Governance_and_Risk_Ep_200_(getmp3.pro) Sun, 7/24 9:22PM 1:24:28 SUMMARY KEYWORDS dai, governance, maker, delegates, people, proposal, stable, coin, decentralization, decentralized, holders, token, dao, post, point, layer, users, vote, big, core SPEAKERS Prose11, Andrew Burban, monet-supply, David Utrobin, UltraSchuppi, Artem Gordon, Pablo Prose11 00:00 All right. Hello, everyone and welcome. This is the two hundreds scientific governance and risk meeting here and Maker DAO. My name is Pete me, I go by pros 11 online, and I am governance facilitator here and Maker joined live by a bunch of awesome people who are interested and working in developing the Maker protocol. And I'm sure plenty of people afterwards watching the recording as well. We do have a few ground rules, agenda, all that fun stuff to get into. But I did want to take a moment just to acknowledge the 200 meeting. Perhaps it's silly for the it's quite impressive. See that 200 there. And then personally, the governance and risk call was like my first foray, and kind of into Maker, right, I found the forum. And then my calls were kind of the next place where I felt like I could really get involved. And yeah, I still love showing up here every Thursday. So thank you to all the really wonderful people that make these calls happen. And for the screen, and we have some time at the end, we can maybe share some memories and stuff, but cap it at that for our 200th episode of remembrance. And like I said, there are a few ground rules for these calls. As you notice we're being recorded. So hello, if you're watching on YouTube, let's try not to talk over one another because that's really annoying, both live and then the recording. There are a few features you can use that'll kind of help moderation and making sure that other people feel free to to speak and use the floor first, which is the base hand function, presume you'll find that under reactions, if you're using kind of the full suite, I think it is a different part for mobile. The other thing you can do is drop any questions or comments in the chat. If you're unable or otherwise, I'm willing to up on the mic. We'll circle back to them and in a reasonable time. But yeah, just a final call that, you know, this is meant to be an open experience. If you have questions, comments concerns, we do really encourage you getting involved. So everyone can kind of benefit from from your perspective. Cool. So we got the agenda laid out in front of us. As usual, we'll be starting with our governance Roundup, covering the most recent votes, what's going on with Maker improvement proposals, and the latest from the forum. We don't have any initiative update presentations today, but to have two solid discussion topics, the first being the new GHL proposal from AMI, for their own stable coin, kind of talking about how that might affect Maker and any changes we might be need to be prepared to do in light of that project. And then our final topic is MKR token decentralization, we had an awesome post from the Strategic Finance guys, kind of showing some metrics on decentralization, and figured that might be a cool topic to engage with, but this group Alright, that's enough intro blabbering. P We'll get into the governance roundup now. On the votes and it was fairly quiet this week, with no polls concluding so, so plenty of time to express your opinions on the two ongoing ones, one of which is the green light pole for backed finance the short term bond ETF and then we'll cover our ratification poll in the next segment that follows this. Next step, we have executive proposals you might recall, there was no executive proposal yesterday, we didn't have a lot scheduled a savvy large chunk of of the Deaf Talent over in Paris for ecc. So the next executive will be getting posted the following Wednesday next Wednesday, and is expected to contain both the suction and Huntington Valley Bank on boards. So keep an eye out for those. Next we have our MIB segments. I'm going to hand the mic over to Pablo Pablo 04:13 Thank you, Payton and Hello, everyone. Hello here with a new Mapes update. So it's the second and last week of ratification polls for July 8. And certification polls was closed on Monday the 25th. You shouldn't use in the plural, but we actually have only one ongoing ratification poll for this cycle, which is Patrick Chase facilitator onboarding proposal, which has unanimous flawless approval. So good for you magic and that the younger ratification poll, which will close on Monday. Let's move on for proposals in our FC polis victory. Oh, that's broken. So we have our two top level MCs MEPE 76. The Medicare share Redux which was initially introduced as a special purpose fund and rejected and is now being reworked into a top level MC that addresses some of the concerns that it's SPF incarnation raised. And also make 72 Which would authorize exists capital as a real world asset arranger core Maker DAO. Then we have a a proper