Les Amis d'Ethereum France #4 — PART2: Romain Figuereo, Paladin

[Music] So, thank you Exalte for organizing this evening. We're going to talk a little bit about economics, a little bit about history, and a lot about Paladin. I hope you'll find it interesting. The idea is to present how Paladin, which is the market for influencers today, will become the gateway to what we'll call the participatory economy. So, how do we not push the next 1 million or 1 billion people into decentralized finance, but how do we push the next 1 million or 1 billion people to build this ecosystem and make a living from it?

I think this is extremely important because, as we'll see, the damage to the wings isn't supposed to last 2, 3, 5, or 10 years like a company. It dies otherwise by creating something useless. We're supposed to create commons, finance things that are sustainable, and if we want to do that, we'll have to create systems so that contributors can renew themselves. So, okay, so we 'll just start a little Let's briefly explain how governance works. The idea is simply to give you some background so you understand a little bit about what we based our thinking on.

So, quite simply, governance is a system of cooperation, a system of coordination. It allows us, as a human species, to balance survival and free will, to concretely decide what we're going to do. This is expressed through decision-making. In our modern societies, this is expressed through law, through enormous amounts of pure power (if you 're rich, if you're attractive), and through language. We'll quickly see how we express governance.

We'll focus on financial governance because finance is essentially decentralized, and that's what we chose to specialize in. At the time, financial governance was established in the 17th century, quickly at the level of Dutch companies to finance exploration because states weren't capable of doing it. You need to know... At that time, nations financed almost the entire economy, and this continued throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. Therefore, we saw virtually no innovation during the Dutch era and the English language regarding corporate governance.

The traditional forms of business were reinvented in the late 17th and 18th centuries, during the conquest of the American West, because nations lacked control. They weren't regulating or controlling what was happening in this new American West. So, companies making profits there had to comply with the law and therefore had to structure themselves. And if we look at the companies that started out as international corporations, up until now, after World War II, there has been virtually no innovation in terms of financial organization. These companies, over the past 200 years, have n't evolved.

What's interesting is why we created companies in the first place. Actually, it wasn't about rice in the economy, Ronald Coase called it. We did this because it allows for a smoother flow of information. Because when you work with someone, it means you have a lease with them. You know you have a shareholders' agreement.

You can trust them, the price of the press release, all your research results, to communicate all your plans to them. You can share financial plans simply because you work together, which is a guarantee that, in this case, is protected by law. But it's interesting because, in fact, if we think about crypto, that's what it's for. I took the liberty of putting this definition in because it explains how we did it. Surely, the basis of crypto, beyond the Shane blog in particular, is to allow for coordination on trust, which we call trust-linked.

Why? Well, that's a very important concept. It's not because we created something miraculous; it's because we replace this trust with algorithmic control. You do n't have a choice because, in fact, the algorithm... The decision is made and executed automatically.

So, for example, a traditional bank might choose to grant you a loan, but if you're unable to repay it, you'll face arbitration. They'll try to find repayment methods, and you could find yourself in liquidation. Have you ever tried this? Faced with debt and a loan, suddenly you fall below the liquidation threshold. We no longer have any money.

This is important; it's about automatic execution. So why is this important? This process of switching between them means we have one of the most chained contracts, one that, in theory, we no longer necessarily need from the company. The IT contract, the smart contract, can replace the concept of a company. Therefore, the importance of decentralized governance is that it allows us to structure all this coherence and, above all, it allows us to change the parameters.

There are two schools of thought in terms of crypto governance: the minimal governance approach and the decentralized governance approach. There's a whole segment of people, particularly very large investors like Adam, who are convinced that governance makes no sense and that everything should be put directly into the parameters. The problem with this theory—and I'm really the opposite of it—is that it's absolutely incapable of accounting for human variation and weakness. Secondly, it's not capable of taking context into account. So what does it mean to say that if something happens that wasn't planned for in the barcode, your protocol becomes useless?

So that's probably what will happen with CleanEquity if they don't do something new. This is their toilet, a dish. So that will lead us to the DEA, right away. A lot of people use the term "art," or hear it everywhere. Everyone was trying to create one of the streets where everyone raises millions on DAOs, one of the wheels.

That means sunlights, autonomous organization. People tend to confuse autonomous with automatic. We talked about how shameful it is to operate automatically, but by the Smart contracts, but we must be careful. What does " autonomous" mean? It means it's self-governing.

