was Split B, he was in here, and then 5.3 was obviously the reversal show. And then now today.
What a wanker.
Welcome to Game of Nodes, a weekly podcast on Cosmos from independent validated teams.
Hello, welcome to Game of Nodes, a weekly podcast on the Cosmos from independent validated teams.
And we're back from the alternate dimension with your regularly scheduled hosting panel,
except for our Australian contingent whose absence has been noted, registered with their line manager,
and in their 360 review, they will not be getting a positive response. They're going to get a short
drift from their colleagues, three weeks nonattendance, it's a poor show. I don't know how he's going to
possibly meet his KPIs with that love attendance. I mean, you got to do a lot of yourping to make
up for that kind of showing with your manager because they've got targets to meet. We've all got,
it's, you know, sort of just coming down from the top, isn't it?
It's really the bear hitting in, right? This is like, this is the bear right here when
Null isn't shopped at GON, that's three weeks in a row, that's some sort of sign.
That's a sign that things have gone quite bad. So there's probably quite, there's probably a
funny thing if you look back in the Game of Nodes, like Canon, I think it's weighty and
significant enough now at this point that we can call it a Canon. Anything with enough
shit in it is Canon, isn't it? But I'm fine the first episode where we say something like,
whoa, the bear's been going on a little while now.
CBT- It's like episode four.
CBT- Yeah. From that episode, the delta from that episode to now, I'm curious. I'm curious how long,
you know, the like, what's the meme I'm thinking of where you think it's super bad and then
it's actually way worse. CBT- I was just thinking about that recently.
Like I remember like six months ago, everything was six times the price it was right now. And I
was like, man, things are getting pretty tough out there. And yet for some reason, it feels
less bearish to me right now than it does then, even though prices are obviously far below.
CBT- Yes, weird, isn't it? I remember $5 Juneau, I was being like, it's fucking rough. It's rough times.
There we go. I'm not sure. I think we've got a new viewer this week, some chap called Ben Davis,
never heard of him before, that says in the comments, Prop1June to slash King Nodes is coming.
Obviously, BigFans are social slashing here on the show and in the comments.
CBT- We are BigFans social slashing. CBT- Love the social slashing. Can't get enough of it.
CBT- Whichever way the wind blows, baby. CBT- Social slashing is the one thing that's
going to see us through this bear and into successful mass adoption of delegated proof
of stake. But yeah, I mean, everything, everything is kind of, it's so redundant now to look at price
like we're just, I mean, as a, we've, I've gone back to doing some corporate work recently because
it's, it's like a welcome distraction from, I mean, also, you know, better than McDonald's. But
it's also kind of like weird being back in like, because the rest of the economy has got its own
problems, cost of living crisis, inflation, all this stuff. But if you're like a large,
a large organization like institution type organization, they're just, they're just partnering
on like nothing, nothing's happening. It's super weird. It's super weird because we have this totally
insane whatever this is. And then people are just like, yeah, so yeah, no, so this is like,
then planning for next quarter and blah, blah, blah, and you're just like,
CBT- You're like, but the world's on fire. Don't you see the flames outside?
DG- It's more just like, they're just like, oh, well, you know, this is a relatively short-term
perspective. But you know, we're looking for about four months here and you're like four months,
four months. I don't even know if I'm not going to be in the poor house in four months.
CBT- I don't see. You think that's short-term? DG- Yeah, you're like, like,
these throughout the neck, first time, you're like four months. For some reason, that's the
beam of picture. I know it completely breaks the format of the meme, but just like four months.
CBT- I have this cryptocurrency like, you know, price gauge above. I have a magic mirror,
which you see me looking up, that's reason why, but I have a magic mirror, like,
which is an open source tool. It's just a separate monitor. It runs off a pie and it has a bunch
of shit on it, like a bunch of shit. And one of those is cryptocurrency prices. So I'm constantly
looking up at it, which is not a great thing to have above your eyesight. But I only track our
day and week, because if I put like month or year, I would probably run through a Blake glass window.
DG- So it's good to see like, you know, at most down 22% for the week. Doesn't sound that bad.
It's only 22%. For the year, it's probably 24, right? That's no big deal.
CBT- I mean, I'm pretty sure I remember the first time you mentioned that monitor and
mentioned that you were going to turn it off. DG- And here I am. Actually, I added more,
I added more, which was even smarter. CBT- I reckon that was actually like August
last year that you were like, this is getting too stressful. DG- Yeah, exactly. Here I am. Yep.
DG- Yeah, whenever we're obviously a small company, we don't have like an in-house finance team,
but we have like people we pay for that. And they cannot get their head around how we
financially plan like as a business. Because like we sort of say, oh, we're going to move off of
primarily using contractors, bring some more stuff in-house. Like this would have been just
before FTX. We literally put our job ads, right? And we do like quarterly check-ins, right? With
the people we use to finance stuff. And between one check-in to the next, you have this situation
where you're like, yeah, I think we're going to put out some job ads in the next month or something.
The next one, they're like, right, okay, so you've got staff now, presumably you managed to hire,
okay, great. So what we're going to do is talk and you're like, oh, okay, so about that.
Everything went to shit. Everything's down. We're basically bust. We have a big tax bill. We definitely
can't. Without this stuff, without line goes up, there's no staff. And they're like, so you didn't
hire anybody. And you're like, no. And they're like, okay, so what about diversifying? And you're
like, there's no money to diversify. Diversify zero. Yeah, exactly. They're like, well,
we have some other ideas of like, it's quite spotty, the income in the sector you're in.
So there's other ways of getting kind of long-term strategic business. And I'm like, no,
no, no, I think you don't understand. There's no income coming in.
Like listen to the words that are coming out of my mouth. We have nothing.
Last time we checked in, it was all cricket and coconuts. We were going to the moon. Now,
this is not so good. But it is funny as well. Because you're just like, again,
you're reminded that in a lot of small businesses, that kind of budgeting, reporting, stuff like that,
just do it every quarter. Like why would you need to need them? What could change that radically
in three months? For a pizza restaurant, right? These sorts of small businesses that these people
normally have about, they're just like, yeah, what could change that much in four months?
So you're just like everything. There was a live stream today. I don't know if you saw it,
she'll see, but in Washington for like all the crypto, they're like the head of Kraken was there.
And even we know some folks from Republic Crypto, that CEO was there and they were talking.
There's a bunch of groups. And one, I forget who it said it was, I think it was from Illinois.
And I think somewhere in the conversation, it came up that the way that crypto has the ability to
lower barriers of entry and to help with inequality. There's a very US focused conversation,
right? They're just talking about an inequality perspective, like an income inequality,
that opportunities there. Anyway, I don't know how crypto solves that issue. It's not,
I don't know, whatever. Anyway, the conversation there was that over the last five years,
the S&P is up like 70 or 40 something percent, 40 or 50% over the last five years, the S&P 500
here in the US. And then, but cryptocurrency is down 46%. It's negative 46%. So the conversation
was around the idea that, that, oh, you know, this is how is this inequality? Because whatever,
whatever, which, which is a nice little stat to pick, right? Pick five years out from 2017 to 2020,
2020 to 2023, whatever it is, and, and make that decision. But they didn't talk about the crypto
that went up 850,000%. And then, and then fall 40%. So yeah, if you held for exactly five years,
you're in there. But, but it was just kind of funny the way that the structure is.
But it's that thing, isn't it? Like for any normal,
Five years, like, come on, for any normal investment, if you were holding it for any
less than five years, you'd be a complete fuss. Yeah, it's not fucking ETF. Well, no, a lot of
people, no, I don't agree with that. Because I mean, a lot of people take ETFs and, and take,
like large bundles and just throw money at it and just leave it, right? And which is,
which is the right investment strategy, honestly, in most cases, because you're gonna mostly,
like that is the way that that is my investment strategy. It's like crypto.
But yeah, even, even in crypto, like, I think the ability to just take a bunch of shit and just
dump it in there for a long period of time. Maybe that works. I don't know if that works here, but
in the regular market to say, Hey, by, by an average, you know, eight, the market grows by 8%.
So therefore, I get 8% returns over not maybe a year, but over 30 years. Yeah, maybe like,
I mean, I guess the one thing that is the same from the regular markets to the crypto space is
that the, I can't believe we've, we've, we've become given us the price chat, but we have
is that the, the price rule positively correlated with Bitcoin on this. So there is a more
intelligent conversation than last week, let's be honest. Yeah, exactly. But it,
there is an element where they're all positively correlated. So
like the, if you get like an all world ETF, and then you get like a specifically like
a NASDAQ ETF, right? The NASDAQ ETF is super risky compared to the all world.
