facebook is at with their strategy,
but at least it was open.
But what does open mean?
Well, the weights being open are a big deal.
But still, we don't know the inputs to the training
for those models which is a huge factor as well I was speaking with someone from NVIDIA last night at the Builder event we had here at PB And he said that NVIDIA open models of their training
do have openness around inputs.
So they actually have an open data set.
Yeah.
So that's huge to me.
It is huge.
And so it's on my list to investigate that more,
to understand those claims.
and there's some kind of like
transparency ranking
and I need to understand
who does that ranking,
how does that ranking work,
but they scored like high on that.
So I need to understand that better.
But that seems very promising to me
because I'd also just like to understand
how does it even work?
Like, is it just trust me, bro?
Or is there like cryptography
or verifiability
to what is being used for training?
So to me, I mean,
this gets a lot at,
And I agree, it's like the idea of what is open source, where the value is, is just shifting.
Like open source is still super amazing.
It's just like instead of the actual labor of writing code, it's now like, okay, what
matters is the data, like the food we put in, junk in, junk out.
And, you know, we talked about this almost a year ago on the show where we talked about
one of like the biggest pipe dreams.
So I've long been, I guess, a little bit concerned that open weights are certainly not enough.
And that, you know, even as people use these Chinese open source models, it's cool.
You know, I love watching Kimmy and all these things do amazing stuff.
But I am not at all convinced that we understand these models well enough to believe that there's
not like poison pills put in there.
And that could happen by a company, could happen by a country.
But, you know, if I don't trust a lot of the closed labs, I certainly am not going to just
trust China as being like just altruistic.
It's great.
Don't get me wrong that we have these to play with.
But to me, I think one of the greatest sort of public goods would be, yeah, like we basically,
here's the model.
You can see the weights.
You can see cryptographically proved every piece of data, which keys submitted it, how it was used in training in the model.
And I think our discussion at that point basically ended with, well, this would be great, but it would be so expensive.
You would need maybe like some early Bitcoiners that are very sort of ethos aligned to fund something like this.
And even then, you couldn't really probably get the right talent to do a big training run.
But I think what we're seeing now, and I think you kind of pushed back on, we could do like a distillation of the models.
Maybe that would be like a first step.
But I wonder now, as training, it seems like you can train pretty good models, maybe not exactly at the frontier, for a lot less money.
I mean, maybe just literally having a fleet of American-made or even global-made open-source models from a community, maybe the compute, maybe we have the marketplace of GPUs that can actually run the training runs itself.
but where every single input in there
is cryptographically proved and rolled up
and then actually,
and this is another idea I have,
I want to run by you,
stamped on the Bitcoin,
on Bitcoin, right?
And you can add that,
like this is when this model was created
and all the roll-ups.
So that's increasingly,
I would love to see a fleet of global
or American-made models
that follow that paradigm.
Yeah, and like I said,
I need to study the NVIDIA stuff more,
but that seems really promising to me
just because they're in a position
to be able to dump so much money into it.
And strategically, it makes sense for them to do this,
whereas it doesn't for the other frontier AI labs.
The other idea that I was thinking on,
from a spiral perspective,
because you guys obviously have funded
a lot of open source devs, but you also have LDK,
is something, this is a little chat
I was having with Claude last night,
but PDK, Providence DevKit.
I've been thinking a bit more about this as well,
where it's like, my understanding,
I'm not an expert in open timestamps,
but open timestamps is great for stamping something when it happens.
So like when in the order of blocks,
but maybe I don't think we have a good way of tying that into more of like the
who yet,
but I'm wondering if there's a way to make it super easy to stamp things with
a Nostra key and open timestamps.
You have a time and a Nostra key that you could go and like survey various
relays to try and find,
you know,
whatever reputation for that key that,
you know,
put this data in or something like that.
I don't know what that would look like,
but increasingly that seems like a very important kind of open source,
not necessarily a company, but sort of tool for humanity
to make it really easy to track provenance, reputation, or data.
Agreed.
