All the Value Is Onchain - Panel

What's up everyone? So, my name is Gabe. I am the substitute moderator here for uh someone more qualified than me who couldn't make it. Uh full disclosure, I am one of the co-creators of Pinto, but of course, we'll do my best to just try to put you guys on your stumps and get the conversation going as much as possible. So,

thanks for stepping up.

So, I think uh Sorry, what did you say?

Thanks for stepping up.

Oh, of course. Yeah, my pleasure.

Not the first time either, by the way. So, he's a professional substitute moderator at this point.

Um, so why don't you guys just say uh your name and the name of your project first and then I'll open it up for you guys to speak for a little longer.

Sure. Hey. Hi everyone. I'm ser I'm core contributor to Alladin Dao which is the DAO behind several protocols including FovX Protocol and we beat trustless and decentralized stable coin. Yeah,

Bert from Reflexer. We made like a floating peg stable coin a while back and now we're building a $1 immutable coin on Ethereum. Ben uh from Pinto, it's a credit based trustless stable coin on base tied to the dollar. So, I think the way I want to start this is to give you guys each a little bit of time to take a couple minutes and talk about the context of how you've seen the development of decentralized stable coins over time and then placing your project within how you see that history having played out. What's your guys' role in moving the space forward given what you've seen and what you've learned so far?

Should I stop? Yeah, please. So yeah, uh FX was created in reaction of the USDC DPEG in March 23. Uh Aladdin at some at this point already had two protocols running and the Treasury was mostly exposed to USDC because uh at that point and it's still the case USDC is the most liquid stable coin on Ethereum and the alternatives that's at this point weren't reliable. I mean the peg would fluctuate a lot and so USDC was the way the easiest way to go and today's unfortunately still the case.

So Aladdin tried to find another compromise because always about compromises and created FX protocol. V1 was was launched in August 23 and V2 in January 25. And I believe that now we find a pretty good approach to the stable control. um that maybe I'll have the the chance to to explain later, but the idea is to have a stable that a stable coin that is trustless uh has a very strong peg and capital efficient enough at least uh for users to to use it.

I feel free to speak a little more about the model. I think it would be good color.

Yeah, sure. So this the easiest way to explain how FX works is uh to to look at at the CDP design because at the end of the day it's a CDP an evolve CDP that has better capital efficiency and very strong peg keeping by design. So the way it works there's basically two kind of users. The first one is the users who want to get leverage. They can get uh up to 7x leverage of BTC and E uh with minimal funding cost or borrowing cost and minimal liquidation risk.

Um instead of paying recurring borrowing costs, they just pay onetime opening and closing fee and instead uh and regarding the liquidation we have a very progressive liquidation mechanism that prevents any hard liquidation basically. So it it lets us uh deliver up to 88% LTV which is pretty capital efficient being 100% onchain. Um and for the users in a way it's some kind of a zero stress leverage. They can have a set and forget it leverage position. They can also just borrow FXUSD for a onetime fee while being protected from liquidation.

And on the stable side, we have a very strong peke keeping mechanism which is um called the stability pool. People can stake both FXUSD and USDC. And when they do so, they uh help peeping FXUSD to make sure it's always very close to one. And to be incentivized to do so, they earn most of the protocol revenue. Since we launched early 25, these guys earn $7 million of organic fees generated by the protocol.

There's no point There's no token inflation. This is just organic and aligning uh people's uh interest. So on one hand you have the more I would say uh uh agents or people who want to who are okay with volat volatility and risk they can take leverage on the other side there's more uh risk averse people that just want stable yield and we just align them basically.

Thank you for the color. C

can I ask a couple questions about that?

Yeah sure. So one the stable coin F ofXUSD is collateralized by which assets? It's the per positions and so underlying or it's the offsetting per positions. How does that work?

FXUSD is collateralized by rept ETH and rap Bitcoin only. It's a CDP so it's over collateralized. The main difference with other CDPs we've seen so far is the liquidation mechanism. While on uh for instance uh let's say a or on a whenever when you uh borrow USDC against E for instance whenever your position crosses 80% LTV 50% of your debt could potentially be repaid at the market with a 10% penalty. On FX whenever your position crosses 88% LTV the protocol just puts it back at 88% so that it never reaches 95% hard liquidation LTV.

