Recording

Transcript

Well, probably. So this is I know you've you spoke with Mark before, but this is our, you know, I think, a good opportunity for us to have a have a cool conversation here. And I think that Mark is certainly one of the one of the more educated people. You know, he was just giving us a really good explanation of the DA Hack and the three M's history.

So, you know, I'm really just here to, you know, put this together. I really want the, you know, the two minds here to have a good conversation. Yeah, well, thank you for inviting me. I mean, I didn't know you guys. I mean, three weeks ago, I hadn't really I didn't I hadn't really encountered beings yet, so it's it's kind of funny that, like, you know, suddenly now I'm on stage with you guys, so.

So hello. And it's a roller coaster for all of us. Mark Yeah. And I, like I said this before you got on, but look, I feel for you. I've been an entrepreneur over the last 30 years on many occasions, and there's always some version of this disaster that happens to every company. Some of them, some of them never get known.

Some of them are never public. Some of them are exceedingly public and far worse than this right? So and to the founders, the amount of stress that you feel is just insane. And a lot of people that have never dared to step out on the cliff themselves don't really understand just how stressful this can be. So I applaud you guys for, you know, shouldering shouldering forward doxing yourselves and also knuckling down and figuring out a way forward.

I really super applaud your courage on all those fronts. Well, I appreciate that tremendously. We appreciate that tremendously. I mean, from my perspective, the thing that was just such an eye opener was the response from the community after what happened on Sunday morning. Uh, frankly, I thought we were, you know, we were dead, you know, like, really, like, hard to imagine coming back from a you know, how much how much of your money did you lose?

It's like, well, we we collectively as a Dow lost 100% of our money. It's like, oh, that that's as bad as it gets, you know, So how do you recover from that? But over the course of Sunday and even into Monday, uh, over two dozen of the people that were working on Bienstock prior to the attack reached out to us and basically said, Hey, uh, we're not going anywhere.

We intend to keep working on Bienstock and we hope you guys do too. And I mean, if that's not, I mean, it was really quite the humbling, uh, humbling experience having so many of the people we've been working together with over the past nine months. You know, who now most of them have been paid right? Being staff firms has people that are paid.

Most of them now are not able to get paid. A lot of them have quit their normal jobs and are working on bienstock. And their attitude is we're not we're not going anywhere. This is worth fighting for. And uh, just have felt so inspired and so appreciate the kind words. But from our perspective, we've really been inspired by our community and the hope and just to do our part in getting Bienstock back up and running.

Yeah, I mean, I think the thing, I mean, the way I look at things like this and frankly, I looked at when the whole Wonderland and memo thing went down and I'm completely v pegged for well then completely. Too bad it depicts a little bit for a while and then it came back to it's P&G. After Doe Quan removed 100% of his U.S. he liquidity from curve in my mind that actually in retrospect now that was a massive stress test which Mims survived and so it's a positive and what we now know about you guys are you you know, first of all, we know your names, so we know there's real humans behind it.

We didn't know that before, Right? We just didn't know who you are. So it's a positive now that we know who you are. And we also now know that you don't buckle under stress, you don't give up. And that's new information. So that makes you know, you've survived your own stress test. We don't know yet whether the protocol is coming back.

We know that you're doing everything. You can bring it back. So we're not quite there yet. But we know a lot more than we did, you know, back when there was nothing when you first started. So some questions have been answered that were never answered before. Well, that's a glass half full approach. And from our perspective, there is a lot to be proven.

The protocol has a lot to prove. And in the same way that being a 24/7 was a major opportunity for Bienstock to prove itself. And in the same way that being at 1600 percent debt level was a major opportunity for Bienstock to prove itself. Why not a $76 million hold piece be be a great opportunity for Bienstock to prove itself?

So yeah, the glass half full attitude can go really far here. Okay, so where do you guys want to go? You guys want to repeat things for that? We're gone over in the town hall. It all to sort of summarize for everyone who knew kind of what happened and where we are and what the plan is going forward.

And you just want to jump into other stuff. We'll do whatever you want to do. Mark, this is this is your is as far as I'm concerned. And if you just you know, if you have questions for us or you want to just chat about whatever, we'll we'll ride this roller coaster with you. Okay. Well, I'm going to assume most people know, you know, know what happened.

They know there was a hack. They know how much was was drained. They know that there's a plan to come back to life. What's let's do this. Why don't you describe briefly, you know, keeping in mind most people probably know this already, what the plan to come back is. So the the thought and there's been a ton of discussion within the community and lots of tweaks and stuff being made.

It's kind of amazing, all the great ideas that everyone's been able to put forward and synthesize together. In effect, there's two parts, really three parts to the the reset and the the the second part is the meat around which things are easy to understand, I would think, which is effectively leveraging the credit mechanism of the protocol to attract as much of the $76 million via debt or lending as possible.

So over the course of the thought is three days or so, Bienstock is going to try to auction off 76 million soil or up to 76 million soil. And the weather is going to start at 20% or so and increase 1% every 10 minutes for three days. And the thought is that will facilitate something similar to the normal weather mechanism and demand for soil mechanism.

But obviously much simpler and expedited given the circumstances. Now. So go ahead. Let me let me just explain this, because I think this is I know I now understood what you said, but I think I think for a lot of people it's still possibly confusing. So when you say so, basically the beam protocol has within it it based the beam protocol basically has two things that it needs to do.

One is if beam is above the peg, if it's worth more than $2, it more than $1, it has to hand out more beam to bring the peg back down to a dollar rate. If there's more beam floating around out there, now being is worth less, right? So that's when you hand out the candy. That's where you reward people who have helped the protocol in some way.

The other thing it's got to do is if there if it's starting to if the dot if the peg is starting to float below a dollar is it has to incentivize people to give you their being. So that removes beam from circulation and makes the beam that's out there more valuable by a supply and demand. So the way you do that is through this pod mechanism where you basically say, give us your bean.

The weather is kind of, you know, the rate at which you'll be paid, the bonus, what you'll get for putting it, putting your being in a pod. So when I was doing it, when I went out towards the end of it, right before the hack, the rate was something like 60 to 1 payback. The weather was 6,000% in your parlance.

And so which is pretty awesome. But there was no soil, so it was above that at the time. Bean was floating above the peg. So therefore you did not allow people to purchase pots. Now when you purchased these pods, you know the rate at which you're going to be paid back 60 to 1 or whatever it is, well, you don't know when that's going to happen.

