 So, I've been talking about housekeeping, whether there's food, there will be enough food for the whole day. We will have parties or not the ocean protocol tonight, which is very fortunate. I'm very happy about that. There's one problem. So, I had two students who wanted to look after the presentations and happy with it. But they cancelled. They called INZIC this morning. So, we have to work on the presentations a little bit. But it's very easy. You can send it on the program page or on the way down to the bottom. And to the people that come, I would appreciate if you tell them. And that shouldn't be much work, right? Because you can just send your talk to talks. And not check for slides.com or upload it to the Dropbox. And it will be on the presentation computer over here right away. So, we don't need to have a big presentation system and everything like that. It should be easy. You can have PDF, keynote, PowerPoint, Google Drive, Google Presentations, everything, okay? Okay, okay. And I'm very happy that you are all here. And I'm very excited about this. And this is the second international conference. I'm not checking for slides. And thank you for coming. Including those who traveled far. Like last year, people traveled from all of these, from Australia this year again. And it's like really cool. It's really an international conference. And thank you very much for you all being here. Taking the effort to like gather on this very important topic. And so last year's conference was a success. There was 120 people there. Some people got to know each other. Projects were initiated. A cooperation started. And I want to have this year again. And then in the program, there's more time for networking and hacking and socializing than last year. And this is like, especially because it's important. You can also have so and so many important talks. And what's important is that you work together. So what happened in the last year in Blockchain for Science? Well, after the conference, there was another conference. It was organized by Valid Tilebs and Davos on Blockchain topics in research. And we had a meet up together with molecule and the Weizenbaum Institute and Blockchain Knights. And they thank doing the Berlin Blockchain Week. And I want to thank the participants for that on Science funding. And we saw that the Blockchain field. So over the Blockchain field, but also the Blockchain in Science field moved from ICO driven projects to and the unlasting crypto winter to like really working projects that actually moved to alpha version, even better versions that have became serious legal structures were funding for funded for these projects. And we are like, I think in Germany, we divide the spoil from the Weizen. Yeah, and this is actually happening. So it's a good sign. So the conference this year's and last year's conference was criticized. It was criticized on many levels behind the scenes and upfront. Right. So well, I don't want to go into things here, but the field has to mature and this for sure. Right. And this needs a lot of work. And we have to. It should not be a centralized entity that does all this stuff. It also by itself has to decentralize. Right. And well, in terms of conference organization and stuff, we keep things easy here. If you think about like a conference, I was invited to like a four letter engineers conference in Berlin or like bio engineering. They had like, you basically go there as an invited speaker, you pay 1100 you and you go through a very outdated online submission system. And you actually sign away all your copyrights on everything that you have. You go to late taken everything it takes you like one hour or one and a half hours to submit stuff. And it pay you pay 1100 and you get a coffee and the apple. Right. Doing the conference. Right. So there's a lot of overhead going on. And we keep these things simple and the blockchain for science conference will always be like this. Right. So and what is the fundamental idea of us doing all this stuff? Well, blockchain for science. So I have to openly disclose to you that we are basically doing an ICO. Yeah. We want to collect 40 million dollars upfront and build the infrastructure of science for the future. Of course, this was just a joke. Right. So we don't do an ICO or something. Right. Well, we do one and initial sticker offering and you have your fungible or non fungible token. And you can discuss about that the whole day or the whole next two days whether a real world sticker is fungible or non fungible. And yeah. And we don't do an ICO for sure. People ask me like what is it or as well as the business model behind blockchain for science and the limited and stuff. Well, it's basically there to organize conference and bring people together to bridge waltz. Right. But to bridge the world between the crazy blockchain scene, which they're crazy ideas and things, sometimes too crazy people. Right. And this science world, the conservative science world, sometimes too conservative science world. Right. And there are a lot of brewing the answer sometimes. Like brewing the answer like between people that live in Neukölln and maybe Charlottenburg. Yeah. They're like prejudges and misconceptions. And basically the idea of blockchain for science is to bridge these both worlds and bring them together. Yeah. So what are the challenges in the current process of this? And we have like several challenges here. So of course there are misconceptions of what blockchain actually is. And I vote to like ministries or to like institutes. And they said like, we don't do blockchain here because of greater and Friday for futures. We don't want the energy conception. And well, blockchain can't contain enough data. It's not good for anything. And you have to double your data and everything. It's a lot of waste of resources and blah, blah, blah. You all heard these things and we know better and we can argue with them. And this is our task to like bring this out into the world and like inform people and enable them to make informed decision about what blockchain really is. Right. And that it's not only a hype. There is some hype component, but hype is only good. It's also good. It brings stuff or brings energy to the field. Right. And then I heard so well at skepticism from established groups about and very focused research groups. Yeah. Well, we already had decentralized and distributed systems and ages. Blockchain is nothing new. And even systems that can like be poofed and probably do stuff to the outside. So what this blockchain is all, all stupid stuff. Right. We don't need that. We all have been there. It's like a hype of cook to kitties or whatever. And it's like they have a point from a technical perspective. They have certainly a point. But if you would like transfer the same argument to Facebook, then you can see Facebook adjust the database and the timeline as just a query of a database. Right. You would miss completely the point of what the web 2.0 means to us. Technically it's just a database and connected database. Right. And technically blockchain is just a distributed database in the system. So arguing this way totally miss a point on what the crypto economy is and no token structures and new token structures and token and incentive system could mean or what the new deals on data on privacy could mean. Right. And what they are missing is that blockchain and the hype enables people to like talk about new user autonomy. They maintain their own power, their own crypto wallets. Right. And