space. Just turned it on. Let me invite everyone. This will take a second. Okay. I invited a bunch of people, so hopefully they show up. And just a reminder that we do these spaces in order to answer people's questions, because people do have a lot of questions. They have a lot of messages, you know. It's very wearisome replying to them all individually, so people can ask them here or they cannot. I mean, one purpose was to address the haters, which is kind of a waste of time, but it's still fun to do it anyway, because at least your supporters can see that the haters don't really have anything on you. But yeah, I mean, like a lot of haters don't even show up, so. But let me post. I forgot to even post it. Post it on my post. Post. Okay. And we've got Vlad. Let's move Vlad up as a co-host. Why not? And these spaces are often kind of slow at the beginning, but then at the end, they're a little better. I don't know. We may stop doing them, because I feel like the utility has fallen off a little. I don't know, Vlad, what do you think? I disagree with you. There is a lot of value in showing up, and I think that people need just to see that someone actually cares about what's being built and receive that reassurance that, unlike what some toxic maxes will say, this is not a scam. This is happening. This is building. This is shipping stuff that previously did not exist and was supposed to exist on Bitcoin, but that's not what happened. And maybe, I don't know, maybe I just enjoy listening to people every week in here, but I feel like there is something growing, and this grassroots feeling, like there's no professional marketing or whatever. It's just the creator of this, answering to all the questions and even dealing with trolls. I think it's amazing. I'm grateful that you're doing this. I might have to have someone else do it every week, and then I'll just pop in from time to time. But yeah, we're building lots of stuff. For example, there's now a second CUSF client that adds quantum-resistant signatures and will probably add a lot of other weirder stuff, like it might add OP_CAT. It might add OpVault. So of course, that's something that BTC could just take at any time, but we know that they won't because they're deranged. And just the whole 110 thing is a huge distraction and kind of an embarrassment. So we are building tons and tons of stuff. It's kind of hilarious, sorry for interrupting, but once you launch eCash next month, they will say, well, we can't take that because it's used by shitcoin. It's shitcoin tech. If it doesn't come from our sacred circle of high priests who are coming up with stuff, then it's just not good enough. So we have to figure out something new. It's hilarious because essentially eCash is going to be a shield against this technology ever getting adopted, which is kind of bittersweet, right? You built this for Bitcoin and you spent almost a decade pushing this. Yeah, that's true. It's not like I was pushing for it every single moment of the decade, but because I just kind of thought lightning would be fine or something else would be invented, and it turns out everything else is really terrible. I had no idea everyone else was so bad at this. But yes, so we could probably continue to do things, but maybe we'll have someone else host. Although each week we do get some interesting new stuff. Let's see if Shomari wants to come up and talk about all his stuff. He's always talking about this and that. He's always complaining about the bug bounty, even though it says to message on Telegram. He can't spend $2 to get the Telegram account. Just buy a burner Telegram. Oh, I thought I brought him up already and then he has to request. I don't know. The way they do this software, I swear to God. It's not that I'm complaining, but why is the Twitter software so bad? Although I guess that's the other big news is frankly that the Twitter algorithm is way better as of two days ago. Yeah, thanks for inviting me up. I do appreciate that. I do appreciate that. Yeah, welcome. Long-time listener, long-time caller. I really appreciate what's been going on for the past week with the Discord because it's really allowed me to be very engaging with many members of the community. Brand new Discord. I'm not running it, which is even better, so I'm not responsible for it, but I am on Discord. And yeah, who doesn't love a good Discord? Discord night with the boys, except instead of playing Call of Duty, it's to talk eCash without nasty Telegram and it's mean KYC. The horror, you know, the horror. Shomari, I don't remember. I didn't really follow up on your bug because I've been very busy and sometimes the universe just conspires against you. I wasn't really dwelling on that. I was looking to really get involved with the fixes, the bug fixes, and I'm still submitting issues, whether or not I'm officially part of the contest. I just really support getting this as prepared for the launch as possible. I just recently submitted another issue for the eCash Wallet Mobile to that gentleman. He's doing an amazing job, by the way. I just really am impressed with your team. That's good to hear. Yeah, definitely. We try to work them really hard, you know. But of course, it is also crunch time, so everyone can relax a little bit more like in September. But I was like, everyone, work hard now. Work hard like you have been working hard. But yeah, he's really great. Mobile app is pretty good. Mobile app is also great because you got your deplatforming risk. You got a lot of people who don't even use desktop or laptop. So, you know, people love the mobile app. Mobile app also, I mean, the mobile app is kind of dicey because it means that Apple or Google could just pull the plug on you at any time. But it's not so simple. I don't think they want to do that necessarily because they know that web apps and stuff, they know that the game theory doesn't completely support that. Yeah, and that's why web apps are so important. I know a lot of people will complain about the security risk, but it is a hedge against exactly what you just said. I wholeheartedly believe that their requirement as part of the wallet ecosystem to maintain those web apps just to hedge. