 So thank you for those ones that are here and skip lunch yet. So thank you very much for that. So before everything, I would like to talk before about trust, something that I believe is the fuel for our current assistance. Trust is what makes our relationships available, not only with friends and with family, but also with institutions and with companies. And there are some problems now with trust and reputation. And this is something that takes a whole life to achieve and to get, and yet still, it's something that you can lose in just a whole second. So that might be a really big issue. Trust has evolved, especially in the last century, quite a lot, especially as we are coming into a very digital era. Before, we used to know people. We used to establish local relationships. Now this is quite different, right? We established relationships. We buy, sell, trade things, hire people that we might not know and never see in our whole lives. So it's really important how to establish those relationships and to understand as well what is the core things that manage and create these relationships. In fact, there might be many issues related to a bad management or reputation and trust and on data, which is a topic that I'm going to explain you and introduce you about. So one main issue is how can we protect our reputation in this era where everything is connected, where we don't know many people we interact with. So this snapshot is from a black mirror, and many of you might have seen this capture. So this is obviously the biggest extreme side of this thing we are talking about. So it's this sort of society where everyone is seeking for other people evaluating them. But the main issue is that if you don't have the right valuation, you are going to get constraints over things like getting a mortgage or most things like living in a flat that you are going to rent. So your reputation management can really affect you. In fact, in this capture, they touch one main topic that is should we have a bankrupt institution for reputation? That is something that is quite a technological issue that affects the society right now. The three main pillars of a digital identity, and this way we interact with the environment and people and society, might be not only a reputation and trust, which are two different ways to measuring the different relationships we have. A trust is something that you can create generally over society, over the people that are close to you. Reputation is a social scoring. It's just that it can be valuable to some things that we would like to perform. But the main core thing about here is how can we use this to measure risk right? In order that big companies or even me, if I want to buy something over internet, can establish successful and safe relationships with each other. Traditionally, when we speak about digital identity models, we tend to think about it in a simplistic way. Banks, when they talk to you about identity, they usually mess around with this and they end up talking to you about identification, which is just one of the little small parts that identity solution is compounded by. So we do not only need identification, we need to establish proper criteria of entering new data. We need to establish standards to make sure that we have a digital identity, that this information, if it's valuable to one company or to one institution, it's going to be valuable to many more of them. There is authorization, something that has been especially powered by the regulation PSD2 that we will explain about that more in detail later. But also, for me, the main thing is that there is one main thing I think is missing. And it's something as basic as incentives. No matter how the standards are well built and the technological solution that stands behind that, me as a consumer or as a citizen, I really need to understand what is the final value that this system provides me. For example, what incentive can be that, for example, if I give you my personal data, then I'm going to earn money for that. All that, in exchange for that, with some models, there is one of a Spanish company called Traiti. Traiti does something that is really clever. They play with what is called a social reputation, and they create what they call a trust network. They have one thing that is completely different to all the different digital identity solutions I have seen before. First of all, they have a magnificent user experience, something that is missing in all the space. And I have been working about this for a while. And they have that incentive. So how does Traiti work? You have your social scoring. And let's say that I want to incorporate people that I know in order for them to value me. If I have 15 friends or 50 people that trust me, that information is valuable if I ask, for example, for a credit, for a consumer credit, or there's also something that they also introduce into the platform. That is, I can add personal information from Facebook, from Twitter, but not only the typical ones. For example, I can introduce information from Blablacara. Imagine that I want to rent a car, and I want to get it insured, of course. So that risk is going to be measured among a serial criteria of data. And it will be really interesting for companies to know if I am a good driver. And you can know that with the data in this case from Blablacara. At the end of the day, what it enables you as a user is the more information you introduce into the platform, you can see directly how your scoring improves, how what you are paying for on insurance and other services, how can you get access to better products and services, or pay less in a way that is really interactive and easy to measure for you as a customer. So this pretty much differs from what we have currently, which is an internet not really of trust, but an internet of silos. And there is many problems that are related to this. First of them, companies are forced nowadays to increase their level of interoperability of their data and their customers. But still, from a business standpoint, it's not something that they are prepared yet. So the thing that if I open my customer's data to the exterior, that might be a problem because my competition might be stealing that information from me. And that is not what your core business is. And we are going to think together on the last point of this keynote, how can we measure and define what is our core business even in really