Just need to, I need to see a proposal or think through a proposal
or a liquid plot on a proposal to make it a little more concrete,
but totally agree with the concept and the goals.
Yeah.
I mean, as far as, yeah, I mentioned maybe a week or two ago,
spirals thinking about an AI initiative
and what would that look like.
I can speak to my thinking on the criteria.
Yeah, please do.
I mean, there's the obvious that,
well, we want to work on a project
that's going to have impact and value to the world.
I mean, everyone does, right?
So of course we have that.
The most unique part of the analysis, though,
is how to work on something
that's not going to just get run over in three months
by the big AI labs or NVIDIA
or 50 startups in Silicon Valley.
we want to work on something
because we're going to have a small budget
a tiny team, maybe one
three people, something like that
a small grant program
and so
with a small
but mighty team
and effort, what's something we can
invest our time into and like have
reasonable confidence that
there's not going to be a thousand
times the investment in it three months later
or 12 months later or even years later
Right. Like picking the right problem that's super important.
Or just that filter. So it's like a litmus test. We should brainstorm all the ideas we could work on, but then apply it to this criteria.
So, well, one, we have the luxury of non-commercial. Spiral doesn't have to make money.
We don't, like, we explicitly don't want to have, you know, revenue, customers.
I mean, we want people adopting what we build, but we don't want revenue.
So, I've never heard those words before.
Well, it's our strongest lever, right?
I mean, because it allows us,
but there's certainly high impact things
that don't have revenue.
What do those things typically be?
So the next criteria is,
I believe like the further away you are from the customer,
the more safe you are.
So if you're-
Safe from revenue.
Yeah.
safe from
being run over.
Keep that revenue away, please.
I mean, look at Goose.
Goose was launched and it was novel
in many ways and now
others have caught up and surpassed it in many ways.
That doesn't mean Goose is dead
or going to die, but it does
seem to me like Goose needs to be more
opinionated and focused and then be world class
at that and defend itself versus
trying to be everything
and anything and everything to everyone.
And it's very much, I mean, it has a GUI, right?
So it's very much like in your face.
I mean, as a company, trying to accrue value,
one way to do that is you acquire customers
and you have a direct relationship with them, right?
So the further way you are from that,
the more, the safer you are.
But that doesn't mean you can't deliver impact.
So what does that mean?
Well, protocol work and low-level software work
and SDKs, like SDKs,
you used to be able to make money.
Borland made money doing that
and Microsoft made money.
And then now it's free, right?
I mean, like,
No one makes money off SDKs. So SDKs, protocol work, low-level software, also like protocols, but like peer-to-peer networks, the protocol software. All of that stuff is more defensible, right?
So I think example projects would be
like a peer-to-peer inference network
or a peer-to-peer training network.
Our friend Paul Itoy swung by a week or two ago.
Are you an investor in Stackware?
Great idea guy.
And he brought a friend along.
We talked about his friends all about
a peer-to-peer training.
So getting back to some kind of project
around Providence,
I haven't done the math on this
or any kind of analysis,
so I don't even know
if this is one of these things like,
oh, well, Bitcoin mine
with our laptops or whatever,
which is not realistic.
So maybe it's a situation.
I don't know.
But imagine a peer-to-peer network
of GPUs that do train
and part of the protocol,
I mean, both the ethos,
but also enforced in the protocol
is some kind of providence
and key signing
and open timestamping
on the Bitcoin blockchain or whatever solution
to train
models. That would be amazing.
So if there's a there
there, if no one's really doing that
and there's a credible plan
to build that, I think that's super
attractive. I agree.
And I think that there's interesting commercial opportunity
obviously commercial opportunity around that too.
You should chat, I think
Christopher
David, who I've mentioned with OpenAgents,
he's taken various shots on call with this and
has a new one coming out now.
His is more commercial focused,
but still would be interesting to...
Yeah, I need to...
He's coming until next week.
Oh, good.
All right, well, I'll try to meet with him
and like to study that more.
Actually, that popped up.