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, game theorist approved. Like we're all holding a pistol at each other and it's like, don't make me use this web app. Exactly. And then you do have F-Droid since your code is open source. That is definitely an option as well. Just on the Android side. I like Android personally. And then I have that, you know, I have blue bubbles. I have like all these hacks to like trick iPhone users into thinking I have an iPhone, which for me works just fine because like I've got plenty of like multiple Mac minis and stuff. You just, I got like a iCloud. I got all this stuff, you know, I've got all the Apple stuff so you can like fake it. But, you know, I think, well, we don't really want to get into iOS versus Android. Although, God, like Android had like the anti-spam call thing like three years before that. But anyway, so yeah, Shamari is great. Shamari has a sidechain idea. It's very interesting. Now, I wouldn't worry so much about Shamari. The people who have all the hashrate now would be basically Sat's scholar. So he can't make it right now. I happen to know that he dropped me a line saying he couldn't make the space. But for the dry run. The mining, the M1. He has been talking about this exact moment in time on the dry run site. He has, you know, whatever, a lot of hashrate. So, and just to be, oh yeah, but you can't be in Shredge and talk. Well, we're going to do something where we're going to have it. I think, do we have this working already? Yes, we do. We have it so that on Telegram and Discord across posts. It does. I've been following Sat's scholar. So I'll be more in tune with what they're saying. Yeah. Because I considered just renting my own hash just to get the M1 done. But to your point though, I mean, you immediately have to act and I definitely don't have the hash power to act. So yeah, the idea was that miners would be represented by pools, would be a small number of expert specialists. And then these pools would decide to enthusiastically support the sidechain. And then it would be, so that's the way the filter was designed to catch anything that wasn't already pre-approved by the human brain of the miners themselves. I have a very, I'd just like to rant about pools for a small moment, if I may. Can I just interject really quick, just one clarification, because I'm still not sure if I understand, how many acts do I need over the two-week, like 2100? Well, the dry run we have shortened it. In the real world, it's two weeks. So because it was supposed to resemble BIP-9. It's like 95%. So I read that somewhere, but I also saw like 50%. I think, well, the thing is, it's 50% in practice because of the so-called nuclear option. The miners can just filter anyone who doesn't signal. This is what BIP-110 is going to do, except they're going to filter themselves immediately because it's mandatory signaling August, whatever it is, 5th, I don't know. And so, in practice, it's always 50%. You can always turn 51 into 100, if you wish. I have no idea what that means, but I'll take your word for it. Let's say you have 51% and you say, I am going to act this chain and if someone else doesn't mine a block that doesn't act it, I'm just going to ignore that block. Oh, I got you. I see. I'm going to build on my own chain that has X. So if you do that, you will end up with 100%, which is what everyone will see. Now, there will be a lot of minority chain, but it'll have 49% hash rate, so it will never be chain active. So it will just be orphaned. I understand that. Got it, yeah. So 51 equals 100. Okay, we got a JK up here. Yeah, I just, I... JK Rowling. How many people have made that jump? Yeah, right. No, I was just wanting to comment on, I think Ishimori was proposing another chain to add on and just some, I guess, checks. Sorry if you can't hear me. Just some checks, basically, to have it be valid and under BIP300/301, things like committing the bundle hash in the header and things like making sure that there's only one bundle ever constructed at a time. I don't know if he took into account all these things, because I don't know, it's just... Yeah, I would actually love to just maybe quickly review a few things regarding that, because I wanted to clear up one thing that I really finally understand now with regards to the fees going to the L1, because initially it just didn't make any sense to me at all. Like, how would you sustain an L2 if all the fees go to the L1? But I'm essentially going to be following the Ethereum fee model, where they have a base fee and then a premium fee. So there'll be more than one fee, essentially. So all the transactions, every single transaction has a base fee, every 100% of them, and that would go to the L1. But smart contracts, you can program whatever you want into a smart contract, and that would have a second fee. I would call it a contract fee. And that's from the contract owner, author, to decide. And then that would then can also be shared with the L2 treasury, so to speak, to kind of sustain the actual sidechain. So I'm imagining there'd be two fees, a base fee and another fee, and the base fee would get 100% would go to the L1. And just also just finish my point to just extend some math that I worked out, because another issue I was having with your, I guess, proposed 10 cent fee, I just really never made much economic sense to me, because for me, Bitcoin, at least my Bitcoin from 2012, 2013, was all about microtransactions. So I was always thinking sub penny would be the unique value proposition of Bitcoin that no other currency could do. In terms of being able to do maybe gameplay, microtransactions. So just having really low fees was, to me, a requirement. So I just wanted a little counter on your expectation. I did some math, and specifically just using my proposed chain as an example, today, right now, with no optimization, the fork that I'm using is capable of 60,000 transactions per second. If you were to just look at max capacity, and using the microtransaction model, let's say a tenth of a penny per transaction, which is pretty common, even lower than that, you're looking at like $60 a second in terms of capacity that the chain can produce in just L1 base fees, which translates, you just do the math, about $3,600 a minute and $36,000 per 10-minute block. So I think volume would really make more sense in a lot of these cases than just having a higher