traditional markets? Other on the main issues that we have here is the owner of the data is the company itself. So there is a big problem there. We don't have any sort of trackability of the data. We don't know if there is other people that are using it for any sort of purpose. And in the way, we don't monetize it as well. And maybe we should. But the main issue we have with this is about incentives as well. And it's that traditional companies, and especially the GAFAs, have an incentive to make the data of their customers something difficult to access. So they create platforms where it's really easy to enter, where they concentrate the value, and where it's really difficult to exit. So in that sense, as information, which is to be a data common, something accessible for third parties, becomes something that scares, and because it's something that scares, they can inflate its value. And something is really damaging as a society. So how is the regulator positioned on this space? There are three main regulations that are very related to this. First, the regulator was trying to force the main institutions to compete. So that is why the main reason these regulations has been promoted. But on the other side, they wanted to increase the customer protection as well. So GDPR is the most well-known that we affect us from the last couple of two years. And it's about recognizing that your personal information should be yours. Still nowadays, companies are not really compliant to this. And most of the companies that have in Spain are paying penalties because they are not doing things right with this. But that is not a technical problem. It's a business problem, and it's a way of thinking problem because we are still thinking that data should be ours, and it should be a tool for us to get into a final purpose, where that is, I believe, is the value. We have the other main regulation, PSD2, the new directive of payments, that makes mandatory for main financial institutions to open their APIs, meaning that I, for now, let's say energy company, can start a payment from an account of a customer, even without using my bank. So I can use other as a platform, and yes, as a tool. So what happens with this? And is that the same that we saw in the telco space with the over at the top that just started to create new services and concentrating on the value? We might see many emerging companies in some markets, domining other markets, because they will be able to access that last layer of value. And then the end of the day, also my fight, too. What it recognizes is that people should be in access to all the financial information that they are related to them. And also, if you hire any sort of financial product, that you should know when this has been promoted by a bank, because it's the specific product that makes more money to them, or why it fits a better product for you. And it has been tailor made, because something that was an ambit, where there was a serious lack of transparency, and it really defines the way we invest, especially people that have not that knowledge about investing rightly. A really interesting topic is what is the value of the information we bring day after day? So a couple of weeks ago, there was something very interesting, which is a Google buying Fitbit for over $2.1 million. That's a huge amount of money for a company that was supposedly just building pieces of hardware. At the end of the day, if we value the users with this sort of valuation and the exit they did, we have a $75 value per user. So that is a value of your personal medical information. The issue is that we don't see that value in any way. We just give and throw away and other people use them to make profit. Maybe we should do the inverse thing, and there are some systems that are being emerged right now that precisely focus on that, on how I should be the owner of my information. And if you want to access it, I will be in control of it, and you will have to pay me for it. Other really interesting thing that is emerging now and is that really putting pressure on the regulators is Libra and the wallet, Calibra. I don't know if you have read about this. Libra wants to be an stable coin, which is a sort of a currency that is backed in this case by more than seven different currencies from the United States. So it's the first time that we see almost in the modern history company, private sector, creating a currency with all the companies. So what is the main finality that Libra has? On one sense, they don't really want to compete with traditional banks. They want to create something different. So I used to travel a lot, especially Asia and South America, and there was a really big issue. Some things that we find here that are common, like if I want to rent a car, I can buy a car, I can get a listen, I rent in many different features and ways of financing things. If you go to other continents or countries, the reality is quite different. So as because many people, more than the health, doesn't have a bank account, we don't really have ways to understand what is their banking, a track record. So it's really difficult for us to measure their risk. So in other ways, they get isolated financially from the world. So this is really important because people, despite not having a bank account, they pay every day. They pay their bills. They have little jobs. They have many different interactions on their day after day that we could incorporate in one single platform globally. Imagine that we could have the same interest rates here in Spain that someone that, because life is like this, was born in maybe Colombia or Venezuela. By the simple fact that you are born in another country, you are treated completely different. And this is a clear example of how risk is not measured right nowadays. So this should be one of the most powerful tools that we might see in the modern history in the term of how can we incorporate people that are outside of the current system and institutions we know. We shouldn't be so worried in the first world, especially in Europe, because these tools, despite Facebook, and barely anyone trusts Facebook right now, might unlock an incredible amount of value in society. So, some time ago, I used to be obsessed with network effects and how can you evaluate the companies that were emerging in the United States? The typical Twitter, Facebook, and so on, even like Twitter, didn't have a business model until almost