 Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena kato, katoa. No mai, haremai. Hello, everyone, and welcome. This is the final of our public sessions for the Impact Springboard, where we are leading innovation for global impact. It's great to see all of you here for this session, where we are looking at catalyzing communitarian responses to combat world crises. My name is Michelle Parker. I am the Head of Fellowship Experience at the Edmund Hillary Fellowship and we will open this session together with a karakea. So for those of you who have been joining us over the four days, you know that this is a multi-session event where we are connecting Aotearoa, New Zealand with our EHF Fellows, Hillary Laureates, and more key leaders around critical challenges and opportunities for Aotearoa, New Zealand, including in this session here. And I will hand over to Kamiya Young, who is a Director of the Hillary Institute and Edmund Hillary Fellowship and a Director of the Tawhaka Co-Housing. Her experience weaves together architecture, property development, community development, and entrepreneurship. So Kamiya will be our moderator and will introduce Sid also. Kia ora, Kamiya. Oh, I'll just unmute there. Thank you. Sorry, thank you that every time. Thank you, Michelle and Kia ora, Tato. I have the great pleasure of introducing Sid. Sid and I met, I think just about half a year ago through the EHF Fellowship. And we are certainly kindred spirits and that both of our work centers on supporting communities to thrive. I think really the main differences is I'm working in the physical realm, like literally building buildings. And Sid is working in the realm of building the technologies that would support communities to thrive. So I'm extremely grateful and very curious about what Sid does mostly because it's a realm that I know a little about but I know holds many opportunities to support communities in the future and in the present if we could pick up these technologies faster. Sid's background, I think maybe some of you were on the call that he presented at Climap is varied and he really crosses the whole spectrum of economics. In his early career, he was heading up the South Asia's largest trading desk on the one hand and then later, not too much later, I think he left that a little bit disheartened and disgruntled and joined Gandhi's ashram and where he was working with and designing distributed economic models. So clearly an incredible background with lots of experience. We are very fortunate to have him here in Aotearoa, New Zealand. He's the founder and chairperson of Neighborhoods, a web three project headquartered in Aotearoa. Their toolkit enables new social coordination patterns for the world. And Sid has offered to share with us much more detail about that today, which I'm really excited to get under the hood of and to really understand how web 3.0 can be revolutionary for communities. I'm just a little housekeeping. If you have any questions, I know Michelle said this throughout Sid's talk, please just prop them into the chat and I will pick them up once Sid's finished with his presentation. We will have plenty of time for Q&A at the end and a discussion. So over to you, Sid, welcome. Thank you. Thank you so much. Should I share my screen? Yeah, right away, yeah. Cool. Thank you all for joining. I'm gonna start with a basic question that I think most of you might be holding around what is web 3.0? What is it really enabling? Why are we having these conversations about communities and web 3.0? And just to start out, I'll just say web 3.0 is a really vague and nebulous term that's being thrown out, thrown about, because there isn't a very coordinated agency out there that's providing a clear definition. So different groups use it loosely. For today's conversation, we'll kind of use it to talk about peer-to-peer technologies or technologies where communities deploy, store, and use their own private network to coordinate themselves better. And just to start off, for those who may not be very familiar with these technologies, I'll just say they are enabling a new patterns of coordination. Typically when groups of people wanted to coordinate themselves better, they used institutions like the government or banks or large technological platforms to store information with which they coordinated themselves. So things like birth records or land records or monetary transactions to keep track of who's a criminal, who's not a criminal. And typically these overarching institutions tend to be quite monolithic and the kinds of information we can store tend to be pretty limited. But these newer technologies are allowing us to validate and record information in a much broader way. And we think, or people, everyone, all of us at neighborhoods think this opens up a whole new paradigm of coordination because one, not only can each community or group start to record what's important to them, but just the spectrum, like it opens up a very rich spectrum of information that we can record and use for coordination. And so what we're talking about on the slide is that we're not just storing monolithic information anymore, but it opens up a pattern of storing a very broad spectrum. So instead of just recording, if we're trying to organize a group, instead of just recording who paid whom what money or who's a criminal and default on who's not, we can also start recording bits of information like who volunteered how many hours at the community garden over the last year. And that information may not be monetarily critical, like it may not have, Camilla volunteering 10 hours every Saturday in the community garden may not have a monetary imprint, but it can be extremely