Takatoshi S.: 0:00

Hey, hey, hey, welcome to this week's episode of Blockhead's Blockcast. I'm your host, Takatoshi Shibayama. I'm also the head of APAC for Ledger. I aim to uncover the creative, intelligent, and radical minds who are shaping the crypto industry today. I'm as crypto curious as anybody that's tuning into this show. We're doing this together, guys. Let's go. Welcome to another episode of License to Show, the offshoot of the broadcast normal series where we discuss the weekly recaps of what is happening in the juicy world of crypto, the markets, and anything else that comes to our minds. Before we start, everything we say here is not investment advice, business advice, relationship or friendship advice. I'm Takatoshi Shibayama, the intergalactic host of crypto, and I have here with me Lisa Jay Y. Tan, CEO of Economics Design. Welcome back. Always glad to be here. And Nikhil Joshi, CEO of Emergo, a co-founding entity of Cardano. Welcome back, sir.

Nikhil J.: 1:01

Hello.

Takatoshi S.: 1:03

Cool. So, you know, this, it's not this week, but it was July 17th when the Clarity Act passed. Was it the House or the Senate? I can't remember anymore. And then after a recess in August, then the other, the House or Senate will actually kind of decide on this. So recap, the Clarity Act is called the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025. It passed with bipartisan support on July 17th, and it's considered a foundational step towards regulatory certainty for digital assets. And this is something that the industry asked for, and now they got it. Prior to this, everything was very dysfunctional. There was no clarity on anything. And now this introduces a functional classification of digital assets based on decentralization, replacing reliance on the traditional Howey test. And the jurisdiction over the digital assets is clearly delineated between the SEC and the CFTC. depending on their asset characteristics. So Lisa, you wanted to talk about this. You're probably much more knowledgeable about this. Apparently, this thing had 235 pages. Obviously, I have not read it. I don't know if you have, but I'll let you run with it.

Lisa T.: 2:16

Yes. So I'm really excited to talk about this because the last time we talked about the MAS and we had some conversations around regulations. And it's not just the MAS trying to regulate the space, but the US is also doing that. So I'll start with a bigger picture. And last week the sec which is july 31st the sec's chairman or one of the chairmen of this digital working group called paul atkins he talked about the digital finance revolution so it's almost like a crypto playbook that the white house is preparing so it's not just you know finally after 10 over years we're finally getting some clarity on how the us wants to look at digital assets. The thing is, the Genius Act that was passed middle of July and the Clarity Act that was half passed and is going to pass at the Senate this in August, they are both the starting points. The Genius Act is really just stablecoins, allowing stablecoins to exist one for one bagged. And this is a really good move ahead because stablecoin is one of the ways to enter the market with a bit lower risk and asset that people understand. It's just a crypto version of USD. So that is really exciting. The clarity act is really the digital assets clarity act that we talked about. And it's really talking about how a digital asset is intrinsically linked to a blockchain system. So like your layer one, layer two, or one of your DeFi or application tokens. And the value is reasonably expected to be derived from the use of the blockchain system. So really, it just means a token that exists in a token-based economy or a token-based market. And this provides a lot more information, like to what degree of decentralization are we looking at? We need to have some level of vesting period. We need to have some level of holding period. Investors or insiders cannot sell and things like that. That's very interesting. But more importantly, in the speech that this guy, Paul Atkins, said, he is talking about not just stable coins and digital assets, but to the degree of decentralization. classifying these crypto assets into categories like digital collectibles, digital commodities, stablecoins, or having more segments of categories for digital assets, for crypto assets. It's not just trying to fit what we understand or these new assets we're creating into the existing frameworks, but to have a better way to classify them and categorize them in different segments. They also see how tokens are not all securities. So talking about the SEC and CFTC, this is a very important distinction. Because the SEC, the first S stands for securities. And previously, everything is deemed a security. And so everything is regulated under the SEC. But to some degree, once the blockchain has matured, which they talk about it in the Clarity Act, the asset can now be considered a commodity, which is now... regulated by the CFTC, a different governing body, which means a different set of regulation and less stringent in the rules. So it's almost like a maturity from a security to a commodity, and that's very, very interesting. More importantly, the White House, or at least the SEC's speech, which I imagine is the White House direction, it's not just evolutionalizing the America's financial system, but also what they want to do is to create a system of ownership and governance economy-wide. And this means it's not just stopping and oh, we have stablecoins, oh, we have digital assets. But how do we recreate this new system of ownership? Ownership is not just physical assets that we have today, but also these digital assets that has economic value linked to the economy that this token or this digital asset participate in. So all in all, I'm really excited about this. It's very hopeful. And, you know, we talk about treasuries for like a thousand times already. Enterprises coming in, stablecoins coming in, more clarity of what digital assets are going to look like. This is all really good news. It's not that we are a wild west where there is no regulation, but proper regulation to allow this space to keep flourishing with the ultimate goal of recreating a system of ownership and governance for these new economies.