And we managed to do this um if like in um profitable way for the liquidators by aggregating the whole liquidity as one giant CDP while as a user you just have a receipt for your position on that giant CDP. So liquidators can liquidate as little as a couple of dollars on your position because they would they will have liquidated dollars on other people's positions as well at the same time. But so the the stable coin is collateralized by just the wrap state and the BTC.

Uh how do the pers derive their value then on top of that

or it's independent?

When we say perp it's actually we we deliver a perp ux but in back end is a CD CDP looping using a flash loan. So it's it's it's the same like the C the CDP and the collateralization it's it's the per it's the same thing

and it's long only exposure

long short yeah can get both

wonderful

or just CDP so you don't get like you don't don't get directional exposure you just keep your ETH or BTC exposure and borrow stable to do whatever you want

I guess the thing I'm trying to get at is with respect to the short exposure is there some sort of offsetting element where you get more capital efficiency or scalability from that like how if I wanted to go short what would that transaction look like?

The transaction looks like when you want to go short it's basically your collateral you're borrowing if against your FXUSD. So basically the the the collateral backing FX when you do when you open the short the collateral backing FXUSD is sold to create the short position basically

just like on a but it's simpler because there's only two collaterals so there's also less um less risk in a way.

Thank you very much.

Thanks for your questions. It's very interesting.

Yeah. So Ry dollar is heavily inspired by reflexers rye and liquidities lusd and bold if you all are familiar with those. Uh rye was a floating peg stable coin. You guys might have heard of it. Uh that was recently shut down by the DAO.

uh the the inspiration for rye was USC independence had a floating peg and also low governance wasn't quite immutable but you know very minimal that governance can change and so I was inspired based on what we learned off of rye the rise floating peg and also the immutability immutability of liquidity to sort of take principles from both of those and then add some new things. So, uh, Ry dollar will be a $1 stable coin. I have I have to say that because I have if I had a reflexer t-shirt on yesterday, I'm telling people I'm building a stable coin. Like, well, is it going to be floating? No, it's dollar coin.

Uh, and we'll be immutable. And immutability sort of implies uh, you know, you don't get the privilege of sensorability. They sort of come hand in hand. And, uh, the vast majority of stable coins on Ethereum are you know, regulated now. [clears throat] So, I think that's attractive.

I think the market is sort of underserved for people who who want an immutable coin. Uh so some innovations that we're going to have uh if you're familiar with liquidity, we will have automated rates um unredeemable troves. You can opt into hey your trove uh will not be redeemed against. Uh the the coin uh like in liquidity can be redeemed for collateral. Uh that's a good but the downside is if you're a trove owner you you know you lose exposure to your collateral.

So we'll have an internal sort of rate market that allows people to you know pay more a dynamic rate to avoid redemption. Uh what else? We'll have more collaterals and we have a mechanism to deal with uh under collateralized debt. So uh yeah that's it. We're plugging away at it and uh super excited about it.

Potentially you buried the lead. What's the undercolateralized?

I'm sorry.

What's the undercolateralized element

to deal with that?

Yeah. When you say you're saying if the CDP becomes underolateralized,

if one of the collaterals becomes the debt that's produced by the collateral is greater than the value in the system.

So, we'll basically divert fees um revenue and redemption fees, but also we have the floating uh par. We're incorporating that for stability. It's not going to it's not going to float much. just floating to bring the market back to a dollar. But in cases of like the peg the floor dropping for from under collateralization, it can correct that.

Makes a lot of sense. So go ahead, Ben. Good morning, everyone. Uh Pinto is not a collateralized stable coin. Uh so the history is Pinto is the first fork of beanto uh for those of you that were around uh in DeFi summer and that is downstream of uh empty set dollar dynamic set dollar if you go further back basis uh so there's a long history of uh creditbased stable coins uh in this case Pinto does not hold a tight peg so uh it's comfortable with some volatility and the trade-off space that Pinto operates in is in order to uh as was saying the stable coin trillemma uh ultimately the trade-off is uh scalability for stability that Pinto makes and so the thesis is if you're going to use onchain collateral in particular there is a fundamental lack of scalability up to the scale of trillions of dollars so Scott Bessen the Treasury secretary is talking about he wants to see trillions of stable coins and in his case he wants and backed by treasuries.