I was looking at GitHub dependencies.
I was looking at that for different projects,
for the adversarial part,
meaning like supply chain attacks.
But then I looked at the dependents.
So for the LDK project,
who is using LDK?
And I saw open agents pop up.
So I need to look at how they're using LDK.
But there are like over 800 projects using LDK.
Oh, wow.
Pretty cool.
That's sweet.
Yeah, anyway.
It's also worth looking at the field of interpretability.
Yes.
Because that sort of like,
instead of necessarily training your own model,
if you can work with a model
that has good interpretability hooks,
maybe you can save a lot of the cost of training,
but still get a grounded understanding
in how it is making the decisions
and what paths it's running through.
Maybe build like a test suite
to understand how it makes decisions
and how they're consistent
with what you would otherwise
have trained yourself.
I'd like to explore that more as well.
And by the way,
I mean, the interpretability thing,
my understanding is there's people
working on various ZK roll-ups
or I guess ZK proofs and whatnot
from maybe more crypto land
that have come into AI.
But I haven't seen anyone do this well.
It would be extremely useful
if you could make compute,
different kinds of compute more fungible,
which I think some of the ZK stuff
could also help with
because then you could actually
build a marketplace.
it's hard to build a marketplace for compute
if there's too many distinct types
catching up on that
we have a lot of people's commentary
avoiding revenue means no one wants to bother you
like moving into the middle west
you mentioned model scrutiny a few weeks ago
I love that concept
if there's something of substance that could be done there
I think that could be an interesting pursuit as well.
The Providence thing I'll come back to, though,
and the reason, I mean, I also love the interpretability.
That's a huge unlock.
But the Providence thing using Bitcoin,
I think Bitcoin is the only thing that can really do this well.
Some timestamping on Bitcoin,
because otherwise, what is the global source of truth?
So it's kind of interesting.
I think probably something like Nostra keys as well,
so you can actually have identity and reputation
that you can easily query and find.
But I think in order, it's kind of interesting
because this may be one of the legacies of Bitcoin
is it's the only way to prove provenance in the AI world.
So that's one of its ultimate biggest gifts.
Which also, I guess, maybe on a future show
you can talk about your provenance ideas,
but I'm pretty excited about those.
You're talking about the naming stuff?
Yeah.
Actually, we don't have to talk a ton about it right now,
but I have been intrigued by the Flint community.
The discussion that happened in the Flint community
got me thinking about that project idea again.
And then I actually built it this past week
and I kind of like it.
It feels like, you know, sometimes I build things
and I get like, you know, halfway and I'm like,
ugh, this actually has all kinds of problems.
It's not that good.
I got pretty far into this.
I'm like, actually it looks better than I thought
even for a bunch of reasons.
So I'm gaining more optimism on it.
But I also think it feels like the original design
and thinking around it was really around
more like self-sovereign names.
And I actually think there may be
a new or better framing around agent-based network resources.
Because you think about the future of the internet
is going to be mostly agents interacting,
and then human readable names are going to be valuable
when humans want to use network resources.
We're going to want to use a name that we're familiar with.
And so we need some way to map the human desired resource
to something that agents can understand and work with pretty flexibly.
So I'll need your guys' help in brainstorming that a little bit more,
but it feels like there's something,
in a sense it's like the same core idea,
but instead of just thinking about names for humans to be self-sovereign,
there are actually names for humans to reach.
This could be a spiral AI project.
Actually.
I mean, if it nicely addresses AI in an AI world
with a Bitcoin tie-in, that hits the sweet spot.
I love it.
Sorry to steal your project.
No, please.
It's open source.
It's meant to be.
You can apply for a job.
DK's about to join Steve's team.
What would be an example that you can think of
of like a resource where you need a name?
Well, you know, imagine some future
where you're not using the internet the way you use it today.
Today you type something into a browser,
but maybe in the future you're going to speak.
I'm just talking like this.
You're going to speak to a phone.
You just want to say,
go to like that place where you got those,
you know, I don't know, those teddy bears.