Takatoshi S.: 6:17

I've always been a proponent of having some kind of market conduct driven by regulation because, you know, as we all know, retail has been wrecked time and time over again, not just by FTX and the likes of those exchanges, but even rug pull by a lot of projects as well. And, you know, there hasn't been a very clear regulations around market conduct. And I was hoping that they'll come more from the crypto side rather than the government. I think we discussed about this last time, when we talked about the block works token transparency report that, you know, it should come somewhat from the industry. But you know, here we are with the US telling us what that should look like. I mean, in a way, I think it gives a lot more clarity, it takes in the IPO standards of the SEC and then puts it into crypto. So that part, I'm really quite, I wouldn't say excited, but it's great that it has some clarity there. And Nikhil, what do you think about this? One of my

Nikhil J.: 7:13

often repeated phrases when I'm talking about regulations and regulators is the lack of unlevel playing field. So I think what the Genius Act really brings in is an opportunity for a level playing field between banks and non-banks, which prima facie I think is very promising. I think that with a combination of the Clarity Act on stable coins, I think is It's interesting because it keeps banks relevant. I think what we'll see now is a whole flurry of banks issuing stable coins. And I think Citi has made some pretty vocal noises in the last couple of weeks off the back of this. I think there's still a thing here with... So there's a bit of regulation called Basel III, which kicked in after the GFC. And it basically... right now acts quite punitively if you're holding cash on the balance sheet. I think that there's probably going to be some changes to that, which will allow for banks to continue holding cash, or in this case, stablecoins, which are now deemed to be cash equivalents, effectively for free. And so that's going to mean there's a whole tsunami, effectively, of stablecoins that are leading towards this movement from what we've described as a set of rails, right, through to something more systematic, like a financial operating system. Now, is that a good thing or a bad thing that the banks stay relevant and still continue to have a pretty meaningful role in all of that? I don't know yet. I don't have a strong view on it just yet. I think the other part here is that although at the 20,000 feet headline level, this is good news, but I think with the US, especially with this whole fragmented kind of states and laws and whatever, it could mean that there's a lot of fragmentation that happens. The banks capturing those rails again, is that a good thing or a bad thing? And the other thing here is that we've seen a lot of exodus of talent from the US over to the Middle East, to Asia, Africa. Is there going to be a bit of a U-turn of that back the other way?

Takatoshi S.: 9:13

Yeah, I mean, look, Nikhil, you could always be opinionated on this issue. episodes right i mean you know for me you know there's always a kind of consideration of like okay obviously regulation is always going to build some moat around their friends and you know obviously crypto companies are not really their friends so they definitely want to bring more banks into this kind of digital transformation of blockchain and crypto and you know they kind of made sure that there's a proper guideline in place so that banks and crypto companies can participate in this stable coin world what i kind of look at this one which there was an exclusion was is that these stable coins were not able to offer any yield so that is something that i've kind of noticed that when these stablecoins really pick up, people are going to deposit fiat for conversion into stablecoins and then other banks are going to take all that yield to themselves. The other thing that I think about is, okay, well, you're saying that you have to put X amount of treasuries in that balance sheet to make sure that it stays cash and cash equivalent. Does that mean that it's trying to prop up enough treasuries for the bank to continue printing money for free or borrowing debt for free? So that's kind of the two main things that comes to mind. I'm always kind of skeptical when I look at these things. Obviously, there is a good part and a bad part, but those are the things that kind of pop into my mind. Lisa, what do you think? Or Nikhil, it doesn't matter.

Lisa T.: 10:37

You nailed it. that was the thing that I was thinking about a lot because who's buying treasuries these days, right? Not Japan, not China anymore. And the US is just creating a lot of enemies with the rest of the world. More like the US is not doing as much business as it was before, which means someone needs to be buying the treasury to prop up the economy. Just get your own citizens to buy them. And if you have it through this act, that's fantastic. I don't know about the printing of money, like the continuous printing of money thing, because That makes a lot of sense. Now they have a leeway to keep printing more money. And also what's the benefit of holding stable points anymore? If you cannot get yield, it gets eaten away by inflation. Isn't it better to just hold crypto assets instead now that you can hold crypto assets? It'd be interesting to see how the public will respond to these acts in place.