Sure. But the, but if the all world tracks positive, like 99% of the time, you're going to see the
NASDAQ one track positive as well, because like the world economy is inherently like
pretty strong. I mean, and also, yeah, it's very, it's very, it's very, it's very, it's growing.
Right. To the, yeah, exactly. It's growing or it's contracting.
So the more you hold, the safer it is, right? I think that's pretty safe.
Yeah. And it can vary. It can vary from country to country. It can vary from stock exchange or
index to index. You know, these things, you could have the whole, the all world ETF growing and
the NASDAQ contracting, that's entirely possible because of local conditions, but it's kind of
unlikely. But the thing that's like obviously completely different is that, that generally
speaking, there is a sustainable income model or business behind the companies and ETF, whereas
your average grab bag of shitcoins or altcoins. Right. I mean, yeah, it was just a really unfair
comparison to say something has been around for, I mean, let's be realistic, something that's been
around in some sort of, and he was picking top five, I mean, he didn't even list what coins was
in there, but it was like five coins that were, I assume it's like Bitcoin, Ethereum, whatever,
else, right? And you probably throw some meme coins in there or some shit. But to say that,
that represents possibility, and it's only five, it's that industry is what like less than five,
five years old, maybe seven, eight, and to compare it against, against something else that's been
around a basket of companies that have been around for 50, 60 years is a little bit ridiculous.
But it was funny just because it was funny like, yeah, you lost minus 46% over five years. I'm
like, dude, I've never held any of these folding this for five years. Yeah. He imagined like,
like most trades that last five years, right? Yeah. Most of these, yeah. Right. The ones we deal
with are, they're probably barely three years old, right? Two years old, three years old.
Three years would be the hours. Osmosis was, Osmosis was what, October 20?
21? 21? Wow. I sent two sounds about it. It's crazy to come up with the exact day.
I got into validation in Cosmos just after it launched. And I did, I also had all my fucking
Juno, I don't know how Juno exists, had all my Atom on in a custodial wallet and cracker. And
when the snapshot was taken for Osmos, I missed the insane LP, because you know,
it was like an insane LP party in the early days where you were just like, I've just made $10,000
from $10 of that. In 45 minutes, right? Like just whatever the hell it is.
Yeah. That would have been a night. Like at the time, I was doing a quite stressful contract.
So I don't know where I would have had the energy to work that out and do it,
but it would have made a nice holiday. I think that was also before that. I feel like that might
have been also before the full crypto assets handbook came out. So the weird status of LP
is would have just been complete, do whatever you feel, which means probably pay a bit of capital
gains tax and then pocket like a huge profit. And then just put it on your self-assessment taxes as
did some internet nerd shit made 10 grand, spent it on a holiday. Thanks, lads. That's basically
how taxes work, isn't it? You just write it long form like a narrative description.
That's right. Yeah.
Well, the play for that now is generally I kind of avoid LP now because this last tax season,
I got hammered by the tax man. And I think the play now is using Quesar for LP because then you
just shove in. Is that how you pronounce it?
Quasar.
Okay. All right. I wasn't sure.
I'm not sure either. But I think the play now is just sticking in there, sticking in the contract
and then you'll just pull your stuff out later because I don't even think you get any LP tokens
or whatever. And so you don't get any of those epochs. You don't get any of that,
those income hits that I got.
There's no transactions, right? Until you yank it.
Yeah, exactly.
Right. Yeah. That's cool. It's much cleaner. I'm excited about it.
You want it to quietly de-gen accumulate. That's right.
That's right. Exactly.
I don't want to personally hold anything. I think that's number one goal.
I mean, just in general, the business, yes, me, no.
Yeah.
Such a bad personal tax structure in crypto.
But it was so just in the US.
Well, there wasn't, I mean, all of it is just,
it's just, even when there are some bits that totally make sense, there are some bits that
are totally bad shit. The fact that you can't, the fact that you can
bankrupt yourself so easily with a taxable event that is worth zero is like a massive
hole in the system. And you can see, and the thing is at the end of the day,
the tax man doesn't benefit from bankrupting you as a person. And the tax man does benefit
in a very limited and quick sense in bankrupting you as a business, but they don't want to bankrupt
you as a business. Certainly not a small business because they want to continue to get tax revenue
from you. So that's how you can tell that, at least in the UK, that the way they're handled
as assets and the way staking is handled as a taxable event is just completely out of whack.
Yeah, I agree. And I think that that follows through into a lot of aspects of crypto that
people haven't really dealt deep into enough yet. My kind of knee-joker reaction to that would be
gaming in crypto. Right now, it's kind of like a lot of podcasts are talking about how it is,
like that's going to be the next wave of users. And that might well be true.
But if you have all your items in crypto, so therefore all items have a worth, that means if
you're running around a world of Warcraft and you kill a boar and you get a Grey Sword and that
ends up being like 0.001 cents, listen, that's a taxable event. That's a transaction. You pay
tax on that Grey Sword. Do you want to pay tax on that Grey Sword? I don't think you do. Do you
want to have to deal with the tax ramifications of it? I really don't think you do. Anyway.
But there's an interesting case study with this, isn't there, with Eve Online,
because they worked out that they had a functioning economy and they were like,
hey, do we actually make this into a functioning economy? Because we know people are literally
trading the money, OTC, out in the real world. But they were like the close that we get to being
a security. In some ways, bad for us. In some ways, who gives a shit? We can monetize it.
But also, yeah, our users are going to hit a whole world of strange stuff as soon as they can
actually earn money in this digital space. Maybe some users want to do that. Some users want to
play Eve Online, make money from trucking Rock or space truck in Rock or 24 seven. That's what
they want to do, like Axie Infinity or something, but a bit more sci-fi. Hold on. Since you brought
up Eve, I need to interject here a little bit. Did you hear the most recent heist with Eve?
With the, someone got voted the president of one of the biggest things, corporations? No.
Okay, it doesn't look like you guys look confused. Okay, this is awesome. So there's an intricacy
with Eve Online, with our corporations. The corporation's like a guild. It's their DAO, right?
And what is it? I think it's...
But for listeners, a DAO is just a bunch of nerds on the internet. So a guild is a corporation,
is a DAO. Got you. Yeah. Right. Continue.
Or a sub-DAO, really, if you think about it, because the first DAO is Eve Online,
and then the corporation is the sub-DAO. But so here's how this heist happens. So for context,
Eve has a lot of history of social engineering and people spending multiple years of their lives
building a grudge against a corporation and then spending all their time getting into the corporation
and then killing it, basically. Then they'll sell the stuff off. So the most recent heists
happened fairly recently. What happened? So two guys, they found a corporation that most
of the members were inactive. However, they had an insane amount of money on them. And so they
were kind of active, whatever. But in corporations, if the way voting works on it is if a share votes...
So a vote goes through regardless of what portion of the share votes it has to do with
what shares voted. So on June, there's, let's say, a million staked. If 10 people vote,
10 shares vote, then the thing won't go through. It didn't hit the quorum. There's no quorum on
even like corporations. So these guys, they joined the guild, there's two people. So each one by one
share of the corporation, they put up a prop to make one of the guys the president and they don't
tell anybody that the prop just went up. They just kind of like loosely let it in there. They both
vote yes. He gets made the president and takes all of their ships and stuff and sells it for like
$30,000 online. Amazing. So like, amazing. Yeah. And then people log on and were like,
what the hell is happening? That's insane. I heard that like a few years ago, I heard one about
there was some guy that had basically dismantled, gradually dismantled one of the biggest guilds
from the inside. He didn't like fly any ships or whatever on EVE. He just logged on and essentially
acted as a diplomat in the game, just using the chat and stuff. He never actually played the game
in the way that, I don't know how you played EVE online if you've ever played it, but
how you normally think of playing the game. And he's like, yeah, I think it was like a
heist or like a really successful political dismantling of a rival faction or something like
that. And it turned out he was like a double agent or something. It was some super complex,
like quite serious level of intrigue. And people were like, whoa, what a crazy guy, what a legend.
And then he just disappeared from the game and stopped posting. People were like,
oh, that's weird. I wonder where that guy went who caused all of that shit show.