But ultimately the demand for stable coins is going to go to trillions. And uh we at Pinto hold the belief that if you want to have trillions of decentralized stable coins, onchain stable coins, uh ultimately there's not enough collateral to meet trillions of dollars of demand. And even if you said, okay, the Bitcoin and Ethereum market caps are going to grow to trillions of dollars, the opportunity cost realized for locking up trillions of dollars of collateral is too high such that the carrying cost, the borrowing cost for holding those positions would make it such that in practice the stable coins aren't usable. So Pinto takes a riskier approach uh designed to create scalability where it makes a trade-off it accepts some volatility and instead of uh having backing due to collateral it uses credit. So anytime the price of Pinto is too low the protocol uses its own creditworthiness to try to create stability.

It tries to borrow excess supply from the market. So the there's lots of layers of incentives designed to minimize volatility, but the fundamental assumption that holders of Pinto are making is that the protocol is sufficiently creditworthy such that over time the protocol will be able to borrow enough excess supply from the market to return the price to its value target of $1. So that's uh the short version of it. Your your first question was also about the evolution and how we've seen stable coins evolve over time and fortunately I have to say that trustless stable coins are we are building right now is only.1% of all stable coins.

So we're building DeFi on one of the most decentralized infrastructure that actually allows trustlessness but what everybody does is just being trusted product on top of this trustless um infrastructure and that's a shame and I believe we what we're building is important to be also supported by uh every other builders and it's very important to put this forward uh now before it's too late and before before people don't have the choice anymore to use decentralized products.

Thank you for saying that and I I think we should go deeper into that. You know, uh I think it's just worth noting the privileged position we are to be able to speak on a decentralized stable coin panel. So, shout out stable summit. Uh this year has been huge for centralized stable coins. Um, needless to say, so I I think one question I want to ask is what uh you made the point Bird about uh immutability being an underserved part of the market in this case.

So I guess the question what to you guys is the value proposition for decentralized stable coins to offer at this point in the market. You know, obviously for builders like ourselves, decentralization is a value, right? Um, but how do you think that plays out in the market at this point?

You know, I heard a few years ago, you know, CDPs won't scale, and that's true. Definitely true. There's a limit. But I don't think the market is homogeneous. Uh, a lot of people don't care and they'll use the centralized stuff.

That's fine. But I do think there is a a core group of people that, you know, don't want their coin to be able to be controlled or limited. the so beantock famously was hacked due to a governance issue. So the immutability thing is something we've spent a lot of time studying. Uh at this point uh we are uh in the late stages of designing a new governance mechanism for onchain governance while preserving immutability through forking.

uh sort of taking the like network native uh hard forking model and applying it to smart contracts uh which is something in 2026 we'll be putting out more content towards but when we talk so I'm a big fan of the immutability element of what you're doing now uh when it comes to what is the differentiator and why people might want a decentralized stable coin uh or a trustless stable coin uh at some level we are in a generally a riskoff environment within stable coins. Uh I think there's a lot of uh trauma from what happened with Teral Luna. Obviously, a tremendous amount of value is lost and arguably that was what set off uh the last bare market. And so, uh particularly when you're asking people to come further out on the risk spectrum, I think this is something we've experienced since we launched Pinto just about a year ago. there's a real, you know, like really you guys are still doing this stuff and ultimately it may be that until the the centralized stable coins start to censor in a more active way do people not care.

Right? So you look at what's happening with the US dollar. It was only as a result of the Russia Ukraine war and Biden the Biden administration censorship of Russian assets that really at a global scale did people start to consider uh in a more serious way alternatives to the US dollar even though it was a very similar dynamic. And so uh we we may have to wait for you know for that gun to be pulled for that trigger to be pulled. uh at the same time I think where we can potentially compete is on yield.

