 not so sharply defined when it comes to hardcore secure electronics. Then if the platform is well-designed, it can really enable to switch seamlessly between a ledger and a ledgerless environment. It doesn't necessarily have to be locked into one or the other scenario, and that's a beauty of it. And you know what's funny? I was reading the Australian Central Bank paper earlier, and they mentioned an offline device capability only with battery power, meaning even mentioning the fact that recharge would be necessary every once in a while. I'm like, no, it doesn't have to be battery powered. No, no, no, no, no. That's like five years ago, 10 years ago. There's NFC now. No, but the truth is that what we've managed to accomplish is to compute all sort of elliptic curve cryptography only with NFC power. And that's what everyone else hasn't figured out yet. And that's why some technical people are still according to the notion that you need a battery to run ECC because it actually is difficult to do it with very low power, very difficult on a secure chip. And you can also charge the battery using a bicycle. Australia, yeah, I have long distance. That has been done in African countries where our solar power disconnected from the grid. There are various ways in which this can be achieved. I mean, and let's wait till more people show up or a couple of minutes more. And I am glad that John has really joined the meeting and started debating right from the beginning. That is a wonderful thing. John, you're on mute if you are speaking. Yeah, I was gonna say that I find this group quite promising because I get invited into a lot of different groups that are sponsored by various usually commercial interests and so on and then I get lured in because I'm told that we're gonna get into some real hardcore interest in debates and topics. And it always ends up being the same thing. It ends up just being very high level discussions and trying to bring perhaps the idea is to bring non-believers into the fold and so on. So this one seems to be a little more hardcore and all of us here seem to be, we don't require an awful lot of handholding here. We're ready to jump right into the deep end, which is I think really good. And in fact, I would suggest that instead of splitting the session in a monologue by me and James plus UNA, anyone can just jump in any time and ask and interrupt me. Frankie prefer an interruption than having to go through for half an hour. Well, we have a small enough group. I think that's gonna be cool. So before we start, I have to do certain things that are required of me by the Hyperledger community, oh Hyperledger management, let's say. One is the fact that we are bound by antitrust policy that is obvious in this context. The second is the code of conduct which says two important things. One is even when we disagree, we treat each other with respect. Second is that we properly attribute people. And the third, which is actually should be the first is we give space to people to talk if they want to instead of being the sole talker on the call. So that fits in nicely with the kind of debates that we're going to have. So without hesitating any further, let's dive into it Sergio and Sergio, if you look at him, you see that he's hardcore. His photograph that I posted up on the presentation looks like, you know, he's a tough guy. But he's not that tough. I know him really well, Vipin. He's really just a softy. Yes, I know. I can see that in his smile. Anyway, I'm going to keep quiet now and Sergio, you take it away and you know, others interrupt when necessary. One of my best friends once described me as a cookie, hard outside, but sweet and soft inside. I don't know, well, time will tell. Anyway, welcome everyone. I'm very happy to be here. And James, it's also here with me, been helping Tangem for a while as well. I'd like to start this with a self-introduction, hopefully not overshadowing the importance of the topic, but to set some context and I'll start also sharing the deck here. So when did digital money really come into place? Digital money really come into place. And when did FinTech really start is a question we should ask ourselves. And we'll see later in the presentation that in the 1870s and 1880s, a lot of things happened virtually 150 years ago. Western Union started the first transcontinental United States line between coast to coast in 1861. 10 years later they started using the telegraphic line to transport messages about money transfer and that's how telegraphic transfers were born. 150 years of constant iterations and evolution, of course, with more modern, more complex, more powerful systems blossomed obviously with the internet and the fact that all the digital access got democratized all of a sudden 20 years ago, 15 years ago and then mobile. So we have a lot of iteration and now we got to the point where things are speeding up at an exponential pace. And this is such an interesting time obviously to be witnessing and participating constructively in moving forward. Personally, I've seen a few milestones of this process happening. I was born in a family where my dad was a tech entrepreneur which was not really a common thing to be in Italy in the 80s. So I've witnessed firsthand mobile terminals doing over landline communication before moderns were even really a word. Then in 2003 coincidentally, I was still living in Italy and Hutchinson-Wampoa Group launched 3G, so UMTS was called CDMA 2100 in Italy. So we were one of the first countries in the world, if not the first to have mainstream video calls between phones, I wouldn't call it a smartphone, but they had already a decent experience, really like a FaceTime experience. And this was early. Then 2007, at the time coincidentally, I was living in Korea and I still vividly remember how I landed in a country where iPhones were