And that's the pod line. You know where you are in the line. And it's basically when that when the system was hacked, it was worth about 110 million, I think. And the pod line itself was about 600 million long. So because you were paying out to both silo holders and pod holders, it was roughly double that. So I wouldn't get paid out.

So if I put something, if I bought some pods at that at that moment when the protocol was worth 110 million, it would not I would not be paid out 60 to 1 until the protocol was worth roughly 1.2 billion, something like that. And then my payout would come out. So if the protocol were really fast, I would I would be paid out very quickly, maybe three or four months, or it might have taken a year or something like that.

But it wasn't unreasonable at the rate at which it was growing that it would be sometime within a year. Did I summarize that correctly? It's it's quite impressive. Mark, to hear you state it so eloquently. I'm glad I understood it. I'm glad I wasn't sitting here saying something was completely wrong. So thank you very kindly. Yes. So maybe just to continue, the idea for this fundraiser is to have a new pod line right where it's unclear, particularly given the fact that all of the liabilities in the system are at this point really liabilities.

Right. There was all this PDB and the silo being denominated value in the silo that was stolen and not being stock assets. And now you have all these pods and all this stock and all this beans that are kind of worthless. And so the question is, how can you attract some sort of bailout in a way that leverages the core mechanism of the protocol without, you know, totally restarting the stock, you know, maintaining some of its liabilities and obligations, but potentially not all of them, such that there's a path forward, if that makes sense.

Yeah, it does. And so when we think about how to incentivize that, the thought is to have this new pod line where, you know, whereas before, as you were saying, you have to get in the back of the 600, $700 million line and it's unclear how long maybe it'll take a year for you to get paid back even though you lock in this 58 X, But because of the nature of trying to get in a large amount of capital in a short period of time, the thought is to create a new pod line where you're now at zero in line going forward until this new pipeline is paid back, all new B ments will go

one third, one third, one third to the new pod line, the old pod line and stockholders. So a slight deviation from the old minting schedule, but not that far of a deviation. And the the bidding. The auction will start at 20% so someone can get in the front of the line for 20% and then the weather will increase 1% every 10 minutes for three days, up to four, 400 plus percent or so.

And the thought is over those couple of days. And again, there will in theory be this bidding process beforehand being stopped, will hopefully be able to reacquire a lot of the capital that was lost. Yeah. So just to be fair, I'm clear on this. So do pod line starts up like day one. It starts at 20%. But I'm first in line to get paid up.

So I you know, if I show up with $100 within like a couple of blocks now, I got $220. That's correct. Right. In theory. Now it wouldn't be a couple blocks per se, because there will be some time between the the auction or the sowing period and when being stock is restarted. So the three periods are the bidding period, the sowing period, and then finally the the restart.

But in short, you know, between whenever the restart happens, if you're at the first in line, you would expect it to be a very short period of time before you're paid. That understood? It's not block it's epochs in your system, seasons forming and start to be restarted. But yes. Yep. Got it. Okay, that makes sense. And then up it goes until Yeah.

So basically people can bid on. Yeah, they can just wait and see. Yeah. So it is an auction. It's, it is, it's just another auction. So that's super interesting. It's interesting that you have a mechanism already built in to boot this back up again. And now when people get in the pipeline, you're going to have them pay with a theory, right?

Like that's basically the coin of the realm. I guess it's the only way. Yeah, well, we were thinking it might be USD or recurve or some sort of stablecoin. Oh, really? So you're going to go with stablecoins and not a theory on this time around? Well, because there will be time between when the funds are being sunk, is able to raise the funds and when the thing is restarted.

And we don't want e volatility to rise and change the value that makes sense. Okay. So yeah, it will be a stay. So you'll do this, so it will be a stable, stable pool. Yeah. If volatility, you know, really makes sense and those are both so. Yeah. Yeah. So I assume you'll do it on curve, not Uniswap v2, right.

Correct. That is the other thought. Got it. That makes sense. Right. Maximum stability. Okay. You know. Well, I mean, I think we all feel like I think we're all feeling the need for maximum stability right now. So I think that's a that's a good decision. Yeah. There's a lot of complexity associated with doing multiple pools at launch, right?

You have this pool that was just raised by being stuck. It's much easier to deploy it into a single pool than to do multiple pools and to figure out what distribution. So the thought is start with the single pool. Yeah, I agree. Agree. So basically, if you were in the old pipeline because you basically had four and I'm sorry, I'm mixing up silos.

Let's talk about the silo now because this is a bit confusing to me if I am. So when you reboot this whole thing back up, the silo will once again be summoned into existence in the state it was in before the hack. Right? So if I had 100 beans in the silo when this thing comes back to life now I got 100 beans in the silo again.

Right. Assuming that 100% of the fundraiser is filled. Oh. Oh, okay. Right. So if so the percent. So it's based on the percentage. Correct. If 50% of the fundraiser is filled, then you'd have 50 beats. Okay. And by and by fund raise, you mean the new pipeline, the barn raiser, whatever you want to call it, the 76 million soil event.

Right. Okay. So what? I will. I know when. Okay, so how will I know when the new. Well, let me ask you this way. So I'm assuming by that you mean the new pod line, Right? There's no other way in which you're raising money. Correct. So there will be this event, right, where there's 76 million soil, there will be the bidding period for a week.

In theory, then, okay, there will be this three day period where the auction actually happens, where the weather starts to climb from 20% at the end of that three day period, there will be some amount of soil left. It may be zero, it may be 75 million. Right. So whatever percentage is remaining, that will effectively be the haircut that everybody receives.

So if there was a 30% remaining, everyone will take 30% haircut. Okay, Got it. So my $100 will now be $70 in the silo should that happen the way you just described? Correct. And so whether it was beans or LP tokens and stock obviously associated with the beans or LP tokens or not, if you just had circulating beans, let's call it, or farmable beans where you just had one stock, everything will get scaled by whatever that percent is got that makes sense.

Such that all of the liabilities of bean stock will scale with however much money it's able, Right. So if Beanstalk is able to, in this debt event, raise all of the 76 million, no one needs to take a haircut. But if it's only able to raise 50%, then everyone takes a 50% haircut. The system is totally reset to the state it was before, except scaled back.

And now whenever it's restarted, it can effectively resume as before. Yeah, with the governance will be off. There will be no on trade governance for the time being. Yeah, I'm getting there. I mean, not that we're not quite there yet, but yes, I'm going to go there because I do want to hear of the plan. Is there also.