Uh so when it comes to mechanism design I think what F ofX is doing is quite uh brilliant and obviously you guys have started to generate very competitive rates uh I think I saw as much as 14% uh which is wonderful right uh so there's a an interesting thing where you're really competing uh the the trade-off space that I view these stable coins to be competing in is when you don't consider immutability and you don't consider centralization for the majority of the market that clearly doesn't air, at least at this point in time, the trade-off space that you're operating in is volatility and yield. And so Pinto is at the far end of the spectrum where it's willing to accept a significant amount of volatility even though it's designed to be as low volatility as possible without collateral in exchange for higher yield. And so in this case, we have uh other mechanisms on stage as well that are designed to create some competitive yield. And the question is, what is that trade-off space? uh uh in Bert's case there's uh some volatility that's accepted uh in Pinto's case there's uh infinite volatility that's accepted although it's attempted to be minimized uh and then f ofx is generally stable but there's also competitive yield so it's a you can see there's a spectrum here if you think about volatility as a proxy for risk uh in terms of risk versus reward where yield is the reward so ultimately I think the way that our niche less than 1% right now is going to compete is through competitive yield through interesting mechanism design and that's a really cool space to be in but it's still uh a bit of a desert you know it's not there's not too many of us out there so it's it's honestly an honor to be on stage with you guys also trying to figure this out

definitely and I think there's there's lack of uh education as you said there's a massive PTSD after Luna what Luna's happened one of the first question people ask when I I say we're building a decentralized stable coin is is it an algorithmic stable coin And I guess you must be struggling with that question because we're not doing an algorithmic mix stable coin. But people like got so shocked as so now the value per perception of risk is higher for decentralized stable coins than for centralized ones while they do not rely on trust. So people would rather trust any blackbox entity in the in whatever blackbox country than something they can verify and audit all the time on chain. And that's a total nonsense. And I'm very confident for our future because I'm absolutely certain that every centralized cable coin would disappoint at some point.

And it's it's already happened many times and will probably happen again especially when token car trade sells himself as stable coin. It's probably going to disappoint at some point. And so I'm very confident in the others failures to put us in front of the scene at at [clears throat] some point. And um what I believe also is that at the age of AI AI agent being uh about to take financial decisions for people and to generate yield and so on. These AI agents will have to best find the best riskreward strategies.

And I really believe that AI agents would most likely not take the human execution risk uh when they can just verify everything in um in yeah on with onchain data basically. So if we achieve to deliver at least similar yield than trusted solutions then it's going to be a no-brainer for all these AI agents and we actually deliver better yields with lower risks. So, in my opinion, it's just a no-brainer for AI agents. So, I'm very confident in the future, even if so far it's pretty hard after what happened with Luna and so on, it's pretty hard to convince with the decentralization. And as you said, most people just don't care about decentralization yet.

But at some point, I'm pretty sure like there's a shift is going to happen, especially if we get support from like big instit in institutions such as the EF or like people like that.

What a powerful thesis, right? The the AI is actually going to lift up us. Uh that's wonderful,

I think. So, yeah,

you know, it's funny you mentioned uh the ALGO stable and people being scared. Uh ultimately all of these systems run on an algo but typically when you think about algo stables you think about uh uncolateralized stable coins. Uh this was one of those things. So when we forked Beantock to create Pinto uh if you look at the Beantock white paper it's a creditbased stable coin. Uh if you look at the Pinto white paper it's a low volatility money.

Uh so we tried we tried quite hard to get away from the algo stable uh language because people are so traumatized. Ultimately uh we've come back to it because it does feel like the crux of the issue.

This is the only algo stable design that worked so far the one you're building on.

Thank you very much. Well works is all relative but we're definitely uh at the forefront and feel like it is working generally. So there is certainly some volatility. You look at the price today, it's about 38 cents or so. And you may say, well, that doesn't work at all.

But if you look at what was Bitcoin's volatility its first year, what was Ethereum's volatility its first year? Uh, Pinto is incredibly competitive. So in the context of new currency, uh, we feel like yeah, it is working. So I appreciate that you're saying that.

Can you go over like the archotypes in the system? like CDP you have uh you know the actors of the borrower and the holder but I guess that's different with Pinto.

