Web3 Galaxy Brain 🌌🧠

Nicholas: Welcome to Web3 Galaxy Brain. My name is Nicholas. Each week I sit down with some of the brightest people building Web3 to talk about what they're working on right now. Today I'm joined by a chorus of organizers and critics of ConstitutionDAO2, a crypto crowdfund effort attempting to buy the Constitution again. Just over a year since the original ConstitutionDAO failed to acquire the Constitution, a group of contributors to PeopleDAO have banded together to attempt to repeat fundraise with some new ZK-powered technology in hand. On this episode, I'm joined by Matter Turbulent and Y4K from PeopleDAO, who are two of the original organizers of ConstitutionDAO2, also known as We Are Going to Buy the Constitution, or WAG-BTC. We're also joined by Matt Wyatt, co-founder of Nucleo, a zero-knowledge multisig on the Aztec network. Matt and his team at Nucleo are pioneers of the new ZK-powered portion of the ConstitutionDAO2 fundraise, which allows the DAO to raise funds without revealing the total amount raised publicly. In the second half of the show, we're joined by Denison Bertram, founder of Tally, an on-chain voting aggregator front-end. Denison has been a vocal critic of the use of multisigs and DAOs. In this conversation you're about to hear, he presents those views and interacts with the team on the practicalities and challenges of buying real-world assets with crypto crowdfunds. Since the recording of this episode on December 9th, 2022, Sotheby's has announced that they will be delaying the sale to allow interested institutional investors to raise funds to participate in the auction. ConstitutionDAO2 has not yet announced their plans going forward. It was interesting to get to sit down with DAO organizers and critics in the throes of uncertainty, disagreement, and hope as they organize a large initiative for the first time with some brand new technology. I hope you enjoy the show. Hey everybody. Welcome, Matter Turbulent, Matt Wyatt, Y4000. Today we're going to be talking about ConstitutionDAO2, aka WAGBTC. Welcome to the show.

Matt Wyatt: Thanks Nicholas. Yeah, great to be here. Yeah, thanks for having us, Nicholas.

Nicholas: Of course. So we have the three of you, Matter Turbulent, Matt Wyatt, Y4000, three of the voices that are coming up over and over again in the initial DAO organizing phase. There's a bunch of topics I'd like to get to. Maybe just to set the stage, we could do a little bit of introductory work on how this whole initiative came together. Do any of the three of you want to speak to how the ConstitutionDAO2 thing started in the first place?

Matter Turbulent: I think that we, different people, have sort of different things that brought them here, brought us all together. But I can speak from at least the PeopleDAO side and just say that for those of you who don't know who we are, we're a DAO who formed after ConstitutionDAO dissolved and we adopted the orphaned people token as our own governance token. So we've always been extremely close to the story of ConstitutionDAO and in our own ways have tried to sort of build on it and reinterpret it. And when we saw that Sotheby's announced that they were auctioning a new constitution, it just seemed like such a natural thing for us to try and go for it. So we did get together and deliberate and think about, OK, do we want to do this? And the answer was yes. And around that time, we also started talking with Matt. So maybe I'll pass it over to him.

Nicholas: Yeah. Just before we jump to Matt, I wanted to ask a little question. So maybe some people are aware that ConstitutionDAO sort of relinquished control of the project and the tokens are exchangeable for the ETH that was originally donated one to one, backing the people token. So people can just refund their people tokens, the original juice box project, ConstitutionDAO. So what is PeopleDAO about? What has PeopleDAO focused on since the end of ConstitutionDAO?

Matter Turbulent: I was listening to Matt and Briley's retrospective podcast series that really delves into this actually in detail. So I really recommend folks check that out. But she framed it in a really fun way that I liked, where PeopleDAO was sort of the cold side of the pillow on the opposite side of ConstitutionDAO in the sense that while ConstitutionDAO was mission focused towards a single purpose, PeopleDAO is really the opposite, where a meta DAO, meaning that there's a sort of overarching DAO, but we support and integrate these smaller entities within us for the purpose of allowing these different entities to kind of do what they want. Right. So we're really just trying to branch out in many different directions and support different people, whatever they're trying to build. So we have an incubator. That's what we do. And we try to also always incorporate the people token because that's what we're passionate about. And it creates this sort of linkage between all the different pieces.

Nicholas: That's cool. So and if people are curious, that's the JuiceCast, the latest few episodes of the JuiceCast podcast, where Matthew and Briley are doing this research series on ConstitutionDAO. I actually haven't had a chance to listen to it. Maybe later today I'll get a shot. But basically PeopleDAO is like a group of people who've been brought together by the people token and then want to do further projects and don't want the thing to disband. Is that a fair summary?

Matter Turbulent: Yeah, exactly. It all dates back to those initial Twitter spaces we had days after ConstitutionDAO shuttered and everybody had these different visions for the people token. And so we said, OK, let's be a meta DAO and kind of give folks the opportunity to do what they want and flash forward. And that origin is reflected in our existing structure now to this day.

Nicholas: Yeah. Awesome. And Matt, how did you come into the picture?

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, so similar to PeopleDAO kind of forming after ConstitutionDAO. That's kind of our origin story, too. So Nucleo and some other privacy tech, Nucleo specifically actually came out of a hackathon that was happening during ConstitutionDAO in which there's a privacy focused hackathon. I added some CKPs on top of the JuiceBox smart contracts to give some privacy.

Nicholas: So to give people a little context, your project is called Nucleo. That's your. it's like a startup, right? Yep. And Nucleo started from a hackathon where your goal was to allow people to make private donations on top to JuiceBox projects like the original ConstitutionDAO. because the original ConstitutionDAO failed, many people think because the total amount that they had raised was revealed. And so the competing bidder in the auction was aware of what their maximum bid could be. Is that right?

Matt Wyatt: Yep. That's 100% it.

Nicholas: So tell me a little bit about the development of Nucleo and what was the original hackathon? Where was that? What was the product of that and how did you decide to move forward?

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, so original hackathon was actually based on Fandora, which is a different story for a different day. But from that, we kind of ended up moving to Aztec and Alio, where Aztec actually had Aztec Connect Bridge grants that they were giving at the time. And one of the grants I tried working on from there to kind of keep this going as a fun side project was a grant to actually build an Aztec bridge for private JuiceBox donations.

Nicholas: So maybe for people who don't know, maybe you could just say what Aztec is?

Matt Wyatt: So Aztec is a privacy-focused LLT on Ethereum. Similar to Optimism and Arbitrum. having their own account system and everything and cheaper gas, Aztec provides the exact same thing, but with privacy at the account level as well.