fee. I think stressing just mass transaction volume, but at a very small fee. I was more so just wondering, basically, when do you consider a block valid on your sidechain? Usually, for elements, it's like one-to-one whenever there's a block on the main chain, and then you don't confirm the valid block unless it has the hash of the previous BIP301 commitment. So I don't know if you have an equivalent, like if you're doing one-to-one blocks in the main chain, or if you know, like, yeah, well, again, it's like the fees, there's going to be more, like the definitions are going to change slightly. So I have this written somewhere. I think it's in the white paper already. If you actually do check my site, there is a white paper that details a lot of this. But essentially, you would have, because the blockchain is two minutes that I'm using, two-minute block times from the native chain that I forked. So essentially, you just aggregate like five blocks into the hash bundle and then send that to the L1. So essentially, you're still doing block confirmations at two minutes, but then the L1 quote-unquote settlement is going to take 10 minutes. So it's just, I would say different levels of confirmation. So, you know, you have three levels actually, because the first level is actually at the transaction level, because we're planning to do like pre-consensus. So the transaction confirms, finalizes, I should say, in about two to three seconds. And then the, you know, all the transactions get aggregated into the block every two minutes. And then those five blocks get settled on the L1 every 10 minutes. So you are putting a... Sorry. I'd just like to say that I'm very in favor of all this stuff, even though I'm also a little skeptical of it, because I do think, I had this, a similar idea that you could have, you know, you can change the block time on the L2, and you can even use the L2 to like create like what you might call an L3. And you could have stuff over there to prevent double spending in other ways, such as people staking, and there's a lot of like R&D has been done on this stuff. So I think the compound fee is a great idea. I think the sub blocks, I think it could be great. I think it probably will work really well, especially if you have a situation on the L2, theoretically, where different people are willing to stake different amounts, and then it will all settle long before the three-month check-in is finished. So I think as long as you have that proof of work anchor in BTC, in the three-month anchor, you could build backwards in time from that, and you can make stuff that settles instantly. I don't know if this will be the... the final form, so to speak. I would just recommend that you, like at some point, find a way to anchor it on a hash in a block in the main chain, like before the withdrawal bundle is like active, I guess. Yeah, I think he's saying, though, that he does one-to-one, and then between the block, there's like four sub blocks also. Correct. Yeah, because the chain I'm using has native two-minute blocks, which work perfectly today. They've been running for four years now. So that works for the L2. And then in terms of the terms, I'm finalizing the terms, but essentially, instead of calling it a block confirmation for the L1, I'm calling it a block settlement, or I forget the name, but instead of confirmations are really for the L2, every two minutes, and then it settles like a final, you know, enshrined, and that's all just security. It's all just levels of security. So it depends on the transaction you're doing, how much security you want. So you might just let it, like for like a cup of coffee, you're just going to use, obviously, the pre-consensus. It's going to finalize the transaction in like two seconds. So that's for like just low fee. And then you'll have the block confirm every two minutes. That might work for like, say, the exchanges, I would think, as it does today. And then you'll have like the next level where it settles every 10 minutes, which maybe some exchanges might require or not. But it's just levels, you know, from the transaction to the L2 block to the L1 block. I guess just to clarify, like the hash commitment in the BIP301 message is sort of like what pays the fees back to the main chain. And then the withdrawal bundle hash is like separate, like for just doing withdrawals. So just consider both, I suppose, is my point. Oh, absolutely, yeah. And like Paul said, I mean, I'm catching up. I haven't been in this community very long. So I'm still understanding like how much liquidity and how that will work. And like, you know, he's mentioned it, but like just taking me a while to understand like the actual economics and the mathematics behind it. But no, it all seems to work. It seems to work very well. And again, I was concerned about like, you know, the incentives to the L1. And as I just did the math, you know, potentially, you know, you're looking at $36,000 a block to the L1. Yeah, I know. We currently have like basically zero. The BTC, I mean, BTC has basically zero dollars per block. I mean, I know it's not literally zero, but in fees, but it's very low. And the efforts to make it like a luxury good have all ended in complete failure. And it's just much easier. It's much more stable. Everyone has said this time and time again. You know, it's much easier to have a world where lots of people are paying a small transaction fee. The total transaction throughput is very high. There's nothing to do with the L1 block size at all. This has all been like, you know, discussed for like 10, more than 10 years. Let's see if we can get any new. Do we have any new people who want to come up or any skeptics or anyone who has got an axe to grind? I do have an axe to grind. People maybe have never found us before today because of the Twitter algorithm. Can I actually do make one? Yes. Which I have been holding. Essentially, I have issues with the Drivechains and Discord. You know, now that I'm chatting with people, I have been getting some pushback. And I had a really good conversation with some cat. I don't remember the name of the screen name. Yeah, he's very feisty. Yeah, yeah. He bites people a lot. It was wonderful. I want pushback. I want feedback. So pushback is good. But essentially, I just wanted to kind