It means there's no higher standard than the DEA (Department of Economic Analysis) standards. So, in theory, these contracts, or at least the internal rules of the DEA, allow it to be entirely autonomous without having a state, without simply operating within its community. This is extremely important because it means there are two things: the rules within ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) must allow this project, this organization, to exist in self-sufficiency. Today, most projects that do this aren't truly DDO (Department of Organizations). We don't necessarily need concrete SMART heroes to help, but vice versa.

Smart contracts cannot create a self-supporting contractual organization if we haven't created one of the wheels. It's simply impossible, just in terms of logic. What's important to understand in this story, this major turning point, is that if we are truly capable of coordination without trust, but in fact, we are capable of exponential coordination, that's... To say that you and I, if we had just received a phone notification, could be able to coordinate on something, a governance action for example. So that's what's important to understand: we're going to be able to do something a bit like the concept of a flash mob, but much faster and on extremely complex financial operations, for example.

So that's the importance of governance. Here are some figures to understand a little bit what it is today: more than 500,000 holders of two governance tokens on just one Silk Road, and then on A320. And if I'm not mistaken—except that you'll often be told there's less than 5% participation—it's a figure that's used a lot. That's the name of the tokens used. In reality, we have less than one percent of addresses currently participating in governance.

So if you look at it, there are 32 million, or about 3,000, who have participated at least once in governance. It's ridiculous when we tell you it's the beginning; it's just that, in fact, there are a huge number of people who They are not interested in what would be created by this participation in governance, and that's normal. We need to build a solution to take that into account. There are many governance systems, and more and more of them, so each one is a different set of rules. That is to say, it's complicated to integrate them all.

A huge amount of time is needed to understand how they work. They all complain about keeping up with current events. These are complex protocols. I invite you to follow, for example, En Gueule. Being able to understand everything they do in governance is essential, and they do a very good job of summarizing at the end of each week.

It requires real work and being able to be a source of proposals in a qualitative way. It's almost a full-time job to do it in the POs. Today, we haven't yet created the necessary frameworks to allow people to contribute, especially because they need to be paid. In fact, it's a full-time job. The last thing is that there are more than 10 billion in assets in Idaho.

And mind you, I'm not talking about their governance offspring. Billions of USD in assets, that's what's been entrusted to DDO. This is very important because these are entities that are mature, entities that sometimes generate tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue per year. Some of these entities are worth tens of billions, but they lack maturity in terms of governance. So, in two or three years, we've created systems that are extremely powerful, extremely large, but that don't have the capacity to coordinate as an entity of their size should.

These are extremely fragile systems. So, this means two things: regulations are coming, investment funds that know what they're doing are coming, and they have no problem taking over very quickly. And that's what we see when we say, "Yes, the toilets are taking over," right in the face of the Kryta myth. I'm not at all sure we haven't created structures to do this. So, what's the point of Aladdin?

We still tried to set the scene; we want you to believe... Democratizing activism means allowing more people to understand how all sectors work, and in particular, to simply participate and, further down the line, earn a living. We want to solidify the value of the governance token. When you look at any governance token, they're called worthless tokens. Unfortunately, that's wrong; we say that for regulatory reasons.

You have three options: two essential values. The first is what we call the price, even for speculation— how much the next person who wants to buy it will pay. This is the one that takes precedence. The second, which the team doesn't talk about enough, is the value. I'll work on a game where what we call the governance loan is what the pure voting rights of this game hold.

This is extremely important because it allows us to completely rethink all the models and curd, for example, with choirs. We can think of it that way, just with the governance token. And so, it means that we can be very comfortable with the token action, not because... We're in a speculative mindset, and we can think with power, with the value and influence of tokens. Our clients, by creating markets, don't exert the influence we've created.

We're not really crystallizing value, especially because there are many people who sell their assets after ten years at a sufficiently high price. They don't realize that people who buy afterward are buying because they see the influence the token can give them. So what does that mean? We have many small holders, and many protocols. We're very careful to send them tokens to distribute them properly, to have something to do.

We centralize them, sell them to funds, and then sell them to large investors who understand the value of the tokens and buy them at prices where they're comfortable because they visualize the governance model. And the last thing I mentioned, which is probably the most technical and ultimately the long- term goal for Paladin, is to allow the emergence of ephemeral coalitions. So what does that mean? It means that you, me, all of us together We can be able to say that we disagree on a subject and very quickly connect and take action. Governance is extremely important because today, on environmental and political issues, we can all be against what's happening in a company.