barely being launched elsewhere in the world. So that tells you how smartphones were at the time. So be easy, barely an internet connection, barely a browser, barely some apps that would be like calculator and compass to start with. And in Korea, almost every phone, feature phones, smartphone, all alike, had NFC capability for mobile payments, store value and account base, tap, tap, tap anywhere in the country. So that's where they were and they were so advanced, no other country, maybe Japan only. Can you tell us what NFC is because there may be people who do not know? Near field communication is a wireless protocol that is based on low energy, high proximity, wireless transmission that is used mostly for payment systems and it's like the Apple Pay and Google Pay and also the credit cards. So these cards, all these cards that have, sorry, I shouldn't see my number, maybe, these cards that have the NFC logo here, whoop, can't see it, anyway, the little four waves, that's a EMV logo for NFC. So it's meant for close proximity transactions. It's called contactless, although usually you just go so close as you almost touch, but it could be technically a few centimeters, a few inches away. So in 2007, we were already doing mobile payments in Korea and from that on, has been a landslide of innovation up until today where I'm very happy to be at the forefront of this innovation with Tangem. Tangem was born out of hardcore research and development in secure, embedded and micro systems, anything from SIM card in laser to more complex solutions with the results that in 2017, yeah, so 2017, three, four years ago, were founders understood the power of blockchains and decided to focus on applications to bring digital assets to mainstream. Now, blockchains, of course, unlocked a lot of creative thinking in R&D. Don't necessarily mean that every solution that the world needs or that Tangem provides are based on a blockchain, but it means that the fundamental principles of asymmetric cryptography and how this is used to secure assets and secure property on a blockchain are usable in other contexts too. And this is where Tangem really comes into place. But I'll dive straight in so that we can have a better understanding of what we do. And again, please don't throw me any time. Love to have feedback and I love maybe to explain and break down certain concepts that may not be obvious to the viewer so later for the recording. Central Bank Digital Currency. This is a beautiful schema first seen in 2018 made by the Bank of International Settlements. It's called the money flower because it looks like a flower and it describes through means by means of a Venn diagram how different type of applications and different properties of money can be identified. For the purpose of understanding where Central Bank Digital Currency really fits. So the gray area, so the central four squares, sectors are where the Bank of International Settlements in 2018 thought Central Bank Digital Currency would be. The lines are blurred in certain cases. So I'm not gonna dive into the discussion of whether this is right or wrong, but there is a very good starting point to understand what type of problem we're trying to solve today. And the problem we're trying to solve with Tangem is to make Central Bank Digital Currency accepted, accessible and inclusive and secure for everyone. So really bring it to mainstream. Our starting assumption is today we have paper cash. Can we do better, like 10 times better? Because if we're not improving UX by 10 times, we're really not solving a problem. We should take this as a Silicon Valley startup with the intention of really dramatically revolutionizing the experience for the better, not just iteratively add a little bell or a little whistle to the solution. And this chart also brings up a few ongoing discussions whether Central Bank Digital Currency should be distributed on a one tier or two tier system, whether it's the only the Central Bank should be involved in the distribution and management and program management of the currency or whether there should be also a cooperation by a middle tier of commercial banks that as they do today help with the distribution. Technically today cash is N-zero. So the Central Bank directly redeemable and issued currency, but at the same time it is in fact distributed by ATMs from the commercial banks. So you can have the second tier anyway. Very few of us would really, you could but very few of us could really do on a daily basis walk up to the Central Bank to redeem or transact or withdraw cash. It is a title of a claim towards the Central Bank in that sense it's M-zero. And another big discussion that has been brought alive by multiple players in the industry is whether the right approach is to have a token base or an account based solution for digital currency issued by the Central Bank. This taxonomy is highly debated and I agree that it's not maybe the proper way to identify the problem partly because it is better to call those two solution ledger-less and ledger-based as written here on the side. Our view is that in any case, the Central Bank needs a ledger to maintain its central currency, but at the same time, if you want to design a product that is comparable in properties to cash, so it's anonymous, it's peer-to-peer direct and can be transferred without internet connectivity and other facilities and witnesses and third parties, then you need the tokens to be secured and verifiable without the immediate presence of a ledger. And so you open not only to the case where the tokens are independent from the ledger, but there's a whole range in between and this is what we're gonna talk about today. How does technology help this plethora of solutions that are an old gray era between ledger and ledger-less solutions? And this is another table taken from the same report, I think from the DIS in 2018. And as you see here, the two columns between token and account-based solutions are very clearly defined as well, that's not aligned, but there's in fact a distinction between them. What we want to do today is open up your minds and allow you to explain, to think that we can't blur those lines. And this is so powerful because at this point, creativity in product design cannot, should not be limited and will not be limited by preconceptions of either technical visibility or dogmatic principles like it's your account or token-based. So not such thing for us because our technology is so powerful, it's non-binary in other words. Exactly, it's non-binary. With a powerful enough platform. Like the non-binary sort of argument accord elsewhere. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, we live in a world where we're starting to accept and understand that it's not all back and white. Let's put it that way. And so with a powerful enough platform, the product design choice is left to design thinking. And so you'd want to start from, how do you want the user experience to be? What are the policies to implement? Monetary and privacy and legal and regulatory. And then walk back to how you want the features to be defined and the specifications. You shouldn't start from a dogmatic approach. Oh, we have to choose whether it's cancer tokens and then deploy the system and trying to force it towards being useful. That's a failure. And look, again, things have accelerated so fast in the last 10, 20 years. And it's beautiful to learn from companies like Facebook, Google, Apple, and all the major tech apps that are growing so fast. Why are they growing so fast? Because they're applying these design principles where they first want to solve for a problem. They want to solve for the user case. They want to optimize for usability and then walk back to what kind of platform they need or having a platform flexible enough that allows to A-B test and check and try and iterate quickly. So this is what we need for money as well. The fact that our central bank is a venerable and solid institution doesn't mean it shouldn't move in the same direction. Absolutely. The two things are unrelated, in my opinion. So going back to my initial storyline, a lot of things happen in the 80s. I mean, the real 80s, the 1880s. One of the most beautiful and my favorite stories is the War of Currents. Some of you may remember, there was also a famous movie a few years ago about Nikola Tesla, Edison and all the bickering about alternating current versus direct current. And a little background. Alternating current is an electric charge that alternates through time, which is polarity. And direct current is instead DC, 12 volts, like a battery, like this battery is DC. It will only provide, what is this, two or three volts and, well, I'm curious now, 1.5 volts and will not change. The main difference is that if you want to transfer over a long distance electricity with direct current you'll have a lot of inefficiency that is inversely proportional. So the efficiency inversely proportional to the distance you wanna travel. And so you reach a critical mass where your system is non-sustainable. Whereas with alternating current you can transport electricity much further at an incredibly higher efficiency. And also with the transformer, which is a second important component of the solution, you can quickly convert the tension, so the voltages of your current, of your electricity in real time and with a very low energy loss. These two factors, the fact that you can transfer far and you can convert easily to a lower voltage at the distribution point for a local subnetwork, of course, made Tesla's theory of alternating current win commercially over time. Today we're assisting a similar revolution that is a bit more quiet and silent. At the time, Edison was burning horses with electricity in the public square to show how electricity would be, how alternating current with high voltages would be dangerous. And I think they also started electrocution to demonstrate that it was weird. It got really ugly at some point. It's not that ugly with asymmetric cryptography, luckily it's all theoretical and on bytes and bits. But we have found out that the traditional example of Bob and Alice exchanging the messages with the private key and the public key, all that story that there's a little too much for today's presentation, but you should absolutely go look it up if you are not aware. With asymmetric cryptography, you can achieve incredible things on securing a digital assets and security and digital communication in general. The role we play at Tangem, and I'm coming to the points, is that Tangem is like the transformer for alternating current in 150 years ago. We are the little component that allows asymmetric cryptography to be distributed and made available at the end point for mainstream consumption on a daily basis and in a scalable way. So our technology is based on a very interesting stack that has proprietary firmware on a trusted chip platform. We can use EAL6 plus off the shelf chips which we are doing today. We can use proprietary chips which we are also using today. We're designing and manufacturing our own chips clearly through a fab lab. We can also use Java card with our own application. So all this trusted hardware plus audited or Java type of firmware is the core foundation on top of it. Everything is open source. Open source SDKs allow for any developer, any institution, any central bank, any bank, any retailer, any startup in a garage to take our cards and to build a solution that uses the properties of asymmetric cryptography to secure digital assets in a very affordable and flexible way. So I think we have already some questions. I don't wanna miss them, so we'll open the chat. How does the