one year and a half ago. So, one of the main things that always turns my mind to understand things is network effects. A network effect is a cycle where the more people demands a product or a service and not for it, the more efficient it is. And that better user experience and better services attracts more people and makes for competition to be more far away. So, in the case of Uber, it's really simple. It's the more drivers that are, the more demand that you can find in the platform. It's the more geographical coverage that you are gonna find. So, it's less down times, so less you will have to wait to get a car in this case. And also, it's more efficiencies, so it's the lower the cost. So, if I have a better service and a lower cost, it's likely that the demand will increase. So, for me, this is not really the important point. If you go to valuations, especially if you launch a company, the first thing you will be likely to try to define is the total addressable market, which is in the best case scenario, what is the potential market that I could cover? In this case, Uber wanted to achieve almost about the 65% of this coverage. And they really didn't get that. It's over 40% 45 globally. But this is not a really important thing. It's that this market, just in the last four years, grew more than the 25%. And over this 25% increase of the total addressable market, Uber has monopolized over the 85%. So, it's not about how much of this market I cover nowadays, it's how this market evolves, how I'm creating new tools and new companies that integrate people that were not using this service before. And how can I create, how can I make them captive so that then they don't go outside of my platform? But with this finality of Uber, it's transporting people, not really, it's creating the best software platform to management, for the management of autonomous and driving cars. You can have a driving car that is autonomous and it will be likely not only to transfer people from place to place, it can transfer objects of any sort of cargo, and also something that is really different. It can transfer energy from what is cheap to when it is expensive, to create mechanics of conversations of that. So, business models are so wide, not transportation of people, and the only thing you can unlock that value is being the smartest company around this relating to data. Something that really matters to us is, okay, with GDPR, companies should use ways to prove, also to the regulator, that the way that they treat information is private. So that is not related to the origin, right? This creates some problems. The main one, and it has been really highlighted by this study of May of this year from nature.com. So it was a paper that explains and they give you the tool to actually try to do this, which is really interesting. So it says that the 99.98% of Americans of a population base of over three million could be identified using just only 15 samples of data. So you might know my full self at once, but if you know what car I drive, where I eat, what kind of films I see, in what kind of environments I interact with, you're going to be pretty likely to know who I am. Even the study says that with only three pieces of anonymized data, you can get to the 76% of a probability to get of who is behind that. So this is really an issue that highlights a main problem we have nowadays, and is that even that we are anonymizing data, we can still use it to track people. So we have to move forward to systems where ever we don't exchange data, the data is saved locally, or where we don't exchange actually information that is valuable. So there are two main systems, one of them is the technology that is called secure multi-party computation. The other one is a way of signing transactions and ways of exchanging information, that is called zero knowledge proof. I will focus on the first of them, because I think it's really interesting and it changes the way we can think about these sort of systems. Traditionally, when we want to analyze data, what we do is send information to the algorithms that are going to analyze that, to mine that data. What's a secure multi-party computation does is the opposite, is the algorithm is the one that travels. The data stays locally. So for example, let's say that I go to a bar, I want to buy a beer, and you need to know that I'm over the legal age, which in Spain is 18 years, right? Traditionally, you will just show your ID, where you are showing who your parents are, where you live, your place of birth, you are sending many information that is not valuable to the final conclusion that you must show. So these systems work in a more simple way. Locally, we will have a petition that using algorithms that are public and that are certified by third public entities, they will extract just one yes or no to a petition that locally will be is Danny over the legal age to drink yes or no? And you will never need that information anymore. So okay, Danny is able to do that. Okay, Danny can buy this, end of the thing. You will have access to the data no more. You don't even have access to that data. So that's pretty much how this thing works and how it might be evolving the way we interact with companies, the way we do, I know your customer, or even the way we can go and have an onboarding process directly from one company to other, directly with that same process to share it without showing actually more personal data. This way of managing our personal data where the citizen, the human being is the center of everything, is called self-servering identity. So what are the main difference between the current, usually identity stack we use? First, we use, we have what is called the claims. A claim is a personal data that is unique. For example, a claim can be my name, my, let's say, date of birth. A claim can be my credit scoring. It can be anything that is related to me. But a really important thing is that they cannot be duplicated. I can have only one name, despite I can't use avatars in other ecosystems. But the main thing is that third parties that are trusted are the ones that are certified that that claim is right. So for example, I'm not Danny because I said it. It's because the government signs and I have that certificate locally in my identity wallet that certifies that I'm who I am saying. If I have a bank in a scoring, it's not because to me, it's because maybe I have three certificates from