We might say, "But why Facebook and its powerful shareholders? How is it that Facebook is a publicly traded company? I wouldn't even tell you how much they have publicly traded shares." We can all very quickly become shareholders and participate and take a governance action. We don't necessarily have the financial tools or the legal tools, but the day we do, we will be fully capable of doing it.

So this is a necessary shift in mentality if we truly want to move beyond the stage of capitalism we're in today. So what do we do? Today we have two technical solutions, both based on the lending of voting rights. The first is what we call "paladin baladant lending." I'm sorry, but there's a second solution because it's a bit different technically, which can be confusing.

The fertilization of DAP with different names is very simple, in fact, you lend games, governance tokens, so you deposit them in our Unis protocol, which we had, it was Café for example. What we do is we just sell the voting rights mandate to people who are ready to buy it. If you don't go into governance like 95% of people, you can sell it and get more guild. If you, or on the contrary, want to do governance actions and you can't reach the quorum because you do n't have the necessary attention, we realize that almost more than half of the proposals don't reach the quorum. You can come and borrow and pass the vote.

Today we make about 7% return on one, I think the biggest one by leading on Unis and we do between them, it depends where you place it, between 21 and 48 years, it must have decreased, we got diluted, but 21 and 32% on had been KB, so we have returns. which are relatively high, that's what we do with planning, in fact, we wanted to liberate because we thought, it's good, we've laid the first foundation of governance, and you'll see, this is kind of the theme, to demonstrate, there's a huge innovation in governance that's happening in economics, in sociology, but especially in governance, and so we're seeing models like Solid Curve Kiosk, interesting is that they are fragmented, the power of governance, so governance in crypto isn't like corporate governance, it's on the bank 24/7, anyone, when they still have the necessary funds, can create a governance vote, which becomes interesting because if you can create this vote, you can't just create it to say, I'm changing someone's salary, I'm firing them, and I want to, you can choose partnerships, issues, investments, etc., etc. They have fragmented the governance space into three types of votes, let's say the one for pure and hard governance against the parameters, and the one for controlling issues is actually for controlling the Emissions are a purely economic aspect, so in fact, the choirs see that, it's a purely economic calculation. He can talk about governance, it is governance indeed, but it's purely on an economic side.

So we wanted to, we worked for nine months, we were countered by several protocols, actually, to be the first to release something on the Kane veto, and we released what we call Warden today. Warden is the only protocol that allows you to buy and sell boost on Girls, so on Cave. What you do is that when you close, you don't deposit high levels of tokens. Liquidity, you can, by May, to a more or less large amount depending on how much you have to observe. You must have it.

It's a non-transferable token; you have to lock it for four years. Except that if you close, it's not certain because your resources wo n't be used. So what we propose is to sell your boost or buy it if you don't want to lock yourself for four years. What's interesting is that we attract a lot of users. We just launched a campaign, released the product a month and a half ago, and attracted almost 5 million people.

They had to observe, in fact, once we have all these people and offer them a return, we're able to have a product that works, but in fact, we can offer them other services. So that's what we're going to announce soon. We're not necessarily going to just focus on this name; we're going to sell other services. They had to observe, and suddenly we're ordering it to become a platform that does full-service tactics for vets like Kane and Pablo, and everything else. So there are a lot of people who have adopted Beethoven systems, which allows us to quickly leverage projects that are interested and capable of knowingly mentioning them.

So that's how Paladin is becoming the biggest, the most complete crypto influence marketplace. On Paladin, you could buy or sell voting rights, boosts, and possibly gauges. It's extremely large. Not that it means that overall we really have this whole range of influence, so that is to say, we are able to concentrate the power that exists in crypto through our protocol, and hence all our Nomix-style features will be based around that. So what does that mean?

We don't do fancy things like a lot of photocalls; we're not here to allow people to collect dividends. Yes, the protocol has a profit motive. In fact, what we want to do is redistribute everything. Concert is continually being reused. Integrated into the protocol, so in fact, instead of having ring files, you've tapped into the kind of voucher that allows you to have influence for free or at a very steep discount.

This allows us to create volume, and on the other hand, it allows people in its line of work, and those we'll be working with, who will align themselves with us—people who want to participate in governance. And that's how, from there, we'll be able to build the entire economy of governance and participation. So we've done what we call phase 1, which is close to the pre- voting rights phase. We're now in phase 2, which will be much more dedicated to providing much higher- quality data. What we're seeing in these cases isn't just a demo with 1500 people governing.