Like you remember that teddy bear store?
Go to that teddy bear store.
And then it has to kind of figure out what that means, right?
And where that's located.
Now, you could imagine there's a convenient way
to use existing infrastructure
and provide the mapping to the .com and stuff.
But like, I would imagine there's some future
where there's like, there's a bunch of transactions
that have been accomplished by some agent
that has some hold on a teddy bear manufacturing process.
And so when I say teddy bear,
I just want to get the thing, right?
I'm thinking about a resource I want to get.
I'm not necessarily thinking about
how I navigate the web to get to it
or my checkout flows and all that.
I'm just sort of asking for a resource.
And I think a lot of...
Why would you need a human-readable name for that resource?
Like if I'm talking to my model,
I can just say teddy bear.
I can say, okay, I'm a teddy bear
and go and figure it out.
I guess it depends on,
like do I care about how it solves it ever
and should it check in with me
about how it's going to solve it?
Like there's usually trade-offs,
like what's the cost?
What's the quality?
Where's it manufactured?
What are the ingredients?
So maybe I want to explain something of that
or I actually have a trusted brand.
Like, oh, Teddy Bear Store
is the place that I like to buy my teddy bears
because I know that they're eFast free or whatever,
you know, whatever the criteria would be.
So in a sense, it's like the concept of a brand
is the durable, sustainable thing
that exists in the world.
it's how we think of things like oh i have nike shoes a tesla car it's like i don't have to do
the research again i just understand that it has the properties that i've already done the why do
you think though if the models are super good at like parsing this stuff why do you think that
being able to say hey i need you to go to tesla and tesla oh that's domain name versus just saying
i need you to go get a tesla and like tesla dominates so that they find tesla well i think
it's less about
I need you to go here.
It's I want this thing
and I want the version
of this thing
that I know of
by this name.
It's exactly
what a brand is.
Right.
A brand is a way to do.
But you don't think
the models will be smart
enough to discern that
just from like
the underlying text itself?
I guess it depends
on how much
of the intelligence
you're relying on
versus how much
you're using
to demand a resource
that you want.
Like I know
when I order this way,
I know when I order
from Unhuman Coffee,
I get coffee that I like.
If I just tell my agent
to order coffee,
I get random coffee.
I might get the cheapest coffee.
Right, right.
I get your point.
How do you think about...
Humans like have brands and names and ideas in their mind
and then they can like demand them.
How do you think about that?
So let's say Nick wanted to buy Unhuman Coffee
as a name on Bitcoin.
How do you think about how the end user
that wants something done would,
okay, like signal I want...
Like if I just say Unhuman Coffee,
whether or not, like,
how do I signal I want this tied
to this specific name owned on Bitcoin?
how do you signal you're saying how yeah like if i if i'm just talking to my agent i say hey
give me coffee from unhuman coffee even if nick doesn't own the domain unhuman coffee i mean it's
still going to look for unhuman coffee if i wanted to say no go to this specific string but i need a
human speakable human readable oh i think it's just like on today he owns unhuman.coffee right
that's like a well-known universal canonical name the only place yeah so i think it's that it's that
same thing. It's the only place to find it. But in that world, I'm like typing it or you're saying
I would just speak like go to Unhuman Coffee and it would search and say, is Unhuman Coffee a name
owned in this domain space? Yeah. And in a sense, I would just say, I want an Unhuman Coffee and
it'll be like, hey, we found this. Is this the thing you want me to buy? And I'd confirm, be like,
yeah, of course, that's the one that maps to the thing I said I want. Interesting. But I don't just
want coffee in general. Maybe like owning the name coffee could be valuable to Unhuman Coffee because
they could then also get a lot of organic.
And your point is if there's a lot of people that just jack the name
Unhuman Coffee, they're trying to be knockoffs.
It's going to be hard for the agent to distinguish which is the one you want.
I just think people
have the name Unhuman as a brand
in their mind, and then they can express their demand for that
brand through some, it's just a naming
mechanism, maps.