three different banks that make sure that I'm not trying to cheat to anyone. So this highlights one main thing and is that identity is evolving from the who I am to just to the what can I do? Because that's the final thing that matters, not starting all that big amount of information that you can either lose or that can be hacked and cause you trouble. You really don't know that, need that. So to finish this keynote, I would like to focus on the final implications from the business side. And I would start from the most traditional case that is an energy company that are usually really traditional. I'm mostly on the consumer part of energy companies that are the most that we are more in contact with. So in this example, let's say that we have three houses with one single company, energy company. Traditionally, nowadays, you will have three separate contracts with that same entity. And why is that? If I'm the same client and I have three different contracts, I should have one contract for three different houses, right? That will make things way more simple. But if you think about that, you can evolve even to more things. So let's say I used to live with friends until a few months ago. So let's say that why don't even have one house, several contracts for several people that are going to be paying for the contract and using the ultimate commodity that is energy. Those people, if you finalize them properly, you will be likely to have more customers as well when they get independent. If we have a user experience that concentrates that value over the final user, what we have is something that is pretty, pretty interesting, which is the next thing. Traditionally, if we think about traditional energy companies again, what is our field of interaction with them? It will be likely to be in our houses or their offices, and that's it. It's a total, local, and static relationship. But now, let's just start thinking about one case. Let's think that maybe I'm going to have dinner to your house tonight, and I will go with my electric car, which is going to be around 15 euros, let's say, if I'm going to charge it at your house. Let's say that I go to your house and I say, hey, I just need to plug my car, it's out of battery. What would you think? You would think, okay, Danny, maybe what are you doing that's expensive? Are you going to pay for it? What are you going to do? And why is that? Because there is not a direct relation between what I'm using and where I'm using and the customer. So now imagine something that is a little bit more evolved. Now imagine that my car has an identity or even a wallet. This black that is in your house has an identity or even a very little QR, and that I have my identity as a customer. But this simple rule of three, I will be able to consume that energy at your place and you will not be paying for that. I will be doing that. So that completely changed the way we interact with companies. And that's where the business model started to change. So traditionally, what is the commodity of an electric company on the consumer side? It's electricity, right? It's energy. But let's see one example to really find out if that is going to be true or if maybe the final commodity is something a little bit different. So when we think about co-vernance over personal data, let's think nowadays about one company, electric company, that let's say it brings 10 plaques to here, to Kinapolis, at the entrance. Now let's say that I want to go with my girlfriend to the water battles. And my final thing I want to do is not charge my car, is do something else. So what did this energy company tell me, hey Danny, why don't you go to a cinema here or to a Starbucks that is inside, grab a coffee, go to see a film, and you will have a free charge. What is the important thing that I will be, this company will be bringing a lead to let's say Starbucks. Average cost of a lead on this sort of business is between $35 and $50 each beer, it's a new customer. So the customer acquisition cost is pretty high. So if this company will be able to bring new customers and monetize that, will be the commodity here. It will maybe not be energy anymore, it will be in this case information. Concretely, the capacity of connecting the user, you know better than no one, and third parties that want to position their products and services to someone that will likely to consume them. And this is where things start interesting because the nature of the businesses don't really belong, it changed over time and it changed not only due to consumer habits, but also because of technology. But now imagine that on this electric company, this electric company owns and builds the plaque with a third party that is from their trust. They own the platform and they basically own anything. It will be the best way of developing this. Maybe there is different ways. So if we start decentralizing, let's say that now I do not build the plaques, I create a business standard. Now more people, I will be creating an emerging industry that will be building hardware for my platform. And that's already something very useful. Why? Because I will be accessing to way more information. I will be better at position products and services for others and I will be satisfying more my customer. But even what will be the role of a traditional company if we decentralize everything? Not only the ownership of the plaques, not only what you need to access the platform so anyone can access and not even owning the platform. What is the platform is a protocol. So here, we still could find a really strong business. If during these years and this process, this company will have been trading their algorithms better than anyone. The same as we were on this day, it took advantage of these network effects to concentrate value. I make it difficult therefore to exit that platform. This should be something that any traditional industry could do in that way. So should we in the following years, another example of our other industry, consume content to let's say Spotify, Netflix, all these wide variety of companies that offer you content or we might be going to moving towards a world where consumers are going to pay for algorithms that are going to select what you need and offer to you better than anyone. So what is going to happen? I don't know, let's find it together. Thank you very much. I think we have time for any question if there is anyone, if not lunchtime. Thank you.