Nicholas: Cool. So basically it's a way for people to make private transactions. that something similar to Ethereum, but the transactions are private. Is that accurate?

Matt Wyatt: Yep, that is accurate.

Nicholas: Cool. So you'd built Nucleo. So what did Nucleo do exactly? It let you do a crowdfund privately?

Matt Wyatt: No. So it's actually once you get down into the nuances of trying to build an Aztec Connect Bridge to be able to do private JuiceBox interactions. And I guess one more background on Aztec is that to be able to make privacy work, you have to use a completely different model than the EBM account-based smart contract structure model. So you have to use UTXO, which is like way similar to Bitcoin. And in doing so, it doesn't quite translate over as well for operating out of Aztec to interact with DeFi. But Aztec had innovated and created this thing called Aztec Connect, where all you have to do is write a smart contract bridge to interact with an L1 DeFi contract. And you can interact inside Aztec's privacy bubble and actually make private contributions to, let's say, a JuiceBox campaign if there is a JuiceBox Connect contract. The thing is, once you get into doing that, you realize, well, it's still going to a public treasury at the end of the day. And that's where you run into the issue of, OK, well, we kind of need private treasuries at that point. Well, then we need private multisig. OK, well, that requires new cryptography and entirely new architecture. That's kind of the origin story for us. And that's what we've been kind of working on since.

Nicholas: If you have a private JuiceBox fundraise, you basically realized in the course of your research that you would need to build some other technology first, namely ZK or Aztec zero-knowledge-based multisig, that that would be the first step that would be required. Exactly. And that's what you've built. And that's what's being used for the Constitution DAO fundraise, correct?

Matter Turbulent: Yep.

Nicholas: So maybe you could explain a little bit about, at least at a high level, how that works for people who've never interacted with Aztec and never done a ZK transaction on any kind of ZK L2.

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, absolutely. And this has been something really interesting in working with Sotheby's and any OTC desk and this whole thing. Just right now, there's a really big kind of perception of privacy just being bad thanks to Tornado Cash. And there's not a lot of detailed nuance conversations around how the privacy actually works. So an important distinction on how Aztec works and how you interact with it is they have zero-knowledge circuits similar to like the EVM has its own specs and how you can actually call any functions or anything. Aztec is a smart contract on Ethereum that has its own kind of like transactions or I guess like operations and opcodes that you could use that are zero-knowledge circuits. So whenever you interact and bridge over to Aztec, you actually create a proof of you doing a valid transaction in a circuit. And what you're doing in that circuit is actually depositing funds and encrypting it to a specific address. that's on Aztec's L2. And on the other side of the smart contract, it'll credit you there. Sorry.

Nicholas: So so basically, if I'm someone who's used to using Ethereum and I want to make a private transaction, let's say I want to donate a million dollars to the ConstitutionDao2 fundraise, but I don't want to reveal that on Ethereum on L1, because if I do, then competitive bidders will know that all that money is available to ConstitutionDao2. So I want to make a private donation because I'm doing a very large donation that's really material to the total amount that they're able to spend. So I would do a transaction on Ethereum L1 to this Aztec contract on Ethereum L1. And then the funds, like let's say I would send it a bunch of ETH, and then those funds would be available to me inside of the Aztec network where nobody can know how I'm moving those around. Is that right?

Matt Wyatt: That's exactly right. And a distinction there that's very important between something like Tornado Cash. is that the proof that you calculate when depositing to the Aztec network is actually to whatever ETH address or whatever address inside of Aztec you're sending it to. And that kind of address system didn't exist in Tornado Cash. So a common criticism is that if you use Tornado Cash, your funds are being used or the funds that you pull out of Tornado Cash could actually be Lazarus Group funds.

Nicholas: They're mixed up with other funds, which are maybe the results of hacks or something like that, whereas in this case, they're not mixed with other funds.

Matt Wyatt: Exactly.

Nicholas: Very cool. So you can basically make a transaction on L1 and then recuperate those funds, an address that you predetermined, and then move them around inside of the Aztec network. And nobody on L1 can really tell what you've done, but you're able to access those funds directly. Very cool. And where does the multisig come into this?

Matt Wyatt: So the multisig is actually on Aztec's L2. So Aztec is still building out and working on their V3, which is trying to build an entire like EVM is not compatible with privacy, but they want to build the entire kind of private global computer, like a VPN inside of Aztec. And so this is kind of one of the first steps is to be able to multisig instead of Aztec. So that's kind of what we built.

Nicholas: And why is a multisig important for this fundraise?

Matt Wyatt: Well, you don't want to be donating money to a single person's address and put max trust into one person. So multisig is at least a stepping stone to kind of get there and distribute that and come closer to them.

Nicholas: Got it. So eventually maybe something like Juicebox could run on Aztec. But given the sort of iterative development of the software right now, starting off, you're focusing first on the multisig. So no individual will be able to extract funds that are raised via the Aztec multisig. And then I guess there is some group of people. How many people are on the multisig?

Matt Wyatt: So there are eight people on this multisig.

Nicholas: And what's the threshold to execute a transaction?

Matt Wyatt: Threshold is five of eight.

Nicholas: Got it. OK, so we now know a little bit about the technology that you're bringing to the table. So how did you get involved and what makes it important that this technology be used for this fundraise? We established a little bit about don't want to reveal all the funds that are raised, but you've also built some like front end stuff to facilitate this. So maybe you could talk a little bit about that.

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, absolutely. So first, how do we get involved? Like I mentioned, we kind of spawned out of a hackathon at the time. But funny enough, some of my friends from college were involved with the OG Constitution DAO group. And then with all the projects that spun out of the Constitution DAO, like Moondow, for instance, Linkstyle and a handful of others, we've been involved since because they kind of were running into the same sort of privacy issues. So I was connected with those guys and I was connected with Django through working with them on the Aztec Connect Bridge back in like February, January time frame. And once the news broke, I reached back out to the OG Constitution DAO guys that I was connected with and Django and was like, hey, I think we have the pieces of the tech that we need to be able to do this. Do you know if anyone's doing it? And the OG Constitution DAO guys said they were likely going to send it out. Django pointed me to the People DAO folks and I was like, all right, let's see if we want to do this.

Nicholas: Awesome. I guess we can jump to Y4000 and then in a minute we can talk a little bit about the front end that you've built and some of the NFT stuff that People DAO has chosen to do with Juicebox and subsequent airdrops for the ZK donations. Y4000, am I saying your name correctly?