You have one of the AOTs with 1500 addresses. Among the addresses, you'll have complaints under Bada OS that will control large shares. So that's what we see a lot on Curve, and so it's becoming less and less understandable because, in fact, you have Tribes are fighting each other in every governance structure, so we need to be able to say concretely what's happening in each tribe. We're lucky, though, because everything is open source, everything is real-time. It's good that we can read everything in real time and redistribute it in a digestible way.

So that's kind of the goal of what we're going to build next. From there, it allows me to create governance aggregators that will allow us to very quickly understand who is taking the most relevant path to win a vote, in any case, to optimize your tools, your broadcasts. In fact, once we've done all that, well, we have a database, and so we can build what we want to do in coordination on it. So that's what Paladin is. Paladin knows how we take this path for a crime, and it's a coordination system that allows people to be able to find their common ground and create governance actions very quickly.

And it's a path that will take us years, we're aware of that, but that's what we want. To build, let's summarize very quickly. Today we are clearly in an exploratory phase. We've done voting rights loans, but that's not our ultimate goal. We think it has potential for high returns because it's very consistent with speculative practices, but it's a true exploratory phase in the sense that everything is yet to be discovered.

We want to allow contributors to become the main beneficiaries of these systems. So, in fact, we want to redistribute this wealth, this access to power, to people who have this drive. We, who will be what we call governors, want to become a commons of governance. What does that mean? It means that Paladin is n't meant to become a large company; its aim is to become a large entity that will lose or increase the number of people possible to enter governance and participate.

If, in fact, all of you here are saying, "I'd like to switch to Web 3," if you're not already, "I'm looking for opportunities," have you looked into participating in organizations that really made me realize that, in fact, the Wii offers the most opportunities today, which are for damage or time-based work. Partial, so they write for them, do communication and marketing analyses, cash flow analysis, hockey, or it doesn't pay, it's called a hole. There are lots of people looking for how to sustain and work in governance, and we want to participate in this movement and encourage people to do it. So, that's what I wanted to stop on. What's very important to understand is that we're also recruiting at Paladin, so if you're interested, join us on Twitter or Discord.

It's a real economy of governance that 's emerging around contributors. It's probably the second biggest resource in crypto that will be the most sought after because, in fact, a short internship, 5, 10, 15, 20 years on a project, my essence, and creating smart contracts that have to last hundreds of years. So, if we really want them to last, there will be a need for people to take over. That's you, that's us, that's everyone. [Applause] I have a few goodies, not many.

Regarding the first, most relevant questions, if you have any questions, feel free to ask. In return, hello, thank you, that was great, it was really nice to hear. I have a small question, but the pyramid is busy with that, a little bit about it. You started the instruction from the side where the important thing is to leverage a little bit of activism in governance, but ultimately, if you ever build a marketplace where anyone can buy and sell openly, the three forms that want to succeed in making decisions go their way can also do so. Yes, but then that's where you have to be very careful: you have to allow everyone to do it and not prevent certain buyers from doing so.

We and Paladin are really positioning ourselves on a neutral layer. Noko is doing our idea, which is to say everyone can do it, and so in fact what we're doing is reducing the barriers to entry, we're not erecting barriers. I'm really sorry, do you want anything? I have a beanie or a t-shirt. red and the rate of natural rings [Music] they come dividend paid a limited edition there are no more it was the last one yeah if we had to make a very simple summary the way I see things I'm probably wrong imagine and at the National Assembly so we can buy the political system that's what it's about nothing if we have to make a very simplistic representation then I would have said it's bad so I would say it's bad I'm taking a position and there is a reason why we do financial governance there is a small detail that you have omitted is that shares we can buy them but I expect governance can you buy delegates of the deputies today there is a market close and deputies what we lose but is to streamline in fact something that already exists if you know how I the deputies especially European I think there are many crypto projects that are interesting at the moment I had a question about the remuneration in fact that you give yourselves it's Remy, so when you say you're talking about the protocol or the visitors, the protocol...

well, the protocol redistributes to people who deposit governance tokens. That is to say, we give them as much as we take from their deposits, and the protocol itself takes—it depends on the application, generally between 4 and 5% of the interest paid to depositors. So that's how they manage their treasury in terms of governance tokens. What I answered to the question is that you deposit tokens, accounts, or tokens into the protocol. Someone will borrow them; they pay off their loan.

You didn't understand that, did you? And so you get back the same tokens. So if you deposited 100 tokens and you still have 2% of the business over the year, you'll have 102 at the end. Thank you for the presentation, it's very clear. I was wondering, then, how is it paid for at this level to be able to last indefinitely?