Yeah. So the there's two sides to the market uh in Pinto or in these uh the type of credit based stable coin that we're building. You have depositors and you have lenders. So the depositors deposit either raw Pinto just the Pinto they deposit it in the protocol or they can deposit LP tokens. Uh and the depositors uh acrue some uh something called stock.

Uh so one of the interesting things about systems like this is when you have some sort of endogenous value uh these systems are highly reflexive which means when the going is good everyone piles in. Everyone wants to participate in the high yield, but when the going is bad, everyone flees. And so, one of the original innovations of beantock was something called the stock system, which is a protocol native bankr run minimization scheme. So, uh, the way it works is you acrew more stock over time the longer that you're deposited in the system. And uh what this does is when you leave in order to withdraw, you can withdraw at any time, you have to burn all of the stock that you've acred over time.

And so the idea is this prevents or minimizes bank runs by creating an opportunity cost for leaving and coming back in the form of all of the stock. Now the thing about stock is uh you earn yield when the protocol grows. When the price is too high, the protocol mints new currency to bring the price back down. half of all supply increases or just under half uh go to paying stockholders pratta. So half of the system is made up of these depositors that deposit pinto or LP tokens uh into the system in order to earn yield.

The other half are these creditors that I mentioned. Uh so anytime the price is too low, the protocol tries to borrow Pinto from the market. It burns any Pinto that it borrows. uh and the creditors lend to the protocol the Pinto and they receive back pods which are the Pinto native debt asset. So the two halves of the whole are the lenders that reduce supply and the depositors that deposit either Pinto or LP.

Now just one other thing to mention. So one of the innovations of uh originally Beantock that has been refined by Pinto is something we call the convert system. So within the deposit facility people are holding Pinto and LP. uh there is now a way to convert your LP to Pinto or your Pinto to LP while preserving or now even getting a bonus of stock for doing it at the right time. And the idea is if you remove Pinto from the liquidity pool, you actually increase the price due to the way that the price in the liquidity pool comes from the ratio of Pinto to non-Pinto value in the pool.

So if you convert your LP to Pinto, it naturally brings the price up. So anytime the price is below the value target in addition to trying to borrow from the market to reduce supply the protocol tries to incentivize conversions from LP to Pinto and vice versa when the price is too high the protocol tries to incentivize conversions of Pinto to LP uh to bring the price back down and minimize the amount of mints uh if you will. So that's a very quick version of it but that's the elements of the system.

Thank you. So I I think things have been pretty chummy up here on the decentralized stable coin front. So I we don't have too much time, but one question I have is do you guys see there being a category winner here at the exclusion of others? We have three different models with different value props. How do you guys see this space shaking out in the short, medium to long term?

I wish you all success guys because I think it's important for us to stand together behind our trustlessness values rather than betting on another's failure. So I wish you guys uh success.

Likewise I was going to say the same thing. Um even just with our you know our 1% we have very different approaches. So I think we need to keep exploring and uh pushing the boundaries. Yeah. And very different sources of utility.

Uh ultimately I think when it comes to creating a currency I think you c you have to move away from the collateralized model but you look at something like F ofX protocol it offers a very interesting way to get exposure. You pay a fixed fee when you open and close the positions but then you can hold the position. There is just simply utility in something like that. So independent of the the future of trillions of dollars of stable coins you look at something like that there's definitely utility. Uh I'm very interested in learning more about Bert's model.

Uh I think until I do the deep dive, it's hard for me to comment about where it's all going to shake out. But uh obviously the the Ry model with the volatile uh peg is something that I've spent a lot of time thinking about uh in the short term. Uh you know it seems like the market really wants dollars on chain uh which is why Pinto uh targets the value of a dollar. But uh we are at the forefront uh collectively of this very experimental part of our space. And uh for me the more that people are pushing the incentive design and creating new pockets of utility and as you said like trying to have the conversations to get institutions to change how they allocate capital slightly.

This is all part of the process. So in my mind it doesn't have to be stock. It doesn't have to be Pinto as long as we're able to ultimately collectively create an onchain uh trustless uh source of currency that can be filling the medium of exchange and unit of account use case for money. That's really what matters. So I do think with currency there is generally a winner take most thing.