And it turned out he was an actual American diplomat and he had been killed in the Benghazi
siege. And literally, I don't remember if he was specifically a diplomat or an aide or one of
those nebulous jobs that's definitely not CIA, but definitely CIA. Like militaries attach a
second class or something and you're like fucking CIA officer. That's the station CIA chief. That's
the real big balls, isn't it? But yeah, so like a busy day at the office doing fucking
diplomatic stuff and they get home and wants to basically the DGEN version of diplomacy.
They're like, oh, this serious diplomacy. What I really want to do is just like leisure diplomacy.
Yeah, I want aggressive regime change with no clear...
I want DOWs at work and DOWs at home.
Like aggressive regime change with no end in sight for owning my economic benefit.
DOWs all the way down.
Exactly. The kind of regime change that Halliburton would be like, that's a bit exploitative, man.
That's actually a bit much, man. It's very transparent what you've done here.
You've just done this for all your benefits. Have I? Thanks, Halliburton.
We never know. That's so funny.
So, I mean, so even online is really, really interesting, although I sadly don't know enough
about it to keep up an entire podcast on the subject of Eve online.
Me either. But I like that they can gain tax or take a tax consequence for earning a sword or
something. That makes me laugh. That would be insane.
It's true, though. Like, can you imagine how bad that would be? You get items like every
minute when you're playing a video game. So you're talking like a taxable event every minute?
No, God, no. Your average user is not going to be that space trucker who's like, yes,
I can finally earn money for carrying iron ore from the outer rim over a three-week period to
smelt down. The average user is like, I want to log on, shoot some lasers. They want to be like,
I want to log on, shoot some lasers, then go buy some, and they said laser fuel batteries.
I think we need a new rule of anytime that the word tax comes up, we have to take a drink.
Yeah. Well, I mean, I don't that. I don't that will. Oh, yeah. I'd be, I'd be premessed up by
the end of the podcast. Well, I have one more statement on the thing, though. Right. Okay.
So if you look at a path of exile, if you look at the path of exile, like items drop a letter,
right? Hundreds of items just splash across the screen. And the way you deal with that
is you have filters for items you can see, right? So like only a certain quality will be allowed to
see through. If you're running a filter, right, that means you're never actually really seeing it.
Therefore, would it still be a taxable event for those items to then have been dropped?
But you're not earning off those, are you? Why am I asking these questions?
It's true. You're not taking.
Suck me in. So just because you see them, that's I mean, you're, you're,
are you not receiving value for those? Are you? I guess you are.
No, you're not receiving value. You'd have to pick them up. But in theory, they've then been
generated, right? So the idea is you can pick them up. You can group them or sell them individually.
Yeah. On some sort of marketplace and sell those for something that could eventually
turn into USD or no. Not in that game. No, I'm talking hypothetically.
Oh, okay. If hypothetically, like you could filter out and not see the item,
do you still have to pay for it? It's kind of like if a tree falls in the forest and no one
is there to hear it, does it still make noise? So it's almost like it's, it's the airdrop question,
right? Because you're receiving a token without any sort of interaction. And if that has value,
then are you on the hook for that, even though you didn't request it?
Ah, I think, I think that's actually a pretty good analogy. Like if you don't even know it's there,
then like how, like how can you pay for it? Because how are you supposed to report it?
Yeah, that's like, like, some, like somebody sent you tokens in your wallet, but I'm not paying,
like, why would I pay tax on that since well, number one, I've never received anything in my
wallet of value. But away from that's actually, I guess all the airdrops I've actually requested
that have had value ones that have been, I don't remember like, was that originally,
there's a couple of things, Netto? Oh, fucking Netto.
Had value. Yeah. Yeah. But the thing is, it's already assigned to you, you're just providing
a Merkle proof that you are the bearer of the key that essentially is, so the Merkle tree,
the Merkle proof is used because the size of the state would be too big if it was just a
hash map. So instead, it's a, what is it, a Merkle tree? It's like a binary tree of some kind,
isn't it? In this case, it's not a binary tree, is it? If it's a Merkle tree,
this is this is why I need to go back and do fucking undergrad, computer science, clearly,
or do it for the first time. But the point is that technically in storage, this is what I
would be saying to the tax man, by the way, technically in storage, it was always there.
It just required you to use your public key to say, I am actually the bearer of,
I am, this is the public key of the account that you have in your hashed tree,
which you have not given, you have not assigned formally that amount yet, but it is already mine.
Fucking hell. At the point that it's created, which is the instantiation contract, it is yours.
It's just that it is actually, it is unassigned from you and clawed back.
If you do not say, I am the bearer of this public key. So I would say it's more of a
semantic. So let's take it out of computer science back into humanities, where I'm nice
and warm and fuzzy and say that it's a problem of semantics. The problem is that people talk about
claiming is not really a claim. You are instead supplying a proof of identity.
And then the thing that is already yours won't be pulled back at the end of the period.
That's not exactly true.
It's not in the wallet though. You are taking an action to claim.
It is yours, but you are yours. Netta wasn't actually, Netta wasn't dropped like that. You
had actually claimed Netta. I remember in the UI. There was a specific action that the user had
to take to claim something that even though it was deemed for you, you didn't actually own.
Because you actually had to take an action. So that could be impactful.
It's a very subtle line. Because the difference is really, bearing in mind,
Netta is just a smart contract. So when it comes down to it, the account balances in Netta
are a hash map. The account balances in the Merkle tree are a hash map that's hashed.
Essentially, let's ignore the fact that there's a tree data structure and I think
is some kind of a, you know, one of those depth, there's trees that have a fixed depth.
I think it was one of those. Whatever, not important. The point is, it is essentially a
hashed hash map. The fact that it is one data storage data structure and not the other,
does not change that those tokens were already yours. It just changed that the problem is actually
about control. The problem is that somebody can say, I haven't seen anybody use those tokens.
The fact that it's called claim, you could actually use any mechanism to say that,
you could say, oh, if they transfer them, if they spend any of them, whatever. The only reason that
there is this claim construct is because storage is ludicrously expensive and you have to do something
to hash it. That means that you then have to do this action to prove who you are. Otherwise,
you would just literally instantiate the hash map from the get-go and have everybody's stuff listed.
The other reason is obviously to claw back funds. That's the other reason to do it.
For instance, which not all airdrops even actually do have
a callback function either. But the user's actually taken action in this situation.
Say I buy a lottery ticket, right? So, I buy a lottery ticket and I win $1,000. If I never
turn it in, that money is deemed to me. It's the lottery system knows that there's a certain
number of tickets. Those coins are out. Those dollars are out there. I hold something that
It can be redeemed for that.
If I don't turn it in, I'm not taxed for it.
Right? So, it's the same thing.
Like, I understand that you're saying in terms of the contract there,
but there's no understanding of who owns,
there's no understanding of who actually has that key.
There's no understanding of the wallet address.
It's the same thing, right?
Like, it's in a wallet that you actually have to claim to actually do something with.
And so, the fact that it's not in my wallet,
if it's not in my wallet, I'm not,
it's not a wallet address.
That's the thing.
But they don't know who the wallet is, right?
Until I claim it, that's really when...
It's way for your private key, yeah.
Well, this is what I mean.
Like, what's the difference between that and the hash map
that's at the root of the Juno blockchain that says,
X Juno, this wallet?
It's exactly the same.
Like, these are just data structures.
Right.
Which, okay, if you are disputing a very large tax bill
in whatever your local tax authority is in court, something like that,
I do not recommend taking this course of argument,
this line of argument.
Strongly, I am not a lawyer.
Which, mine are yours.
I'm not a accountant.
I mean, either actually could lad you in trouble.
I like my taxes.
It's just, yeah.
I mean...
So what, so...
I mean, if I understand it.
I still bear tape, right?
From a state perspective, from a pure state perspective,
we are basically dealing with two hash maps and there is no difference.
But I do recognise that making that argument might mean that you go to prison, right?
So what you're saying is...
It's still a stupid cover.
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.
Yeah, clever.
Turnabout.
You never know which it is, right?
You never know.
So it's kind of like...
It's a fine line between going to prison and not going to prison.
It's just that turnabout, that little turn of the turnkey.
So I don't know if where other places have it, but I know in at least Oregon, there's
this idea of unclaimed property where, let's say you work somewhere and you leave early
and they don't send out the check or you don't claim the check.
They then give it to the government and the government holds it for you in escrow.
Or kind of like lost and found, really.
And then you kind of put in for it.
So that's already yours, right?
Would it not be kind of the same idea for aircross?
That's another good analogy.
Yeah, that's another good analogy.