But yeah, so for those of you who don't know what the silo is, because I know we didn't really define it, I'm assuming most people here know. But you know, the pods, we've discussed it like the silo is kind of the other option. If you are just a mere mortal user of the system and you want to mess around with pods, you just want to, you know, deposit your bean and get some sort of yield on it, kind of like anchor.

But the yields are a lot better. Then you put it in the silo and the silo has a bunch of, you know, some I in my view, too complicated mechanisms for determining how much you get. But by and large, it's the sooner you put in, the more you get, the longer you leave it there, the more you get.

And that's that's how the motivations are set up. So and that will be probably how 90% of users interact with the system when I was using it, it was saying that I was getting somewhere between 200% and 300% API, depending on which liquidity pool I was in. There were four choices, but I was actually observing something like 1,200% when I sort of reverse calculated what I was actually seeing.

But I was given to understand the system was in sort of a it's an extreme growth spurt at that moment. And that was very unusual. So you know that right? The the it's funny, right? There are so many different nooks and crannies and complexities, but you seem to have really started to figure your way out through the vast majority of the market.

Appreciate all of your explanations. I'm glad I'm able to give them. And it's only because I've studied a lot of these different systems. Right? So when I came to you, it was after I had studied obviously terror and learned, but also also tomb and on Fantom and God, what else? Mim and new thing called Deus. And you know, there's there's like a bunch of these things so I'd seen similar mechanism before.

And so when I was able to sort of sort through your nomenclature, I'm like, Oh, okay, that's like this other thing, but with this twist, right? So that was kind of how I was approaching it. But it definitely helps to have studied a bunch of these things well and a lot of them are all similar, but with a couple twist.

And at the end of the day, the twists, the twist are what makes or breaks the model or the model. So we should say, and there's a lot of different ways to do them properly. But uh, one of the cool things about the credit based model, which is unique at least currently, is the fact that when you have these deficiencies, you can in a very natural way, uh, in theory, raise it back without changing substantively the state of the protocol, if that makes sense.

Like the debt, the debt is a set as a substantial sustainable way to acquire a significant amount of product like liquidity from the protocols perspective. So it's very interesting to watch it play out in practice. Like if you had something closer to a a Terra or a Luna system, you might you might expect something here where there's more of an OTC sale of Luna, right.

All of what's happening to collateralize some of that system with bitcoin. But in this case the goal is to avoid some sort of OTC sale of stock by the Dow because then there wouldn't be any BDB under the stock. And so, you know, the system inverted in many ways which have their own benefits. And I think that Luna error particularly interesting and innovative in getting around the collateral problem.

But you know it's exciting to see how the credit based model can be very complementary to Yeah, I thought actually in my mind when I looked at your system that the thing that really grabbed me, like for me the headline was you had reinvented, you had reinvented this. The Stablecoin methodology. The key insight to me was that, you know, when you do Terra Luna, you have to burn Luna in order to make Terra so, which had the effect of reducing the supply of Luna to the point where Luna started going up like crazy, to the point where it's at $40 billion market cap right now because Luna is becomes more and more scarce as demand

for Terra goes up. Right? And it becomes Luna becomes more and more scarce and more valuable exponentially. You instead of having a different coin, which was sort of the exponential growth coin, you said the Stablecoin itself is the exponential growth mechanism if it is in the staked state. So staked stablecoin is the value creation token. And so you sort of combine them into one thing and that that was pretty insightful.

I really like that a lot. That was the thing that really grabbed me. Well, appreciate that tremendously and think that at the end of the day, the fact that you have protocol native liquidity from beans is the differentiating, differentiating factor that makes there are to be a potentially product market fit that changes the structure of Defi where you have positive carries stablecoins, facilitating a variety of transactions that right now are obviously facilitated by negative carry stablecoin.

So yeah, that's the core, uh, innovation, if you will, from a utility perspective. But the caveat and this is a big caveat from the perspective of the development that the community ultimately needs to perform going forward because of this, it's that, you know, the positive carry only takes place if the beans are in the silo. Right? And so, in fact, is that means that the silo needs to be as flexible and really I think flexible is the right word, but frictionless maybe as well, such that people don't necessarily need to leave the silo and can do whatever they want across defi such that they can continue to earn all of their bienstock native yield and

continue to use their beans. So that's where and obviously it's on pause right now because of what happened. But a lot of the development that Bienstock Farms was working on around generalized convert and generalized minting and the being farm were all related to creating utility for the silo, right? Because the purpose of the silo is to provide liquidity for bean and another stable or ethereal.

Is that correct? Like from your internal mechanism standpoint, I would say it's not to create utility for Etherium or for other stablecoins, but it's to create utility for beans, doing things like providing liquidity for for liquidity support and such. Yeah, because as long as there is liquidity, as long as you can go to Uniswap and give a, you know, basically exchange one bean for one Etherium, $1 worth of Etherium, then it's worth $1.

But as long as that's true, it is worth $1, right? And that's the point of the silo, or at least at least in my incentive, instead of collateral, if I can attract enough liquidity in the form of other assets such that, as you said, Mark, you can trade one being for $1 of other assets. That's exactly right. That's how stability is achieved.

Yes. So that's pretty awesome. I really like that too. So okay. So we basically suffered a hack in the governance system.

Why is this never going to happen again in the new system when you put it back up again? Yeah. So never is a strong word, Mark. And I think this has been a lesson in humility for everybody in the community as to, you know, what what level of security it's reasonable to expect from on chain governance at the moment.

And so at a high level, the thought is and even Vitalik weighed in on Twitter about this on chain governance is particularly difficult to implement via tokens. And so from our perspective, there's no rush to re implement on chain governance given what's happened. And the thought is to move to a community run multisig and have have there be off chain governance for the foreseeable future until a much more robust and secure governance mechanism can be developed and audited.

Certainly at least once by Trail of Bits, hopefully, and potentially another audit firm as well before anything, whatever go back to on chain governance. So in summary, in the short term, the on trade governance has already been removed. There's already a move taking place to a community run multisig So the attack vectors introduced by on chain governance have already been entirely mitigated.

And then it is worth noting that Beanstalk was audited. Uh, you know, as recently as a couple of weeks ago. And so we do feel like the vast majority of the contract is secure or both, having been out in the wild for nine months and or almost nine months and having been audited, the governance is where all of the attack vectors are.