of clarify and justify the proposal also. Because for the sidechains, you've taken the model clearly of having specialized sidechains for each particular task or objective BitAssets. You have the Z-side privacy and for different things. But again, you haven't really done a general blockchain. And I did spend some time looking into elements. And it does have some additional features. But the main thing... I kind of don't believe in this whole general thing. It's kind of like, what if you had a Swiss Army knife? You see what I mean? The Swiss Army knife already has a screwdriver, a bottle opener, a corkscrew. They pre-predicted what you might need. A knife. And it's not just like, oh, here's a piece of metal that you could shape if you wanted. That leaves too much work to the user. The user should be the consumer. That's exactly where the advantage comes. The word I will use, the key word here is automaticity. To make everything atomic is very, very slow with the model that you have right now. It is very, very slow. And I don't see it being as useful as having one chain that can do everything. Well, you do one chain that does everything. But then certain use cases crowd it out because they muscle out the fee. So eventually, it's just you try to make it do everything. But in practice, it just does. Because the one thing... No, I'm kidding. This is where I think I kind of got a little support from the Feisty Cat. Where the one thing you're missing... Because I understand what you're saying. I totally support where you're coming from. But the one thing you're really missing is the ability to do smart contracts. And I feel like as though you don't really have a great value and appreciation for just how much... How valuable it is to have the ability to do smart contracts. And right now... Yeah, because, you know, I have the good names a bit active. And it's kind of like the way I see it, those are the smart contracts that people actually use in Ethereum. Now, of course, I'm sure there's some... No, no, no. None of the Drivechains have any programmability. But what do people actually do with Ethereum? Is they mint ERC-20 and then they buy it from each other? And then you don't even need the program. No, yes, you do. You absolutely do. Because how do they do it? It's all through smart contracts. I mean, I've never seen it not be through a smart contract. So that's what I'm trying to... I don't even know who does it any other way besides using smart... You're half right when you say that. But then I feel like it's just incomplete. I don't know if it's just from not being involved in those communities. But you seem to be devaluing the importance of smart contracts. And I'm baffled, completely baffled by that. So that's my little critique, my pushback. It's all been built so that anyone can, as you know, anyone can launch any L2. I think we will have an EVM. There's like a new Rust EVM thing that's like super good or whatever. So we might have that. We might have... We'll probably have Shomari's L2, which I'm sure he's going to put everything he wants in there. And I think... That's great. So, okay, now I keep... People keep requesting. I click accept. This might be because... I don't know if Vlad has blocked someone. Sometimes I click accept. And then they click request. I click accept. And then we never... They just disappear out of the space. And we never see them again. But I've also blocked a lot of people. Because if someone blocks me on X on Twitter... Oh, he's up here now. Okay, great. I don't know. It's just the madness of this app and how weird the design is. Just to the makers of this app, when you click accept, the person should, like, go into, like, a little waiting room box so that you can see what happened to them. And then they come on stage because it's extremely confusing. Hopefully, XAI is reporting all the notifications and training their AI on it so they can incorporate the feedback. Anyways. Anyway, welcome to the stage. Let me wrap up, though, by saying... People can launch their own L2. We probably will have EVM L2, like, later this week. God, I hate every time I say that. It's like a curse. Because that takes forever. But I'm not... It's true. Shomari is right. I think the EVM sucks. And I don't like it at all. And I think it's overrated. But is that just me being curmudgeonly? You should look at the fees, though. But you know the fees. You do. Yeah, I do. But I think those are the fees. Those are the fees of freedom. Those are the fees of people saying that they want to do whatever they want to do. BTC is, like, not going to let them do it. So... And... I'm telling you, it's at least... Ethereum is the rival party. I would say at least 75% of Ethereum transactions are not sending ETH. They're just something else. And that else is what is missing. That's all I'll say. I know that. Yeah, no, I've been saying that. I was in 2021. I was talking about how if you could divide fiat value of one day... How many fees earned in a day? Ethereum versus BTC. Ethereum went from... You can have a log chart. Log base 10. And Ethereum went from, like, 1,000th to, like, past 1 to 1 to 1 to 100 in, like, 2021. And it looked like it would just keep marching up. I haven't looked recently. But the point is... It's always... Anyone can look at cryptofees.info. Oh, no. I just invited him on the stage. And then he, like, had a weird connection thing. Just to the makers of this app, could you just do a better job? Could you just do a better job? I literally have to hover my phone. Because if I touch it, I'll disconnect. It just hovers. It's weird. Well, hopefully he can make it back on to the stage. Because we didn't hear what he had to say. And... I don't know. I'm just going to close other apps on my phone superstitiously, as if that's going to help. Close all this stuff. We'll just hope for the best. Well, I'm very happy you mentioned that you're reconsidering the ETH side. Because I did check the repo. And it's, like, two years out of date. I don't know if you're considering just updating that or... No, I'm probably not going to revive that one. Okay. We'll probably do a different one. Okay. Probably start from scratch. Cool. But, yeah, I don't really respect it. I don't think it's that good. I think what people like about Ethereum is that you