Like if you look at modern currencies the dollar has definitely won most and then you have a lot of other fiat currencies that are much less important. So I think in the long arc of this thing we will find there to be a winner but it remains to be seen if one of the protocols that exists today will be the winner. It may be a future iteration on one of these models. Uh I have the thesis that it will be a credit based model. And so that's uh this is the type of thing that will play itself out over time.

But the the important thing is that we continue to experiment. And you know, not to not to get on my high horse or too high on my horse, if you will, but yesterday we were at the uh Gabe and I were both at the Trustless Conference and the Ethereum Foundation just put out uh this trustless manifesto talking quite uh in quite absolute terms that the only thing that matters is trustlessness and you're only as trustless as your weakest link. And this is something that for me resonates, right? I've spent the past 5 years of my life trying to create a trustless currency because I feel very strongly that the dependence on these centralized stable coins is a a total uh destroyer of the Ethereum value proposition. And there was a a panel uh from the people that uh produced the manifesto uh and we were able to ask a question about you know how do you feel like centralized stable coins compromises the trustless of trustlessness of Ethereum and Vitalik's on the panel and he doesn't say anything and it hurts my soul you know uh ultimately we need a culture of experimentation and to me it's totally appropriate to say hey Right now, none of them have worked.

We think the people working on them are a little crazy because it's a crazy idea. But this is the type of experimentation we need and to get silence from Vitalic, it's one of those like, you know, you can build the most trustless computer network, but at the end of the day, if the currency isn't trustless, what are we doing here? You know, so it's uh we're a little bit lonely here, gentlemen. Yeah, it's but it's like it must in many fields people think it's black or white. Yeah, we don't we don't need to replace all the centralized stable coins.

It's fine to have centralized stable coins and real world assets on Ethereum. And Ethereum is probably the best place to build real world assets, but it's not fine if the centralized alternative don't exist anymore. I'm very happy that the EF published this trustless manifest. So, we actually wrote the DeFi oath and I was about to talk about it this week and but they published the pretty much the same thing with the trustless manifesto. I'm really glad that they finally also put this forward at the same time as they're trying to on board reward assets.

So, I guess Vitalic couldn't say much about centralized stable coins because they're trying also to to get more and more institutions and trusted products on Ethereum. But as long as they also promote alternatives and also put uh their uh words where the mouth is. I don't know if it's the exact uh way to say it, but uh it's it's already like a good beginning and in my opinion. Yeah, I've been getting a lot of push back on the immunability from Ryoler and uh so I was very relieved to see in the trustlessness manifesto the line like you know it's very hard to do trustlessness but we must strive towards it. So that's that was really motivating to see that in there and I've been thinking about this stuff for 5 years too and just uh that's part of my my DNA you know pushing forward and making uh you know free stable coins free currency.

Yeah, maybe uh this this is probably too technical for the group, but we should talk about how to do the immutability and upgradeability stuff. Uh yeah, it's a I agree with you, Sel, but at the same time, I think we could use a little push from the front, you know.

I agree. I agree. We could definitely use it. And I I believe even the guys building the trusted solutions, most of them are cryptonatives in the like or at least in the project there are crypton natives that also um share our values. They just made different choices in the the product they build for probably many different reasons.

But these guys could also stand with us and and value the fact that we that decentralized solutions also need to uh to to to to be offered to to to the users. So we could get support from not only the EF but also the guys building the the the the other products.

Yeah, you're much more diplomatic than I am. uh uh in my mind we need the support and ultimately I look at the people that are doing the opposite and focus on the centralized stable coins as unlikely to support because their financial incentives are no longer aligned with our values. So people may hold the values, but your actions are the thing that matters. And at this point, we're not really getting any of that. And I feel like you look at what happened with D, now Sky, that's the epitome of it, right?

They started Ethereum collateralized and hey, we want to scale. This is how we're going to do it. And now they're valueless. So, and they're huge now. So, it's one of those,

speaking of education, this is also a topic most people when we talk about decentralized stable coin still believe that D is the the decentralized stable coin.