Y4K: Yeah, for sure. Awesome. Y4000 works, Y4K works.

Nicholas: Have you been a long time People DAO member?

Y4K: Yeah, relatively speaking. You know, it spun shortly after the Constitution DAO kind of came to a close. What brought me there was the Constitution DAO. Actually, late last year, I guess 2021, I was just kind of generally in the space and I'd never participated in a DAO or anything like that. I'm a generative artist. I was dabbling in the sort of generative art space on the blockchain and doing various like art projects on the Tezos ecosystem. And if you're familiar with FXHash, that's where I was kind of geeking out over there.

Nicholas: You're a generative artist, right?

Y4K: Yeah, that's right. And so I got involved with the Constitution DAO just because it was like the movement that was happening. It was with getting a lot of attention in the industry and bringing, shedding light on the whole decentralized autonomous organization stuff. And so it was my first foray in the space. So donor and it was on the discord. It was really fun just to be a part of it. And just it was a fun week of lots of excitement. It felt like a wash of emotion after we ended up losing the auction. And at the time I was noodling on generative artwork as well. So I decided to do a generative art project for the community. And so I came up with this project called the constitution fractionalized. And what it ended up doing is like becoming a member at people DAO and they ended up kind of taking me in and adopted it as a community project. Whoever was a donor on the juice box contract for the original constitution DAO could claim one of these generative art NFTs called constitution fractionalized. And so I kind of just like became a part of the people DAO community at that point and just have been rapping with them about different stuff. And there's a whole incubator program there and I was helping them with that. And in fact, I have a project that I'm percolating with them over there. And then we started talking about this whole coincidence of like a year later and other constitutions coming up for auction. So then, yeah, matter. And I had been talking about it and then Matt came into the mix and, and we just kind of the three of us put our heads together and spun this whole thing up among others. And here we are.

Nicholas: Awesome. I want to get into some of the details of how you're organizing this and what you're selling and how it's different from the original constitution. race, but maybe Y4K or matter, you could talk a little bit to. what is it about the constitution that's interesting and to what extent it's your passion for collect a physical copy of the original pressing of the constitution and to what extent it's sort of the social event and the social happening inside of people now that led to this constitution to raise. Neither of you have thoughts on that?

Matter Turbulent: Yeah, I'll add two thoughts. One is that although the constitution was created by the people for the people to govern the people, meaning the public of the new country that is America, the in terms of the copies from this particular printing, which is like a very, very early printing. There are 14 that we know of so far, but only two of them are held in private hands. And these are collectors, wealthy collectors, and so that's not the public, right? That's a very select, exclusive few. The other copies are owned by museums which don't have participatory governance processes. They're opaque. So the public doesn't have a direct say in how these documents are exhibited. So Web 3, with its participatory governance, offers this opportunity for the people to govern the people's document. So I think that's one of the reasons why I find this to be so exciting. And in general, the constitution represents an important innovation in democracy and in rights and in law and in human coordination. So our mission doesn't end at the constitution. We want to continue collecting other important civic artifacts and put them in conversation with each other. What really gets me excited is when you start to put the constitution in conversation with Web 3 innovations in governance. So stuff like quadratic voting, I think like an exhibit that's sort of in the same room when you have those together, gets me really excited for the future and civilization, us continuing to figure out how do we better coordinate.

Nicholas: Do you think it's significant that Dow own one of the copies of the constitution? Is it not enough that the public institutions, the museums, etc. display it? What is it about the, I don't know, the narrative about governance that makes it relevant for a Dow to acquire this document?

Matter Turbulent: Oh, well, I mean, I think that Dow's represent just a form of decentralized. It can be one of the most extreme forms of direct decentralized governance. So I just think that that's where innovation has led us, that the Dow represents that. Does that make sense? Like, yeah.

Nicholas: Yeah, it seems like another moment in history where potentially a new form of some kind of democratic or other governance of organizations is emerging. So I can see a parallel. I'm curious what it is or Y4K, if you have any other thoughts on the matter or what it is about people Dow that I don't know. I'm curious about what you're excited about, I guess, what dimensions excite you or other people you've encountered in the Dow?

Y4K: Yeah, for sure. A part of our thinking was just kind of zooming out on sort of the things that went wrong or so or kind of like the single. the nature of the single purpose the first time around left everyone hanging a little bit. And we kind of felt like if we gave a broader mission, there's so many mechanics to how it actually functioned. OK, if we had these documents and a curated collection that travels and just how the governance would work and exploring all these mechanics, just also noodling on this sort of decentralized organization that the people could come together and do something kind of big and meaningful and have a broader purpose. That's part of the attraction as well. Just it's almost like solving a new kind of embarking on new grounds, basically, you know.

Nicholas: And Matt, I know you're very motivated by the privacy angle for the fundraising. Maybe you could speak a little bit to what motivates you to be involved in this project.

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, there's two big angles for me particularly. And I think some of the other folks that were really interested in coming into the fold at the get go. One is just the privacy ecosystem and the tough year that privacy has had in general. So in addition to being there for the mission of PeopleTel and having this document be something owned by the people in this new form of governance as kind of evidence of a progression of governance and rights that Canada excluded on, privacy has been the only thing that's landed anyone in jail this year. And out of all the kind of 20 billion dollars lost, I think, in open source privacy, Dev is still in jail and there's court cases and people like Coin Center, Coinbase and Bankless are working on lawsuits against the Treasury. But the unfortunate nature is that this tech is very early. Like, TornadoCash is one of the first successful adopted uses of privacy tech on Ethereum. And the shortcomings of it, similar to that account structure, like I was saying before, led to it just being abused and then put such a stain in the whole privacy space. And there hasn't been anything positive. that is just an easy use case to point and say, hey, before privacy tech, we couldn't do this. After privacy tech, we can do this. So that's kind of one of the big motivating factors here is that this is something that could really be used to help protect our rights to privacy in these court cases that are actually going on and help protect privacy devs like myself and everyone else in the privacy community from even being worried about regulation like that. So that's a huge motivating force on that side. And then the other angle is really there's been a handful of projects that got funded and were able to even get off the ground because ConstitutionDao shed a positive light on like, hey, this could be a way that privacy could come to the forefront. I mean, like Dan Bonet at Stanford even posted a HackMD paper on how to build a private DAO on Ethereum. This has spurred a lot of research in areas into the space about how could we practically solve and bring about new use cases by introducing privacy into the space. So just the fact that ConstitutionDao was a successful failure the first time and even greater success in spurring all the DAO tools and then the entire privacy ecosystem along. And I think that's another really exciting part about this is just that you get to see how much you study the blade and how far you come.

