API tools faq
paste
Guest User

The Gridcoin Fireside #15 - Team Requirement Removal

a guest
Aug 8th, 2019
1,489
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 93.03 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Speaker 1: 00:00:10 [Music] Hello and welcome back to another Gridcoin Fireside. Today is August 1st and we're going to be talking about the manual fwa.... That was last week. Last week was manual rewards claims. Great episode. I'd recommend listening to it this week we're going to be talking about the team requirement removal, which is an update in the pipeline. The
  2.  
  3. Speaker 1: 00:00:28 Gridcoin fireside is a participatory pod cast put together by the gridcoin community. Takes Place on the grid coin discord server every Thursday 8:00 PM EDT. You are welcome to join it through the voice chat, text chat or you can sit back and listen. If you say something related to the conversation in text chat, we'll bring it into the recording. Um, if you want to talk about anything specific, you're more than welcome to reach out to any of the friendly host here and we will put it on the schedule for a future episode a is your host being myself, J Ringo, and in the corner this week we got goblin popper. Yeah, in the corner. Down below is our friend the I like chocolate. Hello? I gave you the definite article this week. I know, I know. It sounds, I'm very pleased. Oh, you are the one and only, oh, did you guys ever play counter strike?
  4.  
  5. Speaker 1: 00:01:16 You've never done it? Heard of it. You can down to the last guy and while the one who normally, all right, nevermind. Um, yeah. So we don't have a project brief this week. Delta is a way doing something fun with Kangaroos, them walabees, whether they got down there. Uh, so we're just gonna go through the news and get to the topic. Uh, and there isn't much news this week so this will be very quick. The only news that I've really got is, is about the two polls going out right now. There is a poll for the updated white paper that is halfway through its uh, polling time and it's August 15th. Uh, and if you want to know more about it, listened to one of the other episodes we talked about in the intro. Uh, the stats for the poll from the update that was just posted.
  6.  
  7. Speaker 2: 00:02:03 So there have been a couple of more votes since then, but I'm just going to read from this post here. There are 82 votes. 76 for yes, two for no five abstentions. The majority of the vote weight is going for yes. Uh, the AVW is at 17.9 out of 40%. AVW that is required to be validated. I'm pretty sure that's a little higher now, uh, since this post was made. But do get out there and vote, uh, validating the poll makes it so that the result is valid. Right? So even if yes, wins, uh, if yes, wins and the ABW is less than 40%, the poll doesn't matter. So get out there and vote. Don't just think it's going to pass because yes is winning. Uh, the other pole is a poll. Seeking to reimburse me. F King Lag and Loaded Anvils for attending these Chicago are the 2019 BOINC workshop that took place in Chicago.
  8.  
  9. Speaker 2: 00:02:58 Uh, all gave presentations there. It's seeking to the, the poll options are to reimburse us with $100 or $200 or to not reimburse us. Currently $200 is, is winning. Uh, and I don't have that AVW in front of me, but I'm pretty sure it's very close in AVW to the other polls. So there's probably like 18% ish. How did that go by the way? Cause I, I was, I kind of wanted to go, but um, uh, yeah, a bunch of stuff came up. Yeah. It was really good. Um, me and like talked about it a little bit. I know like talked about it at the a hangout last Saturday. Um, for those who are wondering, the hangouts are another sort of get together that take place on Saturdays at, um, was it seven UTC, three, 3:00 PM EDT and was it the week right. The um, the workshop was like second week of July 9th through the 12th.
  10.  
  11. Speaker 2: 00:03:53 Okay. That's what I thought. That's right. Okay. Thought about it crazy. Yeah. No like talks about it. Last week he was experience, we shared a little bit on it. Uh, when we did the fireside from when we were both in Chicago and like was on the street getting a pizza. A pretty funny. Alright. We both enjoyed it. Enjoyed it. Just to sum up, I think both of our opinions, like you correct me if I'm speaking for you here, but we both enjoyed it. We thought it was just really intensive. We learned a lot and it was just really inspiring to be in a room with a in a way like put it with so much humanity in it. Cause there was just a lot of project admins and people working for science and doing really cool things. Just volunteering really. I mean some of them were for pretty big institutions, but they're just there doing the science stuff really kind of for the hell of it. Right. It was a, it was pretty cool. Uh, yeah, we learned a lot, met a lot of people. Really Nice, really great experience. I would recommend going next year if it sends the states or if it's not in the states and only you can make it out there. There's a lot of fun. Uh, so those are the two grid coin news items we've got. Dennis says, I feel like anyone who votes not to reimburse is reimbursed as an a-hole. I'm not gonna respond cause I'm biased, but I am winking. [inaudible]
  12.  
  13. Speaker 2: 00:05:06 I will say that the conference, uh, attending the conference cost, uh, it was about a thousand dollars from me. Uh, so I mean this is not reimbursing me completely. I didn't put the poll together. Uh, I really appreciate the people who did put the poll together. I neither of us asked for it and it's just really nice to see that if you go out and do this stuff and you do a good job and you represent the community well, people notice and they, they got your back and every little bit counts when it comes through reimbursing for those expenses. So is greatly appreciated on my side. I know like it's greatly appreciated as well. Uh, but the other news article, I'll, thanks Dennis, appreciate everything you guys do. Um, other news article we were going to talk about this week cause we have no project brief. Uh, we, we talked a little bit about science news, uh, and robotic mind shared a post about the lightsail two mission, which is, uh, it's like a sail in space.
  14.  
  15. Speaker 2: 00:05:59 Uh, I lightsail is basically like a sailboat in space. So instead of running on wind, it runs on uh, solar energy. So like photons hitting the, um, the sail quote unquote the sail. I forget what the sales made of, but as the photons hit the sale, it moves the abject cause there's no gravity and you know, the thinking is because there's just light everywhere in space. You can put one of these up and it will over time after just like being hit by light over like a year or so, a year or two, it'll start going really, really fast. Like some crazy percentage. The speed of light, like over 10, I think a number I'm just pulling out of the top of my head. So it might be wrong as it, there's like 20 some odd percent that would be late, uh, is what they think they can get a vessel to just using our sun in the solar system. But don't take my word for that percentage. Double check that.
  16.  
  17. Speaker 3: 00:06:50 How would you slow down though?
  18.  
  19. Speaker 2: 00:06:52 That's a great question. I don't think they've worked that out. You slow it down.
  20.  
  21. Speaker 3: 00:06:56 Can you control it's mood? Like it's still rap? Yeah. I mean I'm not concerned about sits it down. It's gotta have a sale on the back. I'm assuming that it users to like use channel direction though. Well as you want, I'm open. The whole point is that like the was us the whole, I don't know. No, I was just wondering like can you can't can it, can we control this direction? Can it direct consults direction?
  22.  
  23. Speaker 2: 00:07:17 It's just like a sailboat. So if you turn well maybe not. Maybe if there's, if like if you turn the sail and the light hits it in a specific way, then it will change.
  24.  
  25. Speaker 3: 00:07:27 Well you need an engine. Well no, of course the, you know the La hates it and right. But like I'm, I'm saying you know it in order for it to change its own direction that it needs to have some source of energy. It needs to like use into is we have to create a force.
  26.  
  27. Speaker 2: 00:07:43 Yeah. I don't know if we can manipulate the way the photons hit it to change its direction. But my thinking is if, you know, if you send it to another solar system, you can use the energy from that sun, you know, as it leaves this power of our sun and you know, gets past the halfway point to another star. The Sun hitting it from the other direction might slow it down. Uh, yeah. Everyone is saying the use of the other son to stop. Uh, you can control the robotic minds, then you can control the turn shoulder direction is also saying and just flies by things, which I think is what they're sort of saying they want to use it for. Like if you attach one of these things to a satellite, you can send it to another solar system faster than we can go with chemical rockets.
  28.  
  29. Speaker 2: 00:08:21 I'm pretty sure, uh, just we're less expensive. You know, you'd need a giant chemical racket to continue accelerating for as long as one of these things can accelerate a slowly. I think the idea is throwing one of those micro satellites up there. Um, and what they just did with this a sail is they just proved that this works because they sent the sail up and then they unfurled it, which is kind of a feat of engineering in itself. And then they raised its orbit without any internal energy source just by using the sun. So it's pretty cool. And it's also kind of a citizen science project, the way you understand it's run by the Planetary Society and uh, it's just funded by Kickstarter largely. I mean, a lot of money came from big names in science communication field, Bill Nye and Neil degrasse Tyson, but, uh, cs or Psi Psi, sorry.
  30.  
  31. Speaker 2: 00:09:11 So it needs a dark matter rudder. Uh, but yeah, so it was, this is a project that, um, it kind of demonstrates the power of encouraging or forcing people to have a stake in a system. So it has a lot of people with a stake in the project itself because they all invested money into it and they put it up and you know, 10, $15, but a lot of people invested 10 or $15 and then now all those people invested money. I've been paying attention to it through its development or it's launched through this first step in its testing phase and they're all really excited about it. They're learning about science and really cool and it's kind of a crypto economic concept. It's a concept it's brought into cryptocurrencies in terms of giving people a stake in it, full economic network and forcing them to learn what the network's about.
  32.  
  33. Speaker 2: 00:09:58 Yeah, yeah. We were, uh, he, he'd let everyone know what the hangout that we're all, uh, saying it wrong. It's PSI, Psi, not cc for me. He also said he's grown accustomed to it and he kinda likes it. So I think we can call him anything at that point. But it's not just you. I think everyone's doing it because there's the pizza place called CCS in the u s at least I know someone mentioned that they hang out as well. Pretty funny. We don't talk about that place. Hey, welcome to c C. Yeah. I just don't it all. Somebody talks on the light sail or the white paper or, uh, the reimbursement poll. Uh, or should we just get into the team requirement removal. These were so lost now without Delta. We used to do this all without Delta.