Nikhil J.: 11:25

Yeah, but I think that to your question, who wants treasuries? Who wants or needs a bank? Who wants a stable coin that doesn't provide yield? I think a lot of people do. I think the answer to that is that there's going to be a large phase of coexistence, right? That's what I'm saying. And not everyone is subscribing to the ideas that, to be fair, are very minor. population has around crypto and the benefits that it brings. So there will be a need for banks. And that's why I'm saying I'm sitting on the fence. It wasn't to be a bit opinionated. I actually don't have an opinion on this right now. Like, I think there needs to be a period of coexistence where the banks will serve a purpose. There will be a demand for treasuries, right? Whether you agree or disagree is a different matter. I guess if there were a tiering of what most people need in the world right now, would you put at the top of that the ability to generate yield of stablecoin? Or would you put the ability to move money around from one part of the world to another quickly and cheaply? I'm sure there's other tiers you can put in there. I suspect, I don't know, I haven't got any data around this at all, but I suspect that the need to move cash without the cost that it comes with through the incumbent system, there's a far greater demand and appetite for that than the ability to invest with crypto-like returns that some of us are used to right now.

Takatoshi S.: 12:43

Yeah, at the point of cross-border payments, it hasn't been very clear whether yet that what are the fees associated for doing these transactions right so before there was a pretty hefty percentage on this money that you're sending across swift now moving to stable coins through these banks are they going to charge the same thing because this is like a cash printing in a cash cow right so are they going to just give up or are they going to reduce the cost was still yet to see this is going to be the thing that i think will change how people use stable coins because If they know that they can use stablecoin at a much cheaper rate or almost non-existent fees, then they're going to be adopting to it. And then stablecoins, if in this way, it is a gateway drug into crypto. So once you get people on chain into crypto, then they'll find that, oh, as you said, Nikhil, rather than holding on to my stablecoins that yield nothing, I'm going to hold on to crypto that generates some kind of yield for me that I can beat inflation. So I guess it's like a two-way thing, like the government benefits from keeping their treasuries propped up and then at the same time gives consumers a way to come on chain and discover the whole world of crypto.

Nikhil J.: 13:57

So I'd eke out a nuance there. I'm not sure if it's the stablecoin per se. I do think that what it links indirectly to is that, I mean, you can basically bank yourself. Right. You don't need to rely on a third party. And so once you have a mechanism to serve your needs on a day to day basis, essentially saving, making payments, and ultimately investing, right, then I think the power of crypto really will start to cement itself in people's minds. But people have a basic level of hygiene to take care of, i.e. paying the bills, you know, taking care of family, etc, etc, right? The adoption of stablecoin will certainly be a penny drop moment of their own ability to empower themselves and effectively be their own bank.

Takatoshi S.: 14:43

And in this Clarity Act, obviously it takes out the digital securities out of it because it's still held with the SEC. So how do corporations, aside from banks, benefit from this Clarity Act, this Genius Act? What do you think, Lisa?

Lisa T.: 14:57

I can imagine one of the biggest things is that I can see companies just being more comfortable with holding assets that's more mature. So Ethereum, maybe Monero, although Monero has an economic potential, heck yeah. two weeks ago, Bitcoin, you know, all these other more mature assets that is decentralized because these are commodities and not securities. And again, it's all about having little gateways to assessing or having access to this world of digital assets. And yes, one way could be treasuries as they keep buying treasuries. And the other way could be actually just buying these assets because they can hold these assets. And I think that will be interesting. The other thing that I was thinking about is as more companies and enterprises are coming in to create their own digital assets, primarily stablecoins, I can imagine more enterprises coming in to build their own blockchain to create their own digital assets as a form of transactional tokens within the ecosystem. Because now these assets can exist with, I imagine Clarity Act is like step one to show that we acknowledge that this asset exists and this asset is, its value is derived from the ecosystem that it exists in. So having that clarity gives potentially enterprises a bit better confidence to say that, yes, let's build an L1 or an L2, and we can create a token out of it. The thing that I'll be concerned about is that right now in the Clarity Act, the maximum an entity could hold is 20%. And usually 20% plus minus includes the opco plus the founding team. usually just means the entirety. It takes a bit more than 20%. And I imagine with a bigger enterprise company, they need to hold a little bit more than just 20%. And I wonder what that looks like for them. Because yes, we want enterprises to come in, but enterprises will require more than 20%. And I just wonder what that means to them wanting to start a project.