Nicholas: Very cool. If anyone has questions or comments or wants to interact with folks up here, please feel free to request. Matter, I know and Y4K also, I know you're. one of the things I learned when I first started interacting with PeopleDao in this recent period, talking about the new Constitution sale, is that the PeopleDao members are very concerned with like a kind of reverence for the people token. And you didn't want to do the exact same kind of raise again. Maybe you could talk a little bit about the motivation, the culture around the original people token and and why you chose to do the type of raise you're doing this time.

Matter Turbulent: Yeah, I will just get one thing out of the way and say that there were regulatory concerns that factored into the decision. There's that. Yeah, regards to specifically what you just asked. I think that there is a reverence for the people token because of its story, but also just because it's our tokens. It's what we use to link our ecosystem together. It's what we use to pay out to contributors. And so like every DAO, every protocol, you know, we are mindful of things that might sort of work against us. So I think that that's where the feedback was coming from in the community around wanting to do NFTs versus ERC20s. And originally there were some ideas around sort of integrating the people token into the actual fundraising. Maybe people can donate people token or something like that. It all proved to be too complex. So this is where we are now.

Dennison Bertram: That's the background on where we are.

Nicholas: And can you explain a little bit for people who aren't aware, how is the fundraise functioning, if not via a fungible token or raising people? How does it work?

Matter Turbulent: Maybe actually Y4K just to spread it around. And he's like the NFT guy too.

Nicholas: So, yeah, yeah.

Y4K: Essentially the juice box contract, there's NFT tiers depending on your donation amount. You could unlock one of four NFTs or multiple. And similarly on the privacy side, basically it'd be reflective on the privacy side, although the NFT contract will be a separate contract. You'll only be able to claim that NFT after the fundraising campaign is over. And essentially, you know, it's still a token which we could use for snapshot voting. And the plan is to use these NFTs as governance tokens for the DAO at this point in time. And similarly, on a failed campaign scenario, a refund process where you could burn the NFT for your refund.

Nicholas: Very cool. And I saw that there is already some notion of voting weight associated with the different tiers of NFTs.

Y4K: Correct. It's basically proportionate to the tier that you unlocked.

Nicholas: OK, so there's no advantage to buying a more expensive NFT. It's all the same.

Y4K: You know, you would get more voting power.

Nicholas: Commensurate with if you had purchased that many lesser, less expensive NFTs. So there's no advantage. It's just more convenient.

Y4K: Yeah. If it was just a flat single tier, the token, we don't want to necessarily have such a large token pool.

Nicholas: If someone wanted to donate more, it would be inconvenient to have only a 0.1 ETH tier, for instance.

Y4K: Yeah. If you think about it from a NFT collection point of view, it'd be out of the ordinary to have hundreds of thousands size collection, you know?

Nicholas: I think it would also be very difficult if you wanted to donate 10 ETH and you had to have thousands of NFTs.

Y4K: And also from a gas point of view, right? You'd be minting that many NFTs. If you're in the 100 ETH tier, you'd probably spend almost an ETH in gas or something like that, you know?

Nicholas: Totally. It might not even be feasible to do it in a block. I saw today that somebody minted the top tier, the 100 ETH tier was minted today for the first time.

Y4K: Yeah. Yeah. There's a big wind inside of a little doubt here.

Nicholas: Very cool. And Matt, so maybe you could speak a little bit to how the other side. So that's sort of the juice box NFT minting experience. But Y4K mentioned that the NFTs will be airdropped to people who do a donation via Nucleo after the fact, I guess, so as not to reveal who had donated, because obviously the NFTs would reveal the price paid. Maybe you can explain a little bit of what the user experience is of someone who wants to donate to the Constitution Tao to raise.

Matt Wyatt: Just in developing the front end for this thing, we wanted to make it as easy as possible for anyone to make a contribution, either private or public, whichever one they wanted to, and to be able to see that they could do it publicly through Juice Box or do it privately through Nucleo. So we kind of schemed up based on the tech that exists right now. What is the best possible way that we could spin this up? And we were able to take advantage of a lot of the kind of SDK and work that you guys and the Juice Box team has kind of put in. And it was able to be pretty easy to both add the contribute with Juice Box token terminal, be able to set that up so that it would actually mint the NFT on contribution and then to even add the activity feed there. On our end, on the private side, we actually had to build some special stuff over the past month to be able to get like kind of a private contribution feed. So you can at least get a little scroll and idea of some of the private contributions that have come in without kind of reviewing the entire thing. And then one of the other things that came up as doing this is like some of the biggest things that were beneficial to the first Constitution Tao was just the progress. Being able to see the live progress, how much has been raised, how much was targeted. Again, we're able to take advantage of some of the stuff Juice Box is building, be able to just grab that data of the public treasury whenever possible and throw that in the front end too. So, you know, we really just wanted to make this as easy as possible for users to do Juice Box contributions and private contributions with Aztec and Nucleo. And a complicated thing with Aztec is whenever you are actually on the site, what's happening is in the background in the wasm of the website, the entire Aztec network and world state and circuits that you need to calculate these proofs and submit on contribution are done in browser for you. So that just kind of required a whole website to kind of spool up. And that's why we wanted to make sure that we can get Juice Box on that website working too. And just for the Juice Box SDK, it was great to kind of plug that in.

Nicholas: Very cool. If people want to take a look at how this feels, it's contribute. constitution.to.com. Obviously not financial advice, but it is cool to see the website where you can track the activity feeds of both the private and the public donations. They look very cool. So does this mean that there's for the Nucleo side, if someone were to go and make a contribution, there's compute happening locally in their browser. Is there also data being stored that's required for them to be able to access something on Aztec? or the fact that they're just sending it to a multi-sig means they don't need to keep any data once the transaction is done?

Matt Wyatt: So the super cool thing here that I kind of geek out about is it's all done locally in browser and it's encrypted to the multi-sig key on the other side of Aztec. So in Aztec realm, you don't have to record any like metadata kind of outside of it or anything just from that multi-sig. Whenever you load it, it'll decrypt all the notes so that you can get all the information of that transaction too.

Nicholas: Very cool. And is this the first time you've executed that in a browser client?

Matt Wyatt: Nope. We have been kind of in private beta or so for the past two to three months. And that's kind of how the private multi-sig works as well.

Nicholas: Very cool. And I guess this fundraise is potentially increasing the TVL of Aztec as people are onboarding new ETH to Aztec in order to make donations. Is that right?