contextually relevant because we can lend certain sociocultural benefits to it and that's what we always do as humans. Camilla could be a certain highly regarded individual in our little group because of these contributions to the local garden. And so that's just a backdrop around what peer-to-peer technologies are enabling. And within that, neighborhoods came together a few years ago and said, why don't we leverage these technologies to enable new things for communities? And so what we are enabling is helping groups come together and say and ask these questions of what do we value and how do we share it? So what are the resources that are important to our group? So we might be a locally congregated community, you might be geographically dispersed, but let's say we're local and we value our little community garden and we value who's contributing hours in the community garden or volunteering there every day or every weekend. And so that's, we could say it's an important resource for a community, you can then express preferences and prioritize action around it. So we might have a certain rule in our group that people who volunteer in the community garden actually get the loudest voice when it comes to decisions around climate change for our group. So we might be a group that says contributions on the ground are most important for us and those should be the voices that get heard the most. And lastly, neighborhoods also allows groups to articulate its governance or the rules with which they play with each other. So it doesn't necessarily need to be Sid's neighborhood and everything Sid says goes, it can actually be either adeptically created or culturally modulated that these are rules that the group gets to decide. And so neighborhoods is really just making it easy for groups to do this. So you could be a group that has absolutely no coding experience or no fundraising experience, but our job is to provide tools and infrastructure that allow you to just pull these things and encourage you to coordinate yourselves in the real world better. And so in that sense, we're allowing, enabling you to express coordination questions and experiment with new actions. And typically like if you try to do this with web two infrastructure or what you might say is the Silicon Valley internet or platforms like Facebook or WhatsApp or Instagram. I think most people here would have come to understand that these groups didn't actually evolve to encourage communitarian responses. And so each one of these platforms have very specific tasks that they're trying to achieve. Like Instagram is used for sharing videos or photos or WhatsApp is used for chatting. They're not optimized for cohesion or evolution or coordinating ourselves better. And which is why neighborhoods is stepping in with certain approach towards community coordination, which is really threefold. And we'll focus on the first two that's just letting people create custom community spaces. And the second bit, which is our open source framework which just allows communities to, it provides what you could say is a cultural skeleton that allows groups to organize themselves better. With the first bit, just custom community spaces. Think of it as a little private network that groups would deploy. So instead of your information being stored in Facebook servers, you would run your own networks. Again, which is not technologically complicated, but effectively you as a group would have agency over this information. You would have agency over how you want to architect the space. A very simple example we use is if you're a community and you decide to hold a meeting every week in your local area, you have complete freedom over how you might want to arrange the chairs when you gather, like you might want to arrange it in a circle or you might want to have a speaker with rows of listeners. It's almost absurd that in our digital spaces we don't have that kind of sovereignty of freedom. So you can't operate, go into a WhatsApp and say, no, this isn't how I like my conversations to flow. I want to actually rejig things. And so neighborhoods kind of lets communities have priority or their cultural preferences have priority. And so you can actually put together these spaces through what we call modules. And so these modules I'll go through, think of them as little Lego bricks that you can drag and drop and bring together for your purpose. And these purposes might be tracking contributions in the local garden. They might be organizing events together. They might be sharing articles or blogs, as well as the rules which define who's visible and who's not. And so that's where the neighborhoods framework comes in and we don't need to get too much into this, but think of it again, like I said, as a little cultural skeleton, which lets groups say, these are the resources that we value and this is how they show up in our group. And these are the rules that define who's seen most, not just in our community, but as they hop from one community to another, how they show up in different communities. And so these are just snapshots of how different people can construct these spaces, how they can layer completely modular assessments on them, how they can define who's seen, whether you're a more extroverted community and introverted community, what kinds of behaviors you value, all of that again, coming together like you would assemble a little Lego set. And within that, to make things easy is a little effort called the Neighborhoods Bazaar, which lets communities who want these little modules, but don't have the ability to design them to actually come forward to a little marketplace where they can assemble and buy these generic tools for extremely low