It's like if you're bequeathed some dollars from a long lost aunt and it comes down to
you, it's in your name, but you're not there and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, right?
That's the same type of thing.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, let's say somebody says, hey, every bank account with this bank, we're going to
give them all $5 or something like that.
And then you get given $10 because you have two bank accounts with that bank.
So you consolidate those two $5 into one of your bank accounts where you now have $10.
And then the bank notices and they're like, well, hang on, hang on, dude.
We said it was only $5 for each person.
And you go, well, no, it's actually $5 for each bank account you see.
So you gave me $10 and that's your mistake.
And now it's my property.
So it's one of those small things that could happen.
But in this country, the house thing is actually a good analogy because in the UK, from my
understanding, very, very, very hard if you can't track down the freeholder of a property
to do anything with it, like a house that's totally liveable, that's useful.
If it's literally like, yeah, we think the person is still alive and we can't fucking
find who owns this house.
Property law is pretty robust in favor of the owner and you literally something will just
go completely derelict.
And it would be like, well, we actually can't find the person.
I'm saying the reason I know this is because it's literally happened on the street next
to me where there's just a house and literally nobody has fucking clue who owns it.
And there's nothing anybody, the council, and actually the roof fall again.
Who's going to fix this?
It's like, well, fucking the freeholder, right?
And everybody's like, well, this house isn't worth nothing.
It's worth something.
Surely somebody is going to play and literally the council have tried to track down who owns
it.
Nobody fucking knows.
They know the name of the person because it's in the land registry.
They can't find the person, but they're also not dead.
That's the weird thing, right?
They looked, you know, burst registers and deaths.
They're not dead.
Where the fuck are they?
They're not here.
So all fun and games.
And where there's ties into crypto is crypto is kind of treat like an asset here rather
than money.
So yeah, I mean, if somebody says, hey, here's an asset, do you have that same?
Well, obviously you don't because, you know, it's a bunch of nerds on the internet who
ultimately control what you own that thing or not.
But in theory, right?
If it's an asset with the same safeguards as property law, then that's interesting.
Well, so let's take one step back a little bit and ask more kind of nebulous tax questions
that might not know the answer to.
So by the way, before we continue, I did some Googling and the incident I was trying to
reference about Eve online was the vile rat incident.
The vile link in the show notes.
We'll put a link in the show notes because it really is quite complex, but it's a good
story and it's wide on school.
I love you guys.
They're just so much fun.
You said tax, right?
She'll see.
I did.
I ran out though.
I've already drank all of mine.
Damn.
That was quick.
I've got to prepare better.
Okay.
So, yes, here's my question.
All right.
So I think on instantiation, Vitalik Baturin or how have you spelled his name?
He was sent like a trillion, yeah, exactly.
He was sent like a trillion Shiba Inu, right?
And I just sat in his wallet for a long time.
I assumed that he never paid tax on it, whatever.
However, instead of like selling it or using it, he actually sent it to a charity.
Does the charity pay tax on it at time of reception and is it relevant whether the charity
has like a means of usage, right?
Let's say, I know there's a couple of charities out there that just have a wallet.
Let's say I just say that I sent them $10 in Bitcoin, right?
Yeah.
I do this.
So go ahead.
Yeah.
I do as well.
You sent $10 in Bitcoin.
I think you said $10 in Bitcoin.
I was like, I'm sorry.
Casually.
I'm a casual.
If they don't actually have the wallet or know how to use the tokens, how to sell them,
what have you, they would still have tax on it, right?
If they're a real charity like a 503 in the US, they are tax exempt.
That's the whole thing.
If they're a real charity, charities are tax exempt.
They don't pay taxes on anything.
Really?
Yeah.
No, they don't pay taxes on anything.
So you're saying you're saying Acron Juno don't pay any tax?
Like a church.
Same thing.
They don't pay taxes on them.
If you give a church 20 bucks, they're not paying tax on them.
They're all tax free.
So like we give to, we give to, we use the giving blocks.
So the giving blocks are the true 503 and they pass all that through 100%.
They convert, I think they use, I thought they used Gemini in the past.
Are they still around?
I don't know.
But whatever, they used to use Gemini or a couple other exchanges, but they're a 503
with those exchanges.
They exchange 100% and they just, they just donate it out.
Yeah.
Huh.
Okay.
They don't deal with that shit.
Yeah.
Okay.
But I guess that answers that question.
It's a very clear answer to that question.
Yeah.
That's the whole point is like, if you're a true 503C, like then you don't need to, then
you can just ignore all that shit and just, you just, you live like you live in Puerto
Rico or, or, or Portugal or some shit, right?
You just, here there's a specific rule in the crypto assets handbook that says that
if you're airdropped token and have no knowledge of it, interaction with it or interest in
it, you can actually just fucking ignore it.
Because you could basically be grieved by a token.
So there is a specific,
Do they call it grieved?
It's when they don't call it that.
That's pretty awesome, yeah.
It's a shame they don't, but it's like, it's, yeah, it's like a weird and somewhat open
to interpretation clause, which is essentially like, yeah, you, you can just be like, ignore
shit.
If some of you just like, oh God, like that fucking, like, like then you all the fucking
stuff you airdropped in 2021, like bit song and stuff where you just like, yeah, yeah,
it's not like, I think I've got, I mean, well, bits, bit songs, bit songs token, it's not
really worth much and the airdrops not worth much.
Don't think the, the, I know they don't give a shit.
They're good devs.
They're, they're, it's not the time for that.
I did.
I've gone on and on about what I think about what is going to work and what isn't working
with regards to music industry before it's, that's not, I'm not going to repeat myself
on that.
Anyway, so the point is that you don't have to, you don't have to worry about that stuff.
If someone just like dumps a bunch of crap on you, you can just be like, forget it, whatever.
But then there's also a weird one where you, if you lose full, if you fully lose access
to the wallet, you can also write it off, but again, this is where the assets versus
income thing happens because you, it's just assets.
I don't think, I'm not even sure you can claim an asset loss.
I think you just don't incur taxable events after the point where you lose access to it.
And yeah, I don't see how you, I don't know.
I'm actually glad that they put that.
If you had 1000 cars from the four court of your used car dealership, you would be like,
yes, I'm going to claim the fucking asset loss on those, right?
Right.
Yeah.
So, you know, just because we have whatever, 54,000 very, very small three wheeler trikes
known as Juno's or whatever as a company, you know, if somebody nicks all of our 54,000
trikes, you know, those ones, you know, when you see those guys with like, you know, the
Harley Davidson, you know, like the real, the leather and the chrome and it's trike.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's badass.
Oh yeah.
Yeah.
Okay.
That's, that's a flex, I guess.
Although I suppose actually some, I shouldn't make jokes with some people who ride trikes
are obviously disabled and that's, and they're living their best life.
And so actually I now feel really bad.
How the fuck do we get on trikes?
All right, can we stop talking about tax?
Okay.
Let's talk about neutron.
I've got one thing to do.
Oh shit.
I thought we got rid of this segment.
Oh, we have, we have, so we've opened the page at the tough guy section.
I have a, wait, I have a quick question.
The one that was performed last week by performed, performed, sub part, sub part, you know, host
structure.
And that, or was that, that was natural selection?
I think it was like an online select a really situation because there's a website in the
book where you can get, you can get a hot.
Yeah.
Why use it for governance votes?
Yeah.
The book is only the first five years, I think.
Oh yeah.
So it's only, it's only the first 1500 or so.
So there's literally thousands more, including some of the stone cold classics that are not
represented in this book that we've, that we've established from our selections in previous
weeks.
Please go ahead with the drill tree.
The, they're actually, I, I, I, I put my finger on one and sadly all of the other ones are
actually better, but nevermind.
You can make it, you can change my followers.
It's about wrong.
Who all hate me and wish to kick my ass on.
No one can time.
Why do you love me?
Because, well, I mean, what do they do when friends in the neighborhood are weddings,
or dad & mom's, man, when youorming a subdivision matter, it's complicated, especially for
people.
If you have a moment, invite your friends, Jeśli pressure, yes.
I don't know what you're talking about, but I'll you would love it.
Actually, that's that might be a that might be a game of notes.
Watch because you would have even early on it's still good, but like even early on it was amazing.
Let me find a link for you. I'll throw you on what your way.
So I have a recommended monkey dust because that's like that's the most that is that is like the people are like, oh, yeah, bridge comedies.