Matt Wyatt: Yeah. So Aztec actually, I believe, just crossed the 50,000 ETH mark with 500,000 transactions. So certainly contributing that TVL on Aztec and you're increasing that ETH, it's just building up privacy.

Nicholas: Very cool. And then once ETH is inside the Aztec network, I guess nobody from the outside can see where it's being transferred. So having more ETH in the system increases everybody's privacy.

Matt Wyatt: Exactly. If you go to zk.money, you'll actually see that they've built out some of the front end ability to use different DeFi products. I believe they have 12 different options right now. So once it's inside of Aztec, you can do completely private DeFi as well if you want. And still no one from the outside would know who is doing that private DeFi. They would just know that someone within Aztec is doing DeFi things in general. And once you add all that in Aztec, you start to kind of build up this entire privacy ecosystem where you can't really tell what anyone's doing per se inside of Aztec.

Nicholas: Cool. So I guess for you, this is like an opportunity to onboard lots of people potentially to using Aztec more frequently.

Matt Wyatt: Yeah, I think the biggest thing that's pretty exciting here is just introducing people to practical use cases for privacy with the systems that exist today and getting people thinking about like, hey, we can use privacy without worrying about getting landed on an OFAC sanctions list.

Nicholas: That's good. That's a good thing. I see we've got someone from the audience who'd like to ask a question. Rami Wrights, welcome.

Matter Turbulent: Yeah.

RamiWrites: Hi, thanks. Hi, everyone. Just a quick question. Thanks for hosting this space. It's interesting how you're using zero knowledge proofs or zero knowledge technology in general to kind of counteract what was the issue with Constitution Dow last year. But my question is, is it the same constitution that you're buying or is it a different constitution? I don't know that that constitution is up for auction or for sale anymore. Is it a different one? Or I'm just curious.

Matter Turbulent: So it is a different constitution, but it is from the same printing series. Our resident historical documents expert is actually in the spaces, Seth. So if at any point, Seth, you want to chime in and speak to constitutions or speak to why this whole effort is meaningful to you. Yeah, you're always welcome. Yeah. So the answer to your question is it's from the same series, just a different copy. Yeah.

RamiWrites: OK, I see.

Nicholas: So in this experience, as you set up the website now, people are donating and the funds become available on Aztec to the multisig. If someone wanted to go ahead and use Aztec themselves, like, I don't know, transfer some to their own wallet on Aztec in order to be able to do private transactions and do defiant things. Do they need a new wallet or can they do that all within their existing MetaMask, Rainbow, whatever they use?

Matt Wyatt: So they can use any of their MetaMask, Rainbow, and what's kind of happening. whenever you do that is that you'll sign a message. So like ZK Money is great. I would recommend everyone to go check out ZK Money and you'll get a feel for the flow. But what you do is just connect to whatever wallet you're on and then you sign a message and what that. what happens whenever you sign that message is that it deterministically generates your new Aztec address. And Aztec is actually on a different curve than Ethereum, Arbitrum and Optimism. It is more efficient for these ZKP circuits that they use to be able to actually be computationally light enough to be able to run in browsers so that you can calculate all these proofs locally. But you don't have to create any new wallets or anything. You just sign that message and it'll generate it for you. And then because it's all running in the browser, you sending a message kind of acts the same way as you downloading a whole new wallet.

Nicholas: So you can use your existing private key. Do you need to... is anything stored in local storage if you reset or using a private tab? Would that pose a problem?

Matt Wyatt: Yeah. So this is a fun thing building these systems. is that so? every note, because it's UTXO and it's note based. So a lot the way you can think about that is just cash stuffed inside of an envelope so that no one in the entire network can see. But at least you could track all those envelopes on like a tree. And what you're doing? whenever you actually sign in, you generate that private and public key locally and you are downloading the entire Aztec world state and opening each envelope with your private key to be able to check and see if you can decrypt that note.

Nicholas: Got it. Does that pose a problem as the chain grows and the state grows to have to decode the whole thing from the start?

Matt Wyatt: That's a hot fix that we had to actually push day one of funding to be able to even do the deposit proofs on mobile. So within the first 24 hours, we're getting a lot of feedback that it wasn't working on mobile. and it wasn't working because downloading that entire state whenever you load the Aztec network in browser was too heavy that phones would run out of memory. So we had to push a hot fix both on our side and on the Aztec side to be able to not have to load the entire world stage just so a user can make the deposit proof locally. It certainly poses a challenge. I believe like we've even seen performance as we've been working with this entire year like increase from load times from 30 seconds all the way up to like four minutes. So there's a lot of active work being done there and it's really interesting active research problems to solve.

Nicholas: I guess it's good to be out in the wild with something to have to solve these problems. I'm going to throw it to Seth in a second to talk a little bit about the Constitution. I also see Denison's in the room. Denison Bertram from Tally has been a strong critic of some of the decisions around how the governance is going to be structured. Denison, if you want to come up and chat, I'd love to have you interact with some of the folks from Constitution Dow too. Seth, what are your thoughts on the significance of this particular document and as it relates to the prior constitution that was on auction?

Matt Wyatt: Sure.

Nicholas: Do you think this is a significant document? And maybe you could speak a little bit about why you're interested in a Dow owning one?

Matt Wyatt: around and owning

Nicholas: Absolutely. Difficult to do one person, one vote without knowing when you're ready. Exactly. But speaking of governance, Denison, welcome. I know you've had some critical thoughts. How's it going? How are you?

Dennison Bertram: Good. I'm good.

Nicholas: Good to hear from you.

Dennison Bertram: I won't be able to stay long. My kids just got back from daycare.

Nicholas: All right. Lay it on us. What are your critical thoughts? And what have you learned this week? thinking about Constitution Down 2?