The vast, vast majority of them would have appeared to have been. So the fact that it's removed, uh, makes you feel a lot better about it. Now, at the end of the day, everyone does need to kind of come to a decision together and the down needs to vote on whether it makes sense to relaunch the stock once the the barn raised is complete, once this fundraise is complete, or whether it it makes sense to wait until the Trail of Bits audit, which is scheduled to start in early June.

And so it can be completed towards the end of June to wait for that basically. So there's something to be said for the community could make a decision, you know, that it's it's worthwhile to just wait an extra month or a month and a half to wait until the protocol is audited by the gold standard for computer security firms before relaunching.

And that's totally reasonable as well. Right. Okay. So just to summarize your answer is we ripped out the governance. We're not going to put it back in any time soon, if ever, but we might. I did see Vitalik comments that Alec was with Alec was particularly negative on Coinbase governance completely. He was like, you know, no delay, no, no amount of Multichain can ever fix this.

I don't know that I'm personally that negative on it, but without a doubt having some sort of delay that can be human intercepted for governance, you know, call it a week and there's nothing there's nothing so burning that it has to happen, you know, in less than a week, I think at the very least, that seems like a reasonable way to run it if in fact, you're going to put governance back in.

But for the time being, no governance is just you guys in your multi sects, correct? Well, not us. Not us. We're actually probably not going to be on the Multisig or even have just one of like nine or 11 keys or something. So we will not be the multisig, if that makes sense. It will be the community got the keys over.

Understood. One thing, one thing maybe to comment is that if you think about what governance looks like for Beanstalk at scale, right, and this was something that was ultimately going to have to evolve anyways, because the hope is to at some point figure out how to leverage the credit history of beanstalk across multiple chains. And that's a very sophisticated problem to solve for a couple of different reasons.

Primarily if you're harvesting beans on one chain, but you have a universal plotline, the message that beans were harvested on one chain, if you're able to corrupt that message and say, hey, a trillion beans were harvested on this chain, that can fuck the whole system. So there's a lot of risk that comes with going to other chains and having some sort of cross chain infrastructure here.

And once you have been staff, are multiple chains. Coordinating governance and protocol updates across those chains also becomes very difficult to do. On what would require some sort of off chain coordination anyways. So the point is whatever governance looks like can be super robust, can be super decentralized, but the amount that happens on chain versus off chain that the goal is to figure out how to have a really robust and decentralized governance process without necessarily allowing for any sort of attack like this to ever happen again.

Right. And what you just described is effectively a bridge problem, which is which is the the other great hack of the last few weeks, the Ronin bridge. So we all know bridges the theory and allocates bridges as well so well because they're dangerous. Right. For exactly this reason. And to that point the thought is or the thought was prior to the attack that six months or 12 months down the road, there would have to be work done on a specific bridge to communicate between the different bienstock, because at the end of the day, if Beanstalk is going to grow to trillions of dollars of size, it's very unlikely that any one bridge is going to

be large enough to secure the protocol, right? Yeah, you're going to have to. Yeah, I do think that, you know, I saw they studied other systems. What are things I thought was super cool about Mim was before. It's sort of semi demised They did have cross-chain bridging with no fees and no slippage up and running, which made it extremely attractive as a stablecoin that could do something that no other stablecoin to do, least of my knowledge.

So I thought, yeah, that. So you do definitely want to somehow I think provide I'm sure you know some. Sherman I'll tell you something, you haven't seen yourself, but that seems to be very valuable. Yeah. And there really is something to be said for the elegance of both the Oracle solution that is possible and the bridging solutions that are possible because of the fact that Terra has their own node system, right, or no network of nodes.

So a lot to be considered. One of the nice things of this, even though at the moment it is a total shit show, is that this does allow for like a grander reimagining of governance and there's nothing wrong with that. So most people thought that the impossible problem or the much more difficult problem to solve was the economics problem, which being stark, has been doing a good job of demonstrating its efficacy of solving.

And so the governance is we're betting that over that the community can figure it out collectively, right? Yeah, No, a agreed. So getting back to I just want to go somewhere else for a second because I've said this on Twitter before, the hack and sort of studying your system after I sort of figured out what all the knobs and buttons did, it seemed it seemed to me to be really complicated.

Right? You mentioned, Oh, we're really happy that you understood, which means that a lot of times people don't understand it. And for it to have trillions of dollars worth of beans floating around out there, it has to somehow be ridiculously simple. And I would say that Terra and Luna, despite whatever is wrong with it, they did that. The value proposition is ridiculously simple.

But you know, why do you want Terra? Well, so you can put it in anchor, so you can get 20% right? And you definitely will get the 20%. You know that now and so that creates demand for Terra, like something like 75% of all Terra's is staked in anchor. So that's its primary use case. And that creates demand for Luna feeds.

And so the price of Luna goes up ridiculously. And, you know, even though all these things are sort of ridiculous, they're also really simple. And I feel like Dean, as at least the way it was born, I love the insides of it, but I don't love the outside of it. I don't feel I feel like you, me and our our sort of Twitter friends that love Defi will be into this, but it'll just stop growing at a certain point because normal people in the normal world can't understand it.

What what is your answer to that? You agree with me, You disagree with me. What do you think about that? So I think this is a question of scale. There's a couple of things. First, to get Rome wasn't built in a day, mark, as I'm sure you know. And so to seed a strong decentralized community of defi people first, this has had, you know, the lingo and the means have had a very strong effect.

That doesn't mean that it will be easy for a billion users to understand the means. However, I would push back and say that from our perspective, the nature of being stock is so novel and the structure of pods are so novel and the structure of stock is novel, such that all of the metaphor is really designed to make it easier, not harder, to understand, even if there is a veil that needs to be pierced.

Once you once you break that veil, we do think it's very the metaphor is very helpful. Now, with that said, I think the metaphor can be refined a B, there can be a lot of supplemental materials produced that don't include any of the metaphor. There needs to be manpower to do that. And in in stock farms, which grow in such that that at some point could have been possible.

But now that might be a little bit on hold. I mean, in short, it's definitely complicated, but I designed, you know, the language that's been used to communicate how Bienstock stock works is really designed to make it as simple as possible to understand. I know that me I mean, it's a complicated system, so it's tough. But at the end of the day, the question is, is it is it fair to oversimplify?

Is is it reasonable or honest to oversimplify, to make people feel like, oh, yeah, I get it, but leave out some very important details? And at least from our perspective as Publius, our role is much more to err on the side of, including all of the information and all of the details. And then, you know, if other people want to summarize, that's up to them.