And so it's like, yeah, there's like a spectrum with like the ones that make it around the world.
And then there's the fucks up shit, which is the stuff that all the comedians were watching so they can make those kind of dark ones that are kind of palatable for everybody.
It's like they can make the kind of dark ship because they're mainlining the one where there's a say in monkey dust like the level of darkness we're talking about.
There is a recurring Joe.
There's a recurring sketch every single episode is the same.
It has the same sketches, which is for the different setup and a different ending.
And then there's a couple of other additional sequences that come in each episode that form a larger arc.
And it's all this dystopian version of kind of new labor, late new labor Britain, which is a reference that nobody other than perhaps two or three people in the chat will get.
And one of the sketches is basically a son going to his father who's kind of like his parents are split up and the mother is doing great living her best life.
And the father is basically living in a bed sit and loot it.
That's another I think it's gluten, maybe it's Croydon, but it's like not it's not a good situation.
And the set up for every single week is the son tries to connect with his father and some I can't you can't believe how dark this is now.
I've remembered it anyway.
It's actually just somewhere beyond dark.
Now my father as well.
I'm actually just like, God, it's actually the person who wrote this was fucking cold as ice.
Anyway, he's trying to connect with his father who he doesn't see.
And in doing so every week, he says something that upsets his father so much that he goes and kills himself.
That is that is what the recurring segments are.
Bucky dust.
That's just one of many of that level of darkness.
Every episode, every episode, there's also a section where a man in a witchfinder hat.
This is this around the time of the pedophilia scare in the UK, which was a thing.
A man in a kind of witchfinder hat like a middle ages, which find a hat called the pedophinder general goes to a public place accuses somebody of being a pedophile on various various grounds and essentially incites a mob to string them up.
And you see like, yeah, like it like he goes like to a swimming pool and goes to the lifeguard, he says, you're a pedophile. And it says like he has his swimming trunks with the brand Speedo on them and he's got his hands on his waist.
So it's covering the S and he's like, you even admit it.
And he's like, what?
And then they basically just kill this guy.
Sounds like a Mr. Bean skit.
Yeah, it's great.
It's really, really dark.
So Ben, Ben Davis in the chat says, how dark would you say League of Gentlemen is?
League of Gentlemen is quite dark.
League of Gentlemen is like an eight out of 10.
I think Monkey Dust is like a 10 out of 10.
I mean, I mean, it has a recurring sketch about suicide.
It's pretty dark, but very, very good.
Very, very good.
Neutron.
So Neutron, tell me what's, Schultz, tell us what the hell's going on.
Yeah, so the classic case of the big validators have made sure that we haven't actually launched yet.
So Neutron is the first change to become part of the Adam Economic Zone or ICS, the was EnterChain Security.
So basically they're going to utilize the Cosmos Hub validators in order to validate their chain.
And there have been quite a few dry runs for this basically to like prepare validators for launching.
And today was supposed to be the day for launch and a handful of validators said, nah, we're out.
We're not participating in the launch.
We'll join after.
And naturally it's some of the largest validators.
So there's a bunch of tweets on Twitter.
I guess that's kind of obvious that it's Twitter.
Of like, like four out of the top 10 being like, nah, we're out of here.
Yeah, so it's not, I guess it's not a huge deal, but it feels very ironic that there's been like, I think there's been about three dry runs by now.
But because there's been fears of like tombstone and jailing, teams just haven't wanted to join.
You are muted.
And where did, so wait, what does go for cigarettes again?
So why were teams afraid of tombstone?
Were they afraid of tombstone because the chain halted at Genesis and then didn't start.
It's just been making rounds.
Yeah.
So the idea, so yeah, so Neutron requires that or doesn't require, but recommends you use the same private validator key for your ICS chains as it does for the top tier chain.
So for Cosmos Hub, right?
And so because you're using the same private validator key, people are like, well, I'm using the same key to sign validators.
That's kind of scary.
Now, you know, they're considered different networks, so it doesn't actually matter.
You can use the same private key.
Like if you were a true validator D gen, you would just copy your same private validator, get all your validators or whatever and use that to launch it.
Horrible idea.
But that's the recommended thing for Neutron right now.
And so because people are reusing the same private validator key by necessity, the fear is that because you're signing multiple chains with the same key, the old tombstone.
And there was something that happened like that during the dry runs where a bunch of validators, I don't know that they're tombstone, but they're certainly jailed.
But obviously that's due to being misconfigured, not due to.
So what we're basically saying is that the complexity of the slashing mechanism in Cosmos has literally resulted in a chain stalling on start.
Yes. Yeah, that's basically, yeah.
I mean, they've been trying to get it going for like eight hours now.
Yeah.
Oh, they're producing blocks as a fresh for me.
Yeah.
Apparently Neutron producing blocks since three minutes ago.
And that was a couple of minutes ago.
So maybe five, five whole minutes of producing blocks at this point.
Well done, Neutron.
Happy birthday to you, Neutron chain.
Finally starting despite the limitations of how the technology works.
Anyway, I mean, yeah, so I had a really interesting conversation with an academic the other week, not important the context, but the, the, they weren't familiar with Cosmos and they were like, what are some things that are unusual about?
And I was like, you know, delegate approved stake, but and they were kind of like, not going to make it.
I mean, I'm paraphrasing a longer conversation.
And the interesting, there was also a thing about the, yeah, like essentially to some studying and they were like, who cares?
And I was like, well, indeed, if you can't double, you can either double spend or you can't.
And if you can't double spend, then who gives a shit? And they were like, well, precisely. And you're like, that isn't the whole point that you can attack the network as much as you like.
And they were like, well, the real concern is you basically did ask, right?
That's, that's, that's probably the reason why you want to reject malicious validator because they could be just hammering something with the knowledge they can either slow down the chain or, you know, whatever there's a bunch of different attack vectors, right?
But yeah, basically what I'm saying in the long and short, short series that we're right.
Although Neutron has not started. So maybe, maybe everybody would just go, it's fine. We're totally okay with the team zoning and slash and all that stuff.
I, I don't know. I'll hop up in my soapbox for a little bit here again.
From what I've seen, I don't think any other group of state network has tombstoneing because they have different mechanisms for handling it, right?
Like, if your signature has already been logged, then don't log it again if they try and sign, right?
Like that, like that's all it takes if, if you're simplifying a bit to ensure safety of like people not trying to, you know, do an attack.
That's basically it. So then why is tombstoneing even really a thing whenever there's other ways around it?
And the tombstones we've even seen are like their accidents, supposedly.
I feel like actually, you know, I was saying the other week about how several weeks ago about how the drill tweet, you begin to realize when you've seen enough of them that they are useful contextually.
I've already forgotten the drill tweak of the week from this week.
But okay, you are a cosmos blockchain, POV, you are a cosmos blockchain.
The drill tweet of the week from this week could actively describe somebody trying to attack you, whatever it was, they try and attack me, but they do not have enough combat training to successfully injure me.
That is why you don't need tombstoneing, right?
Because they do not, your attackers do not have enough combat training to successfully injure you if you are using cryptographically signed blocks like you're done.
Yeah, well, in some networks, even do have it disabled like Akash Akash just have tombstoneing enabled in there.
I think it's their last upgrade that like six tombstones happened and then it moved on because they don't actually do tombstoneing.
So it's called just trying to bell. Yeah.
Man, Akash, that's the name I've not heard it sometime. That's what I was thinking.
Yeah, what are they doing at the moment?
Let me add to the board over here.
Yeah, add it to the board.
Okay, well, yeah, now Neutron started, we can't just shit talk Neutron.
So that's what was I fell off.
So what was the final? What was the final decision there in terms of what the hell's going on?
Blocks are happening, but yes, it took how long did it take 12 hours or something?
I think like eight hours.
We can still talk shit.
We just can't talk shit about the chain. Now we talk shit about individuals, which is arguably way more fun.
Yeah, okay, we're here for it.
So, okay, so can I talk a point of business?
No.
Business.
So we looked at, no, it's not about taxes, don't worry.
Although it was tempting to make it to say something about taxes there just to kick it back into full circle tax mode.
Last week, I, during the mirror universe episode, I really enjoyed the contributions of a friend of the show, Funky, from the polka dot side of the fence.
One day, maybe we will actually convince polka to join us and get more polka based insights.
And another fun thing.
I think we were able to push that pretty easily. He's been getting more and more interested in like conversations with people and like going out to lunch and stuff.
I think we can do it.
I mean, I think I'll be very, very cool.