  34.  
  35. Speaker 4: 00:10:41 I do have one piece of news. Does that have something to do with a US Seti? Um, they all posted on the off topic. John, uh, apparently, uh, is anywhere safe. They found a binary system out there. So one larger sun or one sun's larger than the other and uh, or even one puts with the larger one, there's 14 Jupiter sized planets and about the same size, the other one's 14 earth size planets and our bolts same size. So, um, it's funny if everybody should be wrapping up SETI that as possible so that there's an intelligent life out there.
  36.  
  37. Speaker 2: 00:11:19 Yeah, I watched that video. It's really interesting. Like it's, it's just a bunch of, um, solar like dips in luminosity around this binary system that they can't explain in any, uh, known science with any known science similar to a, that plant or that star they found with the abnormal dips in light. Uh, the, that dips in light that didn't have a pattern to it. And they're like, oh my God, maybe to alien superstructure. And they're like, well, it probably is just a asteroid cloud or a dust cloud circling the star. So uh, yeah. So the only
  38.  
  39. Speaker 4: 00:11:54 thing like that, it's just, there's a lot of weird stuff with it. Yeah. They found all these plants already in was in the 87 days, which is fairly quick.
  40.  
  41. Speaker 2: 00:12:01 Well, hold on. They, they don't know their planets. They found these luminosity dips that can't be explained with any, any science they know. So they could be these planets, they could be something else and do something else. It's definitely interesting. And I mean I'm with you at this point, some steady satellites at the spine area system and see what's going on. Maybe it's the calm filter that uh, they had for the Dyson ring or the Dyson's sphere. Alternating light. Dark passenger could be, what is it? Comb filter. No, remember in that then the science fiction novels that they had a, a essentially a set of a, if I remember right, like rectangular plates. Yeah. In a Oh orbit that was farther in simulate light and dark on the actual a Dyson ring. Oh, right. Clear for this. Shoot Seti, get to work throw your cruching to Seti. Let's go. I read one hypothesis is, ah, sunspots maybe abnormal sunspots on these giant stars. But yeah, I personally like Dyson sphere is better.
  42.  
  43. Speaker 4: 00:13:06 It's not that they ruled out the sunspot. I pause this. I don't know why though.
  44.  
  45. Speaker 2: 00:13:09 Oh really? So, yeah. Dyson sphere. All right, problem solved guys. Aliens exist. Let's fix climate change and go meet him. Any other thoughts on that and should we jump into a team requirement removeal and how can we follow that up? Okay. I hear a Elon Musk wrote a new song called, uh, the hamster dance. No. Okay. Now let me in a pivot. [inaudible] Nissan called one the hamster dance did at Doodoo. It's a real song. I didn't get it. I appreciate your curiosity though. All right. I'm going to have a sip of water here and then we'll do team requirements. All right. Team require removal. This is a development that has been, um, been sought after for many, many years. Uh, it's been said to be soon trademarks, uh, for many years as well. But this time it is actually soon. Other things that are, have had, had been down on the back end in order to make the team requirement possible are scheduled for the Elizabeth release, which is going to be mandatory update.
  46.  
  47. Speaker 2: 00:14:16 And that's coming out actually like soon within like let's say safely within a year, but probably much sooner probably before the end of the year. Um, Jim can correct me or [inaudible] I can correct me if I'm wrong on that, but uh, yeah, no, we, we definitely want to go to before the end of the year. I'm going to be disappointed if we don't make that, but, uh, yes. Right. Okay. It's just, you know, it's for people listening, it's always hard to say with extreme confidence when the stuff's going to come out. Cause when you get it into testing, you know, you're testing for a reason and that's when you want to catch all bugs. And depending on what bug you catch, it could take longer. Maybe you don't catch anything and it goes perfectly smooth. But yeah, and Elizabeth's pretty big. So there's a lot of stuff going on in there. Very, very exciting update for sure.
  48.  
  49. Speaker 2: 00:15:03 Uh, so the team required removal in a nutshell. I will explain the team requirement. I will explain what it is and I'm gonna explain what teams are and then we'll open it up for discussion. Uh, all right, so this'll just be like a five, five minute speech, I swear. All right. So the team requirement removal basically just as that, uh, anyone crunchy in a white listed project can register a beacon and get rewarded with GRC. Currently you have to be on the grid coin team and white lists and crunching and white list of projects in order to get rewarded in order to register beacon and get rewarded with GRC. That's a team requirement removal. Removes the conditional must be on a grid coin team. You can be on any team you want. You can not be on a team. All you needed to be doing is crunch a, is be crunching a white list of projects and then you have to register a beacon through the grid coin client.
  50.  
  51. Speaker 2: 00:15:55 And then you, your magnitude gets recorded, your RAC gets recorded and you get your RAC is recorded, you've build magnitude, and you get your GRC in relation to how much you're crunching based on all the magnitude rules that we'll probably talk about at some point in the near future episode. But we have also talked about many times in the past. So that is what the team required rule is in a nutshell what teams are on BOINC. Cause I know this is something people are asking about. It seems to have to do with the gamification aspect of BOINC, which, which is like one of the amazing things that Boeing did with regards to, uh, volunteer computing. So BOINC said that like there is a competitive aspect of humanity similar to how blockchains and cryptocurrencies say there's a greedy aspect of humanity. So let's instead of denying it, let's use it and build a system that helps control it.
  52.  
  53. Speaker 2: 00:16:43 Uh, BOINC said there's a competitive aspect to humanity instead of denying it, let's accept it and use it and help control it through a system called concept called gamification. And when they built their gamification system, they built credit. And credits are the things you earn when you crunch work units. And if, you know, people like to compete about the credits they earn because you get to say, I did more science than you, blah, blah, blah blah. So another thing they added to their system, our teams where you can now, well not now, they've been around forever. Uh, you can join up with your friends or strangers and then you would come friends through these teams, uh, and work together to compete against other teams. And there are like team competitions. Uh, there's a seti wow. Competition coming up, I think August 15th, we'll be talking about that more next week for sure. For example, there's also the pentathlon and there's a bunch of competitions that BOINC teams run and blink communities run where teams compete against each other for short spurts. But then there's also the longterm stuff where it's like, by team has more credits than your team. Ha ha ha ha. So it's a
  54.  
  55. Speaker 5: 00:17:50 really cool gamification aspect. It's really nothing else to it. Uh, but it's also a great way to meet people who are like minded and you know, working on the same projects as you and there's a lot of really cool just things that come out about come out from teams. So that's basically all I gotta say about teams and team requirement removal. Um, let's just open it up here. Does anyone have any opinions about team requirement removal? Why is getting done? Should we pull it again? Uh, what's happening, et cetera. Anything really. Um, I think this is a really cool and important stuff forward for the community and for the, uh, uh, just the protocol as a whole. Um, ignoring the monetary aspect, just literally the protocol and getting people more, more people involved. Um, because I, uh, Jim will tell you, no one else just, it's, it's hard to work on something for 13 or 14 years and then say, hey, just swap over.
  56.  
  57. Speaker 5: 00:18:45 Right? So it's like, even, even if it's like imaginary points, even if it's like I have some, if you spend like two years doing cookie clicker and we're like, dude, I've got like 40 quintillion cookies. Right? And then you're like, oh, well I want to change my name. Like, like I want to change my account or something. And they're like, oh, okay, well you got to start over. Usually people, even if it's like take points, we'll still just suck it up and just straight denied. I don't want to start over. Right. And, and I, I feel like we're at that point where it's just people don't want to, people don't want to switch. People don't want to move and anything we can do to make it easier for users to just join us and, and, and help with projects and such, then that's more people who will be able to join our platform easily.
  58.  
  59. Speaker 5: 00:19:29 You know, why we remove team requirement before? Is it just not technically possible at the time to do prior? Um, my a 40 year. Yeah, the 45 is here. Um, and one one just, just really, sorry, just one, just one sec. I love, it feels awesome. Okay. Um, I, Jim could probably answer this. It's, I don't think it was technically impossible. It just, it was a lot more heavy lifting and things had to come before that could happen. And we're, we're, we're now at the point where those prerequisites were met, but I might be wrong. That's pretty much right.
  60.  
  61. Speaker 6: 00:20:09 The old, uh, dot net neural net was, uh, was really not in a place where it could handle it. And, uh, could, could that, could that have been re re massage? Well maybe, uh, the, that, that thing used to take almost an hour to process stats on those nodes with only grid coin teams. So you can imagine what would've happened to it if you'd tried to remove the team requirements. I mean, theoretically you could have, but not really. Not Practically. So, so, you know, we had to write, we had to rewrite that and get a scraper out, which does, you know, processes the stats a lot differently. And, uh, you know, that that was sort of the main part of it. And then, you know, what remains is some work we've got to do in Elizabeth to uh, to improve the, uh, the beacon processing and contracts, uh, which will complete a, what's necessary to really make this happen. So, you know, it's taken, it's taken us a while to practice, get all the pieces in, in position to make this happen and have it be a good experience for folks.
  62.  