costs so that they can engage and converse with each other in a better way. They're kind of limited to that in terms of what Neighborhoods Offering is, because this isn't so much a technical presentation, but we could focus for the next few minutes just on the kinds of projects that we're seeing. So 2024 for us is almost like a year of pilot projects. And so I'll touch upon just the spectrum of projects that we're working with. I would say they've fallen to three broad categories. The first is just local communities or communities that want to do interesting things with each other. They might be geographically close together. They might be geographically dispersed, but I would say that the groups that are actually using these tools to coordinate themselves in some way, there would then be pilot projects that are creating a bridge between these communities and what you might call global resources. And then the third, Neighborhoods is also interacting with and playing a key role in global resources and global projects so that a lot of resources and capital can flow towards these local communities to empower them as opposed to extracting from them or overriding them to create different kinds of responses to some of the crisis we see. So this particular one, and again, it's kind of representative of some of the many groups that we're speaking with is a project based out of Sri Lanka in a region of about 1.2 million people that has recently received a large grant from the Green Climate Fund. But they're really hoping to facilitate and amplify regenerative agricultural practices that have been practiced traditionally over the thousands of years, but have never found formal validation from institutions. And so technologies like Neighborhoods allow these groups to record their information in their own networks in a way in which they can create feedback loops and incentives to build resilience and provide stronger amplification for these traditional practices. So some of the activities that they're gonna be taking on is keeping track of who's practicing agriculture in a particular way and auditing in a peer-to-peer way across farms to keep track of who's actually maintaining these practices. There's the members, young people in the community also coming forward to start keeping records of species diversity. There's also records starting to get kept around seed diversity in the region because that's what they see as an important metric in climate resilience. And so as this data gets generated and populated in their local records, they can then start layering benefits within their system. So in some cases, they might consider giving a 10x vote in local governance issues to elders in the community who practice seed saving in a particular way. They might provide more visibility to certain individuals for agro-tourism that is coming their way. And in some of the subsequent projects we'll talk about as global capital wants to support some of the micro entrepreneurs and micro enterprises in this group, in this region. These individuals have started receiving greater credit limits, grants in micro investments all backed by what you could say is social fabric on chain. And so this projects like these would fit in perfectly with what I reference as the second category of pilot projects which are bridges or translators between global resources and on-ground communitarian efforts. So this particular initiative out of the Kosmetzky Global Laboratory at Stanford is a climate accounting initiative which is helping validate contributions of young people in communities in some of the regions they're looking at are Hawaii, Sri Lanka and even in New Zealand where groups of young people might come together to take on certain activities that might create a net cooling effect on the planet. But their climate accounting suite would look at this information in neighborhoods ledgers and create this translation to an impact that would be better understood by global resources. So if a group of students are coming together in a community to set up solar panels or a solar cooking system, what is the net cooling effect of that activity? The climate accounting tools would actually help create tangible results for this. So if global resources wanted to find their way to projects like this, that translation language would exist. And that brings us to the third category of pilot projects which we presented yesterday last evening. One of, there's a few of this kind but I'm referencing this because it's an EHF fellow initiative and so the Climap fund is looking at regenerative and blended finance and is would be heavily leveraging projects like neighborhoods to say traditionally when global capital tries to enter community efforts that either can't understand or can't trust what's happening on ground or tends to extract from it. But when communities are formalized and have information well validated within their own networks, external capital can actually enter in a more regenerative, robust and sustainable way as opposed to the classical way of global capital overriding local culture or extracting from it and homogenizing it in some way even. And so you could see interesting experiments where projects like Climap could be funding some of the other local climate communities that we're working with where funds from Climap could be providing micro grants to initiatives within communities could be making micro investments in small scale entrepreneurs but because this information is formalized and this information is tracked on ledgers it through projects like the zero degree project that I referenced earlier there is this translation language which allows this capital to circulate within these