Paladin, because what I just mentioned before is that we take 4-5% on loan interest. That's the first part, and it's what we call the first block of Paladin compensation. We're going to have quite a bit of that. The second part is that we control almost all the revenue today. We'll admit to wanting to diversify from the token that came out a few days ago, so it's really new.

So what does that mean? It means that we actually receive all the returns, the speculation, and we've made our mixed bag in a certain way. There's a speculative layer that doesn't involve the Paladin token, and then there's a participation layer. You have to pay for this ticket or the token vault, and it's not liquid or very illiquid. So what does that mean?

It means that people who are there to speculate around the Yukon are completely unable to do so, and instead, they'll pay fees, and we pay them. Great, thank you, hello, thank you. It was very clear in my hands. I just have one question, perhaps a slightly worried one: we're hearing about ultra-credit right now, by Yannis. I think that's the term, which refers to the emergence of a system where everyone has an opinion on everything.

How do you actually get people to develop a culture of governance or to choose their representatives? It's a real question, a real question we all ask ourselves every day. We see opinions on social media, and I want to say that it will happen through transparency, in the sense that the strength of blockchain and encryption in general is that everything is transparent. So, in fact, we can't lie in the sense that we see what people think, we see what people voted for. When we've made a mistake, when we've deceived someone, when we've made a bad decision, it's indelible.

And so, we'll have to highlight the track record of these people who, through governance, can know to what extent someone has participated. We can find out what he voted on, and possibly even why he voted if we dig deep enough, and I think that's what will make the difference. But there's clearly a weakness, and that's the problem with the internet: by giving everyone a voice so quickly, even more so anonymously, we actually amplify the noise. So there needs to be real concentration. I don't know if we'll be the ones to do it, to be honest, it's a monumental task.

It will probably take other companies or projects to learn how to truly distinguish quality from noise. Good evening, Romain, thank you for your presentation. I have a question that's almost philosophical: do you think you could actually code or put into your protocol a system for a kind of osmosis, and I dare say, allow and stabilize the values ​​you think you want to defend automatically, without depending on any humans, for decades and centuries to come, as you mentioned? I'd like to, but it's not possible because, in fact, values ​​are purely human things, so they can't be identified by code. So maybe I'm wrong; I'm not an engineer, I'm a finance professional, a lawyer.

So I believe there are things that can only be done by humans. And if we could do what you're talking about, well, there simply wouldn't be a need for governance to a certain extent. That is to say, we would be able to do it automatically by machines. But there's something we need to be aware of. I mentioned algorithmic control earlier; it's very important.

We're heading towards a world that resembles the Matrix, where hundreds of algorithms are increasingly giving control over the economy, politics, and decision-making to algorithms. What we need to know—and this is our job, as developers and project builders—is to determine the boundary between what we want to give to algorithms and what we want to give to humans to control. And that's where governance comes in. intervenes because in fact governance and kilometers the algorithm is man hello Romain thank you very much for your presentation I'm going to ask them a few small questions again not the dance really distinguishes from this text and water for example with liquid lockers and the second question is do you plan to develop a little more on where there are other governance tokens I'm thinking of polygon but it could be other chains we'll start with the easy answer we'll hang on shine we will be multi chain it's not the same the difference is that cross chain in fact there are links between the two multi chains it's concrete mirror systems it's much more resilient in terms of security cofounder and very strict in terms of security he told us Christiane Jamet so I'm trying to make the difference as far as water is concerned so we don't see at all as a competitor on the contrary I think we have an extremely symbiotic relationship with them because you shouldn't see Paladin as a vortex that wants to have the governance tokens you have to see Paladin Like a monetary Lego set that will actually allow us to increase their value, and so we can have many more strings to our bow. Using it in 1 SD was only useful if we observe it, for example, because it's liquid, because we can use it as collateral to make loans, and so no, on the contrary, with Steak we would like to have a liquid locker for our token, for example, we would like to be able to disintegrate directly into two protocols, and we welcome this innovation with enormous interest because we think it can greatly contribute to this ecosystem.

Afterwards, and we have to be very careful about the two clubs as they were designed, that is to say, the green ones, which were supposed to be non-transferable because we are going to dedicate them by creating banks and the transferable ones, it's a bit like Pandora's box that has been opened, and all of a sudden the governance system works less well because of that. So we have been very careful with everything we do, that Paladin and the projects we integrate actually create the plus potential positive interactions I'm not convinced that making this any liquid ugly but it's done we can't go back so we might as well do better but who are there [Music]