  63. Speaker 2: 00:21:10 I think that last part right there is a huge, huge part of it as well, having it be a good experience for folks. So what did the team requirement did in my perspective please is it was kind of a barrier to entry and it wasn't the best barrier to entry because like Goblin was saying, if forced people to leave their teams that maybe they were crunching on for like a decade and they didn't want to do that and that sucks that we did that to people. But at the same time that people that came into the community where those willing to really kind of go through the struggle of getting grid coin up and running and learning about it and figuring all that stuff out. And those are the people that are still here and have helped build this community into what it is right now and they've helped organize it.
  64.  
  65. Speaker 2: 00:21:50 And if we had just like, so the thinking is with this team requirement removal is now we're going to open that up to a lot more people. When you look at the numbers, there are like 300 and some odd thousand active crunchers on BOINC. There is 4.7 million total accounts on BOINC. There's 13,000 beacons, there's 13,000 crunchers. Uh, so beacons and pool users put together 13,000 getting incentivized with Gridcoin. So we're now about to open it up to like 300,000 more people. If we had done that without having the new scraper, without having like the organization behind, like built right now where we had this, this discord, it hasn't always been here. Remember, even when I was here, this discard was not really put together very well. The slack was, you know, it was there. But the way to help new users has grown dramatically over the past two years or our access to, um, documentation and help has grown, is improved dramatically.
  66.  
  67. Speaker 2: 00:22:45 Our social outreach has grown dramatically. We're now, I think to the point where we can introduce grid coin to a lot of people who might be interested in it already, who understand it at a, at least a base level, you know, BOINCers specifically. Um, and, and not scare them off when they come in because there's no one here to help them. They don't know what's going on. That devs are kind of in the background. The devs are not in the background anymore. They're very out and open and communicative with the community. Um, yeah, we can do that now and, and it will hopefully be, if you'd done that several years ago, I don't think it would've gone to well to say the least. Um, so I think a lot of what Jim is said is right. And then of course the technical aspects like the, the scrapers, like stuff that Jim and the other devs have been developing over the past year. Uh, that's been great. But state, take a step back of what I just said, that 300,000 crunchers actively in BOINC, we have 13,000 incentivize with grid coin. Doesn't that sound
  68.  
  69. Speaker 6: 00:23:46 kind of like amazing? Like at what do in this t w we're opening up our system. Could do, isn't this why we want to do the team requirement removal? Because now we can bring in all these other really passionate scientists and, and crunchers and volunteers into our system without sort of scaring them off without sounding like we're trying to poach their teams without, without being a competitor, just by being in additional layers. So you're BOINCing and now there's really nothing in the way. There's no reason for you not to get incentivized with grid coin. Like why not? It's there. Get some of the money back for your electricity by getting incentivized by grid coin. There's no reason not to anymore. So do we have any estimations for how many people we think will actually join up with the team requirements? Obviously there'll be slow, I mean there's not, there's not 300 users waiting in the, in, in the wings to just jump on.
  70.  
  71. Speaker 6: 00:24:33 Right. But do we want to, do we want to start maybe advertising as the release date gets closer for that patch that hey, you know, team requires removed for team grid coin or for grid coin or, so we really don't know. I mean, um, no, we, we got Jay Ringo just put out the [inaudible], you know, the shells or the rings that we're talking about in terms of the population. Right. You know, the convenient numbers of use are the ones that are actually participating in BONC today because those are the most likely to be attracted as sort of the first ring out. But, you know, we, we don't really have any idea on the uptake of, uh, of those, uh, when we remove it. Um, I think it's going to have a lot to do with how we pub, how, how we publicize it, quite frankly. Um, and, and, you know, I'm, the other thing that, you know, we're, we're not really quite where I really wish we could have the a, the UI ready too, which would make a, the experience of setting up things a lot easier.
  72.  
  73. Speaker 6: 00:25:30 But, you know, that's, that's, that's a ways out. And, uh, but, you know, look, I think, uh, the good thing about the, the wallet as today as a slot more stable, so, uh, you know, a lot of the, a lot of the stuff that was resulting in crashes and, you know, and all the forking and everything that we were having in the past, while that stuff is behind us. So I think, I think it's really a matter of how we, uh, how we, how we market it. You know, how we get it out there. Um, I th I think we're going to talk about tonight to, uh, an idea that we have as a transition piece, which is to, uh, as a middle ground, as a transition to open things up to a few other teams besides grid coin as a transition piece. Uh, that's, that's been a, a point of significant discussion, uh, on slack, uh, the last few days. Uh, by the way, that's technically feasible, uh, very easy to do. So, uh, just throwing it out there and, you know, I'm sure Jay Ringo is gonna want it, uh, take it from here. Would that discussion. But I, I think, I think it might be a good idea, uh, to open a grid coin to a few other teams besides grid coin, uh, and, uh, bring some people into the fold, Eh, that will, you know, not only help us validate this thing as it starts scale up, but also
  74.  
  75. Speaker 2: 00:26:44 give us pointers on what their experience is like when they, well, when they join in. So anyway, Jay Ringo, I don't know if you want to make some comments or not, I'm going to write off that because that last thing you said is perfect. It's a lot of the rationale behind why I think we should do what you're describing, which is sort of a phase transition into a complete team required removal where we, um, we sort of test it first. We introduced this slowly to a couple of teams in a couple batches of teams. Uh, and, and that gets the discussion going among the BOINC community. You know, we, we reach out to teams and say, look, we're, we've said we'd be working on this thing and we'd get it done a couple years ago and, you know, whatever. We got it done now and we want to introduce it slowly because we don't want just a lot of people coming in and to overload the system and overload our infrastructure right away.
  76.  
  77. Speaker 2: 00:27:32 We want to have people come in who want to come in. So if you want your team white listed, let us know, we'll get you white listed and then your team members can get rewarded. With GRC and then let us know what the experience is like as a brand new user who probably hasn't been following GRC very closely. And then from those responses, from that interaction, we'll be able to improve our infrastructure even more. Uh, so that when we do remove the team requirement completely, we're a little more prepared if there is a huge surge or at least, uh, in uptake and people who don't necessarily want to communicate with us directly, right. Who just want to get their GRC. So that way those people who don't want to communicate with us won't be scared off right away. They won't start using GRC.
  78.  
  79. Speaker 2: 00:28:16 And I'd be like, oh, this thing, shit, it doesn't work. I don't want to be involved anymore. So that if we bring teams in who are actively communicating with us, uh, we have people coming in first who are actively communicating with us. So they'll tell us what the problem is. They won't just use it, say it's broken to themselves and then disappear. They'll say it's broken. Tell us it's broken. Or like what their problem was and then we can fix it. So we don't need to deal with people who won't talk to us. Right. Everyone knows that. When Microsoft says, do you want to send a report? Everyone clicks. No. So we want to find people who send reports first because this is a new thing. And I think it, it makes sense to roll it out slowly and that for that reason and because it's honestly it's just good marketing to roll it out slowly because it gets the discussions going among the teams themselves.
  80.  
  81. Speaker 2: 00:29:04 Like, oh Grid coin is doing this stuff. Do we want to be one of the first teams to, you know, test their new function tests or new mechanism really. So that gets a little organic word of mouth marketing going. Uh, and then, you know, when we remove the team requirement completely, it's not just this sudden influx of, of marketing or, or, or whatever into their communities. There's kind of seen, they kind of see it coming. So it's not a shock. Right. How Nix mentions another perspective here. He says we could stealth drop the team requirement, allow a few people to come over organically and then market it with the UI incorporation as not a bad idea. But the fact that we don't know when the UI
  82.  
  83. Speaker 6: 00:29:42 is going to be, um, like
  84.  
  85. Speaker 5: 00:29:45 updated kind of turns me off from that idea because it's like, I mean, wait for [inaudible], something very important to take into account is, um, I know we do extensive testing, right? But cause anyone that I do will tell you there's, there's testing and then there is like finding the bug and prod and there's, there's always a bug and prod. There's always, so I think, I think it would be a little silly to fully advertise, um, when the release is coming out as opposed to just after it comes out. And we guarantee that we, we make sure we fix any, any kind of major bugs and cause I need, well, you only get every single one of these releases. You only have one real first impression before someone tries it and then says it had a lot of bugs and I just want, I just left. Right.
  86.  
  87. Speaker 6: 00:30:26 Well that's, that's, that's right. That's exactly the idea. Uh, fortunately when I wrote the core of the new scraper, uh, I, I did have some foresight that we might want to do this. And so I incorporated in the protocol settings, the ability to set a, a, a team white list, uh, which you guys might imagine. There's only one team in there right now. And that's grid coin, right? But the, it allows you to specify there are, there are obviously, but it allows you to specify a number of teams to be on the white list. Um, the, uh, what's interesting about the code is the scraper is all set up to do that. Uh, the, uh, there was a piece of code and the, uh, CPID validation when you sign up for, when you first go into the wallet and you know, in, you know, you're signing up and you advertise your beacon, that old was hard-coded to grid coin.
  88.  
  89. Speaker 6: 00:31:16 So we have to, we have to a change that. And, uh, in fact that, that the fact that we collected a number of fixes that we really want to get out there as motivated the Dev's were, we're going to actually issue an interim release. So I think Barton came up with a nice ones called nine four, I think he called it method not found. So there is going to be a release before Elizabeth, which is a stepping stone and we'll incorporate a [inaudible], uh, all the fixes that we needed to put in before that, you know, before the mandatory changes that have got to go on. Elizabeth is also going to have the tweaks necessary to support, uh, the team white list. And, uh, you know, that's going to be the release that we use, uh, to do what Jay Ringo talking about. Um, it's a, it's an, it's a, it's a leisure. You don't, but you know, if you don't, if you don't actually use that release you and you try to sign up with being on a team other than grid coin, it won't work. So it's, it is leisure, but you know, it's going to be necessary for people that want to, uh, want to be, uh, coming up to come in on other than on the grid coin team.
