 Sounds good. All right, we're going to start the presentation or rather the discussion in a minute. Karen will lead it. But before we do that, we have two things to cover. One is the antitrust policy. As you know, Hyperledger is covered by the Linux Foundation's antitrust policy. So we should not be engaging in any trust-busting activities here. That's the first comment. The other one is, so if anybody disagrees with this, please do not continue to attend the meeting. The other directive that we operate under is the Code of Conduct, which means that we are going to be civil and kind and respect each other, even when we are disagreeing with each other. Even if we are disagreeing with one another, of course, when you are agreeing to, you've got to be nice. So without much further notice, we I think we should start because I notice there are a lot of people on the call. I do not want to go into introducing everybody. As you know, the Capital Market SIG is concerned with all matters in DLT and in Hyperledger in particular connected to capital markets, which is vast, which is a vast topic. And this month, we are going to have focus on Central Bank Digital Currency. Karen wanted to have a discussion on the digital dollar project. I suppose she will do the introduction to that topic and kick off our debate or discussion here. Yep, thanks for that. So this has been a topic that we've talked about a little bit in this group. Vipin is working on the E-Taller project with Mani. But we hadn't really discussed this paper yet. And I thought it would be an interesting topic to bring up with this community and just see what is everyone's thoughts on this whole concept. This isn't a formal presentation or anything. Just an open discussion. I'm going to put the cart before the horse just a little bit. I took the liberty to just summarize the paper in case you haven't had a chance to read it or spend a couple months since you read it. So I'll get into that in a second. This is a way to queue up our discussion. But we have Amy Kim here, who is from the Chamber of Digital Commerce. And they have a working group in that community that is actually working on a formal response to the white paper to share their thoughts and their input on the white paper. And unfortunately, Amy can't join us for the entire discussion today. And so I wanted to give her the opportunity to talk a little bit about what they're doing at the Chamber, what their draft paper consists of right now, and just share some thoughts on this topic with us. Hi, Amy. Hey, Karen. Thank you for that. And thank you for accommodating that my scheduling overlaps. I appreciate that. And it's really nice to be able to discuss this with this group. So I'm really happy to do it. It's definitely been on the horizon for a lot of us looking at this and the implications of it on the ecosystem, whether you're a bank or a tech company or a so-called stablecoin developer or issuer. So we anxiously awaited the publication of a digital dollar project, both Christiane Carlo and David Treat, who are two of the co-leads there on our board. And so it had a number of conversations with them and had listened to them quite a bit on what their ideas were. The paper I thought, and I'm curious what folks think, I thought it touched on all the right topics that we need to think about. And understanding it's the first description of this kind of over the transom. What we wanted to do as a group is explore it in a little more detail. And so we decided to offer an open letter that we'll share with the digital dollar project that would include our thoughts on that on some of those deeper questions. For example, we have a number of banks of all sizes, global multinational banks to local state chartered banks within our membership. And so just how you would utilize or you would incorporate a digital dollar into the two tiered banking system has raised some questions in our membership. How would that work in certain specific circumstances? So exploring some of those things and understanding that this is complex if we're thinking of completely revisiting how we look at the dollar. The answers aren't going to come right away, but we do need to have all the right questions and start to kind of get to them. The other is, I'm just going to throw some ideas out there that we're going to explore in our paper. We will talk about the benefits of it, how it could facilitate retail, wholesale, international payments. I'm just kind of looking at our outline. And we talk about encouraging growth of the digital dollar of the decentralized finance ecosystem using this as a way to maintain the US dollar status as the low reserve currency, things like that. And then we also talk about some of the maybe risk factors that need to be considered. For example, the tension between AML growth and compliance versus the need for consumers to have privacy and their financial information and just the data surrounding that. So we're exploring each of those. And then I think too, and this could be a really cool conversation topic for this group, but up to you is what kind of, is this a decentralized system right off the bat? How do you, or permissionless, and how do you think about implementing it and in what way? So those are just some things. I mean, these are big topics that you can see. You can see right away, you could argue either way, you could argue a couple of different prospects. So sorry, I'll pause there. But happy to take questions or talk about any of those things. And when do you anticipate your response being finished? So currently we're on track for mid-August. Because that's mid-August, you know, it's possible. It becomes