get away from the psychosis in BTC. Which is a real drag. Well, I can see there's a whole bunch of crazy things. But what I would just like to point out is that that's where the builders are. That's where all the builders are. EVM. There are no UTXO builders. It's a handful. I can name them. Give me a minute. I can name all of them. So EVM has the mindshare. And I agree with you. I really do. It's just I'm saying you have to have some sort of onboarding. But isn't UTXO better? It's a thousand times better. Yeah. I would quantify it as a thousand times better. Why are we EVM? Because no one in the EVM world can speak UTXO. I can attest to that. They just cannot. And you're going to have to give them a way to kind of gradually migrate. It's completely different. I know this from the Bitcoin Cash world. At one point, they had both. And I saw what happened when they launched the EVM. It's called Smart BCH. And every EVM project, like all the good ones, I should say, just dumped on. It was a hundred projects in the first three months. A hundred. One hundred. And that blew up because it's BCH. But I saw the potential. It's not theoretical. I know exactly what it would take to get these builders to come over. And you can't sell them on UTXO from day one. They can't recognize it. Like, what is this? I think that makes sense. That could make sense. Anyway, with this project, we try to be – it's definitely not – this project tries to be very pluralist, which is to say, try everything out. Anything that works can stay. That's different, though, for me personally. I have to have like a kind of quality control or what have you. Would anyone else like to come up? We lost – whatever tried to come up, and he – the app killed him off. So it's time for contestant number three. Maybe we can – maybe he'll come back. Maybe he won't. I don't know. This app already, the dancing – the blue dots that are supposed to dance when I talk are frozen, which is always a terrible sign. I don't know why this app is so bad. But let's hear from anyone. Anyone who is a skeptic or a former skeptic, we'll take that, who didn't even see any of this because the algorithm sucked before. Let's hear from someone like that. They can request, and then maybe the app will let them up. Maybe it won't. If Vlad has blocked you, he may not be able to hear you in the space. I have no idea. I don't know. So many people have blocked me. I've never heard of them in my entire life, but then I block them back immediately. As soon as I see that someone has blocked me, I just say, fine, if that's how you want to be. Then I always block them back. And I know that the Twitter algorithm will demote – if certain people block you, it will demote your reach. And I just prefer to believe that I'm one of those people who has the magic block. Okay, we've let someone up. Kitty M. Kitty Meow. Now, hopefully they make it up here okay and survive. Okay, here they are. Hey, Paul. Hello. Hey, Paul. I just have one question. Are main exchanges going to support your hard fork? Well, I think probably, but I haven't really asked. Because we're still doing the dry run, and I want to put it in a really nice box for them. But I think there's a few reasons why they will. I mean, first of all, there's a few smaller exchanges that definitely will because they're friends and supporters of mine. But the thing is, over the last few years, this question has fallen in relevance by a lot, like maybe a factor of 200. Because it used to be, if you weren't on the exchange, you were completely screwed. And you had no liquidity, and it was just a way of smothering, killing off the project in the cradle. But I don't think it's like that at all anymore. So for starters, now the USDT exists. And so anyone can immediately do a super, super, super strong OTC desk using literally nothing, using IRC, using just telegram or signal or something like that. So I'm just talking at the bare minimum of things are a thousand times better. Because before, you had to do OTC some other way. You had to send the fee out around. But in addition to that, there are all these swap providers, like ChangeNow or whatever. Hypothetically speaking, I'm just going to say – oh, did you want to interrupt to say something? That's fine. Say whatever. Yeah, I was just going to say thank you for answering my question. And I wish you the best on your project. And if I get some from an exchange or something, I'll make sure that I keep it. And just best of luck to you. Okay, thanks. But to just continue about this exchange thing, they used to be really serious gatekeepers. But with ChangeNow and these other things, you can just swap. There's no need for – the exchanges need people's passport and stuff like proving where your address is. They need all this paperwork. And if you, for example, just buy the – if you download – there are many, many, many wallets. There's Edge Wallet, Cake Wallet, whatever. A lot of them do this. The Bitcoin.com wallet. If you download the Bitcoin.com wallet, you can immediately receive whatever you want. Like Solana, for example. You could receive $200,000 worth of Solana. Swap it for USDT in the app. You didn't give anyone your name or whatever. You just downloaded the – so I think the situation now is completely different than it was even a few years ago. And it's very, very different than it was five, six, seven years ago. Now, in addition to having some support from smaller exchanges that are already supporters of ours, I think the large exchanges will have a very hard time not supporting the coin. Because, first of all, the cost will be low, very low, because the L1 is just Bitcoin Core with a few tiny changes. But we wanted to put these changes through a very rigorous bug process, even though they're tiny, first. And so the cost of them is very low to actually support it. And the harm from them not supporting is potentially very high because of the way the transaction replay is being done. So I think they probably all will. But I was going to wait until 30 days out to actually ask, because I wanted to have the project in as good as possible of a state before bothering them. And I didn't want to bother them and say, oh, will you do this? So that's coming. There's a few small ones. But this type of question, I do think it's kind of not