Special Purpose fund recognized delegates Ganga Burrington, proposes the creation of an SPF to retain her as a full time interim chief legal officer of Maker DAO for six months. And there are two coordinate budget proposals in RSC, both of which are eligible to enter the August governance cycle one for the Dai foundation Core Unit, which includes multiple options that cover bear and Superbird market scenarios, and one for the Oracles Core Unit which provides assumptions either a reiteration of their previous budget or a new budget produced by 10%. Bundled with an exemption from further reductions for one year. We have a couple of national a couple of accordingly the 14 proposals three set of proposals to award three Core Unit the events Core Unit, strategic happiness, and immune fi security. And only the only affording proposal that is eligible to enter the August criminal cycle is the one for events. The other two can enter the September cycle at the earliest. Although immune PI security seems to have reached some sort of compromise that puts the affording proposal in hold, prefer to that thread for more information. And we have one facilitator onboarding for Signet who is submitting a proposal to be onboarding on boarded as a facilitator for the Unified Security Core Unit. And finally, we have three amendments, the most recent one, which is eligible to enter the September criminal cycle, or the earliest amend Smith 50. That is the direct deposit module, making it more general. The other two amendments that have been in RFC for some time now are one that I'm in script zero and introduces retrospection dates for MIPS, and one that I meant the coordinator 14 process. As far as I know, neither of these is going to be integrated the September component cycle. And some important dates as I said before, the ratification poll will close on Monday. And the late the latest states will introduce symbols applications to the proposals in RFC that are eligible to enter the August cycle is one say 27. And I forgot to add in the slides that the promo submission window for August, August is opening on Monday, the first. Yep. And that's it for me. Thank you very much. Prose11 08:15 P P Awesome, appreciate it problem. Always nice to see those fresh graphics. That should take us to our formal gates and it looks like Artem is ready to go. Artem Gordon 08:26 Yes, posting the link really quick. All right. So hey, everyone. Happy Thursday. Welcome to the GNR forum recap, and we'll go over going over the week of July 14 to the 20th. And so next slide really quick. And so just one update on a couple of changes to both the forum recap and the forum at a glance publication. So they're the forum recap will be shortened to announcements and signal requests and we're taking out discussions just to reduce noise and remove any redundancies also help sort of make the GNR core call more streamlined, and for the publications themselves, the descriptions for the posts, so the summaries are shortened to about a couple of sentences to a blurb, but a little bit more streamlined and easier to navigate. As always feel free to leave feedbacks or any opinions doesn't matter good or bad. So at least I can know whether this helps or maybe if you would like it definitely. And we'll get started with this week's announcements. First up delegate migration. This is ongoing and ducks team developed a new governance portal feature that informs users when action is required, and it facilitates the migration process for both delegates and alligators. And this is important because delegation contracts are expiring, and due to this expiration, it requires action from both delegates and their delegators Luckily for everyone, ducks provides a simple and visualized step by step action list within the post to make sure that everyone has a smooth migration. All they ask for is first first expiration happens on Wednesday. So please check your allocation if you are delegating. That was a post by Payton just now. But yeah, so all that ducks asked for is that for them to check out the thread for both delegates and delegates to check out thread and follow the instructions provided, the update is live and will be happening once they all right. Next up, we have the Dai Foundation, who announced grant applications for scientific discussion papers that will be analyzing how that how that was managed intangible assets, and intellectual property, the grant amount is up to 15,000 Dai and multiple grants may be issued. Now the application submission will last until the end of this year 2022, or until the grant grant amount has been fully allocated. And we're moving on to our signal requests. There's currently one signal request happening, which will end on July 23. And that's by how Sue recognized delegate how Sue requests to reset his delegate participation and communication scores presented in the monthly delegate Roundup. How Sue explains that his inability to attend previous