September. But we do have some very specific milestones to try to keep this on track because these types of issues, it's very easy to get lost in them and just trying to tackle them, get your arms around all of these. So we're trying to keep it sufficient level of detail, but maybe not too far down the rabbit hole. So that's our timing right now. About a month from now is our current schedule. Okay. Yeah, it might be interesting if we had you come back once it's done and share what's in the deeper. Oh, sure. Yeah. And you know, it conforms exactly to the principle that was raised early, which is it's collegial. You know, while we may have people that agree or disagree with certain things, I mean, this is really an exploration of ideas and really just promotion of the industry. This is a Manipula from Swapsub. Amy, Wipin and I have been working on an E-Taller project. And, you know, we're happy to show a demo of that. And also we are, you know, looking to actually explore and how to implement using data standards. We just been lacking in pretty much every CBDC experiment that's been happening in the marketplace today. And we're more than happy to, you know, contribute to whatever you're writing. And separately, we are also working on similar lines, but more on, you know, how do you tackle technically? Great. Well, that would be great. If maybe, Karen, if you could connect us, we could have maybe talk offline. Yeah, that'll be great. So we're more than happy to participate and contribute and also share what we have done and what we are exploring as well. Well, and one thing we could discuss later on in our call today is also, you know, there is a call for feedback at the end of the paper. You know, maybe this group would be interested in putting together something similar from our perspective, perhaps a more technical perspective. Something to think about during the discussion. So thank you so much, Amy, for joining us for the time that you could. And we look forward to having you come on more often and sharing what your final response would be. Yeah, thank you for that. And let's keep in touch because if you guys do write something, I view this as like a multi-phased development, you know, so I think what you just suggested sounds like a fantastic idea. So I'd love to make sure that we're kind of communicating and, you know, each in our own way, kind of furthering the conversation. So really appreciate you inviting me to share. Thanks so much, Amy. All right, thanks, everyone. Stay well. Okay, so kind of backtracking a little bit. Again, we've got a mixed group here. So just in case you're having, aren't familiar with the paper, I'll just walk through some of the main points in the paper as a refresher so that we can have those points in mind as we get into more the discussion part of this meeting. So in case you're not familiar, the digital dollar project is part of the digital dollar foundation, which was launched in January this year. It's led by Chris Giancarlo and David Treat from Accenture, as well as Charles Giancarlo as well. We've probably heard them do quite a few speaking engagements on the topic as it led up to the release of this white paper. The purpose of the project is to encourage the research and public discussion on the advantages of a digital dollar, bringing the private sector together to discuss these possible models to support the public sector, and the aim of the project is to develop a framework for how to establish a central bank digital currency. Can everybody make sure they're on mute, please? So what is the digital dollar project? So the project believes that the US should lead in the effort to tokenize central bank currency that it is a leader in the global economy and should take that position. It incorporates a champion challenger approach that explores the thesis of this tokenized dollar but considers alternatives as well. And this model is defined as operating alongside existing money, so it's not supposed to replace any current currency we have, that it would be distributed through our two-tiered banking system, recorded on a new infrastructure, which is maybe a distributed ledger but maybe not. The paper does not actually go into detail about that. And it tokenizes the dollar, which is differentiated from an account-based system which you get into later. They anticipate that the main characteristics of a digital dollar would be tokenizing USD, operating alongside fiat, as, again, not replacing any type of currency we have now, but acting as an additional format. It would respect individual privacy and comply with our regulations. It wouldn't have any impact on the Federal Reserve monetary policy, necessarily, but actually act as an additional tool of the Federal Reserve. Its design would be driven by policy and economic requirements and have an adaptable architecture that would future-proof it to any policy or technological developments that come later on. And it's mentioned quite a few times in the paper that this will catalyze private sector innovation. Just an image from the paper here to show you how it would operate alongside cash and not replace it. So we have our Federal Reserve here, the cash that goes to commercial banks and financial intermediaries, and digital dollars would follow along that same system. The advantage here comes with digital dollars being a more direct way of initiating those payments rather than the system that we have today where it's account-based and significant reconciliation. So why tokenize the dollar? The paper says that the main arguments for this are to drive innovation. This would be a new financial medium on which central bank money can