But we don't want to leave out any relevant information when we're talking about Bienstock Yeah, I look, I agree with your, you know, your basic tenant to be transparent and to allow all those all of us who do understand this sort of thing, to see all the cogs and wheels and be like, Oh, so that's how. Okay, now I get how that works.

And, you know, I was able to piece a lot of it together. I still don't totally understand why. And I'm going to ask this now because I would have you in front of me. So when I was puzzling through it, I do understand that when you put when you put being into the silo, you earn seed and then the seeds produce stock and more seed you have, the more stock a stock accrues over time.

And I guess it was just sort of the I didn't see why seed in stock couldn't just be one thing, but maybe, maybe one encapsulates time and the other one encapsulates the amount of being you put in. I guess that's why. But it just sort of seemed like, why am I getting these two things that make sense? So the long and the short of it is originally the main question was just how to create this opportunity cost that is created from the stock that grows from seeds that need to be forfeited when you withdraw.

Now, the original idea for Seeds was was conceived as an accounting tool first, such that it was an easy way to account for a user's deposits. But and this is no longer the case, or at least we don't think this is any longer the case. The original idea, after the accounting idea was conceived was that you could have stock and seeds become liquid, and then you had this very nice interplay between people trading stock and seeds as some sort of, uh, expectation of when Beans senior Edge was going to take place, if that makes sense.

So even though now we don't necessarily think it makes sense for seeds to be liquid, that's where the original idea came from. Now, going forward, as bean stock migrates to some sort of gate system, in theory, one might expect the seeds to be obfuscated, but probably not. Okay, that makes more sense. Yeah, I do. Look, I do like having a version of this where I can see see inside the engine.

There are some people who there are a lot of people who love to buy a car, open up the engine and see how everything works. And you want that to be a bit, you know, you want the hood to be able to pop open and you want the engine to you want there would be a manual and you want to be an engine.

That's understandable for those people, which is us people. But the vast majority of people, they just want to drive the car. Right. And forget mass adoption. That's kind of at some point that that will just have to be something you guys provide. But sounds like you guys know that. And there's a whole team. I've been staff farms working on the brand and how to better explain this to people than we can.

Yeah. Yeah. Makes sense. Well, I don't think I have any more questions on my end, so I guess I'm done. It ends. Don't Mark. Say it. And so yeah well you know I'm sort of question exhausted. I guess so. I mean, do you guys want to take some questions from the audience? I had one question for you, Mark, before.

I didn't get a chance to ask, where did you come across Bienstock How did you how did you find it? And we think, you know, I think probably Twitter, Twitter is sort of where I spent. I don't spend I try not to spend time in telegram. I'm forced there sometimes because it's just so chaotic. But but Twitter is sort of you know, I just I've been doing it for longer.

I have a stronger presence there. And I'm follow it. I'm following a lot of interesting people there. So I can I can tend to sort through new information faster. So I'm pretty sure I saw some people tweeting about it and usually when I see something sort of float past me three times, I say, Wow, that's okay. That might be a thing.

I should probably go have a look at that. And I probably saw it four or five times in one sitting. I was like, All right, I need to have a look at this. So that's kind of that's kind of my approach to I, I, I think probably a lot of people here. A I just brought on Ryan for a question.

Ryan is one of our one of our core team. Hey, Mark, first of all, thanks. Doing this. I mean, this is fantastic. I really enjoyed the conversation. Publius, thank you as always. So not so much a question, but Mark, to your point about like this scaling question and going from this core team out of, you know, folks that are really, really into Defi and really want to look under the proverbial hood, what goes through my mind is what will, you know right now, we've got, you know, let's say we've got twins and users or whatever that are that that core defi as we move outward in that number of users increases, I think we'll move

away from the crowd that might be looking at this as an investment tool more towards the crowd that's looking at it from more of a pure utility standpoint. So the a lot of the discussions we've had around like negative versus positive carry and utility of the coin are around the idea that, hey, you know, I can actually use a bean to do a thing and it will work effectively.

And I almost think that is is is the protocol continues to grow. We're going to see more and more people that are saying, hey, I'm not looking at this to make a ton of money. I want to own a bet on a football game and I'm going to be able to use Bean to do that on Augur or whatever.

And you'll see more and more utility opportunities. I think that's where part the scaling can happen. Yeah, no, I mean, look, it's as we all know, that there's utility for a dollar, right? It's just a question of where it's accepted. So I guess it's just building up a bunch of places where your stablecoin is accepted. People use, you know, tether is sort of the most accepted stablecoin on Binance and exchanges around the world, right?

A lot of them just operate on tether only. So it's got utility as a dollar in those settings and the more sort of place that you guys can find for there to be utility for being or it's recomposed with other protocols and things the better. So although weirdly, Luna and Tara have gotten away with being a one trick pony, right.

You don't really, you know, us t really has one trick and that's to make you 20% a year. It's on a it's on a blockchain that only has 17 other protocols, right. Which is very unlike fantom or Avalanche or even Etherium that have hundreds of different protocols with which things can be recomposed with one another. So weirdly, Luna is escapist.

I mean, if you disagree, but it looks to me like Luna has escaped without a terribly large amount of utility. Yeah, I think that's fair. And you know, I want to give to that. To that point, I want to give a quick shout out to the Bean Sprout crew and really a number of other folks that are core contributor contributors that are working on the exact question of like, how do we increase utility?

Is it through you know, is it through partnering with other protocols? Is it through working on things like, you know, like NFT marketplaces where, you know, being can be use like all these ideas are floating around, too to do exactly that, to build that utility. Yeah, I agree. I totally agree with that. Well, and from our perspective, the negative carry costs are pervading all across defi and it's unclear all of the nooks and crannies that having negative carry costs effect at the moment and the switch to positive carry costs can really present a fundamental shift in the structure of the landscape of of Defi.

And don't think we're overstating it there. Yeah. Let me also bring 111 last thing up that's also been sort of on my mind. I understand why the silo is providing me with 200 to 300% API. I get it. I Believe it, It's working. The mechanism is beautiful from a consumer's point of view, it sounds like bullshit, right? You see something that says 200 300% API, you just go, Well, that can't be real.

And I think that, you know, Lunas are, you know, I hate to go back to every time, but you know, 20% even that seems somewhat miraculous, but it's at least swallow of all. I do worry that like sort of getting consumer adoption because they just don't believe the 200 to 300% is real. They'll they'll just they just want investment because they're like, oh, this has got to be a scam.

