 I have a question for you Andrea, some governments are studying the possibility to issue national cryptocurrencies and so how, what would be your thought with respect to what you said and as a Koloa question, when we think about the national information on a blockchain government will say it should be in the territory, it should be on a national blockchain and a national blockchain is a total contradiction with distributed ledger principles So one of the magical things about freedom of speech is that freedom of speech is not freedom to force anyone to listen and when you speak sometimes what you say is boring or idiotic and then nobody listens, you don't get a guarantee of an audience you only get the right to say something. If national governments want to create their own national blockchains they are engaging in boring speech. That form of system that ignores the realities of a borderless open alternative that exists is by definition crippled, it is limited in its abilities If you take this technology and you try to wrap it in restrictions and control it you have something that is not open, not borderless, not open access, not open innovation not neutral, not censorship resistant, what is it? It is business as usual only binary We already have digital money like that, in fact 92% of all money in circulation is money in somebody else's database, if that database is built by the government it doesn't change the fundamental fact so I would consider that free speech but boring You can't impose your graphical restrictions on these things or if you do you cripple them and so it is an oxymoron I would guess