flow, not just domestically, but also internationally. The fact that a digital dollar would be programmable, both per token or per transaction, which would unlock a lot of new capabilities as well. The fact that it's increasingly portable, differentiating itself from cash, so this is something that if it were to be developed, it should be able to be sent like a text. It would increase efficiency, so lower costs, diversifying payment rails, and allow for more direct monetary relations. It would increase accessibility, so allowing for an alternative access to central bank money outside of the specific organizations that have accounts with essential banks, such as Fedwire, allow for atomic delivery, so eliminating that reconciliation process, and allow for digital international payments. Another reason that is stated is financial inclusion. The question mark is mine, because I think that this is my own opinion here. Financial inclusion is often stated as a benefit of digital currencies, but I don't know, and this is something we can discuss later on, if it's really the digital aspect that's keeping people from having access to bank accounts and such, because it's not necessarily the digital transfer that's keeping people from being included bank accounts, although it can make it easier. But their argument is at lower system costs, and so because of those lower system costs, banks would be more willing, capable to expand their coverage to broader populations, and into other services, and they were writing this paper just as COVID-19 started to take over the world, and so there's a few parts in the paper that discuss how potentially if we had a digital dollar, the distribution of COVID relief payments would have been easier. What are the benefits of tokenizing the dollar? Well, they contrast this token model with the account model, which is how our system operates now. With the graphic there, you can see how that works. A token model is just a direct transfer. Many of us are familiar with this thing from Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies that we all engage with, and the account model instead has two parties agree on a transaction, and then they have to talk to their bank, and the banks have to talk to each other, and so there's just this additional step in process, whereas this is a more atomic transaction. So the token contains all the information necessary for a transaction to be verified and complete in one step, and as a sort of aside, DLT can really ensure the uniqueness of this token. That's one advantage of using DLT for tokenization. The account model has all these additional steps. You've got this enhanced automation of transactions, a near real-time exchange, no matter where the parties are located. Again, we know this from cryptocurrencies and individual programmability for token or transaction, such as controlling anonymity or having interest-bearing features, account limits, et cetera. The paper states throughout the various benefits of not just tokenization, but a central bank digital currency, so it would provide broader access to the U.S. seller, which it considers a public good, and it considers it a priority to maintain the U.S. dollar as the status that it has as a World Reserve currency and would allow for the U.S. seller to continue to maintain that status by modernizing the U.S. dollar. It would reduce operational complexities, think about that account model I just showed or the settlement system that we have improved cost efficiencies as a result, allow for more transparency and reduce counterparty risk, increase the trade liquidity. So by facilitating international payments, it could potentially unlock enhanced capabilities in trade. Money would just flow at the speed of digital, right? Money would be sent like a text, right? And it would enhance not just the national currency but also the global economy. And then finally, at the end, it lists some of the use cases, both for domestic payments, so peer-to-peer, retail, international payments, so your remittances or your cross-border payments between institutions, and then the government benefits and specifically mentioning those exceptional circumstances like in COVID-19. It doesn't really discuss the downsides or the challenges of a digital dollar, which I guess makes sense as it's really trying to promote this idea to policymakers. So I think that could be a place where we could start potentially in our discussion. And then I wanted to just share here, so they do welcome public feedback, and that's something that we could also discuss as a group if a number of us are interested in putting together what we think should also be considered, perhaps from being in an open-source community from a more technological perspective. So that's a quick summary of the paper. Anyone have some initial thoughts or want to contribute to what they got out of the paper before, let's say, we think about what are the pros and cons of the idea itself? Maybe a question here. It's Natalia. It's just before going to the benefits or downsides of using the tokenized dollar. How is the process like this is more a study that it's being prepared, but how do you see the implementation of the tokenized dollar? You say that, what exactly do you mean? Meaning who will take the lead? This foundation is only an advisory board. They are composed of very influential people, but the Fed has already pushed back a little bit on this during the hearings, which is what I have in my link that I have written about it. There were two hearings on the topic. One was about financial inclusion. The other was during a questioning of the Fed chair, there was another question about