They're going to take my money at some point down the road. Like, I think that's a real thing also. And even though it's terrible, right, because you're you're taking money away from the consumer, they can have. But I just feel like most people won't believe it. So do that. What you will. That's sort of my my $0.02 on that Well, and the too good to be true aspect of it is fair.

And I think it's reasonable for people to be skeptical. And it's unfortunate that given the attack, people may be even more skeptical, though it's always healthy to be skeptical, but would just say being stuck is one of the very few systems, in our opinion, that are designed to be as fair to everyone as humanly possible and not to make us, the founders or anyone you know, the earliest adopters just just make us rich.

It's designed to make any of the participants able to participate in the general success of the protocol in a very equitable fashion. And I think that that's one of the key differentiators between the protocol and in practice is probably one of the reasons why there are so many people that now, even with what's going on, are not ready to let the protocol die because they feel like they own, you know, their owners and it's their protocol and it's very reasonable to feel that way.

Yeah, that's actually a great point. I you know, you're making it, but a lot of people may not realize this. I'm like Taryn Luna, you know, like when they booted up and they put that or even. FRAX Right. When you bring it up. FRAX For the very first time, you know, Sam could and I think he did mint a whole bunch of app access, you know, for himself and the team.

And, you know, same thing is true of Luna when they booted that up, you know, whatever percentage of it went to DOE in this team, you guys didn't do that because you couldn't do that because the protocol is designed to only create it. We could have done it. We elected not to. Yeah, you could have designed it fair enough.

So when the protocol launched, when it deployed, we could have said, send 100 beams to this wallet and 100 minutes to that wallet and 100 minutes to this wallet and 10,000 means to that wallet. But we elected to have the system run totally clean and just like everybody else, the only way we were able to get exposure to the protocol was by buying and participating, truly just like everybody else.

So felt like from a first principles perspective, that was a great way to show, you know, there is no yes, there is no first class, there is no first class or anything like that. And being stuck and everyone is equal and that's something we're very proud of. Agree. I saw that and it was the fairest of fair lunches.

Totally agree with that and I applaud you for it. So I wanted to bring up Caesar for my question. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I have a I have a question at the end, but I also have some statements to make on some of the things Mark has said. First of all, I've been studying Bienstock for quite some time now, so it's almost the genesis like quite a long time.

And you are right that the UX is it is a puzzle, right? It takes quite a bit to like I still find, I still click on things, I still read little like pop up descriptions and I'm like, What does this exactly mean? And then I start thinking about it and but I think this problem could be solved with like a, like a light version, just like a switch to light and just have like silo.

And that's pretty much it. Just like swap and silo, some sort of light version might, might solve that. And to speak on the problem of like, you know, people can't swallow 230% or actual like 1,000% because like the APPR was like historical. It wasn't like up to data, it was based on past rate. And that's basically the way most APIs are.

However, when I first got into it, it was 0% and then it went to 30 and then it went to 60 and then it went to 230. And I think the last time I saw it was like 360 or something. Now that's because it was in heavy growth phase and the peg was quite high. But if it's in, once it stabilizes and goes to super high, that I don't think it would be printing at such a high rate unless there's more and more and more demand coming in.

Right. And you know, that would be up to the team to try to find use cases so that demand can keep growing. Right now, the question I do have for probably lists is you always use the word positive. Kari and I haven't actually got a nice good definition of this. Is this just mean yield bearing? Like is it just interest bearing or yield bearing?

Like what exactly can you define posit theory, very authoritarian costs are just, you know what it what it costs to hold a position. And the idea is that if you're holding a in possession position, there's some sort of positive yield associated with that. Okay. So yeah, so basically it's another way to call it like interest bearing in a sense, right?

Correct. Okay. That's it. And, you know, it is really amazing just to hop on to that seizure. All of the different things that are created from that positive carry. If you look at something like anchor and having a fixed yield protocol, beans are also very suitable for something like that where you can imagine a protocol and there was there was chatter before the attack.

Hopefully this protocol will continue to be built called root that was going to offer a similar fixed yield product on bean deposits. But because beans have positive carry, it's actually a very unique relationship that Rudi's facilitating where people who are taking the other side of that trade are really just betting that the yield from the silo is going to exceed whatever the fixed rate is, if that makes sense.

And it's incredibly capital efficient because let's say you want a guarantee for a year, a 25% return on 100,000 beans in order to guarantee that for a year you only need to lock up 25,000 additional being so somebody can, in a super capital efficient way, take some sort of call option on or off huge run the yield for the silo over that period of time.

So lots of really interesting derivatives and other stuff that can in theory be built on top of a positive carry stablecoin and really hope that this is just the beginning. That is super interesting. Guaranteed 25% yield for one party and then the other party is just whatever's left over of the yield. I get or for whatever reason that yield doesn't materialize, then the party that's getting the 25% comes out of what I put up on my side of the bet.

I've seen things like this before. They work really well. That's super interesting. That would solve the problem of the user interface for the app. How about that? How about that? That would work. The grandma and grandpa. Yeah. There's actually quite a few protocols that offer this same system of like fixed yield versus speculating on future yield like a I've done quite a few researches on several of them and they tend to follow the same type of pattern of like two token ideas where one person gets the fixed yield and the other person basically pays guarantees that fixed yield.

Well, getting the the possibility of even more yield. Mark, we've also discussed before the possibility of having two different interfaces. So one for a little bit more of like the power user that explains everything. And the other one, you know, just having a more basic kind of savings account that you could do. Yeah, absolutely. That would be very, very helpful for your growth.

I think for sure. The AOL simple, you know, you guys were all young for that, but you know what I mean? Or being stocks are primitive market. You can only make it so simple. But at the end of the day, the hope is all sorts of tech is going to be built on top of being stuff that makes it accessible to a whole variety of different audiences.

Yeah, I completely concur. This route thing's a great idea for sure. Okay, I'm bringing up Toshi, who's been very patient. Thank you so much. I'm in the gym now. So you hear machines going, I'm so sorry. I'm going to try and be as brief as I can. First of all, thank you for ringing me and thank you to the team.

You guys have been weathering the storm very well and it's really cool to be in the same space and see this big. I love all your videos. My main question that I wanted to bring up is I'm obedient and hard and I believe in I believe in beans as a whole. I see it as a great opportunity to buy Bean right now at point three because I believe it will get to back to one.