a great question. Because the question is, it's sort of saying it turns everything into a popularity contest, and it puts all the agency in these other people. It's like, what do they think? And it's like, who cares what they think? If their thoughts were any good, we would be doing what they want. But there's absolutely no reason. The tail doesn't wag the dog. The reason people like it, it doesn't matter. I wouldn't really worry about that. So I know a lot of people have that question. But I think it's quite a terrible question, if you really think about it. It's like all upside down. It's like if Bitcoin were invented today, and people were like, does Visa support Bitcoin or something? It's like, what the hell? Who cares? The question is kind of upside down. But I know why people ask it. They just want to know, is there any third party referendum on this? And so that is coming. I know a lot of people want to know the answer to that type of question. So I was kind of saving that up to announce it in its own special time, or whatever you want to call it. But it's a perfectly fair question to ask, even though I'm not a fan. Because you see what I mean? It's kind of like, hey, what does Donald Trump think of your, it's like, these people don't know about what it is we're doing over here. So and if they did, we wouldn't have to do it in the first place. So I think it's just, it will be kind of chaotic at first. But I think the chaos will be part of the fun. The exchanges will probably, when they realize what's going on, they'll probably rush to support as quickly as possible. In part, because they can be just drained using the replay protection if they don't. But I think a lot of them won't support it, and they will be drained, and that will be part of the fun. But hey, this information is out. It's in the public internet. They can, they have plenty of time. It's not going to take them that long to support, because it's based on the exact same wallet infrastructure, exact same UTXO as BTC. So it should be very easy for them. But we'll see. Would anyone else like to come up? Come on up if you have a question or a comment. It doesn't seem like anyone does want to come up. Oh, there is this guy, Satoshi's Bride. But for some reason, Paul, I'm having some issues with the app. I could not hear anything of what Shamar is saying, and I never blocked him. He never blocked me. It's a weird kind of situation, where whenever he was speaking, I could only hear complete silence. And now there is this guy, or lady, Satoshi's Bride. And I'm not sure what's going on. And now there is this guy, or lady, Satoshi's Bride. I hope that you can hear. Oh, OK. I don't see them. But hopefully they. Also, on the topic of exchange listings, I think this is only natural, because I remember the first time when I saw someone sending Bitcoin, I was like, what can you buy with this? And in the minds of these people, whenever something new shows up, they just want to know how they can use it. And of course, they might have some Bitcoin, which means they can claim some eCash. And one way of confirming that this is actually interesting to them is that it's going to be listed on some exchange, so they can potentially sell. So I don't blame them for asking this question. It's just that there has been so much development in this industry with routing around exchanges, because in the beginning, they were listing everything. Then they became gatekeepers, and you had to pay them to list stuff. I think it's a green flag for the project that, as far as I know, nobody's paying for any exchange listing. It's all going to be organic, which is really good. I think with most projects, when they raise money, all they do is talk to exchanges, talk to CoinMarketCap for having an animated logo, or whatever, because they want to grab people's attention and show that they're willing to spend money on the project. And of course, they are rarely on the market for longer than a few years. They get abandoned, and then the founders move on to something else. And I think for eCash, this is a very good sign, the fact that it's all voluntary and organic. And some people will say, well, maybe you don't want to let them sell or whatever. But they shouldn't worry. There's always someone else who wants to get their hands on some eCash. Well, I think that people should. It will be easier. If I were the exchanges, I would, even if I hated the project, I would support. Because it's just another thing they can trade, and they can get the... But I think more to the point, it's kind of like, if they don't support the project, then obviously we'd have to advise anyone who wants to make sure they get the eCash to just withdraw their BTC from the exchange. So it's kind of like there's a built-in ultimatum, even unintentionally, where it's kind of like, OK. And then maybe if they don't, if they really don't care, then it's possible that this huge pile of eCash will be created. No one will really know necessarily even what happened to it, and it may be lost, which would be beneficial to everyone else. So I don't know what's going to happen. As far as I'm concerned, the network will credit everyone who has self-custody of their coins. Those are the real users. Everyone else has some kind of... Now, you mentioned someone who's trying to come up, but I don't see this person. Let me see if I can look. Huh, I don't see, where's the, oh, here it is, this button. I don't see anyone trying to speak, so I don't know if it's just the app sucking or what, but... I don't see anyone invited or requesting. Can I just take a quick moment? I saw Jared Woodard come up as a listener. I just wanted to thank him personally because just all the work he's doing with the Discord, it's just so very much appreciated, so I just wanted to give a quick thank you for that. It's also worth noting that there is a very popular football game that's going to take place in about, what time is it? Oh, in 12 minutes, I'm sorry. Yeah, absolutely. I just, you know, well, we'll see if... Yeah, I was aware. And in fact, I have a betting pool with my friends, and since the entire beginning, you know, like to go all the way, and I actually, the teams were chosen randomly, and I got Argentina as my team, so I'm in the running to win this giant pool with