Takatoshi S.: 16:50

And recently I've been kind of speaking to a lot of foundations that are working on privacy chains because now that it's not just like Clarity Act, they already know that these tri-fi banks are coming into stable coins and offering digital securities. I think there'd be a lot more privacy based ones because not everybody wants everything on an open ledger. And obviously, no institution wants to see what derivatives they're trading or what kind of payments they're doing across borders. So there's going to be a lot more focus on how to, I wouldn't say confiscate, but make sure that certain things are held private. And I see more and more of these coming out. The other ones that I was starting to see is more around digital identity. So this is probably more for like the consumer adoption side of things, but you know, I've spoken to Yatsu yesterday and which episode will be coming out with us in a couple of weeks, but you're talking about how to really bring like decentralized platforms, like your Facebooks or your Instagram, et cetera, Twitter, more to the consumer side. And this is the original kind of concept of like bringing consumers on chain. and decentralization is how do we keep our data more private, you know, away from centralized platforms and on-chain so that whenever we log on to any type of platform, whether it be, you know, these social media companies or, you know, age-gated platforms, whatever they are, you know, we use DK proof to make sure that, you know, we are the only ones in control of that information and they're only taking that and they're not storing it anywhere else. And then building that kind of on-chain ecosystem more and more. And that's kind of the next world that I want to see. And this also fits in with this enterprises that kind of gives me kind of a thought of like, okay, our enterprises coming in and they want to offer digital collectibles, digital, whatever. But on the other side is like consumers want more and more of their own personal information on chain, but, you know, help secrets on chain. So how do you see these kind of two worlds kind of colliding together?

Nikhil J.: 18:51

So if I may use my license to shill for a minute. So it's quite timely. Actually, so affiliated, well, everyone knows Charles Hoskington, founder of Cardano. We're a co-founding entity of Cardano here at Emergo. Charles and team have been working on another layer one called Midnight that is all anchored in privacy. And I say it's quite timely because it's going through what's called the Placia airdrop and that effectively launched earlier today. Now, the point of Midnight is that it's a public blockchain, but it comes with a shielded component. And so this very much plays to the idea that financials or regulators, or indeed, individuals who want to keep some information away from what would otherwise be openly available in public can be done so. So I think this plays very well to the idea of adoption and institutional level to safeguard, of course, commercial sensitivities, but also protects against regulatory concerns as well. So essentially, information flows long, it comes, think of it like a black box, you can lift the lid open, have a look inside, if you're authorized to do so, close the lid and off it goes again. So I think privacy is becoming more and more relevant and pertinent and it's getting a lot more mind share in people's minds relative to just everything's public on a permissionless blockchain and that's good because transparency is good but not in all cases. I think just to go to the point about individuals. I think what a lot of perhaps corporates and businesses are not necessarily recognizing yet is that there is a way to validate what customers you could work with using things like zero knowledge proof, right? With having embedded privacy factored into that, which actually then allows you to increase the size of your addressable market. I'm just going to make up a name here, but if you're like a Sephora, for example, you can't access certain jurisdictional regions because the people there simply don't have the information that allows you to say this is a decent credit risk that I'm willing to interact with. But if you can now have access to that through a combination of zero knowledge proofs, etc., etc., you suddenly have a market that you were never allowed to tap before, probably just because of a policy decision more so than anything else. And I think that a number of organizations haven't joined those dots yet in their own mind, that this isn't just some kind of, dare I say, fad about privacy of your own details, right? It's ability to actually increase who your customer base is.