Yeah. And there's a

we need to do a better job as a group branding this stuff and getting educating people because I think yeah you're right that's such a dated talking about 5 years now right like it's such a dated perspective but ultimately people really since Terra Luna no one is talking about this stuff so people just don't they don't know

well I'll just chime in and say that I'm quite inspired by all three of you so thank you guys for building in this space you know I think particularly in an industry which is feels like the wild west and frankly there's a lot of crap um not being driven by utility or value you know the the values that are behind the the cipher punk movement to me this is important work so uh grateful to be part of this uh project um and [clears throat] I think that it would be meaningful at least from my perspective for leaders in the Ethereum community to you know if they're if they're serious about building trust less systems even when it's hard. Okay, we can focus on centralized uh stable coins to the extent that we need dollars now. Um but this is the hard work. So appreciate you guys on the frontier trying to make it happen. And uh you know I know Ben, you've been pretty open.

We may break some eggs. Um but are we [clears throat] doing it in good faith? Are we being transparent? Are we honoring the values of the space? And are we going towards where we're supposed to be going towards?

I think that's the important question to keep in mind. So, we have uh about 4 minutes left. Want to just uh give you guys each a chance closing remarks. We're talking about education. We're talking about leading the conversation to try to get people to take our work seriously, you know, in a a space that has been uh marked by a couple failures which have scared people.

Um how can we give people courage that this is the right work? How can we give people tools to understand what they should do as they're trying to make sense of all this stuff and what's a valuable thing to keep in mind? What do you want people to take away from this conversation? Yeah, I can I can I'll try to not go too deep [laughter] because that's a that's a wide question, but I think like uh blockchain allowed us to own our assets and to get more freedom. But and I often say this, but most people don't want to hear it, but freedom comes with responsibility.

So when we use and and when you take um custody of your assets, it comes with a responsibility and the responsibility to understand what's going on and what the risks are you're taking. And when you're using centralized assets again, then you're trusting someone and you're losing freedom and giving the responsibility of your assets to you don't even know who. And I think it's important if you want freedom because most people want freedom but don't want the responsibility that comes with it. It's also important to embrace that responsibility and to accept it. Uh so yeah, I I don't know if I'm exactly answering your question, but I think it's important for people to be happy to take that responsibility because this is what brings freedom.

Yeah.

Yeah. I I'm interp.

No, I'm interpreting your answer to be that you know currency is an essential part of this story. owning the currency, [clears throat] having a trustless currency.

Yeah. And own like Yeah. It's trustless. So, you basically really own it. And it's and it it's your freedom to own your your money that no one can uh seize or freeze or or control or um and so it also comes with the responsibility.

So, it's it's important as a responsible person to learn about it, learn about how it works and what value it brings. And if you want to experience it, I said we just made the onetime opening fee zero for the next seven days. So if you want to try to mint FX

free money, free money,

it's probably the the best moment to do so.

Thank you, sir. So they're going to cut off our mic in two minutes. So if I could just have one minute from each of you guys.

Sure. I'm just still hanging on to what I thought crypto should be when I entered it, you know, several years ago.

That's my stake in the ground. Uh immutable money that no one can control. That's what I thought it should be, but we sort of got to the point. It's like it's like that minions meme like we have US dollars on chain. Oh, we have US dollars on chain.

So, [laughter] Ry dollar is going to be an immutable stable coin.

Thank you, Bert. Beautiful. Uh, the arc of history is long, my friends. And I think when it's all said and done, uh particularly for folks like us for that are here for a long time and don't plan on going anywhere, uh I'm optimistic that ultimately we're going to figure it out. It is a little bit like alchemy.

Uh you know, trying to create a new currency. And as we know, historically people have said alchemists are crazy and it's impossible. But actually now at the state-of-the-art, people are actually performing alchemy. Uh and so to me it's quite a an inspiring thing if you have a scientific approach an experimental approach and as you go deeper into your understanding of how the world actually works in this case it's a behavioral system you can actually perform alchemy. So uh here's to trying to create new currency.

Cheers guys. Thank you very much. Cheers. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you everybody for listening.