Dennison Bertram: Yeah, well, first of all, I'm really excited for the project. I was a contributor to Constitution Down 1. I was really hyped. And it would be great if we could focus on Part 2. That would be really fantastic. I think as some of you know, I was like pretty critical on Twitter, but I think educationally critical. I was hoping so. I run Tally and we're really focused on on-chain governance and building DAOs and DAOs work. And what my concerns had been was the actual DAO part. What happened last time on Constitution DAO is the Constitution DAO really blew up. It was a really successful failure. And what happened is, is that we had a lot of fast followers for what Constitution DAO did. Some of which turned out to be really awesome projects. But there were projects that turned out to be essentially scams for us. And the sort of thing that I was hinging on and I sort of like feedback Twitter was in the way that this is being built, it's not actually a DAO. There isn't any mechanism by which people who are participating in giving their money actually have any verifiable control over the organization. And that's for a number of reasons that I can tell. Right. Like difficult. There's like the whole legal system sort of gap between what the auction house needs. KYC. These things which are, you know, real problems, real problems. But the sort of like hesitation and the worry that I bring up is what happens when we build DAOs that aren't real DAOs and we are famous, well-known people. Right. So people give us their money because we're famous and because we say, hey, you know where I am. This is why you should trust me. Is that the next person who comes along to buy a boat or an island or, you know, any of these things that people try and buy, they aren't the same boat. But they point to successful organizations like people in Constitution DAO and say, hey, why are you picking on us? We're doing the same thing as what these other folks do. But in reality, they're wolves and they're just sort of like hanging out with the sheep. And we saw this in this past cycle to basically the nth degree. Right. With sort of all culminating in SBF, where we start building Web3 because we believe in trust but verify. We believe in blockchain and this like this intermediation of trust using trustless software. But when we build organizations that sort of imply that it is built on trustless software, but they're not, what ends up happening is that that may work. That may be successful. But that model is then put into place to effectively ruin people's lives in other scams. Right. Because the greatest one, I think, is Wonderland Finance, when it all sort of turned out that Daniela Siesta or Sesta basically it was just him running everything. You have a snapshot where he promises to look at what your vote is, if he feels good about it, maybe he'll do it, maybe it doesn't. But in the end, you know, the joke was they called the Wonderland Finance DAO, right. The Daniela Antonov's organization where one person just controls everybody's money and isn't honest with it. Right. So that has always been my concern, that when we build things that are successful, but we don't build them in the way that we imply to the people who participate, that they're built. We're actually setting the stage for more people to come in to our ecosystem and take advantage of it. Because maybe we know what real DAOs are. Maybe we know the difference between X and Y. But tomorrow, someone comes in because they missed Constitution DAO. They want to be a part of something because this is so exciting. And they buy something that looks identical. But there is no trust mechanism behind it. Right. So it creates this environment where we're actually just building on a house of cards. Right. Like if we're in an ecosystem where we have to take people's word for how an organization is going to be run. Well, what are we doing in the first place? Like, why do we build all this technology in the first place? At the end of the day, it's not a DAO.

Nicholas: Right. So I know. The pivotal thing is on-chain voting is something that's important to you for effective decentralization of an organization.

Dennison Bertram: Yeah. To be fair, I understand that DAOs exist over this temporal timescale where they start as an idea. They move into a multi-segment. And they move into. Right. I understand these things exist over time and there's many practical challenges to do. So I'm not like this absolutist where everybody in the world has to vote in your DAO on chain from day one. But the catch is a lot of people. This is the learning that came from the last cycle is a lot of people build DAOs with multi-segment.

Matter Turbulent: Right.

Dennison Bertram: And this is an idea that was very new when we had multi-segment when the DAO, the original DAO was around. But nobody called it DAOs.

Matter Turbulent: Right.

Dennison Bertram: This is kind of a concept from the last cycle because it's a little bit of a shortcut, like a little bit simpler. Right. There's a group of people who are somehow like trusted and they control the money together. So no one person has the ability to like run. And then there's some sort of off chain voting mechanism that is used along with it. But the catch here is with multi-segment or other sort of voting mechanisms. is that one? you know, is that phrase from Henry Ford, you can buy the Model T in any color you want as long as it's black. So we have organizations out there that are quote unquote DAOs that use multi-segment with off-chain voting where you can vote for whatever you want as long as it's what I want or what as long as the team wants.

Nicholas: Are there examples of that that you encountered where DAOs that are operated by multi-segment ignore the will of the snapshot?

Dennison Bertram: Yes. But on a Friday night, I'm definitely. I think I've put enough folks on blast. I don't think I'm going to make any more.

Nicholas: Well, that's spilled the beans.

Dennison Bertram: Spilled the beans this evening. But the last cycle is just replete with these examples. Right. Part two of that, right, where they don't implement the will of the people when the people vote is and I don't mean people as in like people, people token. Right. But when folks are voting in the system, is that on multi-sinks, you don't have to have a vote at all for anything. And there are some well-known applications that maybe people would vote on things, but they need to pay themselves out of bonus. You know, they just went ahead and did it. Right. There isn't any mechanism here to actually hold yourselves accountable or have the public hold them accountable. So while it's a very convenient mechanism to jumpstart organizations, it's a very dangerous mechanism because at the end of the day, you're not saying, trust me, you're saying, trust me and three other people that I know very closely and very well. But you don't. But that's not a doubt. It's not like we're building or it's not like prominent segment of the quote unquote Dow ecosystem. believe that what we're building, like if at the end of the day we have to trust you personally, it's just not a doubt. Right. Even though it may be the fastest way to move.

Nicholas: Well, I'm very curious to hear what happens to hear the response, because I think the main issue and I see we have Pablo from Moondow has also come up. who operates or is a member and operating member of Moondow who might have some reactions. The main thing that comes to mind for me, and I'd be curious if anyone from the Constitution 2 team has any thoughts, but as long as you're going to have to custody the funds off chain in order to hand them over to Sotheby's in order to place bids, it seems to me like on chain voting up until that point doesn't actually change the score because this is not an on chain asset. If you're Nounds Dow, you can do everything internally coherently inside of L1. But as soon as you're purchasing something that exists outside of Ethereum blockchain, you're going to have to have some kind of custody of those funds off chain, which would sort of make the on chain voting irrelevant, wouldn't it?

Dennison Bertram: That's to me, I think the answer there is yes. Right. And that happens. And that is like where are the limits of where we're at today? And that makes total sense. Like, it's not that I'm someone who doesn't realize that, like, if you're going to bridge this digital world to the physical world, the interface is not going to be smooth. But I do think that if we're going to lead, we should be by example. And there are ways to at least give more transparency over this. Right. Something I think that like is sort of like a call out here, sort of like a watch out or an idea is, is that when this money that's contributed by this community then goes into this nonprofit organization, LLC, the law sees that totally different. The fact that the LLC owns the Constitution, I think the terms of service are quite clear in Constitution now, too. Right. Like you get to help govern, but you don't have any ownership over the document that's owned by the stat, which, you know, of course, could force them to sell.

Nicholas: Right. I'm curious if anyone from the from the Constitution to race has any thoughts on these subjects.