Lisa T.: 21:28

That makes sense. I mean, you know, I think we talked about on-chain reputation. So credit scores is one of them. and the more shopping done online and the more you've actually paid on time then that builds on your reputation so you know even if you are a person that sephora does not sell to today you know because i have this unchained reputation of a credit score that i've done on different platforms i can passport that over to Sephora and say, hey, I always made good on my payments, you know, sell me X, you know, or sell me, you know, kind of the products that you have based on financing, as an example. I mean, Lisa, you do a lot of tokenomics design. How do you think this will change how you design tokenomics around? Because I guess currently, like utility tokens, you know, has been kind of like around and tokenomics around it has been quite I don't know. From my view, it has been kind of stagnant. It hasn't really had a huge uplift in the design. How do you see token economics change based on this? Yeah, I like that you guys talked about privacy and digital ID. So for IOG's Midnight, that's actually really interesting because it's not a privacy token, but it's a privacy chain. And we worked on the token model and the token design of Midnight itself. It's very interesting because, as Nikhil mentioned, Everything is on-chain, but it's all encrypted. So certain people get to open the black box and see what's inside. They can only see things that they can see. For example, that's how you can be GDPR compliant, because you can publish some of your information, but you're also hiding some of your personal information. And this is very interesting as we talk about digital identity as well, and what's going to look like for the future of token economics. When we talk about identity, it's not just about, okay, I always pay my things on time, so I get a discount on paying today, or the buy now, pay later thing, I get a better rate for buy now, pay later. Beyond that, if everything is going to be on chain now, and we can keep certain activities and transactions private, then we can start creating a reputation of subject matter expertise of an individual. which means let's say these certain kind of acts of regulations come up again and instead of just getting people who seem to know what they're talking about, we can validate and verify that this individual is expert at climate change, this person is expert at waterworks in some lakes in the US and then we can get them to speak on behalf and create the right kind of regulation. I think that's going to be very interesting because right now, privacy and everything, you know, I don't think the tokens don't really change that much because it's a utility token for the platform. But when we talk about governance using tokens, I think that would be very interesting. Right now, it's primarily one person, one vote or one token, one vote, and it hits a kind of quorum and you go into governance. But governance is beyond that. Because if it's one token, one vote, then someone could just purchase a lot of tokens and it's not really a democratic system anymore. If one person, one vote, you can do civil attacks and an individual can create like a thousand wallets and identities and it's also not fair. So how do you balance between creating governance for these systems. I think governance is a very underrated subject that people don't talk a lot about. You just slap the word governance and hey, we've got a governance token. Come buy this token. This token can allow you to change whatever is in the blockchain. But it doesn't work like that. Governance is not just about making decisions. Governance is how do we organize, create the right kind of rules, update the old rules, punish the economic agents that are acting in bad faith, and how do we encourage the good faith actors? How do we reward them? And governance is a much bigger decision-making mechanism than just, oh, you vote with your tokens. And if we can start establishing certain kind of identity to these governors' decision-making and there is some level of privacy in place, then it's going to be very interesting because you can still use tokens to be voting and it could still represent your interests. But now we have people who are not just the loudest in the room, but people who are knowledgeable on the subject to come and make certain kind of changes. Because there are a lot of problems in these foundations in the last couple of years. An individual can just go into an improvement proposal, write a huge list down, charge extreme amounts of money, but because they're popular or people follow them on Twitter or X, and people just vote on these improvement proposals without understanding the details, that's just not fair. So how do we get experts to come in to weigh in? And that's a bit of a fairer system, a better governing system. So I'm excited about how privacy and digital identity can improve the governance part of token economics. And do you think that, so let's say like a lot of enterprises decide to come up with their own projects and they have their own kind of governance around it. I mean, generally they're not doing it on a day-to-day basis, right? I mean, even today, off-chain. So when they introduced this another layer of like on-chain activity where you have to provide by governance to maintain the project that you're running, doesn't it, one, it adds a lot of complexity to it and two, are they really willing to do it is my question and consumers willing to buy governance tokens to kind of be part of it, right? Because as far as I know, even when I look at the enterprise blockchain stuff, I mean, the governance is kind of like spread across all the institutions that are partaking in that. And that also kind of like needs to have maybe a separate team or different group of people to decide on how that chain kind of maintains itself. So is this like a really important factor that enterprise needs to factor in when they start developing chains or developing projects that are on chain. So having worked with a bunch of enterprises, what I understand is that every of these enterprises, they have a corporate governance structure. And it doesn't matter what your blockchain says, they have to follow that corporate governance structure. And usually this is still the old school way of making decisions. However, an example that's really being executed will be, for example, Hyperledger. Hyperledger is interesting and they're always the classic example, right? They're interesting because they don't have any investors and they do have a big loyal following of users. What they're doing right now is that loyal following of users or loyal users with I think x amount of tokens can start their own asset that they can start trading on Hyperledger itself. So that is quite interesting because now I'm not exactly buying governance token because I want to create these assets but because I participate so much in this ecosystem that I gather enough amount of governance tokens that I can start creating this new asset that people can start trading. And in a way, I'm making certain kind of decisions and I'm making a change in this business model itself of Hyperledger. So that's quite interesting. I don't think we're going to see like massive, massive changes. As you mentioned, we don't make changes on a day-to-day basis. It's more like a massive change and it's going to take some amount of time to make these decisions.