  90.  
  91. Speaker 5: 00:32:19 So for a, for testing, we're going to have to have people set up a bunch of accounts and various other teams, right? Yup. And since the team, uh, since the team requirement removed, but there's still a white list, I'm assuming, I'm assuming the uh, teams would have to submit a request for everyone on their team to be able to get access or no,
  92.  
  93. Speaker 6: 00:32:37 no, we just have to, it's protocol set. So
  94.  
  95. Speaker 2: 00:32:40 you just have to add the team to the a team white list and the protocol and then the scrapers, uh, take care of that. So here's, here's the testing process as I understand it so far, we spend a little time talking about it. So Jim, correct me if I'm wrong here, but it's basically two phases of testing one and test net and one on production. Yep. Or, I mean that the test, that section is going to be a couple of the guys already on tests that are going to leave the grid coin team, make a new team and you know, make sure the functionality works during this process. We're going to start reaching out to teams and say, Hey, we're testing the team requirement removal on our test net right now. If you want to come in and help us on our tests net, like really getting involved with the back end development and or development side, uh, you're welcome to come in.
  96.  
  97. Speaker 2: 00:33:25 Here's how you do it, you know, join slack, contact button, uh, and he'll set you up a testnet and we'll walk you through that process. So that is a way to get maybe some more people. And you know, a lot of BOINC users are developers themselves, so maybe get more developers into the grid coin, a development circle. Uh, so that maybe one of them as a UI developer as well. And they'll help us with the new UI. And then the second, we don't expect a lot of people to be running that and test net. So the second part is then we port that over to main net and the interim release that Jim was just talking about. And uh, that's when we are again, reach out to teams and say, okay, it's now on production. You don't need to join the test net and go through this whole other set of process.
  98.  
  99. Speaker 2: 00:34:07 All you need to do is contact us, let us know that you want your team to be on the white list. And it will be a first come first serve basis. They're like more or less, if your team is appropriate to be put on the wait list during this test net during this testing and main net, then we'll do it. And that will let us sort of test it with small groups of people and the thinking right now as we'll do that in batches, you know, maybe we'll add one team in the first batch, then maybe we'll have three teams in the second batch, then maybe rollout five teams in the third batch, you know? And then that will be a slow testing on production where if there's a bug that's caught during that process where we're really adding more people to this new mechanism, then we can, you know, fix it without a lot of friction, without that horrible experience reaching a lot of people who weren't actively reaching out to us and saying, yeah, we want to help you test this.
  100.  
  101. Speaker 2: 00:34:56 We want to be one of the first teams involved. Um, so that will help us scale up testing without getting a lot of people involved in testnet who wouldn't get involved in test net. Right. So those are the two phases. That's pretty much it. It's a very small scale testing on tests now followed by a little bit larger than a on main net. Um, you know, maybe quite a bit larger depending upon how many people, uh, you know, participate in the main, that phase. And then after that, once everything settles out, you know, we'll, we'll, uh, that'll be the transition point to essentially no, no team requirements later on. So it's a, it's pretty neat. Um, pretty neat idea. And, uh, any, uh, comments from folks on, I'm curious about the inflation rate. Um,
  102.  
  103. Speaker 7: 00:35:38 I think that we need to think about factors we affected requirements for example, signed and part.
  104.  
  105. Speaker 2: 00:35:43 Absolutely. Yeah.
  106.  
  107. Speaker 7: 00:35:44 It's a good time to, to think about like a reshuffle of that as well.
  108.  
  109. Speaker 6: 00:35:48 Absolutely. Absolutely. We need to be having these discussions. Uh, I don't think we made that story have to, we don't have to have too much during this first phase I think, but, you know, as we had to work why the way we're going to get an ID of the dilution of the a researcher rewards is going to be, uh, as people join that had not been participating before. And then I think we're going to have to, we're going to have to come up with some plans and what we're going to do, uh, you know, when the full team requirement removal was actually done, I think that's exactly right.
  110.  
  111. Speaker 2: 00:36:18 Yeah. To add on that a little bit. We've been talking about it in the past. You know, we've hinted at like a lot of us aren't really happy with the way the magnitude distribution works, the way the, that, the scientific inflation works, that's a really good term for it. Uh, so we've kind of been discussing it at a very base level over the past several months if not years. And this is going to be a catalyst to start pushing that forward. I think. So chocolate, I know this is something you spend a lot of time thinking about. If you have ideas that you are, you haven't been putting time and now is the time to start really developing, uh, how it might work. Um, yeah, I've been thinking about it where I feel like we keep cutting off Terry and sleep by the way. He keeps putting his mic on the, so sorry. I'd like to know your thoughts on the door.
  112.  
  113. Speaker 7: 00:37:05 Yeah, we should have some sort of like, um, I guess, uh, like an interest rate, almost like a federal federal interest rate or some sort of like something that we pin it to, for example, number of users, a number of users that are crunching so that, um, because if we have a reference that keep being consistent on, I think that would be more predictable.
  114.  
  115. Speaker 2: 00:37:29 So
  116.  
  117. Speaker 7: 00:37:30 yeah. So we should, we should agree on some sort of a, a reference point.
  118.  
  119. Speaker 2: 00:37:35 So just to all the chocolates, I agree with you and just to show how much I agree with you, that's called dynamic block reward. That was the last section of the CBR proposal that says we should, we should pin these things. Some of us think very far at here, uh, that we should be pinning these things to context context. So number of people crunching the number of people staking and that changes the blocker ward. That changes how much we meant for, um, crunching and all that stuff. So I think you're absolutely right. I think there's a really good idea we should continue to explore,
  120.  
  121. Speaker 7: 00:38:08 look at like the average electricity costs of, you know, in the world or something or maybe the minimum. And then from that, um, calculate the reference.
  122.  
  123. Speaker 6: 00:38:19 So, so here's the dark side. And so I agree with scent that you know, but remember that if we, if we're going to increase the number of coins generated, which is essentially what we're talking about, the, we as a group have to find a way to sync those coins. I hate to put it that way, but there's got be a corresponding coined sink, right? Cause otherwise generate inflation like problems with the coin. Does everyone follow me? Yes. MRC fees maybe come in. Yes. Well, I mean we gotta be thinking about how all this fit together because you know, if, look, I agree that a researchers do, you know, it goes up by a factor and unless we do something about the emission, right, everyone's going to get one 10th of the rewards that they got before all things being equal, right? That's not what we want.
  124.  
  125. Speaker 6: 00:39:00 But we also increased the emission by a factor of 10, then we've got to have a way to, to base, you know, expend those coins, you know, to control the economics around the coin. So I think, you know, look, all these are part of the discussion and, you know, we're, we're gonna, we're going to have to develop solutions. Uh, I actually really liked it. It looked j ringo, you know, I was one of the rare people that came up with, with some formulas for dynamic. I remember it was great awards. I loved the discussion. You know, I think, I think it's gonna, you know, we may not be able to do that feed the first go around. It'll probably still be a little bit simplified, but I, I do think that could come up with consensus space rules, uh, that can be in protocol for, uh, you know, uh, scaling the emission rate based on the total number of active beacons, for example, and stuff like that. We absolutely could do that. Okay. Chocolate, you go, then I'll respond there.
  126.  
  127. Speaker 3: 00:39:53 Right. So I've been, um, advocating for, uh, a long time for changing our, uh, reward mechanism to be more closely tied to that actual kind of computational power contributed. I'm not going to go into the details. I take most of the people here and all that at this point. Um, and I also, uh, have been advocating as well for, uh, changing our, the, the rate at which we, uh, make coins as in the end that the number of coins we meant to be well have to the actual amount of computational power on the network. We've also discussed that before, um, regarding the sink. Uh, and, and by the way, yeah, I mean Jim is totally right. A Terrance who is trying to at least also, right. I think we just got, we were discussing this after last week's fire side. Um, the reality is that, uh, we need a sink for all of these coins, even if we don't change the mechanism.
  128.  
  129. Speaker 3: 00:40:46 But especially if we do, when we started meeting more coins, we need to find a sink. And ultimately I don't think that w uh, you know, to kind of try to make the very simple, I don't think we're going to get around the fact that this sink is going to have to rely on the fact, uh, of somebody's willing to contribute money for volunteer. Uh, I don't, you know, it doesn't matter how many ways we slice it or if, you know, um, uh, I think we were also discussing this after last week's show. Uh, we've, um, uh, I was pointing out the fact that I think, you know, a couple of years ago during the, you know, the cryptocurrency craze, um, people were acting like gridcoin would be the, you know, the 1.2 rule them all right? People would be, no, but I mean they were asking like, you know, it was going to replace bitcoin or, I mean, people weren't necessarily saying that out loud with it, but that was kind of the mentality.
  130.  
  131. Speaker 3: 00:41:40 Like, oh, look how much, how much energy, bitcoin wastes grid coin is so much better, obviously in grid coin should be used for everything or you know, for each at least replace like Bitcoin, you know, maybe not a theory cause we don't have blockchains or something. We don't have, they don't have smart contracts. Um, but, um, yeah, I think that was the wrong mentality. And I, and I think we, I, I think that was kind of underlying a lot of our, a lot of the ways we were thinking a lot of the ways we were thinking about, uh, where the, uh, about the future of the coin and how we were going to use it. Uh, I think that our coin, uh, it needs to, one we are going to be a niche coin or be a niche market. I don't think we were all, we were ever going to be mainstream.