communities. How am I doing on time? I feel like I should stop there and allow for some kind of conversation. We're at about 12.25 so we've got about another 35 minutes so we could open it up for discussion. Yeah, I feel like we could do that because you have to get a sense of where people are at. Yeah, we've got one good comment and a good question already and I have a couple of questions I'd love to ask you as well. So others do have questions now is the time to pop those in the chat and or raise your hand and you can ask them yourselves. But to start out, Graham you've actually had a comment here and I'm just curious if you could elaborate further on how neighborhoods could support your venture if you wouldn't mind unmuting yourself if you're in a space you can do that. Graham, you've just posted another question so you may not be in a space where you can unmute perhaps. I'm not sure. I don't see you in there. So I'll just read out your question that you've just posted. If 2024 is the year for neighborhoods pilot projects how can our collection of resilience and I think you mean regenerative initiatives in New Zealand get onto the list for 2025? Neighborhoods could unite initiatives that are currently isolated. That is a trade question and I would say we're still short listing and finalizing pilots that we're working with for 2024. In fact, it's always a good time to speak with us for the others on this call as well because what we're building for some of these pilots could easily be repurposed and used for your context like especially if it's an allied cause. And I would say the big question for communities is if they're interested in formalizing some of their rules of interaction and engagement in the way that I might have, that I've kind of touched on and described. I think it's perfectly fine for communities to say they don't see the value in this kind of formalizing like they don't want to keep a record of who's contributing in the local community for whatever reason and that's ultimately the community's discretion. But I would say the benefits of such formalizing are that you can start putting in the foundational blocks for more clearer governance within the group. So as you start to grow or the impact of what you're creating starts to grow, it is prepared and much more robust as you start to scale. But even if you tend to be a small group, like let's just say you're a group of 10 people doing fascinating things in your local community, the fact that you've formalized allows for clearer coherence and interpretation across groups. So I might be part of a 10 people circle we heard in Christchurch, but when I show up in Singapore, I actually, because this is natively web three, I actually carry my chain of information and so I can actually enter new neighborhoods communities and my engagement can be accelerated because I'm literally porting my social capital with me contextually. And that is one of the larger aspirations for neighborhoods. Traditionally, communitarian responses have remained locked within the silo and the argument against communitarian responses always been like, yeah, it's nice and cute, but it's like the 50 of you aren't gonna be reaching any kind of scale or like all your efforts are gonna stay locked within that group. But we think these technologies create that breakthrough where we're not really talking about standalone communities but groups that are embedded in this, almost like this contextual mess and as individuals hop from one group to another, they can actually, they have the agency or how they'd like to carry the information. And honestly, that's how I guess real life works if I show up in a social context or just let's take this conversation as an example, I see many people that I know not just from EHF but from multiple contexts. So if I show up at a dinner party, it's not the host's responsibility to curate an experience for me. I actually might know someone from my office or from the gym or that person might be a neighbor. And so these technologies actually allow us to engage with each other in a much more real way as opposed to showing up in new communities and new platforms as blank slates, which is weird to be honest. But yeah, I'll stop at that. Yeah, thank you. I've got another question here from Larry and one that I'm also very curious about. How do you manage, how do you manage slash facilitate the interfaces between the online and the offline worlds given that some communities, especially in rural areas might not be as connected as all of us are here. Some might still have very limited experience and or very expensive internet. How do you see this working with communities and you're working in some areas in the world where that's certainly the case? How are you bridging the real, let's say the physical realm with the digital realm? That's one of the reasons why 2024 for us is the year of pilots because we want to land these technologies with a varied set of communities. This is, it is in the case where we can release this in an app store and just allow communities to download and replicate by themselves. It's gonna be a lot of prioritization and handholding. And so in some, like I think many of these communities that you speak of are treating this in different ways. Natively though, the peer-to-peer technology we've chosen Holochain works is designed for these contexts. So there isn't this need for every member to be online 24 seven. A member could very easily be offline. Like let's say they have a mobile device with them that goes out of network, goes off grid. Contributions can be stored on this device. And when that individual comes back into an area with connectivity that actually gets replicated