Nikhil J.: 28:22

I'll just chip in now. So I get using Cardano as an example. So Cardano right now has just gone through this huge exercise to really push out decentralized governance. Emurgo, ourselves as a co-founding entity, along with the other founding entities, have been responsible for a lot of the decisions up until very recently. What happened over recent months is that that ability to govern the ecosystem has been pushed out to all ADA holders. And most pertinently, we've just gone through a process where ADA holders and the Cardano community have decided how a portion of Cardano's treasury will be allocated out for the purposes of propagating the ecosystem, be that technology build, marketing, other commercial ventures and so forth. And so that's the first time, right, that something has happened in earnest where anyone with ADA, in this instance, is able to vote. Now, to your point, Taka, a second ago, could or should any individual person holding ADA vote on anything? I think this comes back to real life where we essentially delegate to politicians who supposedly should govern the country that we live in in the best way for the majority of people. That's probably just... running the risk of opening a Pandora's box by saying that. But notwithstanding that point, here AIDA holders can delegate to representatives. I think there's a very interesting point, Lisa, that you made about where is the expertise? Because actually what we've seen is that there are DREPs, as they're referred to here in Cardano, who are voting on behalf of community. but may not necessarily be experts, right? So as an example, EMURGO is a DREP. We don't necessarily want to position ourselves as a technology expert, right? We're more so on the commercial side of things. And so we will champion those sorts of causes. And we encourage people to delegate to us if they're aligned with our commercial mindset with regards to car data and its ecosystem. So that was just more, This is happening in real life in Cardano right now. Point number one. Point number two, I think there's some really interesting points around apathy, which exists across the board anyway, not just in crypto world, around voting. I think that it triggers a question on expertise. And what do you do if you're not an expert? And I think then coming back to the enterprise question, should enterprises be involved in governance? Yes, if they want to shape governance. If they just want to play and be dictated, then no. But I don't know if I'm making too simplistic a point, but I think that if enterprises do want to embrace what public blockchains are all about, then it's incumbent on them to decide whether they just want to be subject to the governance or be helping to shape some of the governance. Any enterprise that's joining this space right now has got a head start on everyone else because they can really get into the weeds of what that shaping ought to look like. Personally, I think this is a very interesting space right now. How do you create effectively, I don't want to use the word DAO, but something like that, or a digital nation state. These are slightly overused terminologies, but it's moving towards that kind of realm, which is very interesting, both intellectually, philosophically, socially as well.

Takatoshi S.: 31:40

Yeah, on that, I have a good example because, you know, Ledger is running Cardano on its wallets. And basically every year we have been kind of paying for any upgrades that for the chain itself. So basically it's coming out of our pockets to maintain the infrastructure of maintaining Cardano to our ledger users. So we had to go to your voting system to ask for kind of a grant, I guess, for money to maintain the chain and it's up for a vote. I don't know what the outcome is going to look like, but know in the kind of more on-chain world that i've been discussing that means that every single you know service provider in this world who are kind of maintaining cardano infrastructure would have to go get a vote so that they can maintain the infrastructure and then the users or the holders of ada get to decide what service provider is beneficial for them it sounds very democratic in a way and people can vote like, okay, that service provider is not that great. You know, we could vote them out. This one's great. You know, let's keep those guys, you know, so, you know, it's kind of, I guess it kind of works very kind of both ways and in a very democratic way, which I do think is quite interesting.

Nikhil J.: 32:51

Yeah. Very interesting. It's a thought exercise and very interesting to see how it practically manifests itself because there's all sorts of things that I guess if you're not in politics in real life, then you really get to see how some of these things play out once you're playing within this new version of governance.

Takatoshi S.: 33:12

Cool. I think this is a wonderful episode. We started off with the Genius and Clarity Act and then we made ourselves all the way down to governance in blockchain. So what a jump. But thank you guys for your time. We'll find a few more topics to discuss about for our next episode. Thanks for listening. If you like what you hear, give BlockCast a like and a subscribe on your favorite podcast channels, Spotify, Apple, wherever they are. For all your juicy Web3 news, keep updated on blockhead.co. You can also catch Valentine's Daily Views on the market on BRN. Catch you all in the next episode.