how much would private parties participate in the creation of infrastructure, which seems to be more towards your question. That is, who's going to take the lead? The Fed says that they will have to take the lead and control most aspects of the infrastructure. And I would assume that that means including the parts of the wallet. And that's my view because the integrity of cash, for example, is preserved by the control of every aspect of the production of cash by either directly the central bank or their agents, the US Treasury in America. And in most other countries, these are all very strictly controlled. Private enterprise, if it's involved, is operating under the guidance and control of the central bank. So any CBDC effort will have a huge input from the central bank because any hacks on this wallet or any hacks on this CBDC would reflect very poorly on the integrity of the money itself. That's my view. Thank you. Yeah, the paper mentioned that there could, if there would be collaboration with the private sector and potentially regulated intermediaries for the actual distribution of the tokens. Yeah, that is the two tier model, which is there in cash too. Normally you don't go to the central bank to get your cash. You go through the regular commercial banks to access cash, which is available to everybody. But the fact remains that the cash is controlled heavily. Anyway, I would like to hear from, I mean, this is me. I would like to hear from people like Stefan, who have access to the thought process in ECB, European Central Bank. They also have a CBDC project, and French government also has a CBDC project. So maybe we can internationalize. And also, Paolo Rodriguez was great insight into this through Public Mint, his company. So, you know, any of these people or, you know, anybody else for that matter with insight into this before we launch into what Karen's questions are, which is one of the challenges. Hi, it's Stefan. It's more a question than a comment, if I may. I'm wondering, I mean, it's an exciting project, but I'm wondering how does that accommodate anti-money laundering requirements? Because the account model know that it has many limitations and is structurally costly, but one of its benefits is the owner has some regulated entities to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering rules. And how would that apply here, especially if you have direct interactions between the sender and receiver of money transfers? I think that's a good question. It's brought up in the paper a few times. And I think privacy would be, this is a real consideration for a CBDC, especially if it's a CBDC that is, you know, maybe not using distributed technology or some things that in our world are privacy preserving. What it says is it basically brings up the privacy consideration, but doesn't necessarily offer a recommendation that, you know, policymakers would have to essentially figure out where to draw the line on AML and KYC. The line is already drawn, right? According to the laws that we have today. Who's that? Let's try to hold on a second. Is that Kevin? I'm going to mute Kevin. Okay, I muted Kevin. So anybody else? Ron, it looks like you have your hand up. Go ahead. Okay. Well, first of all, hi to everyone. This is really an interesting topic for us. Following what was said before, I think the report is not clearly stating a model or another model exclusively. So there's this token-based approach and the account-based approach. But obviously the solutions will arise with some hybrid approach, taking the best of both worlds. What I mean is we need to find, or technology and regulators need to find a balanced way between privacy on one side and all the AML tools that typically are provided by the financial institutions. And Chris Giancarlo already mentioned that before a few times regarding this bubble of privacy that we all live in up to a point where the amount becomes too big in order to a person to still be private. So there is this balanced approach correlated with the risk involved in any financial transaction. That's one comment that I would like to add. And the other one, I think it's really relating to the hyperledger community and how we could help the whole industry to tackle this issue. Because the report is not really addressing some of the challenges, as we already allured to it today. But one of the challenges is really interoperability between different jurisdictions. There's different agendas behind each CBDC around the world. There's monetary sovereignty. There's the client of cash in some regions. There's the resilience of payment systems. Different approaches for different CBDCs. If it's retail or wholesale, there's a huge amount of combinations out there. So obviously along the way, we foresee that several players will be in this space and there will be space for everyone. But the crucial thing behind all of this is really to answer the question how we tackle interoperability between CBDCs. And that's something that's not mentioned in the report by Chris Giancarlo. I think it's on purpose because as mentioned before, it's just trying to push the regulators on a specific topic. But that challenge will come and I think that's where hyperledger can really step into and help everyone with a standardized approach or at least with a vision of how that could be tackled. And I pause here for a bit, maybe to hear the person, please. So Vipin, it's Ron. And actually, Paolo, you hit the nail on the head where I was going, I think, interoperabilities. And in full disclosure, Vipin and Karen, we Wall Street Blockchain Alliance is also reviewing public commentary and obviously several of our working