  132.  
  133. Speaker 3: 00:42:20 And I don't think people are gonna be using grid points to buy coffee. I don't think that's realistic. I think the, the other, uh, thing is that, um, I think that we need, uh, we, we're not going to get around the fact that, uh, at the end of the day somebody's wanting the sink is going to be somebody who understands that they're contributing money for volunteering. Now, um, uh, I proposed animals six months ago or something, but not enough of, I posted a proposal well over a year ago, but, um, it's about six months ago I, um, wrote an article on steamit, uh, and the, I suggested that, you know, we have some sort of a green energy bitcoin exchange, uh, where, you know, um, the, we take the gridcoin that we make and we exchange of course something that offsets your carbon emissions in some ways so that we're kind of eliminating or rather we're offsetting our carbon emissions that we're creating from our hardware.
  134.  
  135. Speaker 3: 00:43:17 Um, I think that this might be, uh, a sink, you know, if we are able to create some sort of chain where, okay, we are now, you know, uh, he, and you know, this is a very limited use case and it's actually more narrow than where we are now. But we heat our homes with, uh, you know, gpus in the winter, uh, uh, which uses approximately the same amount of energy that we'd be heating our homes with otherwise, but it's creating this valuable, uh, some, some value, some extra value that didn't exist before and that has computational power. We then exchange the tokens. We get to this computational power for let's say, uh, some like plot of land and the Amazon or something which we, if you're following the news, is a going to be a decimated in the, uh, years. Um, uh, and you know, s uh, somebody eventually buys those points, uh, uh, you know, some charity or something.
  136.  
  137. Speaker 3: 00:44:17 Uh, will, you know, buy those coins and uh, they'll say, okay, I am simultaneously, uh, uh, contributing to saving a plot of land in the Amazon and I'm helping people, uh, heat their homes with electricity that's considered, uh, contributing to, uh, you know, scientific computation and the fact that, you know, for the restricted it could be, you know, um, uh, you know, computations for climate change, climate predictions. Um, you know, I think that that is a, a far better, uh, marketing strategy than anything we've had yet. Is that not necessarily the best one? But I think that's a much more attractive sell and what we've been trying up until now, which has been this sort of scattered like Eno, contribute to science by crunching a grid coin and to, you know, make the world a better place.
  138.  
  139. Speaker 2: 00:45:06 So I agree with you. I'm going to zoom out a little bit here. So what you're describing is one part of a larger economic system, which is what we're building. I don't agree with you when you say we're going to be a niche market because what we're building is, we've talked about it before. It was called a multicurrency economy, and these networks represent economic systems. So what we need to do is build the levers to control the knobs and levers to control those economic systems. Where you're describing is kind of a second layer. It's an after protocol, a marketplace. It's an eco, it's a, it's part of the ecosystem, not the economic system. And I think it's a great idea having that sort of exchange built in to the a UI built into the experience. But the, the economic knobs and levers are things like transaction fees are blockchain economy systems are built on fees, their fees based economies.
  140.  
  141. Speaker 2: 00:45:57 So the knobs and levers are things like transaction fees and things like manual reward claim fees, things we just talked about last week. So if we're building this dynamic system that also, there's tons of other ways you can build fees into these economic systems to manipulate the currencies to manipulate, manipulate the economics of this system. So with MRC fees, you know, right now the current proposal says we're going to send 95 or 90 or 95% of the fee to development and we're going to send a 10 or 5% to the staker of the, of the fee of their claim, right? We can use that fee and other fees that we will probably develop in the future to say, okay, we're going to send a 60% to development, we're going to send 20% to what you're calling a sink a, we're going to send then 20% to the staker or something like that.
  142.  
  143. Speaker 2: 00:46:51 And you can split that up even smaller. So we need to build these knobs and levers and then those percentages change based on the, the, the, the, the, the variables in the system, right? So if there are more crunchers, then we need to send more coins from the fees to the sink to, to help control inflation. If there are less crunchers, we don't need to send as many to the sink because that will create a drastic rise in price that we don't want that volatility. We want to control it in a way that we want to control it through the protocol. So we need to build this dynamic system based on fees that help control inflation. Yeah. So we can increase the coins minted without increasing the, we don't necessarily need to increase the coins minted. We can keep the value of the coins relative to whatever the hell we want.
  144.  
  145. Speaker 2: 00:47:42 However many are minted, as long as we have these knobs and levers that can be turned by the protocol to keep the value of the coin the same. So I think that's the protocol future. That's the future of the protocol in terms of controlling the economic system. And on top of that, we can build these, uh, marketplaces that you're talking about, which are really good ideas, which I think should be explored, particularly the concept of heating your homes with GPU is finding a way to capture that heat. Actually, we talked about this last week was when we were talking about LHC, the are going to use the heat captured from that. Um, or the heat produced from the LHC to heat houses. We need to engineer, this is an engineering problem engineer, a way to capture the heat from gpus and you just keep building. Some people already do this in large mining operations where they put the mining operation in the basement and they pump the heat pipe, the heat through the building.
  146.  
  147. Speaker 2: 00:48:35 Right? But if you can build that on a smaller scale, if you can engineer that, it's not an easy thing to do. That's an amazing, amazing tool because you're right, you're heating a home while you're also creating value that wasn't there before. Instead of just creating heat, you're creating value in using the excess heat from that creation of a product into, to, to use it using that heat. So I think there are many ways to approach this. I think that main focus in terms of controlling the economic system has to be on the fee based economy, which is what blockchains are developing. Uh, so if we are capable of building a network that people trust based on an organizational level, based on our protocols, stability based on its development path, based on his roadmap, based on the people involved place on the, the ideas that come out of the network, uh, if we're able to build a network that is trustable, people will use that network. And then if we're able to build an economic system that makes sense, that's practical, that's not volatile like crazy, then people will use the currency. It's, I think that's where the main main focus should be. I feel like that's, there's a little jumbled, but does that make sense?
  148.  
  149. Speaker 3: 00:49:42 That makes sense. I, uh, I actually disagree with you. I think it's the opposite. Um, we, I think we should be focusing on a more narrow application, uh, that will actually bring users and then, you know, maybe we can start thinking about, um, you know, all those knobs and levers you were describing. I'm not sure. I mean, again, those knobs and leavers I, it seems to me would apply to a kind of more general cryptocurrency that people would be using. Uh, again, something like Bitcoin, I mean some something, you know, the, the general cryptocurrency, um, and I don't the more, you know, the more and more time passes, the more and more I'm looking at the development of this coin, the more and more I'm looking at what I consider the mistakes of those who came before us.
  150.  
  151. Speaker 2: 00:50:28 Um, I think, I think we should actually be narrowing our focus. Um, rather than trying all these, you know, uh, creating, I'm not saying we shouldn't create these mechanisms. What I'm saying is I, I don't think that they're going to bring more people, right. But the problem we're facing right now is we're about to implement something that is intended to bring more people. But when we bring more people in, we kind of destroy the economics of the coin. So we have to build a lever system where as we bring more people in, the economics of the coin doesn't get destroyed. They have to get developed at least in tandem, or we have to develop an economic system first that can absorb massive amounts of users and distribution from the protocol. Before we bring users in to destroy the economic system.
  152.  
  153. Speaker 6: 00:51:14 Yeah. How many, I mean, what, you know, not to get too far into that, you know, do we even have a, an idea of the levers we're talking about and we've talked about, you know, dynamic rewards before, uh, we've talked about MRCs I mean, what other, what other ones do and vision? A heavy, heavy, heavy, I don't know folks have put any, even any thought to that.
  154.  
  155. Speaker 2: 00:51:33 You could have stuff. Don't you get, hold on Terrence, I'll respond to that. Then you, you can have, you can do stuff with blocks and superblocks that some other coins are doing where some of the coin minted in each block is used for a specific purpose instead of all of it going to the transaction fee. But that's, some people don't like that because transaction fees are like holy, uh, but you can do stuff with super blocks in particular. You can do stuff with, um, uh, I'm blanking right now. So 10 is legal, but there are others they have to do with the way we white list projects. Um,
  156.  
  157. Speaker 8: 00:52:03 yeah. [inaudible] similar to that. Um, I think one of the lever convenience, how much you're contributing to the scientific papers. So maybe, uh, inflation rate could be linked to the number of, uh, papers that we are contributing for example, like related to the science progress.
  158.  
  159. Speaker 2: 00:52:24 Yup. And there's a registries token curated registries, there's voting mechanisms involved. You could use where, um, you have to lock up coins when you vote or you have to lock up coins for a certain number of reason. Actually, the way I'm, um, [inaudible] verified side staking addresses, the way I'm getting, uh, I'm trying to put together, uh, the grid coined out world site to be funded can be turned into a, a lever where people who want to start initiatives have to lock up a certain amount of funds. That's like a sink, you know. Uh, it may be they're locked up in contract where there they released five years later or 10 years later. But it is a contract that everyone can see, so it's predictable for everyone or maybe they're locked up permanently so that it acts as a sync, a permanent thing, cause a permanent burn address.
  160.  
  161. Speaker 2: 00:53:12 Uh, another one is beacons. The cost to register beacon, oh, the cost to vote. Those are actual sinks that more people that register beacons, the more GRC is going to get burned and we can change the of registering of beacon to help control the number of people that come on board while at the same time controlling the, um, the inflation rate. I think there are many options, but this is new in the entire crypto space. So this is why I actually love grid coin a lot. Like a lot of it is the science and how we distribute coins, but we have a community that just looks at this stuff kind of differently because we have these beacons built into the protocol that people interact with regularly. That it's, it's, it's a tool that now a lot of the coins have in my opinion.