interoperability look like from chips to chips and banks to bank? Yeah, this is exactly where I'm talking about it. So actually there's a better slide for this and then I can jump back to here. Interoperability is important for the developers from the SDK app. So once you have an NFC interface and near field communication and you can just touch a card to start that transaction and I can also demonstrate it here. Probably the screen is going to rebel but if I have a smartphone and I just touch it with a tangent card, the NFC will come alive and the real-time verification of the available assets happens and I can therefore afterwards sign transactions. So what we have in the chip here is a fully self-contained key management solution. Through NFC commands, which are open stores, anyone can ask the chip to generate a new key pair, ask to prove ownership with a challenge response, ask to sign a transaction with a private key and ask to purge the keys if necessary or it's part of the cycle, to terminate the cycle of the key. All of this is self-containing, meaning that the private key never leaves this card and this is a part where either an external audit is necessary, we were audited by Kudalski security, Jean-Pierre Homason himself audited our firmware or you rely on platforms like JavaCard where there's a shift of trust to the platform, to a certified platform and we provide only a smaller part of the app on top and that could be opened. So you can shift and the shift in trust is very important because what we're really doing here is push trust to the edges. This is another important milestone to understand if we want to envision the future of money. Blockchains and specifically Bitcoin, but others too have been fundamental in educating the world about the concept of trust. In an old world, by old I mean 15, 20 years ago, you would have trust in institutions or trust in a person. Now you trust a chip and you trust a ledger and the two don't necessarily have to be open source. You can trust it through an auditor, like with a chip or you can trust it, well, in case of Bitcoin and it's open source and you can trust it to mathematical properties. And so this shift of trust makes it possible to disintermediate at will anything in between. While Bitcoin is a very, let's say extreme view on how the world should work, which one may or may not agree with but it demonstrated how things can run without the traditional banking intermediaries. The truth is that the right solution is programmable money where anything going back to my product design principle we should first design the product as serving the people and then walking back to what the requirements are. And by using a platform that is interoperable and flexible and programmable you can define all those features in the meanwhile. So specifically for central bank digital currency we don't have necessarily to choose between hosted or unhosted wallet. So basically to self custody or with a custodial account kept by a financial institution. We don't have to choose between token based and account based or ledger less or ledger based. We don't have to as long as there's enough power in the holder's device and as long as there's the right, the chain of trust is established by means of the right type of firmware, the right type of audits, the right type of mathematical functions in of course asymmetric cryptography, elliptic curve encryption, all of that and the right type of institution then of course to issue the assets. As long as that chain of trust is properly established then it should be a flexible line where we can walk along. We can walk along this green line to define what the product properties should be. We want central bank digital currency to be completely anonymous like cash, completely anonymous, very private, perfect, purely token based. Panjim does that. Of course the firmware has to take more of the trust at the point it could be done with a witness or without a witness. It could be done with a trusted terminal like someone's phone or a kiosk or it could be done by literally passing a card, like a card wallet as a bare instrument. It can be done many ways. There's no limit on how deep you can go in the pure privacy mode. You want a hybrid, you want a hybrid where every week or every so many transactions or every so much value transferred, the wallet has to be synced to a ledger where the tokens are independent by only to a certain extent and then they have to be reconciled to a central ledger, perfect. Then you configure the solution, the product design again so that that is a requirement. You want that to happen only for wallets of a certain size. You want some wallets to given to certain people to behave more anonymously and other people less anonymously. Everything can be done. Of course this is dangerous. You can also go in full tracking mode where like the biggest country in the world is doing with mobile money, which is actually, it's a model that has to be praised because they quickly switch from very old traditional financial system to the most advanced digital money system in the world, frankly. They use a lot of QR codes. They try not to use NFC too much. That does of course protection is three reasons why they're doing that on top of cost reasons. But without getting into the details of the PRC, the point is that it has to be programmable. So there's no reason why money should be defined in one specific way. And this concept of programmability is it should be the central focal point of central bank digital currency research and pilot projects today, rather than fixating on one solution and see if it works. It should walk the other way around. It should be, okay, what do we need? Okay, let's walk back and design the properties around that. Yeah, in that vein, I'll interject a little bit here as I've had a little bit of privilege per