and propagated across the network. And so that's fundamentally why we've stayed close to ecosystems like Holochain for this reason. But apart from that, there's also communities that might not even have internet connectivity in a very, in any form, they might not even have mobile devices. And so in some of these communities we're exploring patterns where certain individuals in the communities run terminals where this information is input on behalf of the larger community. And there would obviously the community would then decide to have specific, well-validated individuals and create some kinds of social rewards for these individuals and also create audit trails around how this information was put in. But yeah, I would say there's a broad spectrum there that we're trying to work with. But many of these solutions are actually like, I think it's just with anyone who's worked with communities knows you almost let these solutions come from the communities themselves rather than us prioritizing. We're just trying to respond to decisions like mobile first or one terminal in the community first like based on what the communities are requesting. Yeah, thank you. I have a lot of experience with this, especially with the Takako group and many of our members of the first neighborhood are not, let's say digital natives. And so they're really a tall bar to get up to speed with a lot of the technologies that we use for communications. So it's interesting. I think we're in a real pivotal time in the way of supporting communities with digital technologies. There's a steep learning curve. But yeah, I think this happens at big stage changes. So yeah, I can appreciate the time that's needed for a community to absorb new technologies. We have another question from Trish Wilson. I can see the value of communities connecting and this is a very interesting platform. If I could ask perhaps a direct question is one of the key drivers of this people, of this people, communities and activities having to prove their value so that they can get capital. So is it this approving ground to access capital or is this more than that? Yeah, I'm so glad you asked this because neighborhoods is not a platform. And this is something we're constantly emphasizing with both funders, investors, as well as communities. Each community is almost its own private network of sorts. And so they can deploy this open source scaffolding. They can then insert generic modules in it which they may choose to purchase from the neighborhood's bazaar or might choose to design these modules themselves. So a neighborhood could, you know, there is no barrier to a community saying we wanna spin this up and start running on our own. And so in that sense, does a community have to prove its capital? I feel like the fundamental purpose of a project like neighborhoods is for a community to unlock resources that they have within themselves. And so if we give them the tools to organize their social capital better, it almost like something starts to emerge from a system that has not been validated by the mainstream system. And so you start seeing like, oh, these people are actually, you know, credit worthy but they're credit, deemed credit worthy by the community, not by the bank. And so if that community decides to give them a credit limit and formalize, you'll actually start to see all kinds of activity which did not emerge earlier. So I would say like that's front and center for neighborhoods. We are simultaneously seeing that global capital is trying to find its way to communitarian responses. And so as these bridge projects like the ZDP or the ZDP came to us, we said, yeah, that might be cool. And so we'll create this translation language. And so as different global resources around the world we want to find their way. It's up to them to work with these communities and figure it out. But I would say the motivation is definitely for communities to coordinate themselves better and to actually release the bottlenecks that currently exist in terms of like very narrow validation language of what is value and what is valuable and, you know, only banks being able to access, provide credit or the formal economic system being able to provide credit. So yeah, I would say like one of my personal motivations is building economic infrastructure to unlock expressive capacities within communities. And that's, I would say the long-term goal for projects like neighborhoods. Yeah, and it's really about leveraging more than just financial capital. That's leveraging cultural and social capital and things that we already do intuitively but giving them more presence if I understand right. Yeah, all the tools of formalization, yeah. Yeah, it feels a bit blurry but it's starting to make a little sense. And I really look forward to being able to participate in one of these neighborhood communities. I'm just curious if there's a way that people can start to use this even if it's more on a mock-up model for you. What are your current, where's your current position? What is your next steps? So there's, I would say in, I think pretty soon in a week or so there's another version being released that people could actually download and run and use and play around with. And so we've actually got a few applets that are already designed and people could use these. Like you could have a little feed sharing applet where you share content with the other or have a simple like applet or module just to keep track of tasks. So people could definitely do that. We want to over the next six to nine months expand the spectrum of modules that communities can use which is why doing this work with pilots. So as they start making requests for these applets we'll