even as bad as Facebook or LEPA might look like. But like this pressure brings us to this to enable a lot of people to have a wallet to be able to keep maintain their own key. So also researchers to do that in the future. Right. So this is a good thing of this. And then another funny argument that I heard was here blockchain. I heard it from a friend who was a computer scientist. And blockchain is just a way to timestamp data in a decentralized manner. Right. And he's right with it. He's as right as saying the Internet is just a way to send around bits and bytes. Right. And I totally agree with him, but he's totally missing the point again. Or if I, if I keep sending like the request blockchain for science and, and well, this email is forward to the IT department, not the IT department that develops those new, new computer systems or something. But the IT department that maintains the firewall. Right. So it just forwarded to the people to like talk about computer security. And they are missing the point too. Right. And then another thing that might hinder us to bring blockchain to the research world is that blockchain can question things that research institutes do at the moment. And there are a lot of people in research stakeholders that work on basically maintaining accounting administration and everything. And we know that blockchain can potentially compliment these things. So they might be afraid as much as banks are afraid of the crypto you all I'm saying. Okay. So what is blockchain for science? Blockchain for science is basically a passport total name for all that's free in science and research. And, and we have to, we have to communicate this and bring this out to the scientists and the researchers, all these things and like deal with the misconceptions. So the positive things on bridging these worlds is that many things happened that are very good. So established institutes moved into the field blockchain. And I'm very happy that we have some of them here companies, serious companies with like backing with the past track history of providing really good services to the science community communication community. Some of them are here and helping the conference. And they are like moving into the field grants has been giving to research groups on investigating blockchain for research. So we moved away from this like grace and we learned here. And if you talk about this, well, the name of the conference is new deals or new deals on science funding on innovation on data. We talk about new systems. And we should not forget that our old systems has to have drawbacks to but we are just very used to them. Right. So our current science system has a token economy so to say around the impact factor and stuff. And if we if we design and talk about new systems, we shouldn't be so strict with them. And we just we should like tell the things that are good about them and just like see that all systems also have drawbacks. Yeah. And OK, so when we are here talking about the old system, I don't want to and I'm like kind of done with talking about like how bad the publishers are, how greedy Elsevier is, how like double swarded double sward, the open access movement is how a conservative librarians are and all this stuff. Right. We here shouldn't make the existing system look as bad as possible because we can like provide so many good things and novel systems and interesting things that we can like look forward and just leave the old system behind and to leave it to other people to make to make the old system look back. Right. And I'm like kind of like we know there are like people having the career in this field, working in the in this field like in the old mindsets and everything. And this OK, we have to respect that because blockchain has to like work with them and adapt with them and with these structures. Right. And we are just amending the system, complimenting it on the longer term. OK, I already said this. And so what is going to happen with this conference with the blockchain for science community? Basically, we have to move forward at some point, like decentralized as I already said, like, but we also should stay independent and trustworthy to discuss things like trustworthy from the tempting structures of tempting or for the temptation of traditional structures being a grants authority, salaries, reputation system and much as possible. And this will be a long process and skepticism have never moved anything forward. Right. And I want to conclude with my so to say introduction and move over to housekeeping now. Are there any questions on this like urgent ones? OK, so regarding the housekeeping. I want to like withdraw after this introduction. I want to participate in the communication and discussion as as any one of you does. I don't want to introduce yourself. You I don't want to introduce you introduce yourself. OK, two students like caught in sick today. So we have to do all the presentations and this work around this. I already told you it's on the web page. Ourself and please stick to the talking time. There's a counter and the talking time is including question and answer. So if you overdo it, there will be no discussion right after your talk, right? If you want to leave some time after the talk. You can you can do that, right? You just have a shorter talk and sorry for the batches. Some of the most important possibilities didn't get batches. This was like a problem in our workflow and I have to apologize for that. Didn't preprinted batches. And OK, so please allow me personal remarks. Yeah. Many visionaries and people I have worked with have great ideas and they're very supportive in the beginning to talk about blockchain for science and the potential of decentralization and research. And the same but also the same I've worked with visionaries and maybe some part of this I'm a visionary myself in like basic medical imaging sciences and everything. But these people sometimes have some other characteristics, right? Sometimes don't integrate with more down to earth people and they have communication problems. They are not as streamlined as other people and they don't give a shit about some hierarchical structures like walking up the like climbing up the ladder and stuff. And I think our science culture has one problem because it's not supporting these people that are especially important. Those earlier ideas give us these odd birds, these strange people. And we really should have the value deposition of some stuff at these people, right? And I think the current incentive structures in science and research basically support the people that are administrators of the current system of the current structures and not the odd birds that give new ideas. If ideas are very important, really new ideas are very important because some people say like implementation count, I think that's wrong. But counts are really, and those people never had really good new ideas, right? So for business point of view this might be the case. And my personal motivation of like doing all this stuff is that I think the upcoming crypto economy and token economies and novel incentive structures around that could potentially create an environment in which we could like support innovators, crazy people, better than we do it today. And that's basically bringing me to the first topic. It's a crypto economy and we start with Paul Kuhlhardt for Molecule with talking about blockchain for science funding. Thank you very much. And last but not least, have fun here too, okay? Thank you.