view into a central bank digital currency project, which as John, you've actually pointed out potentially in some of your blog posts, maybe a misnomer, right? Whether or not central bank digital currency is the tool that's being implemented. The retail payment system around it is really what may add the greater sense of value for these developing nations, right? And the project that I'm talking about specifically here is the National Bank of Cambodia is implementation of their retail payment system, which was on the technology side at least by my former company, Soar Mitsu, where I was doing some project management and business development and almost moved to Cambodia at the end of last year, but given events that have occurred since, greatly I did not and joined Tangium, but one of the things that they're solving for, and we've alluded to this earlier, is the user experience and offline payment capability, given that rural jurisdictions in these countries and in these places that need these new banking instruments the most, they don't really have a way for people to transact in a traceable way, right? So in the case of Cambodia, for instance, that's it becomes very difficult to collect taxes when 80% of your transactions are done with paper fiat money, right? How can you create sound monetary policy and wean yourself off of reliance of the US dollar or foreign countries' currencies if you don't have any idea what's going on in your own borders, right? So creating stability through economic policy just by being able to monitor transactions is one reason why you might want to use this what we call programmable money that Sergio's referring to, right? But more importantly is the user experience and like Sergio said, adapting it to the problem to be solved rather than just trying to fit a DLT ledger on top of a banking system where it doesn't have the same impact, right? So I think when I first saw Tangium cards, it's very striking and unfortunate. It's difficult for us to present the value of it because it is such a physical thing. And when you see it in the real world and you tap it to your phone, you see immediately how simple the user experience is and the fact that it is a zero learning curve where historically in these populations where people may not have had access to a smartphone, understanding the ability to tap and sign a transaction to remit payment is much more digestible for these people regardless of the language even. So it's very valuable from that perspective. And one of the beauties of the cards is that they can be physically distributed not just through banks, but even retail stores. And Tangium is doing that already today. So say you had a place like Campbell where there's these commercial banks and a two tiered management system where anybody with a phone number can register for a limited account without even having to do KYC, they could be physically mail the card without even ever having to go to a commercial retail location to be able to have money loaded to their account, right? And whether or not there's an exchange of cash, physically for them to redeem a token or digital asset is a different question. But even just being able to distribute aid in that fashion as we have seen in the United States, if it's a problem here and we have difficulty issuing checks to 300 million people, imagine what it's like in a third world country, right? So the fact that we can physically give a card or sell a card and have it delivered and remotely load value and store value on this card in a simple way where the person doesn't even have to have access to a smartphone to be able to store and spend on any EMV code terminal in the world is a real revolution. And like Sergio said, a 10x improvement on the user experience and the value that such technology could provide, right? And so we could talk a little bit about programmable privacy and the idea that should the central bank or issuing entity desire, you can have a cash-like experience, right? Someone could adjust the balance to the physical note, have the receiver verify it in their smartphone and lock that value and physically transfer it to someone which unlocks like we've alluded to earlier and in the conversation before we started the ability for offline payments and cash-like experiences. And bridging the old world and the new which is the slide that Sergio has up right here where we have a closed loop payment system like a DLT network where peer-to-peer transactions require no intermediaries. Bridging that with the existing open loop payment infrastructure that exists almost everywhere and is ubiquitous and the messaging is standardized allows the spending of a digital asset immediately so that the accepting merchant can receive local fiat or whatever currency they should receive and that transaction is processed immediately. And so the latency in that transaction because of Tangent's firmware is immediate and super valuable and doesn't necessarily rely on a DLT framework like Sergio said. But the value again is in the fact that asymmetric cryptography allows the agency of the card in the user's hand, right? And the self-contained generation of the keys and ability to sign with that card anywhere in the world regardless of the existing infrastructure is a huge leap forward. Yeah, thanks, James. I think you should answer up. Yeah, I'm doing that. John's question because that is surfaces often in various forms. Yeah, so of course the card is NFC. So there's two ways to transact. Either you physically deliver a card and that is a physical delivery. It's a bear title that passes hands. Second option is to transact and sign a token transfer or some ledger transfer with the card. The signature can be obtained and the token transfer can be obtained either with your own phone or with someone else's phone or with any NFC terminal that