actually start building them out. And so the hope is in about, yeah, but later this year there'll be a pretty broad spectrum of modules that communities could spin up and get going with. So if you just want a little playful community for your local group that's organizing around a community garden, like that's not very far away. Like that is totally things that people could do. If it seems like some of the people on this call here have specific goals in mind, like I would say please reach out to us now. Like we're speaking with groups. And like I said, it's pretty, I'm pretty sure if one of the groups is like what we're doing for some of the other groups is pretty much the same that things that you need that you could benefit out of. So there's a lot of cross-pollination there that could happen. Yeah, so what I'm hearing is that if there's anybody on the call that has a community that would potentially be a good pilot for you that they should reach out to you directly. Yep, I have a Discord server that you could reach out to. You could reach out to me via email or yeah, happy to do all of that. Looks like Graham is interested in definitely connecting just great. There's another question here. And then I'd like to follow that up with one of my own that kind of dovetailed. First, it sounds to me like this is a publicly accessible kind of let's call it space for communities. Is there a way to actually make it so that let's say there's a certain area within the technology that allows it to just facilitate the community conversation so that it's a safe space for communities to talk about things. And then outside of that, that there's a public fronting phase, like can you block some off and have some open? Yeah, so fundamentally each group or each network would have its own space. So you could have comearsneighborhood.com and you don't share that link with anyone other than your five friends. And so only your five friends would know about it and visit it. But let's say outsiders do find out about and you want to invite outsiders, most neighborhoods or communities would have layers to them so you'd have a public lobby where the random public person could enter and get a better understanding of what the space is about, what the rules are, what the governance is. The lobby is also a space where you might say, are you a member of these 50 allied communities? And if you are, we'd actually love to import some of your social capital from there and you could just accelerate your way through this community then. Or you could have people in the lobby contributing in some way and as they start, you feel more comfortable with them, you could escalate them through into your more intimate membranes. So that kind of membrane design and nesting of neighborhoods within each other or hierarchical neighborhoodry, like all of that is completely possible with these architectures. And I mean, it feels like you asked this question just because you've had so much experience with communities and it's sad that in digital spaces, we don't have these kinds of intricate tools. So that's exactly what we would want to enable. Yeah, that actually question came from Sue Cabe. So, but I second it. Plus, I guess on the back of that question, and this is probably largely because of what goes on in our, let's say, bigger political world. And I hate to bring this in, but how does security really work and how do we make sure that these new technologies are truly safe? And this is a curvy question and it might be a big ethical question because what we're seeing right now with Metta and many others is they become platforms that can, not always, but can bring a lot of crime and escalate conspiracies that are damaging. So it's a real ethical conundrum when it's about facilitating communities but maintaining and ensuring that they're safe. Any thoughts on that? Yeah, I have, yeah, I mean, this question has come up a lot. Oh, it comes up in almost every conversation for us as we speak about immunitarian responses. And I come from a background, like having grown up in India, having lived through communal riots as a young child myself, not romanticizing community life. Like, we're not very far away evolutionary wise from our chimps cells in that sense, like we ultimately tribal beings and can do horrific things. So it definitely comes with acknowledging the risks of some of that kind of organizing. Personally, I felt like giving people the tools for organizing themselves better or formalizing is the answer to some of those problems rather than preventing people from stepping into that cultural identity and allowing people to organize themselves. One of, I would actually, I wish one of my fellow board members and key members of the core team, Emeline Friedman was here on this call. She's a PhD and her thesis was understanding the relationship between some of the big tech platforms and addictive disorders that we find in society. And so she's done a lot of work deconstructing the hypercapitalist engines behind some of these platforms. And so I would actually argue that a lot of the conversations that you see on meta, for example, or just name one, isn't necessarily like people organizing themselves as a group. It's actually the ad revenue model that spurs more sensationalist content. Also, a lot of these groups, and myself having just out of research, sitting in and observing even white supremacist groups, often these conversations are just nebulous and almost like, what's the word? Like almost like purges, like people wanting to speak with each other in this nebulous mess. And my argument would actually be if we allowed these people the tools to have constructive conversations, they would probably