Is that the goal? To give the peg back to a dollar or is or are we relaunching with a different point? So because of the level of the corruption of the bean token from the attack, there's going to need to be a new bean token issued by bean stock. So in short, the current bean token is, is that even if bean stock is very much alive, God to God.

That's interesting. So how how does that work for current bean holders? The people, the people that never let go? Well, they will get the idea is that Beanstalk should honor all the state of Beanstalk prior to the attack, effectively with the haircut. And then my last question, and not necessarily on my medium size, I would like I'd like to know how did you guys fund the fungus?

And as I was giving myself and you wanting to do again, how did you guys I as I read, nobody sees. No, no, we have to fund. What do you like? What's there? There are no costs. What did it cost to deploy Beanstalk on main net? Like for grand? I don't know. That's the cost. Anything. And you say to you guys it was just would you say you're a how do I say that.

Would you say your full time team, most of them are a part time team. We spent like nine months with almost all of our effort working on bean stock prior to launches. I think that's interesting about I love it. I will bring you Can you ring me up? That's all my questions. Yeah. Thanks, man. I think totally forgot to ask his last question, which is what it like him to do for.

Yeah. You know, for a relaunch. Exactly. Yes, he did. Was I don't know. So the thought is I think Beanstalk Farms is preparing lots of information about the plan that's being put together and there will be more information forever for the Dragon you to read about how to participate in the auction and the, I guess the bidding process and or the selling process prior to the restart.

Boom, boom, boom. I love you. You guys are amazing. Thank you, sir. It takes a village. Okay. Okay. We got Tibet. Hey, what's up, everyone? So my questions have kind of, like, indirectly been answered is a market is kind of key. Biggest, more so. Yeah. No, no, I came up with a new one. Don't worry, Don't worry. But yeah, it was kind of when Mark was talking about the complexity of being stock and kind of the model of how current users are interacting with it.

And since that point in the conversation, you guys have done a really good job of highlighting. Right now we're building, being, being beanstalk, but then we're going to start focusing on building on top of Beanstalk and layering these new types of simpler abstractions and user interfaces on top of the core protocol itself in order to make it accessible and to scale this thing out kind of in line with that theme.

This questions directly directed at Publius. What utility focused aspect of the roadmap are you most excited about moving forward? It's kind of an optimistic question. After a revive this thing. So to me I thought that the generalized being farm or as we were starting to all the farm and we were so close, even the white paper was being drafted for it was something that was really going to be revolutionary in Defi and hopefully still will be such that if we had this LAUSD pull live and let's say it was even white listed on the curve gauge, which at this point does sound like a little bit of a fairy tale, it's certainly long way into

the future. Well, hopefully it'll happen again soon, but it was a lot closer a few days ago. The idea is that people could, in a single transaction, can take their harvestable beans, sell them, and even deposit that even a liquid he drove meant LSD against that liquid he drove Add that LAUSD to an LAUSD pool, deposit the LP tokens for that LAUSD employee put in convex for cvc's LAUSD being and deposits at that CVS, LAUSD being in the silo or in a single transaction.

And to me that's pretty fucking cool if you consider how the normal flow in Defi is, that would take, you know, seven, eight, nine, ten transactions with a renewable stuff. That's a really dramatic change in that you across default. Can you even imagine the yields on that token. No that's that's fantastic. Well thanks for for answering the question That is super cool.

I agree the tech is cool as fuck guys. It's just a shame that, you know, there's been this slight hiccup, but I think in the long run beanstalk and all of us will be much better for it because what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. And a beanstalk does not appear to be debt by the 100 plus people in this chat, by the hundreds of people in the calls over the previous couple of days, by the amount of endless dialog in the discord and stuff over the past couple of days.

Uh, certainly not dead yet. The rumors of our death are greatly exaggerated. Okay, Jack, you're next. Hey, thanks for having me on. I actually think all this is super, super bullish for being. I did a bunch of research about three months ago, weighted April 16th. I put in 41,000. And of course, this happened, but I'm still bullish on being as part of the research.

I went into all your articles and documents and everything else. This is now also part of the public record and learned more about being in the past three days because of this exploit and everything that's going on. And if I if I find some more money, I'll be put some more money in. So good on you guys. It's awesome.

Well, I appreciate those kind words tremendously, Jack. And we've always tried, even when we were anonymous, to be as open and honest as humanly possible. That certainly hasn't changed. So very excited about the additional eyes and ears looking at Beanstalk and hoping to make the most of this opportunity. You're on track to get Tony. I see you requested again, and I just thought I'd bring you back on if you had a question.

You forgot. Or maybe not. It's okay. It's okay.

Okay. We got Adam coming up. Hey, guys, I want to ask a really oversimplifying question, and hopefully the theoretical clears people's minds. Let's say in theory, at $100 and being whatever, a week before the exploit and in the bidding process, I put an independent hundred dollars. And let's say it's two people or two wallets. I'm curious again, the theoretical we throw a year out, what does that first wallet, who lost the hundred look like and what is that second wallet that invested 100 from the rebuilding look like in comparison?

I mean, the short answer is, Adam, Unfortunately, it's too simplified to give you a good answer because it's dependent on what percentage of the $76 million stock is able to raise. And it's also dependent on what the growth in the senior is over the next year. So it's just very hard to speculate. It's also dependent on the yield you get for lending for the fundraiser.

Sure. I think the concept I'm missing is just I mean, let's say, I don't know, there's a half haircut. I'm just wondering how the order gets paid out in the new investor wallet versus the left over reconciliation of the the individual who's burned? Well, again, I just I think there's too many variables to speculate, like in a in a concise fashion.

Can I can I try to answer through because I think I understand that answer. And you can tell me if I'm wrong, But so. So let's just say they raise like half of the amount that they lost. Right. So. So 50%. So the wallet that had $100 in it when new being is issued, 50 being will magically appear now in that wallet.

Did I get that right? I'm with you. This is exactly the explanation I was hoping for. Yes. So your if the fundraiser is 50% completed, everyone gets a 50% haircut. That's exactly correct. Yeah. Or you get your 50% back, which is a better way to say it. But it's so hard to say a year later. It's just I guess I started to come out it it started coming out of your mouth.

Right now, I can understand. So, yeah. So 50 news or 50 new being will appear in the wallet that that when it's three issued that previously held 100 old bin. Yep. And then whatever And then you have one other wallet that's in the silo, you know, same thing it'll, it'll basically be reinstituted with 50 being but the cool thing is, is that if we get like the 200 to 300% API kind of going and it grows fast, that could grow back to its 400 being and not very much time if I'm totally with you.