And just a random piece of trivia, you know, the P2P reactor in like, you know, the rounds in Cosmos refer to as a polka.
Anyway, it would be good in the documentation.
And if you look at this, there's a whole, there's a little diagram that says this is the polka.
I think might even have dancers on it, although maybe that's the really old school whimsical nerd documentation.
Maybe they've updated that to be something slick and cool now.
Anyway, polka to polka dot different ecosystem very much enjoyed the insights from Funky.
And I wonder whether we should be considering having because obviously you said earlier, you said obviously we have some contact with people like Republic Crypto and stuff like that.
You know, we're obviously in that hearing.
We obviously have sort of like, I guess colleagues in other ecosystems who we also sort of talk to and like, and you know, being this is primarily a Cosmos podcast.
Would people be interested in us having people on from our wider networks and whatnot?
You know, let's let's know in the comments or on on Twitter at Game of Nodes.
I really, yeah, I was I was watching last week's listening back.
And I was like, it is nice to hear a different voice other than from our tiny little backwater, our little minopond in the broader CryptoC to maybe a little bit more.
So maybe we should maybe we should invite some other people on for a bit of fresh air.
But I don't know if that's a good idea or a bad idea.
So I'm really curious to have like some sort of logic off with like, was it Sheldon from near and I don't know someone from from polka dot because near basically has substrate chains right using the octopus network.
So if it has shared security effectively like polka dot, and which also means that it has the same like development environment and stuff.
What's the value add of building a chain on polka dot as opposed to on near like near doesn't have the limitations that polka dot does as far as like app chains and auctions and things like that.
So what do what do people get out of it, aside from, I guess, a base community.
So maybe, all right, I guess to that point, like, yeah, having having the initial community is a good point to start with right like that's that's that is one of the value adds of Juno, right, you have the community and then you expand from there.
But in my mind near has a lot.
This is probably a hot take that shouldn't be thrown out near has more ability to expand than polka dot does define expand in this context.
Well, one, they don't have the limitation of 100 app chain so just from that for two near has like sharding coming right so like that's a little more scalable like their development environment.
It is an absolute.
It's pretty fun like writing smart contracts for for their environment like you have you can do it like type script can do it and rust you can do it and
another language that I'm spacing on right now and all of them have a lot of great tooling for it like near has a lot of really great things going for it and with that in mind, it seems like a hard sell to to start on polka dot rather than near.
Yeah.
My impression though is that there is a little bit of the, you know, through tons of venture capital money at the problem, get great tooling, but there's still a bit of a desert of developers that but then that that I could be totally wrong about that.
No, but that was just my impression of near was very much like people who had dev grants to work on near were working on it, but they weren't like necessarily like you know, like it wasn't it wasn't exactly organic you but then you know, like people want to be paid like maybe you just need to fucking do that through the bank at it.
Unlike Juno is what you're saying.
I'm like, I'm like, look, is it any different than any other.
Because we've been around the house of this cosmos did not do a good job in the last ball run of cashing out into fucking dollars and pounds and yen and making sure it can pay developers to work on stuff for a couple of years.
Yeah.
Lesson learned is a lesson we'll learn for our next business ventures.
The next ball run.
Yeah, for when I'm manager of McDonald's, I'll make sure to bear in mind to when there's a when there's a run on big mags to cash out as you're standing over the fryer yelling at the person putting things together.
Let me tell you, next time there's a bull run.
I know how to cash right.
So it's at this is actually a true story in my like not like a corner shop but like the next shop up where I do my grocery shopping. It's like a big, a big chain.
There was a very, there's a very loud member of staff who's I think like a shift manager and for literally from about I want to say like you can see where the story going like about April 20, 21 to maybe about May, June of 2022 was always very, very loudly giving crypto related financial
advice to his younger colleagues at this shop whenever I was doing my grocery shop and that abruptly changed.
I like I should buy it is no shit.
I like it's not funny because like we're you know, it is people's lives.
I should make a joke about it, but it was it was like it was like, you know, like a perverse tiny window into like, like, you know, when you see like somebody else out because everything we do is online.
We don't see real people ever is this is just like it's just talking to a fucking screen and typing into a box.
And then you see somebody in the real world who is like, then I tell you man these cryptos that can keep going up and you're like, oh my God, we're all the same.
We look like this. This is what we look like this.
This this guy, he's just saying out loud.
I mean, we literally do a podcast and say these things out loud, but he's just saying out loud the same things we're thinking.
And I'm stood here with a bag of fucking oranges in one hand and and and some I don't say coriander.
You guys call it cilantro in the other.
Coriander.
Oh, the same thing.
So no.
Oh, the seeds but the seeds the seeds when they get ground down we call coriander that we use in cooking, but cilantro is actually the leaf.
So what do you call do you call it coriander seeds?
Like if you have a powder or something like that.
Coriander and coriander.
Well, I think our situation once again, our situation is better.
Coriander coriander coriander coriander.
Coriander.
Obviously if you powder coriander is coriander, but that seeds versus the versus the leaf, right?
When a coriander powder, I think it's dried coriander and then you crush it and then I think it's seeds.
All right, to be defined.
I'm sure.
Anyway, I think I think it's a dry.
I think the power is the dried herb.
No, I think the powder.
I think that the potter is the dried seeds and ground down.
I'll check.
Have to make the show notes.
This is the questions that we're asking.
Anyway, I'm stood there.
I'm in journalism.
I stood there with my coriander and I'm thinking, are we this one?
Are we this diluted?
And then you're like, he said it with their things were going up.
Is that what he said?
Well, for like a year.
Oh, all right.
Okay.
Yeah.
Oh, to get destined.
And you're like, don't get investing.
Do not do not this is this man.
Do not this is this man.
His financial advice is bad.
I mean, so I'll still do that.
Be like, Hey, these things are awesome.
But then I'll be like, I'll never refer to his investing.
It's always gambling.
Like, yeah, I'm going to go gamble on this.
Yeah.
Cause that's what it is.
Like someone I know, wasn't me put $9 into a new token that came online
like two days ago and they now have like 16,000.
It's gambling that like by definition is gambling.
Whoa, what?
So what?
Yeah.
Pepe is not.
That's a good retirement strategy.
Yes.
It was.
Yeah.
So I guess they put $9 into it and because the Curie Pulsar low,
they're having to take out like one eighth at a time in order to make
sure they hasn't seen it.
But yeah.
It's a policy investment.
When you make so much money, you make so much money.
You can single handedly destroy an entire economy.
Exactly right.
Yeah.
Like when you go from, when you go from literally like Mino to George
Soros overnight, you know, the ability to crush a major world economy.
What power, what source?
Source.
This is how we, this is why you get addicted to this total shit show,
isn't it?
One more thing.
I knew trying before we move on off of this since our Coriander
decision.
Okay.
I think what we talked about before was the idea that ICS is
inherently flawed because it relies on a set of validators that
necessarily don't give a shit about small chains, having to give a
shit to make sure those small chains are successful.
Correct.
And I think that this was an example of that family of that exact
concern, which is if they're not going to be able to do that,
that exact concern, which is if they cared about those small chains,
they would have been on already.
And we've been a part of a load of GenTex in the last year and none
of those big groups are in there, which means if they were in there
and they were saying, hey, we're in every one of these and now this is a
better way of delivering that, that's one thing.
But nobody asked for this.
And so I think this is, I think this is a bad strategy.
And this is not a technical, this is, I'm not talking about
technically, technically, it's great.
Financially, it's great.
I'm talking about culturally.
Today, what we saw here is a perfect example and that's at launch.
Like when you go through 20 fucking upgrades over the next six months,
right, and everyone is stalled for 12 or 24 hours because of apathy,
especially since they're not making anything still like right now you
have a chain that's launching.
And so there's a, there's going to be a pump, right?
But if you're in the doldrums of running a chain for the third year and
you have the 20th upgrade a year trying to make something happen,
eventually that is going to fall apart, I think.
And that's better served by small validators.
Like this is a natural, I don't know, I think it's a natural ecosystem
that needs to handle itself.
And for the chains that are new and it has a lot of risk,
those should be new, those should be small validators.
Like there should be change, there should be groups that want to be able
to spend that to be able to take, take that risk, not ones that are going
to ignore it because it's not worth anything.
Well, that's actually, it might be one.
So post human product, a, an analysis about a year ago about how,
like the incentive structure for validators is very different where
they're in like the top third, middle third, bottom third, right?