  162.  
  163. Speaker 3: 00:53:57 Um, I guess not, I guess I'm going to stick with, uh, the inflation that I think should be just straight up tied to the amount of computational power I think to just, just because this is what the client is supposed to represent, right? I mean, this clinic is supposed to be about, you know, scientific computing. Grid coin as supposed to represent the amount of, um, you know, Gridcoin's supposed to be tied to the the computational power you've got. Right. Um, once we start introducing mechanisms like, okay, the more people that are on the network, you know, we're gonna change this amount of money. You know, it's, it's just starts. Um, you know, some people are going to win, some people are going to lose. Uh, it just, it just seems to start, I mean, one, I mean, I guess I, you know, we have to think about, you know, are they, you know, ethical mechanisms in the first place. But after that, you know, you know, is it even a good, you know, um, is, you know, is a wise is it attractive? You know, I don't, I'm just, I'm not convinced. I mean, I'm, I'm willing to be convinced. I mean, tell me, tell me more. Like, why, why did we, why do we need these things in particular,
  164.  
  165. Speaker 2: 00:55:05 great perspective. Look at it. It's about being convinced when people look at economies like where you're going to move in the world when something happens or when you want to move. You look at the economy of the place you're moving it. Is that economy attractive to me or not? This happens with businesses a lot and the way governments entice businesses or individuals, but mostly businesses is they change their knobs and levers to attract who they want to attract at a specific point of time that in a protocol and we can put that in a protocol to attract who we want to attract it specific amount of time. Um, Jimmy makes hat, by the way, from your phone. Hold on. I'm going to mute him. Just we don't know who you are. His phone call. Okay. He caught himself.
  166.  
  167. Speaker 3: 00:55:45 [inaudible] finish the thought to finish thought and then foxify and then to, we'll go next.
  168.  
  169. Speaker 2: 00:55:49 Uh, so something we haven't really discussed a lot in this community is how we want to interact with businesses. Uh, on our block chain. It's something that bit shares has in their Wikipedia in their, like their, their breakdown of how their economic system was work, how would they let businesses make decisions, how they, what their relationship is like with businesses who want to interact with their network, want to use their network. I think that is going to be a very, very important lever to develop in the future. The way we build a relationship between the individuals and the businesses. Two tapes to more types of a pitch participants we're going to add to our network at some point in the end that's going to be one of those economic levers. Just like the way economies generally work. It's a way to control resources. All right. Foxifies thenTerrence.
  170.  
  171. Speaker 4: 00:56:36 Okay. Yeah. In regards of marketing, um, I see one thing we need to take into account is how developed people are in terms of what type of economies are willing to accept. Um, the idea is that you could have, uh, scientific research, computational research as, as the core of, of an economy is, uh, is, is fairly radical for most people. And, um, uh, I don't believe it's going to appear, uh, attractive to most people at first. Um, not today, definitely not today. And, uh, it's going to take some time, right? So like what I see here is there's a lot of people are worried about marketing and trying to attract everybody, but they have to, um, go through the steps of development. They have to develop to a point where they see science as something that is important. And, uh, whereas working for, um, you know, and uh, to get there, there are a lot of distractions. You know, look at the crypto market. You have thousands of coins, thousands out. How do you, how do you decipher which is worth something, which is not right? How do you get here? To this point,
  172.  
  173. Speaker 2: 00:57:52 you should watch my, my speech from the workshop, I went through a whole slide on how to interpret the value of a network there in Sligo.
  174.  
  175. Speaker 8: 00:57:59 Yeah. I think a, there's common theme here that we have to keep in mind is that the whole thing isn't a zero sum game. So as long as we're, uh, I guess, uh, hooked to the scientific progress, which will scale indefinitely, right? Uh, I think we can solve a lot of this, uh, problem about like how big the market is and you know, who's winning, who's losing, uh, because the pie is keeps growing. So it's not an issue. Uh, when that's the case now, uh, as to the marketing, I also thought about like how, how, if we can, uh, use our, uh, coin to fund specific research because at the end of the day, uh, the benefit of the research is the society, right? So if it, if they figured out some sort of drug which will cure some sort of cancer, that's a huge benefit, right? And so is there a way for us to, uh, incentivize that kind of research, maybe like pay out to projects, uh, directly from funds collected from the Grid coin community in Gridcoin, paying them in Grid coin?
  176.  
  177. Speaker 2: 00:59:08 I think that's a great way to look at it. Into combined with facts if I was saying and just the marketing concept that's going on so far in the discussion. Like cryptocurrencies are unique in that they're both a product, like a product and their economic and governance models like they're built to replace governments and economies. So there's the marketing from the like, here's our flashy UI, here's our flashy utility, here's our great support team. And then there's the marketing, like who in seriously just brought up, which is like, we want to attract scientists. So let's build an economic system that benefits scientists more than any other economic system in the ecosystem or what I was talking about before. If we want to attract businesses, let's build an economic model that attracts businesses to our network more than any other, uh, economic system out there in the ecosystem.
  178.  
  179. Speaker 2: 01:00:00 So, you know, if you're attracting businesses, this is the way the world works right now. Like you've lower tax rates on corporations to zero as best you can. You create loopholes. You, you have a bunch of benefits for businesses so they incorporate in your country. A great example of this in cryptocurrency is Malta. And Estonia where they're very crypto friendly. So all of these crypto businesses are going to those legacy networks, those legacy government's legacy economic systems. Once we get past those systems, it's going to take a long, long time. But what we're building right now is the groundwork to replace those. Then we're going to, we we have to do it. Who is there honestly is say we have to, if we're building an economy based on science as Foxify says we want to build a system that incentivizes scientists maybe directly out of the protocol, that can be a lever.
  180.  
  181. Speaker 2: 01:00:50 Maybe we need to increase the amount of coins going directly to a research from the protocol at some point to attract more scientists. Maybe we need to shut the tap off because we're getting too many projects in at once. These network can't vet all the projects quickly enough, so we need to disincentivize scientists come to our network right away because it's overloading our infrastructure, so we need to then build a better infrastructure to take more people in. So we have to shut off the tap, build the infrastructure, then turn the tap on. When you do that as an economic network, as an economic system, it's damaging. So what does the argument I'm having with chocolate I think is that I'm saying we want to build those, the, the ability to absorb all these new people coming in, all these new scientists, all these new businesses, all these new researchers and users. At the same time, we want to build the infrastructure to absorb that so that we'd never need to shut off the tap in order to build that infrastructure in the future. Because when you shut off the tap, that opens up the playing field for other networks to turn on their tap. Right. And we don't want to give them that opportunity.
  182.  
  183. Speaker 9: 01:01:53 Um, so, right. I'm just, I'm not convinced that what you're suggesting is, is, uh, what accomplish what you're trying to achieve? Um, well I mean for one, I mean I'm, I'm, for one, I'm not sure that simply removing it seemed requirement will bring a massive influx of people. We might have a spike, um, a short spike. I think it will be small and then we might get more people slowly over time. I don't think it's going be some massive influx. I agree with you earlier. Um, uh, um, and then, uh, you know, on top of that, um, uh, a lot of, I mean we'd be soft to do something about like the initial point distribution, but that's like another story entirely. But beyond that, I mean, I think that the best way to accommodate a massive influx of people would be to fix how we're distributing points right now in the most simple manner possible, which is by, you know, you know, tying the amounts of gridcoin that we meant to, the amount of computational power on the network.
  184.  
  185. Speaker 2: 01:02:52 That's this Ramez no, that's not so simple.
  186.  
  187. Speaker 9: 01:02:55 Well, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's true. I mean, I'm working on it. I mean, you, Jim, you, you're aware of where that's at. Um, obviously it's, it's, you know, we're not there yet, for sure. Yeah.
  188.  
  189. Speaker 2: 01:03:05 And I'm painfully aware of what are, to actually make it work. So that's, that's another challenge. Okay. I'll, I'm saying right now chocolate is that the reason that we're having this discussion that's seems like a side track, the team required removal but it's not at all. The reason we're having this discussion about economics and marketing is because the team requirement combined with the manual rewards claims, it's a kind of next major development in the pipeline is the first experience we're having as a network where we're starting to expand beyond the just being a general cryptocurrency, we're starting to actually building an economic system. It's really, really cool and we're all thinking about it and you know, to use, doing myself as an example, when we built CBR, the, the sort of the rules behind the protocol, we were thinking ahead and like, all right, maybe in the future we're going to have these levers. Let's sort of introduce the idea of a dynamic block reward. And you know, I released the Treasury concept about MRC fees and how we can use them for alternative purposes years ago. And there is a, when we're building these things, think ahead, think very far ahead. Uh, but like you're saying, act practically, we have to do the small steps at a time. So reign me in, I think very far ahead. A lot of the time.
  190.  
  191. Speaker 3: 01:04:21 One of the, one of the just in immediate, um, problems I can point out is that it's a very difficult to predict, um, what, you know, pushing one lever is going to do in a dynamic environment. Uh, it might have the opposite effect that you want to have. It might have a totally opposite effect. Uh, sorry, I may have a totally different effect. Um, it's, uh, I mean economics is complicated ... Here, but a hundred percent
  192.  
  193. Speaker 2: 01:04:52 points doing it at the same time. So, you know, I pay attention to a lot of other coins and when,
  194.  