Yeah, I guess what I was missing is the fact of is there priority that older wallet both wallets have whatever 50 we now know is there priority between the two? There is no priority between the two. Right. And you just get the like credit based on like whatever the fundraise was because you were in it before. Right. So remember, they're raising what really backs the coin right now is the amount of liquidity.

Right? So they just don't they don't want a situation where, you know, if they gave you the full 100 back and they did that for everybody. Now there's twice as much coin out there is there is liquidity. So if there's a run on the bank in that situation, you know, all the liquidity gets destroyed. And now we're right back to where we started from.

So that's a bad idea. Right. So that's what they're trying to protect against. Okay, cool. Thanks, guys.

All righty, folks, I got to hop in just a couple of minutes. But this maybe we'll take one more question. If one or two more if there are interest. Sure. I think I just brought up Victor here. Victory there. Victor Scott. That's a good name. Yeah. Good day, gentlemen. Can you hear me? Yeah. How's it going? Good. Good.

Guys, thank you for. For the efforts and the leadership shown so far regarding the exploit and for the rolling communication you had so far with the various platforms. I got a couple of questions regarding, first of all, I just want you to give color with regards to is the have has the any been venture capitalist or larger Were large investors or high worth individuals to look at buying large stakes that have been approached?

And then the other thing I want you to ask has to is what what are the special incentives that you have in the mind to attract large investment, high net worth individuals to looking at perhaps taking a stake in the bank? And also, I want you to ask a 2 to 2 to answer a question regarding these three dates that you propose to attract capital long enough in view of the 76 million is three days not too short?

Are you looking at perhaps a week or two weeks? What is the preparation to make sure that the fundraising is is a success? Thank you so we drew, a lot of this was already covered, so we'll keep it a little bit brief. But the there hasn't been basically any significant VC investment into being stock to date. There have been some say, seven figure investments, particularly over the past two or three weeks, hoping stuff was blowing up in a good way before pull up in a bad way, you know, in terms of how to attract VCs, particularly in the case of this fundraiser, feel like the structure that's being discussed is very attractive and we're excited

about hopefully how much interest there will be. And with regards to the the question around three days, well, the hope is to have this bidding process, which will be a week prior to the auction, such that you won't have a very, very short period of time. Okay. Understood.

Then I wanted to know with regards to the the exit clause, let's say if, if, if the parallel clause, I know that I'm going to I don't know if you've answered this or somebody has answered the question, what is the exit clause? I mean, for the guys not to dump and, you know, there are beans on us and what have you so on.

Let's say you have assets in the silo and it's good to restate it anyways. If the amount of funds that are paid off in the new pod line, that will basically determine the amount of the haircut if you withdraw early. So if you wait to withdraw any of your assets from the silo until 100% of the new problem from the barn raise is paid off, then we, you know, you would not forfeit any of your assets.

But if you withdrew when only 1% of the new pipeline had been paid off, then you'd forfeit 99% dresses. Does that make sense? Yeah, that makes sense. But I need to understand. Let's assume there's a we see that does come and get attracted and buys the pods. You see. He says no, I'll take out, I'll give a check for about the same to 6 million.

Is that going to be a clause for him once it's paid off that he doesn't come to the market and dump that's holding him to 6 million while the. Oh, that doesn't matter. But in theory, under this auction model beanstalk going to have a wide variety of participants in the pod line and when pods harvest in stock, it's very comfortable people selling them on the market.

So there's no reason for any sort of terms or things like that. All right. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thanks, Victor. Of course. All right. But okay, we'll get one more question. Um, well, knocking over the bean sprouts. Hey. Hey, dumpling. Just because we know Publix has to go here in a minute. I was wondering. I don't to put Bean Tobin here on the spot, but would it be possible to get a little bit of a live performance for for everybody to kind of take us home here.

So it'd be amazing if he's near his guitar. So before we head out though, I just want to say I know being really hard at work, putting together a lot of documentation session to describe what the plan is and how it works and stuff, so that will hopefully be published in the not too distant future. So keep an eye out for all of that and we look forward to continuing the discussion tomorrow in the Dow meeting.

And Mark, just want to say thank you so much for having us. Well, thank you for inviting me. And most of all, thank you for your efforts. You know, you guys are you know, you guys are Jedi and you live by the light saber and sometimes when you do that, you get your hand chopped off. But then then after that, you go.

You go on and you blow up a death star. So here's the blown up the Death Star is indeed. Well, we appreciate those words, Mark. And, uh, you know, we're, uh, we and the rest of the bean community are, you know, we're all hard at work to try to get this thing back up and running. So talk soon, everybody.

Okay, Song Sung. Sung, what do you have for us being telling everybody, Can you hear me okay? Yeah. Sound great? Great. Great. Well, so for those of you who don't know me, I'm. I run audio for for Beanstalk. And I'm also the the resident being Bard. So got a little song just about the times that we've we've had lately and you know hopefully we can drum up some support with this.

Well the phone was working wonders of beans due to looking bride. With so many happy farmers getting richer overnight. Yeah, people pruning up the vines. We were meeting to the nines. We recruiting and a follower in Indian might even sign with that exploit not to sign it back. So they thought we'd sit down. But the heart's back on the head and seed's already in the ground.

Well, I've fallen on some hard times. I can't say anything. So we've had ups and downs and then just ups up to several days. And that feeds into is quite is. And I think that it's a saying we got to pick a sales up and dust ourselves off and plug it right back in. Well Tyler's looking empty because of some slimy hacker curse, but the beans are only beans.

The real riches they, you know, as because this the five that makes the beans grow. And I think we all agree we did it once in just six months. We can do it again in three. So come down to the bar. And we were working through the night. When it's up, we'll raise our cup. It then is back on with the fight because our work is never over till the stocks are so down to the bar.

Reasonable. Oh, I'll be laughing soon. You'll. Wow, that was horrible. Thanks, everybody. Thank you for indulging that. Did I hear we get a new once in two? Oh, yeah. They're churning out. So as soon as I can write them and record them, they're there. You'll. You'll hear it. That's awesome. All right, well, guys, this is really fun. I think this is maybe our best, best Twitter spaces yet, So look forward to a lot more of them.

And yeah, have a good night, everyone. Thanks for coming back.