So if you're in the top third, you basically have zero incentive to put
any effort into the chain because you're already up there.
You don't need to do anything.
You're there.
The middle validators tend to be the ones that do the most because
they're like, Hey, I have something to prove by, by being here.
Or staying there.
And, or staying there.
Exactly. Right.
They haven't earned their, they've, they've earned their position and
they want to keep their position.
And the bottom third, they often do a ton, but because they're at the bottom,
they can't sing so much time into it.
Right.
Or it's just losing money.
So therefore they're looking for the next one.
Exactly.
They're looking for something else that could be in the middle third or top
third.
Exactly. Right.
And so that incentive mechanism still holds further the cosmos where
because the top third is like, well, why should I give a shit about this
little cosmosm chain?
Right.
We're still all beholden to them and have to deal with their
upgrades and, and, and their, their systems and their bullshit.
Right.
Bullshit.
But because they're in the top third, like there's no unseating them.
There just isn't.
Not in the cosmos.
Not in the sea.
Especially since now they can't get slashed.
Right.
They can't get slashed. Right.
Like, so the, whoever missed it today and who's going to miss, is that correct?
Uh, so I don't remember if it's everyone that can be slashed or it's like a
bottom percent.
So Neutron did some smart things with theirs.
Um, they made it so that a bottom portion of the said basically doesn't
have to sign on because it's adding a lot of overhead that they don't need.
Like they shouldn't have to foot. Right.
Okay.
Yeah.
Which is, I appreciate the thought.
I think it's a little backwards because again, the bottom ones, you know,
kind of support them.
Yeah.
Where was I going with this?
Okay.
So James said, go ahead.
No.
See, James just said the bottom 5% doesn't have to run Neutron.
Top 90% will get jailed, but slashing is done via governance.
So they can get jailed in the Cosmos, Cosmos sub for not being, um, active,
but they won't be slashed for it.
But because slashing is so low in the, in the Cosmos ecosystem anyway,
aside from, I have a single exception to that.
Yeah.
Actually downtime, like your downtime while being slashed matters more than
the slash percent itself.
Yeah.
But jail, jail, you're not earning rewards, right?
So that's still, that's still painful.
It's painful for all the delegators.
Like if Cosmos station, I don't know who didn't show up today.
I missed that, but Cosmos station doesn't show up and they don't run for
Neutron and they end up getting jailed.
And then somebody goes, why the fuck are we jailed?
Somebody wakes up over there, right?
He goes, oh shit.
So, so, so a question then as well is that, especially for the Cosmos hub,
where there are some institutional validators, like I'm all for, you know,
the, the, you know, obviously Juno at Genesis excluded, um, some centralized
exchanges who are validators that, um, on the hub, um, you know,
because of concentration reasons and whatnot, those guys are going to have to
run Neutron, right?
So if you're just Jimmy doesn't know fucking nothing like I was,
Smallballs.
Yeah.
Like I was in 2018 or whenever it was, I first got my hands on Atom on
Kraken.
Yeah.
If you're Jimmy Smallballs, you just been sad with your Atom on
Kraken.
It's funnier when you say it.
Fucking staked for the last four years.
You just, you're just making like Smallballs rewards, obviously, because
it's custodial.
But then Kraken, you know, decide that they fuck up the Neutron thing and you
get slashed.
Oh no, you just stopped, they'll stop earning rewards, right?
If they get jailed at them, they're, they're not signing, right?
The VP structure changes.
They're not earning.
Ah, let's add one more thing.
Suddenly Jimmy Smallballs, is he going to foot the bill for Neutron, a
chain that Kraken rightly probably don't give a fuck about?
They don't give a fuck about.
They don't give a fuck about that.
Jimmy Smallballs is having his Smallballs shrunk even further.
Well, actually, no, the inclusion of ICS.
Well, then their percentage of, their percentage of Atom goes up, right?
Because, because Kraken's jailed out, at least for that small period,
obviously, but, but if they're to get jailed out, then, then their VP goes up,
doesn't it?
Well, Jimmy Smallballs is using custodial, Kraken's custodial staking,
not available to U.S. citizens.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Because they staked it in 2018 and they left it.
This is a high-end.
Yes.
Sorry.
I thought it was a valid error, Jimmy Smallballs, but you think it's a
pill, yeah, that would be, I think that's, I think that's actually the name of
Don Kryptonian's new, new name change as of this week.
I'm thinking about it, actually.
I'm just, I'm just giving it, giving it some thought.
Smallballs blockchain.com I'm going to register right now.
It's www.Lochate.com.
I gotta get, I gotta get the inverse.
You gotta get the big of the spool, you know, the end of the yang.
You buy both sides, that's right.
That's crypto.
But, well, like I think about it, I kind of remember the point.
But, you know, but, but, but I think it genuinely, it's genuinely about the
thing that like, I guess, I guess, so the counter argument to all of that is that
like Jimmy Smallballs should have custodied their own crypto.
Yes.
And then voted no on ICS.
Then they could safely return their carefully self-custodied crypto, crypto
back to a custodial solution.
And once again, maintain the rewards on their Smallballs, Smallbags.
Jimmy Smallbags, that was, that was probably what I was trying to go
for.
That's right.
Literally too fucking tired because I haven't answered.
Maybe I was trying to say Jimmy Smallbags and Smallballs came out.
We'll never know.
Well, so, I mean, here's what, here's one cool thing about ICS, right?
We're just shitting on it right now.
One thing I think it's really cool is it further incentivizes people to take
custody of their own tokens, right?
If you go through Kraken, Kraken's now earning neutron, whatever their token's
called, I think it's neutron.
And soon to be stride, and with stride, they'll be earning, you know,
stake stride.
But not if they're going through Coinbase, not if they're going through Kraken.
There's more incentive than ever to take your tokens off those custodial
solutions and delegating on your own.
Create more taxable events for yourself.
For shits, coins you don't care about.
You could say the same for Quasar.
You could say the same for liquid staking.
You could say all those things, right?
Other than just basic staking of coin, you're missing out on all those.
All those other DeFi bullshit things.
Yeah, I mean, absolutely, for sure.
Like all those situations.
Like if you're going to participate in the ecosystem, then obviously being
staked or having a small, having Jimmy Small bags, Jimmy Small bags at
Kraken is going to miss out on all those situations, right?
Governance, all this shit is passing over.
And that's actually a good point because the thing they're going to miss out
most on is not those DGM rewards, but they actually not participate in
governance, which is obviously, that's the reason everybody is here.
It's not to make money.
It's not to be users of new tools.
It's to participate in drama that is above the level that, you know,
Twitter drama is 2008, right?
Crypto drama on chain.
Now that is, that's the black tar heroin that everybody's looking for.
Well, so funny thing about this.
I was scrolling Reddit the other day on the Cosmos Hub subreddit and someone
made a post of like, hey, who should I delegate to on the Cosmos Hub?
And I went in there just to see what was happening.
And some guy was like, yeah, I'll delegate to basically anyone but like
Pocachu and Lavender 5 and Notional because of their governance bullshit.
And I was like, what kind of bullshit?
Exactly.
He didn't say anything about like what it was about.
But yeah, it was us three named right next to each other about it.
And I was just like, I didn't message anything.
Pocachu and Notional?
Pocachu, Notional and Lavender 5.
Those were the three named.
Have you guys ever voted the same way on those three?
It's kind of a mixed bag of votes.
I don't know that we have.
I mean, Pocachu and I tend to vote relatively similarly.
Yeah, us too.
But yeah, okay.
Anyway, I started to throw that because I saw him just start laughing.
What are you talking about?
Get rid of this stupid shit.
Vote your own shares.
No avito everything.
So we actually need to put it in the show notes.
A friend of the show, Asaf from Secret Network,
provided the, if you want to vote.
So those of the listened a couple of weeks ago,
we had a show with Spoo.
And she said the universe brain move, right?
For any governance prop is what she saw on one chain.
I think it was Stargates or it was the hub where you vote,
weighted vote 50% yes, 50% no avito.
Love it.
And Asaf provided the Json for that.
Love it.
If you're curious about how to do that yourself at home,
how to be an IQ 9000 mega Chad,
we will put it in the show notes.
We'll link to it.
We've obviously retweeted big balls of stuff with our,
you know, his fucking IQ 9000 a game, a game moves where,
you know, we're, we're just, we're just,
he's the big dog when it comes to these,
these pro governance moves, we're just the little dogs.