votes made it difficult to recover his score, because delegate scores considered the lifetime performance of delegates. And this request surface a lot of attention and some mixed feelings. Some people agree that has to score should be reset with the hopes that he will improve it. However, others expressed that this can set a poor precedent for the future. And it's unfair to previous delegates as well who were not able to participate in delegation due to any emergencies. And they're still unpaid, or had their scores hurt for that. A common proposal mentioned throughout the response is to reevaluate delegation metrics and work of GovAlpha to help improve on that, to help all delegates instead of just single ones. And posts from GovAlpha responded as well by announcing that GovAlpha is currently working on defining the delegate role, and plans to submit a MIP. Hopefully posted within the next upcoming weeks. The vote ends on July 23. And currently, the majority vote does not support a reset for hostage delegation score. That's it for similar requests. So yeah, if you want a lot more information, the forum at a glance post does still contain three points summary all of the discussions and evaluations and reports for the week ongoing initiatives and any Help Wanted. Prose11 12:44 A P Prose11 12:44 Thank you. Appreciate it arm. And yeah, it's a nice slimmed down version. But do make sure to check out the post for a bit more details there. Awesome. As mentioned a few minutes ago, we do not have a initiative update today. However, we do have a couple items for discussion. Thomas, were you looking to introduce introduce those? Happy to do so. Yeah, Peyton. If you don't mind, I'll let you go ahead and open the right arm. Alright, if we go to next slide, I think the first one up here is going to be are these stablecoin proposal. So many European tension letter notice that are the big news announcing that they will be kind of launching their own stable coin. Obviously, that could be a competitor to to Dai. So seems fairly reasonable that we might bring it up and in talking about here in terms of governance and risk of node, I guess is that their their system setup for who is going to be quite different. Like there's going to be like designated mentors. I think they call facilitators. So it won't be as permissionless as Maker system. However, there are obviously a number of scenarios of similarities. There backing it through. Clever already accepted out of a excetera. Yeah, I feel like that's probably pretty good background, if there's something else others would like to highlight. Keep a moment here to do so. 14:29 Yeah, maybe I just talked to I know the guy who wrote the proposal at Ave and reached out to him and said, Hey, do you want to come on and present it because they they wanted to a lot of which building with Maker for some reason. And then he said, the guy who's doing that developer relationships would come on but he turned in sick. He's waiting to come on for another week if we still want that. So that's that's an option, but I'm sorry that he couldn't make it today. Prose11 15:01 Awesome, thanks for that referral, I would definitely be interested in hearing kind of more behind this proposal. But definitely fine to kind of keep the discussion more to our response, if any, to it. And if there's kind of any risk or governance considerations we should be having. On obviously, I'm less technical and governance facilitators. So the first thing that kind of came to my mind was our interactions with the d3 M. Right, and that we're kind of subsidizing their their bar rate for Dai. And if anything needs to change, they're going forward with this new stable coin. skim through the chat here. It's I would be curious to kind of take general thoughts on, you know, what this means for for makers feature? Like, is that something we need to be worried about? monet-supply 16:04 I could hop in for a sec, if that's cool. Feel free money. All right. Yeah, I think of a is, I would say, the clear leader in like, sort of, like Liquidity Markets across, not just Aetherium. But like, most of the other EVM chains. So at least theoretically, depending on how they set up their parameters, they could, you know, favor, their own stable coin versus others. Or, you know, yeah, kind of like tilt the field against us a little bit. So I think that's certainly something to watch out for. Like Dai has really great support from Avi right now. Which is actually, like really P P M helpful for Dai adoption across all these chains. But yeah, just something to like, watch out for if if, you know, Dai starts to get iced out, then it would be. Yeah, just we would have to like, think of what our alternative like options are at that point. And Prose11 17:20 play some good reflections there. My name is Thor. Recognize delegate and does work for a risk organism. For those who aren't aware. reminder, if you did want to hop on the mic, you can always feel free