a lot of friends, so I've... I hope I didn't jinx it just now, but yeah, I probably said they've come a very long way for me to win, and I just post Malay memes to annoy in the group chat. I just keep posting Malay, like as a cartoon character with laser eyes or whatever. I just keep posting whenever Argentina does well, so. But I haven't been watching, so that's the superstition now, I can't watch, or I'll curse the... Yeah, I told this joke a long time ago to Sergio Damon Lerner on a different space, that it's an economics joke, so it's not very funny, but in development economics, there are four types of economy, developing economy, developed economy, Japan and Argentina, those are the four types. That's what counts as a joke in the econ department. Okay, now, would anyone else like to... We have, we actually, I have stuff that I could run down, but I think we don't really have... We don't have that many people, so it's just like, you know, let's just open it up. If anyone wants to come up and have a question or comment. Some of the stuff to point out is that in addition to all the sidechains that we had now on Signet, we have the dry run on, we will do a new dry run that pays out the investors in a... Let's see, someone is trying to come up. Who is it? Oh, Joe. Okay, and we'll see if the app lets him up without blowing up the space or some other thing. But in addition to those, we have a couple of new ones, a couple of new sidechains, because we have new EVM, we have Shomaris, we have Elements Plus, which is Elements Plus, it's got OP_CAT, OP_CTV. I don't know how many of these will totally take off, but it's really a lot. And then we have the second CUSF, which I think will flip people like Nick Carter, where it adds quantum resistant signature options, four of them, to Bitcoin L1. And then I hope we get OpVault. OpVault, I always show OpVault because it's great if you have people like burst into your house and hold a gun to your head and try to steal all your coins. We got to have OpVault, it's really important. If we want to make it to this cypherpunk future, we're really going to need more privacy and we're going to need OpVault, because otherwise the wrench attack is too... So I tried to bring Joe up, but again, it didn't work. I don't understand. If I go in through requested, it doesn't work. But if I go in through, maybe I'll just try superstition things. Oh, Joe is here, but it says listener on the screen, but it doesn't say, oh, now it's a speaker. God, what the hell are they doing with this crazy app? Anyway, Joe is here and someone else is, Franklin, I think is coming up. Okay, we'll get Joe and Franklin for now until they... Hello, welcome. Hey, I just had a question. I see this coin on Solana, did you guys launch that? That was not launched by us, but there is one of them that is, but we have a scheme since they are feeding us real money in the form of Solana and Tether. We just treat that as a purchase at the old purchase price, which is $30 a coin. And so there's a pool of real ECX that has been set aside. So anyone who owns the Solana token has price exposure actually, because we're going to swap the entire market cap of the meme coin for the real pool of ECX. So if it skyrockets in value, then the meme coin token will also skyrocket in value in theory. Yeah, that's an interesting concept. So we kind of invented... There was also one like two hours ago too, that I saw came out and I was like, I wonder like, obviously this is like a primarily Bitcoin based from the looks of it. So it was like... Yeah, there's only the one. So if you go to eCash.com slash SOL dash token, it has like some information there. But unfortunately, of course, as you probably know, lots of people just launch all kinds of like unaffiliated or even impersonating. Yeah, that's what I wanted to ask you. So I'm not sure about anything made two hours ago, but this is a kind of a fun thing to have around because there's this actual market for people buying and selling. And so it kind of gives a window and it usually sets the implied ECX price at like at least like 100, $200, something like that, which is kind of cool if it was currently selling for like 30, 32, $36, $34. So that makes me feel a little bit better about like, oh, at least the people who bought are very, very likely to do well. But of course, there's no guarantee that any of this makes any sense and won't change or collapse or transform or do anything else. So that's that. So yeah, Joe, did you want to say something? Oh yeah, I did write down some of those philosophical questions that I thought could be interesting. And one of them relates to what Shamari said, but I want to let other haters and new people also talk. So I'll just, I'll wait until there's a moment unless this is that moment. I mean, it could be the moment. Who knows how many people are going to be angrily leaving it because of the World Cup game in five minutes. So. Okay. So. Ask a philosophical question. Okay, okay. So this, I think somebody else might've asked this, but I kind of elaborated on it. But what is the, like for eCash, what is the plan on deviating from Bitcoin? So in terms of like people propose soft forks to eCash, what's the policy on those? Is it, I think you've said before. Hard reject. There's a game theory book about, if you go sailing competitively, you do a race, it's a one V one and you take the lead. Then what the people do is they look behind at the guy they're beating, because it's a one V one race. Just like Bitcoin, BTC and eCash one V one. And they just copy whatever the sailor behind them is doing because the wind can change. The wind can be like random. So you just copy their wind thing. And since you're in first place, maybe you both go backwards. Maybe you both go to the left. Maybe you both go to the right. Maybe you both go diagonally forwards, but you're kind of almost guaranteed to win, you know, because you're already ahead and you're copying their movements. So how can they gain on you? And that's the plan. That's a metaphor for this situation because we do not want to be in a situation where they do something different from us and they have an advantage. We'd rather them just blow up the project and blow up both projects. Because we have an out, which is just people escape under