groups are diving into digital dollar projects. I think Paolo hit the nail on the head around interoperability, which I think is probably one of the biggest challenges. The other thing I struggle with, and I agree with everyone on the call around AML, this really is an opportunity to evolve what AML KYC looks like and that thought has to be given to it. I don't mean to be all economists on it, Vipin, but one of the things I struggle with, I'm trying to understand the model of, it's very easy within the paper to say, we'll operate alongside Fiat. And I'd be interested in everyone's public perspective on this. In a world where central banks are printing money, what does that operating alongside actually mean? What is the mechanism by which that happens because in the tokenized world, are we looking at our premium on tokens? Are we looking at constantly issuing tokens? It'd be nice to see some clarity around that or other people's perspectives on that kind of economic aspect of this. Okay, so far we have one, Paolo saying that it doesn't make a statement about tokenized versus account actually does. It says very clearly it prefers the tokenized model. Whether a later statements make it towards hybrid model that I don't know. The other questions we can, one is interoperability. The other one that Ron just raised is the one on, how is it going to operate alongside the other rails that cash and reserve accounts? Just by being there, I mean, you know, they will have the same opportunity to print CBDC as they have to print cash or reserve. In fact, it'll be easier. That's my opinion anyway. Well, as a side note, as a side note, I think it would be relevant at least to mention to all the participants in this call, that there is an initiative that is going under the radar by the Lithuanian government, which is what at least they call it the world's first digital collectors coin. And I think this example is quite interesting because it's like a middle step between what we have today and what we can have in a few years once we have all the schemes and all the regulators in place with a full CBDC. So maybe you should check it out, the Lithuanian coin initiative for collectors. It is an interesting example that might help people segue to this new way of thinking for CBDCs. This is Manny from SWAPSA to address the interoperability. There are digital standards involving, you know, is the common domain model for the financial industry has been developing these digital standards. Initiative has focused on derivatives, but now their focus has been adding on cash and, you know, the utilization of cash. And in fact, I have been working with them to actually address digital assets into the common domain model such that this can be very effectively used whether it is interard or interbank or even interaction between central banks. So this is the most advanced digital standard we have seen so far and we continue to push through and hopefully we should be able to publish that in the next couple of months. Who are you working on that with, Manny? It is the CDM that is the organization for mostly SWAPSA derivatives association. It is, it borrows a lot of information from FPMO which has been a standard from derivatives, but, you know, now that we are pivoting more towards digital assets and also to cover other types of digital assets in processing for derivatives, the whole lifecycle of digital assets being now worked on and I've, you know, I've been contributing to it and also involved with it as well in the process. So we should get some more clarity and more of a standard evolving over the next, I would say, couple of months. So the short answer to interoperability is use standards. So that we all know what we are talking about when we are talking about something. And can you also, we've been talking about the TTF, the other side of the token itself. Yes, which we have done in the Italo project and these two aspects really struck home to some of the central banks that we have spoken to. So hopefully we can contribute a similar thought process to the DDP as well. In terms of the token model versus the account model, nowhere have I seen a actual solution to sending money as text actually there was a project back in the 80s, early 90s by David Chom, which was using blinded signatures, but that project didn't go far for doing this kind of thing. But in Bitcoin itself, we know that some notion of identity is required for ownership, which is basically your public key and the position of a public, private key being the way to transfer. But exposing a public key and exposing transactions to everybody in the world opens up interesting avenues of de-anonymization. In fact, it is a cottage industry and chain analysis and others have created solutions just to do that, meaning who is hiding behind that public key and they are actually working with law enforcement all over the world in order to de-anonymize Bitcoin users, even in a token-based network. So token-based by, especially with the AML component thrown in there by itself does not guarantee anonymity or privacy. The other thing is they show in the paper this frictionless transfer between peers, but in Bitcoin, for example, it has to be recorded in a ledger whether it is decentralized public or whatever. There has to be another place in which that transaction is recorded. At least I haven't seen any solution that does not need that kind of a central, not central, but a ledger existing elsewhere other than in the phones of the sender and the receiver. So all of these, there is a lot of hand-waving going on. So we want to make clear what is possible versus what is not possible. I mean, it is possible