to raise hands, and I'm happy to call on you. But if no one's talking, don't hesitate to just hop on and go for it. Seeing some conversation in the chat kind of about the January, or Alliance for her GI Joe, I don't know if that's something we want to explore. David Utrobin 17:55 I mean, isn't that kind of just like a design flaw that can be remedied at some point in the future? Is it like really fundamental to the conversation? I guess Same. Same thing with like Dai being a USDC. Rapper like, yeah, like that's what it is right now. More or less. But you know, there's there's stuff happening to try to alleviate that. 18:15 There's nothing happening to try to at least, he's pretty committed to using chain link as their main Oracle. I just started out there because it's, it's one of the most compelling reasons I would personally not touch go, as opposed to Dai, which I do use. David Utrobin 18:33 Avid, it's not, it's not going to stop them from launching, and it's not going to stop like uneducated, like retail and just even like, educated. 18:40 That's right. No, I'm offering it as a way to compare the two. I think people are going to be asking the question, Why should I use Dai instead of go? And to me, that's one of the most critical reasons. 18:57 Like, in my conversations with them, they were like, constantly reiterating that they want to grow alongside I don't see it as a clear competition. I mean, I don't know what that means. Because clearly, it is the same market but per se. The intention seems to be non hostile. Lip service. P Prose11 19:25 Some people might have strong feelings either way. Definitely appreciate the perspective. 19:30 Danny's a cutthroat? Prose11 19:33 That Somebody's here, a hand from Tim here. So just make your way UltraSchuppi 19:37 up. Is it on me? Sorry, my internet tips from Owen starlings. So, Justin, go. I think we should all relax at this, about this. So I don't know. I think it was in 2018 at consensus in New York where UCC was announced that it's going to get launched and by the time I was super out, being involved in Maker by the time a bit, at least in silent mode. But if UCC wouldn't have launched, we would have had a very hard time defending the software or the heartache or whatever. So I think it was beneficial for us that centralized stable coin actually appeared. So either go is, I don't even know, is it go cuckoo? How do you, whatever you know what I'm talking about, either this is just not going to be relevant, then it's fine. Or it's actually going to grow alongside us. I don't think we are in a consolidation phase for stable coins yet. This is going to take a couple of years until we are going to have real competition on that yet, at least from my perspective. So I don't think we should be should be fearful or something like this. Yeah, that's just maybe I'm just naive. Prose11 20:50 I don't know. I mean, to your point, right, obviously, we're far from the only stable coins on on Aetherium. So this is, in some ways more of the same. Perhaps it not being printed based on on getting Fiat, right does put them a bit closer to, to our business model on what we do. 21:19 Awesome. Before. Oh, just one thing I've noticed is from a narrative standpoint, it seems like some some people are reading this as maybe a weakness of Maker Dow or like a sense that, you know, the pressures on us and other parties, you know, see an opportunity to take market share or kind of dominate. Again, I mean, I kind of read what you're saying, Sam as well, like, but but I just wanted to throw that in there. Because that's definitely some some sentiment I've seen on Twitter and indirect conversations that just the optics of it feels like a challenge. And does it reflect you know, us losing our footing or kind of struggling in certain areas that have been well publicized? P P U P Prose11 22:19 Sure, definitely. always hard to tell. It's the Zune or the iPad, that's second. Eye, contact us. David ICA. David Utrobin 22:30 Yeah, I mean, to a certain extent, like, this is the business world, you know, this is people are out for our market share. Dai is our core product. You know, I don't think the level of I guess, alertness coming from the community is overstated. I think it's very important for us to actually kind of consider this, because it should inform the greater DAO about like the strategy, right. But yeah, so I think something that I find really interesting also in terms of narratives is the sort of cross chain LTE future that Maker is pointing towards and that avid Ave is actually also pointing towards Ave already operates on certain other layer twos and side chains and and I think that this GH o token like you know, it could very easily be what's the word like integrated into all of their cross chain activities so it can definitely end up leading the way where Dai might not be leading so they they also might have Yeah, basically like first mover advantage on a lot of these side chains