Matter Turbulent: Yeah, I mean, it's already been said here. We're dealing with what we have in the sense that these two systems aren't compatible yet. The legal system and this on chain system. And, you know, to your point, Nicholas, yeah, even if they were like there was a legal entity to that was compatible with a Dow and the way Dow would govern in a decentralized manner, it doesn't execute automatically because it's like the real world. Right. Like it's not the world doesn't run on code in the real world. I think there always will be some degree of trust because even if there is a correct legal entity, somebody has to go over and pick up the Constitution and put it in a truck and move it somewhere. So like that's maybe there's maybe a lot of people could all do it together. Maybe there's a way of addressing that. But yeah, so we are smack dab in the middle of challenges that the entire space is dealing with for the folks who are trying to interact with real world things that exist within jurisdictions, within nation states.

Nicholas: I know there were some requirements about legal entities as well in order to participate in the auction.

Matter Turbulent: Exactly. There's also that. So like specific to this situation, the entities that we're interacting with in Meetspace want us to have a legal entity. So we had to have one. And then it was a question of, well, what is it going to give us some degree of liability protection? And then and we just tried to make the best decisions we could with the information we had available and the resources we had available. And the result was a nonprofit. That's what we are.

Nicholas: So and U.S. based, is that right?

Matter Turbulent: U.S. based.

Nicholas: I'm curious. I know probably you didn't hear all of what Denison was saying, but I think you've interacted a little bit. You know, some of Denison's perspective. Do you have any perspective on this, given your experience and involvement at Moondow and actually at the original Constitution? Dow also.

Pablo Moncada-Larrotiz: Yeah, I mean, it's a funny situation, right, because it's almost like we want to hold ourselves up to an even higher standard than what exists like legally. It's almost like the criticism from the Dow world is really saying, hey, we should have an even stronger enforcement than what exists legally and really ensure that all of the people involved and all the people making contributions really have even stronger rights than what they're afforded through a legal entity. So I think it's just ultimately I really look like the Buckminster Fuller quote that's don't try to fight the current world. Just make a world that is just absolutely better in every way. And then people will move over to that world. And I think it's just a very slow process of getting some of these traditional entities to understand and respect the ways that those work currently and to wrap their heads around that there actually is even more protection for token holders if you do everything on chain rather than moving something to a bank account. You know, Sotheby's, for example, could just look at the the wallet address that we have and then see the proof of funds there and then just accept directly an Ethereum payment. That would just be a massive step in the right direction. And it's something that Sotheby's could enact in their policies. And maybe we should put more pressure on them to get with the times a bit, because that would really resolve a lot of these issues.

Dennison Bertram: I mean, there's to be fair, like on the other side of my argument, there's a lot of things here that are still hard. Like once you have the Constitution, who actually owns that nonprofit? What happens if a judge takes it from you? Right. Like there are so many like questions that happen after it. There are definitely ways to try and bring these worlds together closer. Can certainly put in the bylaws of an LLC of the organization that the organization's decisions have to be taken in accordance with decisions of the folks who hold the token. Right. There are ways to get these two incongruous surfaces a little bit closer. Obviously, then you tread a very fine line. Right. The money that is raised, like you can't own part of the document because then suddenly it looks like maybe the document might go up in value. And now now the tokens of security, which is I think that would any judges like immediate take. Right. So there's all these sort of arguing on the other side of here. But there's all these like things that you have to deal with. But I think it's worthwhile. This version of Constitution now is really pioneering, especially because it's use of the shielded fundraising. It would be really great that if it's going to be a Dow, all itself a Dow and educate the community about what a Dow is, that it strive even further to at least really connect to those values that decentralized autonomous organizations and the Web3 space really try and do. Like it's simply it's just uncomfortable. For example, in terms of service on auction. Right. If you don't claim your refund in case you lose the auction, if you don't claim the refund in 30 days, you know, the LLC, the nonprofit gets to keep everyone's money that hasn't claimed it. And they don't continue to have any sort of like input of the organization. that's contractual. I could be one thing. It's like, look, we can't return your money. For example, in gift cards, if you start a gift card business, you can't return the money because then you become a money transfer. So when every time people buy gift cards from you, there's like a one way delivery of money. Right. Like the people who give you the money, never getting it back. But if we're trying to get these services closer, if this LLC says, hey, we have to follow the decisions that is taken by this organization via a voting mechanism using tokens. Right. At least then you can say we are trying to become a more perfect union of individuals. You like how I slip that in there. Yeah, that would at least move the needle more because the fundamental structure of this is very similar to what we did last time. And it doesn't move the space forward, but it gives cover to individuals who would do us harm because things that are so important succeed. You know, they just say we're doing the same thing as they're doing. Why are you so hard on us? And then we get taken advantage of.

Matter Turbulent: Seth, can I just weigh in real, real quick? Of course. OK, cool. So, yeah, Denizen, we listened to all of your feedback on Twitter and I'll just let you know what we've done so far to try and do right by everyone. And just like you said, express the values that underpin DAOs and decentralization. So just starting with, we have written up an amendment to our Articles of Association that specifies that directors must follow the decision making of the DAO within applicable law. And what I mean by that is we are not an LLC. We're a corporation, a nonprofit corporation. And the particular jurisdiction that we are in does place some constraints on us in terms of directors having to sort of have the final say here. So what we're trying to do in this gray space is thread the needle. And in our Articles of Association, give as much power as we can to the DAO. I will say that I personally, long term, beyond the four days that we have right here, are very, very much inclined to shift to whatever legal entity we need to such that we can place even more power in the hands of the DAO and do on-chain voting. I mean, we have to talk to the lawyers right now. I think on-chain voting is not compatible with the current legal wrapper we have. So I'll just say that. That's the first thing I'll say. Second thing I will say is that in regards to the 30 days, you know, we've been making lots of decisions in the past couple of weeks that we spun this together. And now that we have launched, we have seen our ideas tested and we've realized that this actually wasn't a good idea at all. Originally, we had thought, OK, we put these 30 days here. So then everybody has the chance that they need to pull their funds out. And then after the DAO can go on with its mission, which actually goes beyond just the Constitution and extends to other civic artifacts. We definitely hear everybody, yourself, that you don't like this policy. And we actually we understand the rationale. We're not committed to it. And in fact, we basically are on the cusp of just abolishing it. And the reason we haven't done that so yet is we started with some community feedback last night and maybe now we've sort of fully realized the process. But we've just been waiting to sort of get the full input from the community. So I can say personally, yeah, like I'm done with the 30 days. It's all good. I'm not married to it. And instead, I would like to do an opt in. So after the auction, folks can opt in to a further mission to the DAO, furthering its mission beyond the Constitution. And then very last point I'll say is that so we're stuck with a multi-sig for right now. You know, we have a short timeline of a couple of days, but within the framework of a multi-sig, we know that we can do better. There's only three people on it right now. And that was really just because we were moving so fast. We always plan to expand it and include more trusted members of the community. So if you yourself would like to be on it, Denison, you are more than welcome. Do you have other recommendations for people? We would love to bring them into the fold. We know that it's imperfect. It's a multi-sig, but even within that, we can do better. So, yeah.