implements the right SDK. So there's a lot of scenarios where you have either a merchant or a trusted kiosk or some other type of witness solutions where neither user really needs their own phone. And this is really designed for the full inclusivity. So the bottom end of the pyramid that does not have a phone or has maybe a feature phone or maybe have a phone but not connectivity. So there's always a gray area scenarios where people don't have an iPhone or a Google Pixel. And for all those situations, our solution can work in different ways. And again, what's a product design? From there, we walk back to what are the system requirements? You do need to tap the card somewhere, clearly to obtain the signature. And in case you want to transfer completely or flying from one card to the other, clearly you will need a trusted witness where you tap the first card and you tap the second card to execute the transfer. Maybe even tap the first card again. It really depends on, again, how deep you want the requirements to affect the product or vice versa. How deep you want the product design to affect the requirements. So let's walk it back to the base case, which is the card is disconnected from the network. Obviously it is loaded with some money, which means it is taken away from some other place. Let's not say where it is. It's been released to the card, but it is from some authority like the central bank or somebody who's issuing the money. Now the card can be then used disconnectedly to transfer money back and forth. So there are several scenarios. One is the card is lost, of course, that's one. Second, somebody finds the card and may be able to use it. Third is, I mean, this is the real scenario basically you've given it money like John says, $100. Now I paid you $25, I got the card $100, I paid Sergio $25, I paid James $25, now I'm left with 50, but you got to some place where the money, it has to go back to the ledger in order to cash it or transform it into some other form. Negative, it doesn't necessarily have to go back to the ledger, that's the whole point, that properly designed secure solution with trust the hardware. Remember what I said, which is to transform it to another form, like for example, I don't want the money on the phone anymore. I want it to be in my bank account, deposit it, okay? Okay, so move to another ledger, okay, yeah. Move to another, to the place where it came from, follow. So the extreme case in all the spectrum of options is the purely offline, purely token based, purely ledger less solution, which uses mathematical properties in order to ascertain a balanced verifiability. So you have a verified balance that is mathematically secured, shifting the trust arbitrarily between the card itself, a trusted phone or a non-trusted phone or a witness, you can do multiple ways. That's why I would not want to really dive in today because it's a 10 hour discussion. But the point is that with the right platform, you can tune these parameters and have exactly the solution that you want. The extreme is that you have a completely ledger less solution. So the tokens are literally transacted from card to card with assigned and verified balance with various type of PKI's. And as you said, between when it is the time of the time machine and you want to exit the system and off-ramp to a different type of holding account, then yes, of course, then those tokens will be transferred to the redeeming party who will then transfer that balance onto a traditional type of ledger. If the card is lost? So those are the other two questions you ask. One is if it's lost and the second is if it's stolen. So those measures are seem awkward, seem difficult to achieve but are so available already. Card is lost, pink out. We call it passphrase because it can be more than four digits. It can be a whole password. But with a password that anyone taking a proposition illegitimately of a card doesn't have access to the assets and recoverability. So if I lose it it can be solved with multi-signature wallets or multi-signature schemes. Of course, in a purely anonymous token based scenario there's no recoverability for misplacing a card. It's like cash by all means. So if you lose your $100 bill, goodbye. The only difference is that with a password or pin code that $100 bill could not be used by someone else. So you can definitely reduce the incentive to stealing digital wallets because they can necessarily be used although they're a bare title. And removing the incentive is a good deterrent already. But if you look at the patterns you'll see that for example, the regular users who want to spend a little bit of money here and there that's all well and good. But once you get into a merchant where they're accumulating money there and there obviously there is a very great danger that if they're only having it on the card and they lose it with perfect anonymity then they're gone. So obviously they are the ones who come to the bank windows every evening and deposit the money back. So any system like this will have these kinds of two different kinds of users. For example, the ones who are selling their services constantly and accumulating cash and then having to use it. But of course they can still just hold on to it and pay for the services and so on. But there's a danger that by losing the card maybe there is another way to recover the money. Maybe like you said, because it always comes from a ledger there's proof that it went into this card. So all the time this talking back to the, getting back to the ledger is important for this kind of recoverability. I mean that's what John was alluding to. Yes. In a perfect world, where the card is probably embedded inside your head, then unless you lose your head you don't lose the card. That happens too by the way. A little too often. That's a little extreme. But you can think