where Maker might not so yeah, just something else that I wanted to bring into context Prose11 23:49 I appreciate it David no signals on chat here about my curve and you know, potentially other protocols that could launch a competing stable scene any other questions in the chat? So if I missed you sir, please repost it to raise a hand David Utrobin 24:16 Yeah, just wanted to echo like what Kanye said like it really is the network effects advantage like Maker had such a huge advantage because we were sort of first out of the gate with a very well designed like initial working product. And also no other layer twos, right, we were just on L one, and we you know, we achieved like we succeeded and we caught like a very large market share. But that may not be the case moving forward with other networks, right? We need to do what we can to keep up and put Dai in a position where it can benefit from these kinds of network effects. Prose11 25:00 So I have a question to offer here. I'm curious if anyone's looked into like, kind of how guys scaling tends to go with or against the the general stable coin market, right. Like thinking of the USD collapse, obviously, there's a lot of contagion and a whole bunch of bunch of other factors that we can't get into in this call. But uh, what was interesting was to see such a large competitor blow up, and then see all the stable coins kind of tanking in issuance around the same time rather than, like, you know, gaining to make up for the hole that USD had. So I'm P P P just curious if that was, particularly because of the the large market effects. Or, like, generally speaking, like with the addition of a new stable coin, would we expect our issuance to go down proportionally? David Utrobin 25:59 Rachele cohort 26:03 David was first. Alright, David Utrobin 26:06 I had my hand raised from earlier you go forward? 26:09 Yeah, just looking at the chart of shelf of the total unstable current supply. So interestingly, Dai was 5% of the total sterile card supply prior to the demise of ust and is 4.5% After the demise. So actually, we lost 10% market share after the collapse of USD, and the biggest competitors are all centralized products. So Biden's USD 11%, USTC, 32%, and T dollar 45%. So, I mean, I don't know, I don't think that, that, that how you call it, I think the market is addressed in a different way. It's like, it's really not about what you can do with with the coin that I think that drives the market and not about the technology behind it because us, USD, T and USDC are simply the most accepted stable coins anywhere. And that's what drives our adoption. So I think if we want to grow with I go doesn't really matter. But what matters is where people can use Dai and for what they can use it. Prose11 27:42 Awesome, thanks for bringing the data there. I fail. And there's a link in the chat if anyone missed it. Cool. Yeah, I don't know. Oh, awesome. Lucas, you wanna take it away? And then I'll get to you, Chris. Yeah, 27:56 thanks a lot. It's my first time on a call. So happy to join these is really interesting. I've just been looking to go, I think, from my own perspective, the main advantages I've seen in terms of how they can get market share is one, incentivize staked Ave holders to use it by getting a discount. If you're staking on there, you get to borrow at a discount. So that seems to be one advantage. And then two, they seem to be timing it with their implementation of Ave v3, so that it can be used with some of the updates they've made in terms of their portals, which would allow it to move quicker to other layer ones and layer twos, their isolation mode, so that P could be used with more long tail assets, and then their efficiency modes, so it can be swapped quicker. I do think that they also did a pretty good job of borrowing a lot of concepts from makers design of Dai and so things like the facilitators that they talk about is basically a direct replica of d3 M. and imitation is the best form of flattery, right, but I think I think it does, will hopefully contribute and help the rest of the space by, you know, maybe hopefully driving some more innovation on the part of us at Maker and other stable coins out there. Prose11 29:09 Right, I don't know Allah. First off, welcome, Lucas, it's great to have you on this call. Clearly, you spend a lot of time in this space. And it's really great to have your perspective here. Awesome. I'll shift it to Chris Mooney don't get too far. Yeah, that was that was a great analysis. Like I, you know, I think it's good to sort of dig into exactly what their strengths are going to be. And also to the sort of previous comment from that. I do think that it comes down to ensuring that Dai is like usable in as many places as possible. And even though like Dai demand continues to sort of exacerbate our like, USDC problem. It's, it's still it's funny because 100 episodes ago, we were talking about how this is a good problem to have right? So, this