Dennison Bertram: Hey, I want to say thank you for that. And I think that's very important. I will decline the offer to be on the multi-sig, although thank you. I'm afraid of this type of thing. But I do want to say I'm not going to be able to stay much longer because my child has gotten home from daycare and she's calling my name. And that always pulls up my heartstrings. But I wanted to say that also the learnings that you can share from this process can really go a long way to strengthening this ecosystem as a whole. It becomes very difficult for scammers to come in and say, hey, we're doing the same thing as Constitution Now did. Right. When Constitution Now says, hey, this is how we started. This is what didn't work. This is how we improved. This is what we would do if we started over from scratch. Those type of learnings, then when other people come in and say, oh, we're doing the same thing, people don't say no, you do better than what they did. And they went through that learning process so that you don't have to, so that we can hold you accountable to two things. In this case, there is a couple of days you have a multi-sig. Yeah. Don't drop that just because. But, you know, continue this process of explaining how and why. Why is it so hard and what you would do differently. Right. Like make it all a learning process within, you know, within your organizational capacity, because, you know, my intention is never to say, hey, don't do it. Stop. My intention is to raise a flag and say, hey, we can do better. Everyone can do better. And that's really important to Web3 being a success.

Nicholas: Great. Thanks for coming through, Denison.

Dennison Bertram: I think with that, I'm actually going to jump because my baby is calling me. Those are great. I would keep listening.

Nicholas: But thanks for coming through, Denison.

Dennison Bertram: Thanks so much, and good luck.

Nicholas: Seth, did you want to jump in?

Matt Wyatt: this

Matt Wyatt: acquire

Nicholas: Rami, did you want to say something?

RamiWrites: Yeah, I just want to recognize that based on everything that I've heard so far, you put together something really impressive in what appears to be a short time frame. I'm personally part of a team called the Dream Conduit. We are a nonprofit 501 C3. We're building a DAO that is on the chain voting and we've spent the past year building it. So it is something that's possible to build, but it takes a lot of time. So I do want to recognize that. But what I want to ask about is how much time have you spent kind of preparing this? Because there are some aspects that have really impressed me, like Matt, I think your breakdown of how the zero knowledge side of things works, but other aspects that make me think that just curious how much time this was put together. If I could ask, please.

Matter Turbulent: Well, Rami, the Sotheby's announced the constitution was up for auction on November 1st. That's your answer.

RamiWrites: Awesome. OK, so in that time, you've put together a nonprofit. You've put together the zero knowledge side of things that accepts private donations and you've set up a multi-sig. And I think that works great. I'll just say on-chain DAOs are something that you can move towards and it kind of makes sense with the timeline that you're up against and with the funds having to be custodied off-chain that it may not feel like there's a good fit that can work in such a short time frame. But I do encourage you to keep in mind that an on-chain DAO with a nonprofit can work. And I'm happy to talk to you about that if you ever want any opinions.

Matter Turbulent: But I absolutely would love to continue the conversation. And thank you for the offer. It might be an issue of jurisdiction on a state by state basis, but would love to talk further and really figure out how it is working for you.

RamiWrites: Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. We're in Delaware, so I'm happy to talk about it anytime.

Nicholas: Yeah. Awesome. So I'm going to have to close out the show now. This has been a wonderful conversation. If anybody would like to keep talking, Matter Turbulent, you're a co-host. Anybody else wants to be co-host that's up here and would like to keep talking? Let me know and I can pass the hosting duties on to you. Thank you all for coming through. Matter Turbulent, Pablo, Matt, Rami, Y4K, Seth, Denison. I hope I didn't miss anyone. It's been great talking to you all about this DAO building in progress. I think it's, if anything, the lesson here that I'm taking away is people are trying to do the right thing. There are constraints put upon us by the legal system, by time limits, by Sotheby's making an announcement just like that, by the state of the market, by people like SBF. And what I've heard here today is people trying to do the best they possibly can and moving towards the maximally decentralized, trustless systems as possible. So very exciting and cool to also see a little bit of how the sausage is made. You know, sometimes we can't make the perfect outcome. We need to make do with what we can at the present until we can get to a place where we can do what we all want, ultimately. So great to have this conversation. Thank you all for coming through. And yeah, if you're interested, it's ConstitutionDAO2.com. It's a cool thing to check out. I don't know if anyone from the effort had any other links to share or where people should come and meet you.

Matter Turbulent: On Twitter, it's W-A-G-B-T-C.

Nicholas: Awesome. And what does that stand for for the people?

Matter Turbulent: We're all going to buy the Constitution.

Nicholas: Love it. All right. And I know there's active conversations going on Discord, too. I get the sense that this is a real DAO where anybody can have an impact by, in the sense of having a real impact, anybody can jump into the conversation and get involved.

Y4K: Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. Thanks so much for putting this together, Nicholas. And yeah, Rami, please come join the Discord. We'd love to talk more on Governance Channel and all this stuff.

Matt Wyatt: Absolutely.

Nicholas: Thank you all. Thank you, Seth. Also, if I forgot to mention your name, awesome to have your perspective here, too.

Y4K: Yeah, shout out to Disrupt Digital, our YOLO executive donor today.

Nicholas: Oh, yes. Disrupt Digital, 100 ETH NFT. Disrupt Digital 8 on Twitter. Very cool. Congratulations on purchasing that NFT, the first one of that type. Very cool. All right. Thank you, everybody. See you next Friday for another episode of Web3 Galaxy Brain, 5pm Eastern with a guest to be announced next week. So thanks for coming through and good luck with the fundraise.

Matter Turbulent: Thanks, Nicholas. This was great. Bye.

Matt Wyatt: Thanks. Thanks, Nicholas. Thanks, Nick.

Nicholas: Hey, thanks for listening to this episode of Web3 Galaxy Brain. To keep up with everything Web3, follow me on Twitter at Nicholas with four leading ends. You can find links to the topics discussed on today's episode in the show notes. Podcast feed links are available at Web3GalaxyBrain.com. Web3 Galaxy Brain airs live most Friday afternoons at 5pm Eastern Time, 2200 UTC on Twitter Spaces. I look forward to seeing you there.