So we have to pay respect to that via the medium of game of
nodes Twitter we have done, but you can go on the Twitter
at game of nodes.
That's a second.
What is, what has happened?
We've obviously had to up our games this last week.
You know, there's competition, there's blood in the water.
We're not going to improve the content,
but we will plug our Twitter two times in 90 minutes.
That's the concession.
The question is, is it a shill or is it a Yop?
Our Twitter.
It's a shill.
I think the shill.
That's a shill.
Shill down.
Yup.
Yeah.
They should, they should add that.
That should be a default option on the,
on the Kepler validator wallet structure.
50% yes.
50% no one veto.
That's just like one button.
Yeah.
It just says, it just says IQ 9000.
This is game of nodes.
Game of nodes.
We could just fault Kepler and just stick that button.
Let's do that.
That way.
I'd use it.
I do like that website.
Yeah.
That's nice.
Sandy should add that.
That would be a weekend's worth of work for one,
for one joke.
One of you.
It wouldn't be.
Yeah.
It wouldn't be the first time I'd done a weekend's worth of work for a payoff that
was really worth it.
But speaking of payoffs that wasn't really worth it.
I heard there was a new core one vote that was coming due about a payment to
Oh, outstanding payment.
Speaking of notional.
That's right.
Speaking of things that aren't worth it.
So what there's a, there's a in dow dow at core one.
There's a vote that's active.
So obviously, obviously, core one is a sub dow of the Juno dow.
And you can go on dow dow.
Dow dow dow.
Dow dow dow dow dow dow.
Is she going to show up now?
You can go on dow dow and you can look at the chat.
You can go on dow dow and you can look at the core one voting history and
everything that's up currently.
And as some eagle eyed people have spotted, there is a proper at the
moment for a dev payment to notional.
The, I mean, so do you want me to explain the background to this?
Clearly it's, it's clearly come up.
I know men, people have seen it already.
I think it was a while back, right?
This is something that was decided two years ago, right?
I can't remember how long ago this decided, but there was, so there was a,
well, I should know where I can, I can pin it down from the sums of money
involved to being in the bull run.
Strange levels.
You do a lot of, a lot of the core maintenance at work for IBC and a
lot of the additional tooling around it.
Things like IBC tests, things like that.
And take points on a lot of that kind of stuff.
So there was, there were two funding props for about one and a half
million dollars a piece.
Kind of, yeah, sort of tail end of the bull run type, type period.
One for strange love for IBC tooling, primarily, but a variety of other
things related to Juno core dev and public goods funding.
And then one for essentially, maintainership work for no Chanel.
Which is, which is what like dev work or whatever.
Is that Juno code base?
Juno code base and some upstream stuff.
I think you can see, if you go on, go on the call once up,
find this prop.
I think it's, I think it's either that there's some stuff to do with
wind. So it's either the most recent one was the one before.
You can find the original in that prop.
There's a link to the original funding stuff.
And there's also a link to the original.
It's like a one or two page document from notional proposing the
dev work they're going to do for the, for the one and a half million
dollars.
So those were then sort of approved when I was working on the
dev work.
And then approved whenever it was back then.
It was like, yeah, it's like some, some feature development, I
think, come related to the Oracle or not, but there was some
feature development and some, go and read the thing if you're
interested.
It's on chain.
Hey.
So, and then the first chart are those two payments was paid in
September 2022.
And as everybody knows, FTX shot the bed and dev payments, dev
payments from Juno pretty much across the board and almost
everything stopped at that point.
They've been almost no dev payments since with it.
So almost with a little asterisk, but almost every single other
payment has been caused since that time.
So since then Juno has taken a policy of actually bringing in
individual development contributors and align the long term with
the chain.
People like Reese, who's obviously been very public.
We've had on the podcast.
They've been very, very public, very vocal about ways to be very
transparent with the community.
And there's done some really good work.
And I actually come to me that yeah, I think, you know, also other
people who have, who are sort of long term aligning with the
chain are people like Noah and Zeke, who we've also had on the
podcast, talked about their work with Dowdow and increasingly
their additional work in Cosmowism, things like, I forgot the word,
what's the word I'm calling polytone and stuff, you know, these
kind of new primitives for sort of working in a cross-chain way
with Cosmowism.
So it's really, really cool stuff.
So that's kind of like the long term vision for how developers
and stuff are going to work for Juno.
So that doesn't preclude, you know, a bull run coming around
and there being some funding for public good stuff.
And obviously, Confio have been funded in the past by Juno and
all that kind of stuff.
So, you know, ever say never.
But the reality is in front of a kind of day-to-day perspective,
it's more about kind of acting Juno-dow, essentially acting more
like an actual regular employer and hiring a few devs.
That's the plan for the foreseeable future.
So, you know, it means terminating existing agreements with suppliers.
And this prop that's up, or this, I guess, vote not really a prop,
it's a proposal.
So this is for, this is a back payment or a forward payment.
This was the last payment towards obligations that were part
of that original agreement, right?
So the prop is that from the end of the quarter that started
with that September payment to today, that is the calculated sum
that Notional proposed their road.
I gotcha.
And that's the, that's this prop.
Okay, which is pretty significant, right?
It's a bunch of Juno, I think.
It's like 400,000?
400,000, yeah.
So, yeah, or smooth brains like me, that is something that the
sub-dow specifically votes on, not everyone, correct?
Like this isn't on chain in the sense that everyone can go on Kepler
and vote on it.
This is the five or seven of you in the core one sub-dow can go on.
Yeah, it's a seven, yeah, it's a 50% majority of seven,
or 50% majority of the seven sub-dow members.
Obviously, strange level funded as part of the original agreement
and have been defunded, defunded, but obviously not being funded
in the same way since they're also affected by this.
So, I believe Jack has recused himself from voting on this.
So, that's range of obligation is done, or there's more to come with that too?
They are not guessed.
They've been, so in an ideal world, we're not going to pay any more money, right?
So, that's the situation.
So, whatever they've been paid, they've been paid.
They're not part of this one, right?
This is just notional.
Whatever they've been paid, they've been paid to date.
Yeah.
There might be money in future.
Who knows?
Yeah.
But that agreement has also come to an end, and that's, yeah.
So, the goal is taking in-house, use less outside people,
try to reduce the overall cost to get through this, etc., etc., right?
Like that's kind of the, which is like, every other company in the universe
that's trying to lower costs, right?
It's obviously cheaper to hire than it is to.
It's cheaper to bring in an infrastructure developer,
and then even if you need to pay some money cash,
we're talking about $5,000 or something, not huge sums for a company.
Yeah, for sure.
And $5,000 is nothing, but you can absorb that kind of price action as a chain much more easily,
and then you can do things like vesting or whatever.
Right.
And then that's a way of having a kind of more long-term alignment,
depending on the tax rules and your jurisdiction, but we won't dwell on that.
So, yeah.
So, that's kind of where that is, and that's where the thinking goes.
So, that's the background to this proposal.
So, so far it looks like there is 57% no.
So, I think this is a, I have no, the both yet.
Yeah, just refresh.
I've just seen the clock behind you as well.
Yeah, it looks like it's not happening.
So, it looks like that's going to be a no then.
Which is probably healthy.
I mean, I don't know how much of that is, like, we, there's things that we're done and we're not paying for,
or we, like, I'm part of this shit, but things that are not done and not being paid for,
or it's just part of agreement, but we've paid for what we've paid for,
and now the rest of it we're closing.
So, vendors get fired every fucking day.
So, I have no issue with changing strategy on how that's going to work.
Yeah, I think there's, I mean, there is a kind of question,
there's always questions around this stuff with like what's been delivered today,
and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
And I think the evident, the, all of this stuff is kind of public.
It's all on GitHub.
It's all around.
I think people need to kind of like make up their own mind,
decide whether, decide, you know, who, what the, everybody needs to make up their own mind, man.
That's the same with everything else.
It happens, just so happens, this is a sub-dow,
but if you would only agree with the sub-dow's decisions,
then they can obviously just change the sub-dow.
So, but it's, these are the kind of difficult or complex decisions
that actually something like a sub-dow is actually really, really good for.
Where maybe on chain governance, it's much,
it becomes a fucking pitchfork situation,
or it has the ability to do it where you have some,
some, I agree, some of these decisions are better in small groups.
Exactly.
Like it can be like, it matters how big your group of nerds is on the internet, right?
That's, that's what we can learn from this.
Sometimes you need a lot of nerds on the internet.
And sometimes you just need like a really elite select group of...