is still a good problem to have, because it gives us sort of options in the future. So, you know, with regards to like what people in the market prefer, right? So there, they either preferred, you know, sort of pure sort of crypto, native, decentralized, stable coins, or the centralized ones, it seems like most users prefer centralized ones. The fact of the matter is like, all of this sort of stable coins in existence, they have sort of, you know, let's say pros and cons, right. And we, we have such flexibility and such focus on just the stable coin, that, I think it, our real job is going to be to make sure that we can benefit from all the pros, that one would get out of, let's say, a purely decentralized, stable coin, or a centralized stable coin, right. And we should try and mitigate a risk balance the cons, right. So, you know, if USDC is like heavily subject to regulators, you know, we may have real world assets, but we can diversify those jurisdictions and, and help risk manage that sort of regulatory risk. And so, I think that's what we should focus on. And we've got a couple tools that allow us to, you know, effectively inject Dai liquidity into markets. And so if our, if Ave really does attempt to sort of freeze us out, that would be still, I think, a pretty risky bet, simply because we have sort of d3 ends and strong tech staff and layer two strategies that allow us to basically inject dye into competing products. So I think, minimally, I think obvious is going to be, you know, sort of forced to grow alongside us and play nice. And for the market, that's probably the better thing to because, you know, users will have the options to switch between these things, but I think we should keep our eye on it. You know, they, they're fantastic at executing, and they've already got themselves on layer two, we took a slightly different technical approach, and worked out like the bridges, and we have sort of self sovereignty over our own Oracle's and so that we've been like, working to ensure that we have sort of canonical Dai on all of these chains. And so they, if you can imagine, they're like two roads to get to the same place. They're taking one road, we took another, I think we're all gonna end up in the same place. And at the end of the day, they're still going to be beholden to sort of chain link Oracle's. And, you know, there's a certain, like I said, there's a set of drawbacks from that. And I think that those drawbacks are pretty severe. That, you know, you can use the chain link multisig to basically, in a single block without a time delay, replace any sort of contract that feeds sort of price, or Oracle's to Ave and then Ave basically, can blow up just like that, which will also blow up pH. Oh, you know, we've got a considerably better sort of Oracle infrastructure from a security standpoint, and also the LSM delay for a lot of the assets that we lend. So, you know, I think there's a set, there's a whole set of trade offs, wherever we see them wildly out competing us. Let's take that for what it is, that should be competitive pressure that shows us that we're failing. If we are 85%, backed by P USDC. And users find this appalling and begin to use GHL. As a result, let that be a signal to us that we need to fix the problem. So it's good that we'll have this pressure and the competition. And thanks, Chris. Always nice to get your insight. Anyway, president and one of those kind of like, vision and business books, so take it with a grain of salt, but that is one thing they always say it's like if you're focusing on your competitors, you probably have already lost the game. Because it's really your your users and your product that deserves all the attention. Awesome. So I see Erica, with your hand race want to take it away? 34:26 Yeah, thanks. This is a great topic. I'm glad people are really following obviously coin. One thing I do want to say is, um, I wish we could get some data like real market research data on what users want, and what versus what other stable coin users want. Because at the end of the day, it's kind of a product of, you know, different stable coins. There's just different choice sets for people to use for commerce. And you know, if you had to ask me on top of my head, and she's gaslighting people want the safest collateral, the most liquid and it's The most widely available I mean, that seems like what most stable coin users want, you know, and I don't think I mean, we care a lot about regulatory risk. And I agree. But on the other hand, in the short term, my guess is most stable coin users don't really care and don't see it as a big deal. So at the end of the day, I think we really should do more and more research on what these people who have stable coins why, and really think we really make the best product for them period, we could say, hey, we want to over focus on regulatory risk versus what the market demand is, and that's fine. But then we're really shutting down our