of people having multiple cards to get around limited limits and all kinds of other gaming the system sort of things. And this is what central bankers really worry about these kind of things. Yeah, exactly. So with the right type of platform these product considerations are transforming to feature requirements. And as you said, different use cases would require slightly different products. And that's okay. One solution doesn't exclude the other. That's the interesting part. There's no mutually exclusive choice here whether it should be purely cash token based or whether it should be multi-signatory, recoverable, institutional account based. It could be both at the same time or you could have slightly different product cards and product wallets that serve slightly different scenarios but based on the same system and same architecture. And that's a beauty of here. It's programmable money, right? So an app doesn't necessarily have to have one feature. An app has multiple features that serve different use cases. And that's exactly how central bank digital currency should be today. And in fact, I want to show you a little video which proves the breadth of what can be achieved with a platform like the Tangem platform. But before you start that, I have to say that I agree with you completely. In fact, my article on digital wallets talks about this very fact that it should be hybrid solution. There is no such thing as one size fits all. Exactly. And now you could tell everybody in the whole world that Tangem does both. Well, I don't think I have a platform big enough to tell everybody in the whole world. Well, it starts small. So this is a video I shot personally a few months ago. First I'm just demonstrating how the traditional balance check works on a Tangem card. But most importantly here, it's my alter ego in Oakland in a Starbucks to prove what universal acceptance and interoperability means. I have loaded a Tangem card with 10 USDC. So it's running over the Ethereum network. The keys to that wallet are only in this card. And I tap it on a visa terminal to transact. So what happened here is that we also loaded visa outlets in our future breed of cards and when we tap on a visa terminal, the transaction flows back all the way to Tangem digital currency processing system that sits within the confines of issuing bank that has the issuers cards. So we're using the Visa network as a rail to transport a crypto transaction. The crypto transaction is peer-to-peer, is purely self-custody. So it doesn't account, but it's on ledger because in fact the keys are in the hand of the user. So it's already shifting more towards token than an account-based. And when the transaction settles on the Ethereum network, Tangem is unable to pay the acquire. So the merchant doesn't even notice a difference between any other traditional bank payment cards. But what has really happened is that there was a four-party system without a bank account, without a depository account. And this is one of the scenarios that proves how the interoperability and the flexibility of a card-based solution that puts the foundations on asymmetric optography is really limitless. So yeah, we're almost done here. I just want to make sure that we understand that the name of the game here is product design and flexibility of the solution. And then from there the requirements should be defined and the use cases should be understood before there's an attempt to try to throw tokens or throw accounts or throw ledgers in the market. Some central bank digital currency pilots that I'm aware of today sometimes focus a little too much on one or other aspect they want to prove without really starting to understand what the mainstream use case would be. So at Tangem, we will be launching actually a very interesting multi-sig product for mainstream in about a month's time, actually two months' time. So stay tuned. But the reason why we have all this line of cryptocurrency cards that are really free and you should all go and buy yours on the shop.tangem.com. The reason why we have these is to prove the technology and make sure that we know what we're talking about which is how to make wallet for the future of money mainstream ready. How do we make sure that a government doesn't have to pay more than what they pay today for a $100 bill? Do we show a wallet for everyone? That's our goal and we're actually getting there. By the way, back to that transaction that you did. So what does the merchant get charged? That transaction means that we have multiple fees. So there's mostly two fees. Well, let's say two or three. Interchange fees are usually split between a choir and an issuing bank and then assessment fees charged by these are master card, the P&O, the payment network operator. The assessment fees are usually very little 0.5% ish. The interchange fees are the bulk of it and they're mostly in the hands of the issuing bank. As I said here, there's an account less system so there's no depository account. So there's less ownership of this whole transaction on the issuing bank. So it really depends who the program operator is. The program operator is the entity that distribute the cards, takes some sort of liability on how the payment system runs and then delegates or takes in house the payment processing, the issuance and the licensing. So the interchange fees in that specific case you see completely depend on the issuing bank that allowed us to demonstrate the solution in the future where program operators or issuing banks decide to use a tangent card base, the solution for EMB, so for visa master transactions, then it's a negotiation between tangent and the bank on how the fees can be lowered. And so it's pure commercial. There's no reason why this should be there at all, that there's no reason why this should be higher or lower, it's pure commercial. This