  195. Speaker 3: 01:04:57 well, well, it's the, so I'm, I'm, I'm mentioning this in order to point out that I don't think that we should be, you know, trying to add so many knobs and levers before, you know, before anything even happens.
  196.  
  197. Speaker 2: 01:05:10 I agree with that. But often enumerate the knobs, we might want to add.
  198.  
  199. Speaker 3: 01:05:15 Oh, that's a good point. Yeah. Mean I, we should, I think we should, I think we should say, okay, here's a list of what we're able to do in the future. Like, here's what we can do with MRC rewards that here's what we can do, a block rewards here. Or here's like all these things that we can change. I think that makes sense to know what we can and can't control. When I'm saying is I don't make, I don't think it makes sense to necessarily say, oh, okay, let's do this right now. Cause I don't think we can predict what's gonna happen.
  200.  
  201. Speaker 5: 01:05:42 I'm going to have to get brown. No, right with knobs or one Sunday. Man, I think we're going to act right one or two of them and see what they do. And a
  202.  
  203. Speaker 2: 01:05:48 Galvin before you go, I'm sorry. And just to, to, to, uh, emphasize why having these discussions very important because a lot of people in the crypto space are in the crypto space specifically because we're building knobs and leavers to do economic systems because we don't believe that the current economic systems work. So we want to attract people like that will help us build these knobs and leavers and not a lot of, uh, communities. There are a lot, but there are also a lot who don't, uh, talk about this stuff. And the more we talk about it, the more we get it out there, then the more people we'll attract who think like this. And then, you know, it's kind of like a feedback loop. The more people that attract, the more rebuild, more rebuild, the more we discussed them more, we discussed them where we attract more attractive, more real blah, blah, blah, et cetera. So that's the reason to have these discussions when we have these developments that are really, really cool. All right. Sorry. Got It.
  204.  
  205. Speaker 5: 01:06:36 Sorry. Now I would just say it, just because you shouldn't touch values doesn't mean that a protocol, any application, any coding whatsoever should not be built to best practices and have those values always set to a variable that is exposed to some comp file or, or, or some easily, um, uh, easily changeable like format. Right? Because as much as I, as much as we don't want to touch them at the gate and, and possibly half those values never ever touch, right. Having the availability to touch them in a scenario is extremely, extremely important. Um, so I, and to your point about economics being complicated, yeah. But the only way to get those values is 100% to to gently twist an ob and see what happens and then log everything and then turn it back and then twist a completely different knob. And if we have to do that on test or we have to, you know, like turn it, you know, two or 3% in like one way or like 1% in another just to see how things change, then we might have to experiment with that. I'm not saying, you know, I recommended just trying that out and out in the wild, but like without telling people, but I, I could put one, there's very little be tested economically and tested out. It's not, you know, it doesn't have enough. No, but, but there, there's some values that definitely, yes there are. But most of this is going to have to just be experiential and maintenance.
  206.  
  207. Speaker 2: 01:07:59 Yeah. This is why the whole crypto crypto ecosystem works together. This is why, yes, it's crypto because it's competitive to a level, but we're all working together to try and figure out how to build a future economic system. One that you know, when you look at the current economic system, they're just, they don't know what they're doing. They have knobs and leavers and they think over like a hundred years. They figured out what interest rates do to economies, but they really don't know. Every time you know, the US just cut 25 points off the interest rate and they think they know what that's going to do, but they don't know. So we're trying to take that concept, put it into code and have thousands of these networks experiment with economics at a level. It's an open economic system where anyone can come and experiment with economics without having to become a fed chair. That's why it's an amazing thing. Hey Jim, quick question.
  208.  
  209. Speaker 6: 01:08:50 Sorry. Sorry. Quick Quick Question Jim. So if [inaudible] you're totally right, like only a couple of those values that we can really tweak would make any sense to touch an in test other than for debugging purposes. Totally agree. Is there a way to isolate a value changes to a specific project so that we don't disrupt the entire ecosystem of grid coin? Um, but instead we could say, hey, for the next month this project will have this change initiated so we can try to understand it better as a whole and see if it's something we want to implement over everything. Is that, is that even possible? Well anything's possible. What kind of change are you best answer ever? Well I don't know. That's the thing. I honestly don't even know. I'm just saying, I'm just saying if we, if we wanted to tweak knob or do this is why we have to have the protectoral discussion. Because when you're, it's just like I had them include the concept of a team white list even though no one had even talked about that right.
  210.  
  211. Speaker 6: 01:09:44 No one talked about that. That, that's something I cooked up when I wrote the code cause I figured out, you know what, we might actually yeah, and I don't know whether we're going to it or not. We have, we have to have a discussion about what we do, what we could do or could possibly do and then architect that into the code if it's feasible. And then the answer is yeah, if you want to tweak it, you can tweak it. Let me give you some examples. If we [inaudible] were to move away from the [inaudible], um, you know, flat magnitude per project, right? That you guys, everyone knows the, and by the way, if you don't go listen to there plenty of fire sides that cover this, but everyone knows that basically you're taking a 115,000 magnitude points and you're divided by the number of white listed projects.
  212.  
  213. Speaker 6: 01:10:20 And that's how many, that's how much each project gets. So each project basically is an equal amount of, of emission rate per day. All things being equal. If we want to adjust that and start, you know, having other factors than we need to talk about what those are and then put those knobs in place in the code. And the answer is you might need, you might leave the knobs at their center or quote Unquote Center setting, which would be what it is today, but that, you know, we could build in a more generalized algorithm to do that. We could, we could go in the direction I like chocolate, but which is too stop paying, paying equal across projects instead try and reward based on the computational power that they're actually [inaudible] using. Um, those are things that we have to discuss to actually wire up in there. Uh, and then, you know, you can, you can literally turn [inaudible] on and see what happens.
  214.  
  215. Speaker 2: 01:11:09 Yeah. And so yeah, to sort of support that, to go off that and sort of go back to what Josh was saying about how we're dealing with heuristics and these economics systems, we don't know what's going to happen when you turn these knobs. And first to build off what Jim just said. So that's what, uh, ethereum did from my understanding is they just built the possibility to do a bunch of stuff and they didn't know what people were going to do with it. And then people built a bunch of really interesting, um, uh, systems I guess on top of ethereum. And we figured out, you know, there's was a bunch of testings ... And things failed and things succeeded and things broken, blah, blah blah. But what we're starting so, so that's what Jim's saying right there. Build the knobs and maybe we change them in the future.
  216.  
  217. Speaker 2: 01:11:49 Maybe we don't, but they're there to use if we want to use them. And then the way coins are starting establish networks, establish academies are starting to use these knobs is they're building friendly forks where they're experimental forks. So they're saying like use ethereum for an example, I don't know if ethereum has a friendly fork yet, but they're saying look very, I can, our economic system is far too big. It controls, it has too much money involved in it at stake to really risk a lot of stuff. You know, grid coin small right now. So we can take pretty big risks without putting crazy amounts of money. Like we have a lot of money in our system, but it's not like ethereum or bitcoin right. So we, these big systems don't want to change, don't want to turn a knob to 11 and their main net and risk destroying a hundreds of millions worth of value of dollars of people at stake with stake.
  218.  
  219. Speaker 2: 01:12:41 So they've created friendly forks where they're like, people come participate in this blockchain and understand this as essentially just a glorified testnet, but it's huge and maybe it will replace the meaning at some point. If you know we're, we're going to turn the knob to 11 at this friendly fork and just because we don't really know what it's going to, what's going to happen, maybe it's going to do something amazing and we're all going to transition from the old for it to the new one. But really we're just using this to experiment on a larger scale. That's the way that these larger developed, uh, uh, economies, blockchain economies are starting to experiment stuff. And I think that it's, yeah, there's something, you know, if greed coin becomes a, an economy with a lot of money at stake, uh, then we're going to have to do that as well as we build these knobs.
  220.  
  221. Speaker 2: 01:13:25 So it's not people are saying what you're saying, chocolate, where's they're like, we're, it's a fear thing and it's very reasonable fear where it's like, we don't want to just turn a knob. So like, okay, yeah, we agree. Let's figure out a way to turn a knob and not destroy what we've already built. Right. My question, my question, who should be or who needs to be in control? The changing these values, do they have to be elected? Uh, does that have to be developers? Like who is it? Yeah. That can be done by building, right? It can be done by voting, but they, the main fundamental question, yeah. The main principle of a blockchain is that if someone turns the Knob and that's called a fork, and then if that now turn is approved by the majority of the, then that fork becomes the main chain.
  222.  
  223. Speaker 2: 01:14:14 Uh, so I personally don't like the idea of having individuals with the power to turn a Knob, but anyone can turn a knob. You don't need to vote someone in power. I could right now fork the code and change the way that magnitude works. And then if it works better than the main grid coin network, people might switch over to that point. But the idea is to build a cohesive community that moves together, that shifts instead of forks. And voting is a really good tool to help shift as a network instead of fork like bitcoin and bitcoin cash. All bitcoin cash did was turning up. They changed the block size. Uh, and that's enough. That's one of their economic knobs as one of ours as well. And that fork the network.
  224.  
  225. Speaker 9: 01:14:56 I think, um, if we're going to be say that these, uh, parameters should be changing in response to changes in the network and they should be automated and that's awesome.
  226.  