market size, you know, consciously, in the name of us perceiving a risk potentially bigger than the market participants do. And I think we just really have to understand much, much deeper, what stablecoin you want? Is there any way to do like test groups focus groups, in order to really start getting real survey data from actual Dai users, and other stable coin users and understanding what their core needs and concerns are? As opposed to us guessing it? Prose11 36:04 That's a fair question. And they might be wrong. I feel like this used to be kind of a focus of the business development back in the Maker foundation days. If someone wants to tell me, I'm wrong, though, I'm more than happy to hear. Like, are there any efforts, we know to kind of surveying Dai holders and figuring out like, what they like and their reason for choosing? 36:33 Hey, it's Eric. I just feel like this is a huge oversight. I mean, we have five and a half billion Dai, out there to people, why the hell do they want it? Why did they hold it or not versus USD? See, I mean, that just to me, it kind of boggles my mind that we're not obsessed on this. At the end of the day, if we don't grow that consistently, you know, we're gonna shrink into relevance. So what can we do to grow it? I better understand what they want to meet their needs. That's the Northstar. Yeah, everything else is kind of white noise. Prose11 37:08 P P Prose11 37:08 Thanks, Eric. Good, I guess for anyone on the call who's wondering how they can contribute to to Maker in a good Walden ecosystem definitely seems like a where they start to have something, David Utrobin 37:20 you know, like back in the foundation is the vision and the use case for Dai was was kind of manifesting really well, in the South American markets. People liked using Dai, this is, you know, I'm talking about a time when it was relatively cheaper to transact on layer one, people were using it, and they liked it, because they had, first of all, a currency that their government couldn't like, arbitrarily just shut down. That, you know, they basically were a little bit more sovereign. And also, they were able to do it on their smartphone, they were able to access financial services, like collateralized borrowing, and even like a low low risk, or, you know, quote, unquote, risk free rate, like in the form of the DSR. So that was the vision back then, like, it was like, Okay, get, you know, the people around the world who don't have access to like digital, financial, you know, tools, access to these tools. And that was really good. But then layer one fees started going up, and the entire retail market got priced out. And not only on the usage side, but also on the borrow side, right. So our product got completely blown up by layer one gas costs. And that is partly the reason why there's such a huge emphasis on the multi chain world. Because I think that like one of the truest use cases, for Dai really is it lies with retail, and it lies with emerging markets. And it lies with being able to access these financial services that you would typically need to go through an intermediary for. So until we see like a layer two future that are like, really, really popular layer two network emerge, where there's a lot of retail and a lot of organic user usership growth. I think like we should really just be heads down building. And to Brian's comment on the fact that we're focusing on following. I don't think that that's the right characters to the characterization. I think it's important to keep an eye on your competitors to see Yeah, like, if there's anything fundamentally threatening about them. I mean, we should still be focused totally on our own products of course, you know. Yeah, sorry for the rant. Anyway, that was that's kind of like my view and where we've departed from. Prose11 39:46 Definitely appreciate like the historical context from layer two David things. Yeah, I mean, keep in mind that GHS is going to suffer all the same. End User gas expense pressures that are We have an L one, they'll obviously be able to deploy this on their l twos as well. But, but so will we so so they're, they're kind of in the same boat, as far as, you know, as it's going to be a hard time for them to try and like get GH O generation. So David Utrobin 40:27 not an easy game to play for sure. I mean, I find it interesting that one of their first moves is going to like with the whole facilitator mechanic is to create a facilitator to market make GH Oh, so they're basically going to be like market making with, you know, uncollateralized stable coins? Is my understanding. I don't know if that's right. But that might give them a significant advantage over Dai in in L. Two markets, because we don't have a market making strategy for Dai. P Prose11 40:57 We do it's just, it's tied behind a couple of technical pieces, right? David Utrobin 41:08 Can you can you elaborate a bit on that? Prose11 41:12 Well, we need, we need not just the