is Mani from Odyssey Digital. We had actually done a prototype CBDC project under Hyperledger. It would be interesting to see how we can test it out with your card because we have the whole infrastructure for CBDC, they've done a smartphone application on top. Maybe there's something interesting to explore and see if we can. We'd love to, Sergio at tangent.com. Okay. And I'd love to talk to you. Yeah, I'd love to be one of the collaborators. Right. Fantastic. So maybe we could use this under Hyperledger project to see if we can. Yeah. Yeah, we don't necessarily offer a solution directly to the central banks just because tangent, of course, only serves so many layers in the stack. We are a 30 people company with good funding from our amazing investor, SBI in Japan. So we can do a lot of stuff, but we're not gonna run the whole show when it comes to a whole architecture for a central bank. So we're very happy to work with system integrators and platform designers and architectures designers. I had mentioned too about a different specific type of API, more like a, we can take it offline, but it's an interesting thing to explore for retail CBDC. As part of the overall CBDC, we have done a white paper on that and we have been circulating amongst our people and we are also getting involved in the Stanford's Digital Currency Initiative. So we bring that also as well in front of this as new banks. So many ways to bring together the solution. Yeah, in the chat you asked about Flutter API. You meant probably Flutter SDK libraries. Yes, we are producing them actually. Now we offer native Android and iOS SDKs. We also offer a full documentation of NFC protocol if you wanna go hardcore. We have also opened and open sourced a Cordova SDK and we are launching Flutter. Yeah, because this way we already have a CBDC integrated into our platform with the Flutter app. Yeah, Flutter is coming. Actually, we can even give you early access to the SDK. Of course. Yeah, we can try it. Great. So I think John's question was on point about the card for a card price and James has replied that you can go down to three to four dollars a card at scale. Well, actually, even nice. I mean, three, four card is if you wanna buy a few hundred thousand cards, but at central bank scale, then the order of management we're talking about is that a Tengem car is competing against the production of a $100 bill. This is really accessible. When you start making millions, then of course, what we already had to commit to millions of production just in order to get where you are, but when you start going another order of magnitude high, then you can really lower the prices to the point where it's an over-anner for a... No, no, a few millions, like tens of millions. I'm just kidding. No, the goal is to produce six billion, obviously, but at that time it would probably need seven billion, but at this pace. But the point is that it has to be an over-anner. Why would you produce a bank note where it costs as much or comparable to produce a digital wallet that is non-controversyable, that it supports all sort of programmability into it? We talked about programmability of using and spending cash, but once it's programmable, then you can tie into it all sort of services like national health insurance, lending, all sort of privately and publicly available services. And in fact, one of the things we're doing today is also working closely with the identity working group at Hyperledger and also Trust Over AP, the Centralized Identity Foundation, because we have adapted our cards to also be a credential wallet for self-sorting identity. So in a different card or even the same card, you can have literally the Central Bank digital currency wallet, your credentials for education, credentials for driving lessons, credentials for social security benefits rights, and all the medical card with private credentials that are not shared, if not with institutions. So it's really powerful what you can build once you have a platform that natively can run asymmetric cryptography only with NFC power. Noted for a battery, no batteries involved. Great. Not Australia, but no batteries. You know, I had worked on a crazy project in the 90s called OneCard, that was to converge all the cards that you have in your pocket into OneCard. But it was a little too advanced for its time. And now it looks like you've brought it to fruition and I'm so glad to see that. We actually did it. We could do it, but since many of the card issues were sitting on top of their networks and they didn't want this kind of a disruption at that time, that was in mid 90s. Anyway, back to our thing here. We are almost a time or maybe a slightly over time. Thank you Sergio and thank you James for showing up and thank you for the opportunity. You gave us a great overview of your card. I think many people are not aware of the power of what is there in SmartCards. They do not still understand. At that time when we were doing it in the 90s, SmartCards were available in Europe, but here it was all stripes. Then it started getting developed, but even now the SmartCards that we have in our pockets are not fully, the power is not fully being utilized. A couple of things, one is, oh, Kirti is gone because I wanted him to make a small announcement about this insurance subgroup that we are starting. And by the way, Sergio, I'm also the chair of the identity working group. So, you know, when you have some time later on, we can talk about the credentials business in that group later on. Thank you so much. Thanks to John. Thanks to money. Thanks to David. Thanks to Sonia. Everybody who's on the call, who's left on the call. I'll post up the video soon. Maybe by this evening. Thank you. All right. Thank you. This has been very good. Anyone feel free to reach out. Sergio at tangent.com. I'm very happy to talk. Bye. Bye.