fail because that's not why those people are there in the first place. Like they're there to propel some sort of lie, which is then accelerated through the hypercapitalist engine. And so what neighborhoods proposes is creating a very clear distinction between that. And so the purpose of the group isn't ad revenue. It's actually to organize themselves towards some common culture or some common purpose. And so what gets propagated through that community is what the group chooses or deems as important and not what grabs the best eyeballs. But I believe this is a pretty nuanced conversation which is I don't wanna simplify it or dumb it down in a five minute answer. It's also one of those ones that requires quite a lot of deep thought because yeah, you don't wanna take away communication of tools because a few people are using harmfully. So it's a matter of figuring out how to maintain safe environments and to stand where harm, where's the edge of harm and how do we make sure we don't cross into that. So it's a very interesting, big ethical question. I would also argue and say like one of neighborhoods is longer term goals is to provide a safer, more contextual internet. And that's because the content that you see or how you engage in these spaces has ripple effects. And so because I would not just be operating as like an isolated individual in one community, I would be the same identity across 50 to 70 communities that I'm part of bad actions in one community actually ripple out into all of these other spaces that I'm connected with. And so it actually creates incentive or creates the ability to have more intimate interactions because I know that this person is linked in maybe 50 other 70 allied communities. And so it would create this pattern where if a person's showing up in your community and has a blank slate and says, no, I'm not associated with any allied communities, you would actually keep them at an arm's length but you would only engage with them if you know that, yeah, this person's a valued member of Kamiya's community and Larry's community and Charlotte's community and Michelle's community and Trisha's community. And then you would tend to bring them in because you know that those repercussions exist. So I would actually argue the current internet is not designed for intimate interactions and our hope is to create feedback loops and incentives to promote those intimate interactions with the repercussions. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, and Graham is grateful for your response and that you're empowering local solutions. So yeah, it seems like when in doubt, yeah, return to the local and really understand what comes from the community itself as a response, as a responsible response. There's another question here again from Larry, great question. How do you plan to ensure Indigenous data sovereignty? And he's got an example here where an existing online portal called local contexts, you might know about sports Indigenous communities with practical methods to deal with the range of IP issues that arise in relation to managing cultural heritage materials. How do you see that playing out with neighborhoods? Wow, thank you. Thanks Larry and thanks for this resource. I'm actually gonna check it out after. So, natively, these technologies ensure data sovereignty. So, neighborhoods has no idea what Larry's doing in his community with his people. Like there's no, it's your private network, it's your chains of information and it's your coordination. And that's fundamentally what these technologies enable. I didn't stress on that through my presentation because I think that is ideologically very important to us for individuals to actually have that sovereignty over the information. Like I personally think it's, it should be seen as a human right. I didn't mention it too much in our presentation because I find neighborhoods or communities tend to not be motivated always by those factors, what they tend to be motivated more by is, oh, if we have agency, it allows for these new patterns of coordination and that tends to be more an option motivation. But you're absolutely right. Like I think these technologies have that data sovereignty built in, like that is native. Like even if neighborhoods wanted to, it cannot access what you're doing in your community. Like that is, that's your prerogative. And so there is no central server, there's no central brain in neighborhoods that's keeping track of all these neighborhoods. Like each group is spinning out their own private network, if that made sense. So there's not even like a central resource or app neighborhood store where you can come in and be like, point me to the funniest communities. We don't know. Like maybe they wish to list themselves centrally and that could be an option, but it's just not that kind of architecture at all. Right. It, yeah, you're not a platform, you're a source. Yeah, yeah, yeah, thank you. Makes a lot of sense. Does that answer your question there, Larry? Do you have anything further on that one? You do, you're all right. I got your thumbs up from it. And are there any other questions from the audience? From those on the call? I do have another one. I'm really curious what your next steps are and what you mentioned that 2024 is the year of the pilot and testing these things. Where do you hope to take this? And I'm also really curious, you've just moved to Ototahi Christchurch and I'm curious what your plans are, if anything, in that location? Yeah, Christchurch is an interesting city with an interesting vibe. And so in conversations with groups who find this interesting and you can always find a group in Christchurch that's trying to rethink things just