core, but probably the volt engine in place on different altitudes before we can start to do things like really spin up the sort of d3 em to, you know, inject dye into various protocols that that exist. And I think, you know, the entire toolkit of, of what we would need on those l TOS is are dependent on us having MCD in those locations. So yeah, I mean, we're, we've got a, we've got a roadmap. So just for anyone who's who's unfamiliar, the Dai savings rate has been mentioned by like a lot of forward looking plans, right, as a way to kinda continue to offer competitive advantages for for utilizing Dai. There are, there are others, there are other ways to skin, the cat, so to speak. Want to make sure we have time for the next topic as well. So we'll kind of give a last call if there's any comments or questions or you'd like on on the other GI Joe side last morning for putting them out there. Right now more, I appreciate the lively discussion. It's always nice hearing from so many different voices and perspectives. So hopefully, we'll keep that energy going into our second topic. Thomas, if you want to the slide, and you. So I believe the plan is to pass it over to lit as if he can correct me on how to pronounce your name. That's I've been referring to you, but I've been avoiding it. So I'm gonna pass the mic over to you. And if you want to correct me on the handle pronunciation, please do so. 43:24 Cool. Thanks, Payton, you had it right. It is lit. lit from Strategic Finance here, guys. And I recently created a forum post about the Maker token decentralization. I linked it in the chat. And basically, we can use this discussion segment to discuss any of the metrics views in that post or just Maker token decentralization in general. If you have any questions on any of those metrics, or views, and I'm here to answer, you can also you can also provide feedback on what else you'd want to see from from us on this topic. I've already gotten feedback, pretty good feedback on that, that it would be a good idea to also show your views on actual like votes and how many entities the votes are coming from. So that's something that will include in the next round. And so just to kick off this discussion, I pulled in one view into this deck that isn't the the prettiest view, but in my opinion, it's the most important of them all. And I'll give a little bit of context first, for those who haven't read the post. About 20% of outstanding MKR tokens were on the winning side of the most active vote in Maker DAO history. You guys are all familiar with that The Love Boat, so it's pretty reasonable to conclude that as of right now, it takes 20% of MKR tokens to dominate any vote. And so this metric represents the amount of entities that hold the top 20% of tokens, or, you know, the minimum amount of entities that it would take to collude and dominate the vote. So as you can see, it's bounced between two and four, but it stayed and mostly, you know, centered kind of around three. And that's where it's at right now. P P I think we can all agree that this is definitely suboptimal long term. It's not very decentralized. But one thing I did want to engage with the community on is, what would be more optimal? What number here would would actually represent sufficient decentralization? Prose11 45:59 So I think that might be a tough question to answer. But maybe we can look at kind of the the framing of it. So in terms of the number of wallets comprising top 20%, of MKR tokens. So just with that as a starting point, I guess my question is, well, how do we impact this number? Because it seems like without convincing some of the big holders to sell, it would be hard to to get this number to increase. You can Yeah. I think participation now. Sorry. Right. Well, that might be another measure of decentralization. Are you gonna say sorry? Yeah. Wait, if we cut you off? 47:07 No, no, no, I think I was gonna say something similar to 47:10 what Mark said. Prose11 47:20 Go for camera. 47:21 Hi. Yeah. Just a question. Did you look at the overall like, where all the supply is? So like, what are all the wallets that hold circulating supply? Do we know what percentage is held by third party custodians, like in Coinbase, that we know, requires a technical fix for the most part, you know, we have in terms of participation, there's like a big technical issue in terms of maybe large holders that want to keep their MKR in the custodian rather than what's required to vote. So do we have like the big, big picture of this subset relevant to the whole ecosystem of wallets holding institutions? As far as we know? 48:17 We don't currently but that's something we can we can look into next time. 48:30 I mean, I'm that David, I were you in the on the forum or discord commenting about Coinbase P P saying, q4, there we're doing something around enabling custody to MKR to participate in governance. Can someone is anyone on this call? Who has been part of those conversation