that you can have peer-to-peer transfer for small amounts, but in the end, it eventually will have to be reconciled in a public ledger or a private or some kind of a ledger that controls, in fact, who owns what. There is like a oversimplification of the token model in the paper. Yes. The token model itself. Well, the token model according to the paper is, okay, so in the beginning, the token model versus the account model is predicated on Bitcoin versus, let's say, Ethereum. But in both cases, there is a ledger, and it doesn't exist without a ledger. And in the token model, it's further said that you cannot, you have to spend the whole token and then get changed. So it's predicated on the UTXO model, unspent transaction output, which is a whole amount. And so in order to spend it, let's say you have $10 and you want to pay for coffee, $2, then you have to make the change, $8 and get it back to yourself. But it doesn't mean that you're completely anonymous and nor does it mean that you can just rely on the coffee shop mobile device and your mobile device because somewhere else, when you go to spend that same $2 somewhere else or the original $10 somewhere else, it has to be detected as a double spend and stopped. So the token model by itself does not guarantee this. And in fact, we have seen in the e-Corona paper, which Accenture worked with, and they also called for the two-tier token model. And in all these cases, in the end they use some ledger to reconcile the amounts. Paulo or any other person with knowledge of this can talk about whether a true peer-to-peer transaction can be possible without some kind of reconciliation. Well, if I might add on my side, if I have some Bitcoin and I do a totally offline transaction with you, we can even do it without recording it on the ledger simply by providing to you the private key directly on a peer-to-peer approach. And it doesn't interact with the blockchain at all. You're simply owning the private key to my Bitcoin. And the ownership was changed and nothing happened on the blockchain. There was an example of a company a few years ago, and I'm not recalling their name, I might find it afterwards, that they could effectively transact between two mobile phones, Bitcoin, between two different mobile phones, and then afterwards that would be some kind of reconciliation with the main ledger. But I think you're right in the principle that at the end of the day, there needs to be an entity or a group of nodes or a whole blockchain network that needs to have the updated ledger. And I don't think that's bad. If you think about real-time gross settlement systems. We're not saying whether it's bad or good. We are questioning the premise of the paper which says that a simple text message-like approach to transferring funds on a peer-to-peer basis. Yeah, I think it's oversimplifying the idea and going over a lot of details. I think it's too oversimplified. That's why I think the industry needs to find an hybrid approach that can give this sense of peer-to-peer, of true peer-to-peer to the end user. And in the background, a lot of things are happening, but it's totally transparent to the end user. And they might perceive it as a simple text message, but in reality it's not. I mean, the layer two solutions, for example, lightning and all that, does have some of those characteristics. But in the end, it ultimately requires some kind of a lockup of the funds and a series of intermediaries with enough liquidity between the two participants to stand in between them. So you're bringing back some kind of centralization back into the picture, especially we know these days that the network effects accruing to the intermediaries always create huge enterprises as intermediaries, which has happened in the payment sphere and which has happened in many other places where they claim that there is decentralization, but actually, ultimately, the network effects work toward leading us back to bigger, big organizations or enterprises being in charge of these interchanges. Anyway, sorry, I've taken up too much time, so I'm going to just keep quiet for now. Yeah, anyone who hasn't had a chance to speak or share yet want to offer your thoughts? Hi, it's Junji. Yeah, it's one thing that I was reading the other day about FAD, one of their, they completely endorsed for what I understood, right? The study, the assessment of a central bank digital currency, but I think they are very interested in having a less drastic approach to evolve the payment infrastructure. So I know that they are working to evolve very old infrastructure to have a more instant payment. And as we see in China, right, it's a digital currency electronic payment, right? So how these things work hand in hand, maybe on the retail side to allow that interoperability that one of the folks here mentioned and also that peer, not only peer to peer, but also connected to the digital currency. And I think it'll be easier to break down into, of course, the retail digital currency and also the wholesale because when we talk about interoperability, when we talk about requirements, they may have completely different solutions. And I was talking the other day with Manny and Zipping. And I think sometimes when you think about digital currency, not necessarily something that people will see in front of them, that they are actually consuming digital currency, but maybe it's just bringing more speed to liquidity, to settlement, for instance, right? So instead of settling like capital markets, stocks in T plus 2, it'll be almost instantaneously through digital currency, but for people who are trading, actually they don't see it, they don't touch it, but all