the L2s. I mean, I think they're already like making the Bitcoin L1 and the L2s as terrible as possible almost. It's almost as bad as it could theoretically get without there being like a revolt. So, I mean, because one, I liked your tweet Vlad about bashing lightning, about how you can look at, okay, it's related to what Shamari was saying. Like the EVM was invented. EVM is used by many different people, Avalanche, whatever, Solana, other stupid projects that have a name. Every project, they all do the EVM. How many projects do BIP39? How many projects do BIP39? How many projects have independently invented some kind of Ethereum name system, ENS BitNames type of a thing, Namecoin type of a thing? Many of them. How many of them use HD wallets? Many of them, of course, with BIP39. How many of them use block explorers? Many of them. So, you got even stuff like Zcash as a block explorer or whatever. So, it's, but then lightning is invented for BTC and how many other people are copying lightning? This is literally like zero because it's terrible. And, but we haven't built a cult. We've built a cult. So, the Bitcoin L2 situation is terrible and the Bitcoin L1 situation is also terrible. It kind of, everyone knows. Everyone knows that it is, but they don't want to say it out loud. Or they say, it's good that it's so terrible because this proves that, it's good that it's so terrible because this proves that it will never become worse than this and it proves how static it is. So, that's something that people say. So, it's already very bad. So, why not just tie? And yeah, if a soft fork is added to BTC, we add it automatically. Cause then it's also less, it's less effort to maintain. You just click merge, merge, merge, merge, merge, merge with your, you just click the merge button and you don't have to think about explaining it or justifying it to all these other people. Any deviation you have to explain or justify. So, we want to minimize that. Now, I think we could do more Q-sifs. That's the thing is there's the second, there's now a second Q-sif in which Hunter Beast among other people, they added quantum resistant signatures, four of them, some lattice, some hash based. And this, and we'll add our vault. So, I think that could be fine. A second Q-sif and maybe even a third Q-sif. And we want to pass no judgment on how good Core is, actually, even though I'm convinced it's terrible. But, cause we want to just say, listen, we just tie with them. We tie with them, warts and all. Right, does that make sense? So, it's just like, so why would we change anything? I don't even want to, the way we have it set up right now, the eCash L1, we don't even rename it eCash in the software because that would break all these different unit tests and stuff. It'd be this big code diff. We just keep it, it's just Bitcoin Core. We just end it at the title, at the top. We rename it, we change the readme. But, yeah, Joe, feel free to chime in. You raised a hand, but there's only a few people speaking. So. Yeah, so, okay, so, since there's a World Cup game on, the soccer analogy is, if we're ahead by one, we want to reduce the volatility of the game. We just want to keep our lead and that's it. But, yeah, how it relates to CUSF is interesting to me. And why do you make an exception for that? Why is that safe? Are there limits to CUSF in this regard? Well, there's many reasons. One is you can just shut off the new CUSF completely. If it ends up being a total disaster, you can just shut it off. And then it'll be like, it was never there. Another thing is, you can just shut off the old CUSF Another thing is, you want to really consider the, like the code diff and the number of lines changed and how easy things are to maintain. Maintaining is really, really hard. And each, it's all about justifying the differences. So if you have, if you edit the code, a single line of code could be like, you know, one different line of code could either cause the software to crash or cause it to like dial out to the, and cause it to like, basically like, look up the user's private keys and like email them to an attacker or something. So changing the lines of code is basically unacceptable. But doing the CUSF is like, fine, because you can't even, you don't even know how much software people are running on top. So the CUSF is kind of like a very modular, very reversible. I know the soft fork is already pretty modular and reversible, but this is even better because it just puts it all in a different piece of software. And so it takes something that's a non-starter and goes there from something where you don't even, you don't even know if it's happening or not. So I think that it's a night and day difference. And especially if we have two CUSFs, we can always have one that's like, we have 303 or one that's kind of finished. It's like an ultra conservative one. And then we could add another one that's like more liberal. We could say, put all the weird stuff in there or that one could harden and we could just have a whole stack of them. So maybe one day there'll be like 15 of these. And that's better. And then a Bitcoin Core disagrees. If BTC changes someday, it's incompatible with the CUSF. As long as we're still behind, you know, we have a smaller market cap and whatever else. As long as we're still behind, you just like hard fork the CUSFs basically. You just like redo them all with like different headers or different, you know, op-nop numeral. You can kind of like move them around so that they're almost exactly the same. And that on the date that the Bitcoin hard fork happens, the Bitcoin soft fork happens, I mean. eCash soft fork happens and then all the other stuff gets like transposed. Yeah. You mentioned hard forks there too. So yeah, like that's another thing that's kind of interesting here. Like you're, you know, this whole thing is starting with the hard fork, but you know, I know you're more favorable towards soft forks and you have the safe way of doing it with CUSF. But yeah, does your, has your stance changed on hard forks? How do you see how they fit in to competition development? You know, isn't it like somebody reading your blog posts from years ago might think that you would never do a hard fork because you oppose them, you know, vigorously. So yeah, any thoughts on that?