DNS already solves this, but your solution
solves some of the problems with DNS. Is that accurate?
Yeah, I think DNS has a lot of gatekeepers.
There's a whole stack of registrars and ICANN and Cloudflare.
There's about five or six people, entities that you're depending on.
And so I think that if we're going to be paying for things and running agents
and everything's going to be autonomous,
we should limit the need for those dependencies.
And we should just say a name and a cryptographic key,
and they pair them, and then you can accomplish that.
It doesn't matter if it's a person or a...
That makes sense.
This conversation also makes me wonder if we say human-readable names,
but should we also be thinking about human-speakable names?
I can't offhand think about how that actually changes things,
but because we're speaking so much more now,
or some of us are,
that maybe that changes that equation.
But just to make sure I understand this,
again, if I speak on human coffee today,
is the idea that the models will start to train
and this becomes sort of a standard?
and it's like we're going to give more weight
if the name you speak is tied into this global namespace
versus we're just going to scrape the whole web
and we'll determine based on who has products out there
which is the real unhuman coffee.
I think there could be some sort of a graph
of all of the coffees and which one is the real human.
I mean, that's effectively kind of one of the features
of what a search engine provides today, right?
You can kind of just say, I want unhuman coffee.
and it's like, oh, you want the getunhuman.coffee
or is it useunhuman or buyunhuman.coffee?
I guess that's what I'm asking.
Search engines do a lot of that resolution today, right?
To me, the equivalent of speaking to the agent
is kind of like using the search engine.
What's the equivalent of typing in unhuman.coffee
if I want to specifically flag?
I don't think there's a close equivalent.
I think it is.
I mean, with agents, a lot of things are turning into search.
you're like expressing an idea, but not something so specific.
If you type in a domain, you know what domain you're looking for.
Exactly.
If you go to a search engine, you just express an idea that you want.
And then hopefully you're trusting that the search engine and the algorithms and people
building that are giving you the thing that you're actually looking for.
And they generally are because they want you to keep coming back.
So you need to build trust.
But I guess what I'm getting at is like, if this domain space, like it almost needs to
become a standard for, I mean, or maybe it can emerge naturally.
because I guess what I'm kind of getting at is like the large language models already kind of have
a bias for this is the real inhuman coffee versus these are all scams at what point like how do you
see that transition to oh we're going to check the like the global bitcoin ledger to see like first
and foremost this is the one we're going to give extra weight to yeah I mean it depends a lot on
I guess how the information retrieval ecosystem evolves like are you speaking I mean news of the
week, I think Apple just said that they're going to open Siri and there might be some
sort of an app store like thing to serve Siri. So who's running it?
Is it OpenAI? Is it Gemini? Is it some Apple local
open source model, which seems like a credible thing with Google's recent breakthrough
on the non-quantized models that are now
compressible to three bits or something. So I think
it's hard to predict what that future
information retrieval process is going to look like,
I think it's just going to undergo a massive amount
of change right now. I think it's not hard
to predict that humans will
want things and that we'll
express those things through language.
And so can we map language to
cryptographic keys? That's
the long and short of it. And then the details of exactly
how the routing works.
And do that with as few
middlemen as possible.
Ideally not.
It's more of a commons at that point.
Yes.
Very cool.
I love it.
I think we can get there now.
I think we actually can do it.
This is awesome.
We have all the pieces for it.
Spiral Project.
Let's go.
I just want,
I want a few of my
Send me your resume.
Savvy friends.
Get that JD ready, Steve.
Let's go.
I just want a few of my savvy friends.
Proper cover letter.
Yeah, exactly.
That's it.
No, I want you to pick it apart
and tell me what you don't like about it.
Right?
Tell me where there are gaps or problems.
That would be helpful.
We're all ready to start speculating.
Awesome.
Well, great show, guys.
Oh, it's done.
Great.
Damn.
All right.
We hit it.
We have more to cover.
More to cover next week.
Always.
We'll be back.
Too much time spent on I with it.