  227. Speaker 6: 01:15:08 Yeah. So, so any like, uh, the emission rate that scales based on the number beacons and stuff like that, it would have to be dynamic and it would have to be based on, it would probably be something similar to the super block base where it would be far enough back in the chain that wouldn't be subject to reorganization so that you developed sort of an unstable feedback loop with the protocol settings changing and then generating [inaudible]. So are you guys following me on? Yes. Yes. You, you have to be very careful implement dynamic protocol settings in a network because you can, you can, you get into some really nasty feedback effects on a network. But if you come up with a system that basically allows them to drift back in the chain head far enough and where you, you have a very, very calm, you're very, very confident that consensus has been achieved, then you can allow those and become active after a certain amount of distance from the head of the chain and then those settings that can apply forward. Uh, it's, it's, you know, we can, we can, we can introduce more dynamic aspect of the network. We just have to be careful about how it's done. And by the way, those changes can be voted on. So you can implement this as a form of, you know, voting contracts and essentially, you know, tallying the votes, um, that can be done automatically to was just has it just has to be done.
  228.  
  229. Speaker 8: 01:16:30 Um, yeah, I think you were saying that, yeah. For the feedback, uh, one way is to have like a time period, right. So that um, anything goes wrong. The feedbacks in immediately cut off. Like, I think you were saying that as well, a number of, uh, the s uh, the steps in the chain.
  230.  
  231. Speaker 6: 01:16:47 Yeah. Well here, let me just give you an idea. So say that you had a, a quorum of people in the community that voted to change CBR. Alright. And, and, and we had a knob in the system in the, in the network that would allow CBR to be changed dynamically based on a vote. I'm not saying that's a wise thing to do at this point, but let's just suppose that we did that. You would want that consensus, that boat to only, uh, to be recorded once it meets the qualifying criteria would be recorded in some block, but then that that change would not become active until that block has been confirmed essentially like 500 times in the network. So that there's very little chance of a reorganization or, or, or forking incident to come back and literally undo the building block for you following me. And then once you, once you've attained enough distance from that decision point, that's when you allow the actual effect take place.
  232.  
  233. Speaker 4: 01:17:42 Yeah, I totally agree. It's like Mandatory, like a mandatory upgrade where, where uh,
  234.  
  235. Speaker 6: 01:17:47 yeah, it's effectively what it is form of dynamic mandatory upgrading as what it is. That's exactly right. And it's a bit tricky, but I, I think it could be done. Um, we got to do a lot of things, but I think it could be done now that's far, that's something today, you know, some of the protocol values, he holder currently has to make those changes and that's a, and then quite frankly an undesirable [inaudible] eventually. One way from
  236.  
  237. Speaker 4: 01:18:11 so far I trusted the developers. I don't know. I'm pretty sure most people do here.
  238.  
  239. Speaker 8: 01:18:15 I think why is a, another similar situation is like you, you know, you turned the lever the Knob so that a certain set of people, uh, more coins and then, you know, because of that we'll have a higher voting power. So they keep voting onto the same knob, maybe even turn up even higher. So you've got this bad feedback with where the people keep getting more, more power. So this is the exactly what you're saying.
  240.  
  241. Speaker 6: 01:18:39 Yeah. Yeah. That's, that's also why you have to very careful what about the types of, uh, knobs that you design, right? You have to, you've got to do some hard thinking to make sure that, you know, you don't become a victim of [inaudible] law of unintended consequences, right? So it's a cause it's a fully done, you know, when you're going to put this thing out in the [inaudible] wholly dynamic system, right? And, uh, and dynamic systems have a habit. As an unstable node, I'm being a bit punishable and unstable notice, call this the whole thing to kill us. So, you know, we have to be very careful, but I like, I liked it. Like I, I, I'm very attracted to this idea of, of on chain governance because what Jay Ringo really talking about and uh, being able to literally vote changes in protocol, uh, you know, based on proposals and then you vote on it, then you actually make it happen there.
  242.  
  243. Speaker 6: 01:19:28 There has to be some, some space. Um, there has to be some parameter constraint in that space though, you know, you know, um, we can't create something that does everything. We can't create something that's got infinite number of knobs. So one of the things you look that right, we have to sit down to the likely knobs and we want to put in place and the likely Obana variability to make this practically implementable. Right? That makes sense to everybody. I mean, we can't, otherwise it's [inaudible]. So, um, yeah. Um, we're going to, we're going to wrap up here. Foxify, you're trying to get a word in Jim. I'm going to respond to that as a closing thought. Uh, the first I saw you wanting to get a word in who in seriously Oslow. So it's going to be Foxify then who
  244.  
  245. Speaker 2: 01:20:08 is seriously. And then I'll wrap up unless anyone else wants to say anything.
  246.  
  247. Speaker 4: 01:20:13 Um, I'm just gonna say that, uh, any type of limitations that we need to impose on, uh, uh, on values than, uh, uh, of, of these knobs, we could, um, uh, it can be expressed in a, and a proposal before it's voted on. So say for example, if you want to change your inflation rate, right? Me and my, we might say, well, to prevent hyperinflation would say that it never goes beyond 10% or something like that.
  248.  
  249. Speaker 2: 01:20:41 I like it. I like where you're thinking. Agreed. They're asleep.
  250.  
  251. Speaker 8: 01:20:44 Yeah. So, uh, I was thinking like, I kinda agree with Goblin as well. Like we should do some tests and I'm thinking like we can also look at other projects and discuss about other projects, uh, and how they're doing it and use them as the test case to see, you know, what, what's the drawback, what's the pro of doing it that way. So instead of using ourself as the Guinea pig, we can look at the other coins and see, maybe there are things that they're doing that's wrong. You know, the things we should discuss based on what other coins experiences. And I also want to talk about like how chocolate it was, uh, had a real good point and how he was saying like, instead of, you know, one of, one of the way we should think is rather we will introduce, uh, problems. Uh, instead of just thinking about all these opportunities, think about like if we turned them Knob, would it costs the problem? I think that's the thing that he was kinda talking about and I kind of agreed with that.
  252.  
  253. Speaker 2: 01:21:40 Yeah, I agree with both thoughts including your comment and what chocolate was saying cause I do agree with it. You've seen as well. I think your idea about using other communities as examples is a great one. I would add on to it that we should actively, we should maybe actively seek out other communities and talk to them, interact with them and build together, you know, help them build their system. They help us build ours because we're, we're building, we're all building alternative economic systems using different knobs as let's work together and learn from each other. Um, and to Jim, are you trying to get a final word in here? Alright. And to close up here, I just, I do want to clarify that I don't think building knobs and levers comes in a single proposal. I think this is stuff that comes about when we get developments like the team required removal, like MRC obviously.
  254.  
  255. Speaker 2: 01:22:33 Sudden MRC for example, presents an opportunity to create a, a sink to create a, a mandatory burn rate through fees where when someone claims a reward, some of that fee is burned in this way. To see that is enough to control inflation, right? So now we can use that to help mitigate the possible downside to removing the team requirement, which is a lot of people coming in and then the reward is getting diluted as, so thinking about knobs and what we want to build in the future. Great. But I don't, we should just be thinking about how to put as, you can't think that far ahead. Honestly, I don't think so. So trying to think about all of the levers that all amounts you want to put it in and putting it in the rest of the proposal. I don't think it's even feasible, but we're going to, if we're thinking from that perspective, like when we're thinking about which way we want to go as a development and development path for like, all right, if we want to develop this thing, what is that going to do for the economics of the coin?
  256.  
  257. Speaker 2: 01:23:27 How are we going to be able to use this coin? How is it going to affect stakers? How's it going to affect crunchers? How is it going to affect inflation rate? Is it going to give us any additional tools besides this intended utility? For example, to use MRC, again, MRC gives you the intended utility where you don't need to stake to get your claims, your rewards anymore. You just click a button and it gives you this additional economic tool to help you control inflation and build a treasury and do a bunch of other stuff. So that is why MRC, in my opinion, is their path to go. Instead of something like superblock distribution, which was an idea of back at the same time MRC was coming out. Some people thought we could distribute all the earned research records and super blocks. Okay. Even if that was possible, would that give us an additional tool to help control the economics of our network?
  258.  
  259. Speaker 2: 01:24:16 I don't. Maybe it could. We didn't really think through it all the way cause everyone wanted MRC, but I don't think it could right off the bat. So that's, that's I think the way we should approach these, these knobs and levers. And the close this off here because this turned out to be, this turned out to be a, the grid coin fireside discussion on knobs and levers did it stemmed because we are developing this thing called the team requirement removal, which is hopefully going to let more people join our system, join our incentive system because why the hell not you're crunching blank anyway. Why not make a little money for your electricity? That makes a lot of sense. So we talked about what that's going to be, how we're going to implement it. Sort of the two phase testing, a concept we're putting out there.
  260.  
  261. Speaker 2: 01:25:04 Uh, and um, we talked about maybe some effects that this team requirement removal might have on the economic system and how we might mitigate those. There was a lot of talk about building sinks and using claim fees as a sink, maybe building a larger economic or larger markets on top of this to help add value to the network. Uh, and a lot of really, really great stuff that I enjoyed thoroughly how nick says knobs and levers is definitely not an off-brand shoots and ladders. You nailed it. Um, so this was a great discussion. If anyone has any more thoughts on the team requirement or how we might roll it out, how we might test it thoroughly, um, and or anything like that or any thoughts on shoots and letters, feel free to reach out to anyone in the discord or the slack. Uh, we will be back next week. I think delta will be back with another project brief. And I'm gonna wrap up on how nick said here, just this thought. He says, enumerate what you understand. Revisit when you understand something new, exactly what we're trying to build here
  262.  
  263. Speaker 1: 01:26:04 on economic. So with that, everyone, thank you for the great discussion. We'll see you next week. Have a [Loud Music].
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!