the infrastructure on the back will be using it, right? So I think it'll be just easier to break it down and also to add the payments infrastructure together and how different countries are approaching it and how U.S. is also evolving with the payment infrastructure because I think that would be a very relevant right for the adoption and evolution of central bank digital currency. This is Manny from SOFSAB. Is there in the paper discussion more about direct claim by retail? I didn't hear what you said. Direct what? Direct claim by retail. That means like how you would handle cash in your wallet. How do you do paper cash? No, it didn't go into any detail on that. Well, talking about physical cash, I would say that if we're going for a tier two model, things will naturally evolve to a situation where you go to the ATM and you decide if you want to receive physical cash on your hand or you want to receive digital representation of cash in your wallet on your smartphone. And that would make the bridge to the current mechanisms that interact with physical cash. The challenge for digital tokens coming to your phone in a two tier model is now introducing technical challenges of tokens migrating from one network to another network. That's been a big technical problem. I don't think that is a proper solution to it yet. Correct. Yeah, I agree. And that's where I think this group can really make a difference. It's really to help the upcoming need to have this interoperability between different silos. When I'm in silos, it can be China on one side and U.S. on the other side with two different silos for two different digital currencies. One might be decentralized and the other one might not be. It might be totally centralized, but that doesn't matter. They need to interoperate between them. Yeah. The paper really doesn't mention at all other currencies having CBDCs as well and how that would work. It really has a very dollar dominant perspective as a world reserve currency. And it almost seems like, well, everyone's just going to use the dollar. So that's, I think, a real hole in the paper is that, you know, the dollar isn't the only one who's exploring this. And so how would that work? Any other comments? Thank you. Thank you. Is hyperledger going to, or this group going to compile as a response to the digital dollar project? That was my next question. So it's totally up to us really. So, you know, hyperledger is a public open source community. So it's whoever comes together and decides they want to work on the digital dollar project. So what we're going to do is we're going to do a quick discussion of what's going to be the response. Is how that would go about. So is that something that. Maybe you could press the raise hand. I con in the zoom is that. Something that this group would be interested in. It's not something we have to do, right? It's totally optional. We could just very well just debate and discuss and. And talk about it. We could also actually, you know, come together just like the chamber of commerce. Chamber of digital commerce, sorry. Is doing and apparently Ron and their groups at wall street blockchain alliance are also doing and, you know, sure there's a number of others. We could also put together a sort of response. I think it could be interesting, you know, we are more a technology based community. Chamber of digital commerce is, is policy focused. Well, she blockchain lines is very business enterprise focus, just like we are as well. But we come from that more, you know, developer technical community. So maybe there's a unique perspective that this could, could add in. So, yeah, just raise your hand. And this is really the beginning of the discussion, right? Just like the paper itself is, is the reason there's not a lot of detail in there is there's, it's the beginning of their own proposals and exploration, this topic. And this is the beginning of the discussion that we've been having on this SIG as well. This conversation also cues up our next SIG meeting. We are actually going to have someone from the bank of England come talk to us. They also released a white paper a couple months ago. And so they're going to talk to us about their perspective. I think that'll be really useful to see what someone outside of the U.S. Is thinking about this. And so I think it'd be great to have you all on that call as well. And we can continue the discussion there and continue to talk about whether or not we want to work on a response ourselves on that call. So to that end, I have captured many of the questions and comments from the people as point list in the agenda. So you can take a look at that. And we can work up a response. It might be better to just do it. But I think we can do it in a synchronous fashion, meaning collaborating over email and over the. You know, working on a wiki page or something. For that. Because, you know, not everyone could make this call here now. So it'd be great to ask on the mailing list who else would want to be involved in this. It is basically we are going to actually have those questions put up on a separate wiki page and then people can add to the questions. And they can also volunteer to take each, each one of those sections and expand on it. And we will present a concise response. With with everybody's contributions. So I'll share the list. To the list, all the stuff that we talked about. Or most of it. And people can expand on it. And I'll set up a page, wiki page. Where we can collaborate. Excellent. Thank you for capturing that. And thanks everyone for your, your input and comments. And look forward to having you on the next call as well. The bank of England. Thank you everyone.