because of the nature of what's happened over the last decade with the earthquakes and everything. So, yeah, hoping there's some schools, some local spaces that we're speaking with as part of that. But apart from working with pilot communities, we see the bazaar as a critical piece of the neighborhood's journey over the next 12 to 18 months. Because if we find more and more communities will need these generic modules to populate their spaces because we find a lot of communities don't have development experience, don't want to be sitting and coding these pieces themselves. So the name, the bazaar will catalyze adoption in our opinion. And so the bazaar is in effect a very simple generic tech company that's just generating these little modules based on requests that come in. It's almost like a SaaS company. And so a lot of our emphasis is on the bazaar internally over the next 12 months where even in conversations about doing an IPO on an exchange here, which would be almost like a revenue engine for the project. So overall, the project is steered by the Neighborhoods Foundation, which is a charitable trust here in New Zealand. And it would initiate the bazaar in a way to sustain itself the activities of the project over the coming years. So yeah, that's what we're focused on internally. And that's how we're planning our road ahead. And again, like the idea, one of the reasons for going down this path is we'd also like to be community-owned and steered by the foundation because in that sense, you know, walking the talk and ourselves being operated and held and controlled by a group that believes in this project. Yeah, thank you. That's great. It sounds like you're quite a year ahead of you, if not a few, to say the least. And there's a question here. Would it be possible to set up a chat group for people in this conversation who want to discuss how we can set up a test neighborhood? That's a good question. I don't know whether this is the right group to do a test neighborhood. Certainly very possible. But what I would suggest to ensure that that does happen for those of you that are interested is to contact CID directly. And maybe we could put CID's contact details into the chat for anybody who is interested. And then CID, if you're okay with that, maybe you could facilitate a test group with those that are interested from this chat. Yeah, I just dropped my... Great. I just dropped my email ID in there. And if you go to our website, neighborhoods.network, there's a link to our Discord server. And so what we do is for people who are interested, we just spin up a channel. And so if you're a group, you create a channel for you and then all members of the team are in there and you can actually invite people that are excited about it yourself. Yeah. And so that creates like a space for you to discuss. And there's very low barrier to this. So even if you just have an intentional idea, just drop into our Discord server and say hello to me. Okay, thank you. Yeah, you answered my question is to have people could stay up to date as well. So thank you. And we do have one more question that just rolled in. You mentioned some other spaces like Facebook, WhatsApp, et cetera. How does neighborhoods compare to these? And she's mentioned some other ones called Slack and Gilden. I guess there's several different, let's say communication platforms for communities. How does neighborhoods differ? Yeah, I feel like the difference is so vast. Like you might wanna think of us and like another generation of sorts. So for starters, like these are web two platforms. So there's no data sovereignty. Like your information is stored in their servers. They are platforms. So they have specific purposes with which they come together. Like a specific technical purpose like Slack is conversations. You can't plug in a module for peer to peer lending or resource sharing or, you know, outsurfing within Slack. Like that it's just not that architecture. Whereas like frameworks like ours allow you to construct your own space with no limit to what you can do. And yeah, because it's agent centric, like you have agency of your information you can carry your chain to any neighborhood or space that you wish. So yeah, I would say it's, I think a generational difference that's probably the best way to describe it. We're going from 2.0 to 3.0. I wonder what 10.0 looks like. Anyway, we'll go there in this conversation cause we've only got one minute left. And I'd like to hand back over to Michelle to close us up. Yeah, thank you, Sid and Camille for that great conversation. It is incredible just to see what the future but also right now is of what is being developed. And again, just knowing it's early stages. So for you to be here and share that and be open to questions and conversation and great to see the interest of those of you here on this call. For those of you who may be watching this later, Sid's email just to blast it out for anyone who wants to connect with Sid is Sid at neighbourhoods.network. That's what he put in the chat. So feel free to email him anytime if any of this has been of interest and resonates with you. And just for those of you on the call here, it would be great to capture from you in the chat what is one key takeaway or insight you are taking from this session. And this just really gives a really good insight into what you've been learning through this conversation. So what is one key takeaway or insight you are taking from this session? Drop it in the chat and then we will close with Aikarakiya. And I will close us out with Aikarakiya. Thank you again, everybody, for being here. It has been a wonderful conversation to share and have with you. Kia ora, everybody. Thank you.