 decisions, like my apologies. Yeah, that's okay. I'm totally, you know, happy to delegate, you know, decision makers, they're good at making decisions. Like if I feel like the outcomes are, you know, in alignment with myself, and then I don't mind delegating that. And so I think that people are willing to. And so it's not like we have to always know everything about everything and always feel like we have to be like making all the decisions for ourselves. And so I just believe in being able to give people access to as much data as they can, because information is power. Right. Right now, there's only a select few organizations of individuals that have access to a bunch of data that we don't have access to. And I so I think opening up that like Pandora's Box, so to speak, is is a decent approach to helping us. So a quick thought back earlier, when you were talking, I was like, Yeah, you would think that the pandemic that like a virus that's killing off a whole lot of people would have been a common enemy and would have united us and yet, you know, look what happened. And one of the major missteps was not following the advice you just gave. And there might be a scenario. Part of the problem is that we're in such a hot politicized environment for lots of different reasons. And there's a bunch of strategies being applied there. But I think that being honest and transparent and offering up, here's the best we know, and let's make decisions together about it would actually have diffused a whole bunch of data skeptics and other sorts of people who were like, This is authoritarianism creeping into us. This is Nazism. It's like, wow, people went pretty far over the top. But, but there's a legit, you know, there's a woman who's been in the OGM conversations for a while, who at one point stopped and said, like, before the pandemic, I didn't trust the government very much at all. And I certainly didn't trust big pharma. And all of a sudden, we enter this moment when both of them are saying, must do this. It's like, why am I going to follow this advice? Right. And you couple that with a bunch of really stupid things the CDC did early on, and so on and so forth. And, and then I don't know, this is just like a, it's a hornet's nest of issues that that we're walking around here. It is it's a challenging thing, because just having access to the data itself doesn't mean that there's data integrity, there's right, it's even more difficult these days with like, deep fakes and all this other kind of idea is how to even disseminize the information. So I should asterisk and say, access to data, but also knowing that there's a solid foundation of data integrity to go along with that, as well as the representation of data. That's kind of like what the book was talking about. And of course, you were in the first time in your psychology stats class, like, here's three graphs, all representing the same data, and you're now have three different views of what's happening here. And so it's all three of those elements in conjunction with one another, I think that it's like, really going to really kind of touch on it. And my undergrad was econometrics. So I was nominally in the economics department. But I remember in econ 101, when we dispensed with externalities in 15 minutes, I was like, that sounded really interesting. How did that go away so fast? So then I kind of abandoned economic theory, because ISO quants and whatever like macro and micro didn't make a lot of actual sense to me practically. And so I found this professor who was doing econometrics and loved that. And that was kind of what I did. But I then I ended up calling econometrics how to lie with numbers. Because give me a data set and give me a story you want to tell and I can massage that data set to tell your story. Right? So it made me it made me a skeptical reader of charts and stats and all that kind of stuff. But then have you read the book, The End of Average? I haven't I actually I need to put that one on my list is someone that once told me so he's not the best writer, but the book is really, really good. And you're like, Whoa, okay, then he starts out with the US Air Force where when jet fighters show up, all of a sudden they have a lot more crashes. And they're like, what's going on here? And and like our pilots just not fast enough sharp enough or whatever it turns like not really. Then somebody has the bright idea of measuring their pilots. And so they measure 3000 pilots, hand length, arm length, waist torso, eyes, whatever, they just do measurements. And it turns out that less than 15 or 20%. Maybe it's the numbers even smaller like 5%. Some incredibly small percentage of the pilots were average. Everybody was like really long arms, short torso, whatever. And all of this leads to the invention of the highly modifiable bucket seat that the pilot seat that can be adjusted so that you can see over the instruments so that you can reach the joystick and the pedals and all that kind of stuff. And you know, in our cars, the bucket seats are the inheritors of that technology. But then like accidents go down. Because they realize that we don't have an average pilot. And so and so the author of this book plays this out in place after place after place, like, like, when you look at average stats, they're really misleading half the time. Yeah, and I think that's a really good example of what are we really trying to accomplish at the end of the day. So objective is for accidents to go down. So that's a very tangible objective metric to say, well, did we get the results that we're trying to achieve? And, you know, that path to get there can be difficult, because controlling all the variables in a world of infinite amount of variables is very difficult. And so trying to fine tune that as much as possible is the way to go. And it's, it's just, it's just a tough thing. And so I think like, I just like want to, I basically want to think in terms of like, the connectedness to things, like I said, in holistic systems, it's hard to describe what is the whole, you know, so it's really have this membrane here, maybe this like community is highly productive. And like, everyone's living happy and healthy. And like, they've got a strong thriving economy. But if it's at the detriment of the surrounding area, that's, that's not a whole system, you know, and so this is, I think now where we're collaborating on larger scales internationally, and we have digital tools, and more and more people are getting opened up to the internet. There's something else that's happening. That is, I mean, it's just like, we there hasn't been a whole lot of like, theorization to what does that mean? And what does that look like now? And like, what does that really mean? Because it's the boundaries and everything it's just kind of beginning to slowly wash away. And we also have enumeracy and a bunch of other things. It's a little bit like the books on behavioral econ that are telling us that, you know, we're full of all sorts of bias. And we don't respond to the right things very often, we don't stop and slow down and think through the situation. So I was just like, what if we live in a dateocracy, where evidence based decisions were kind of king, except the conversation around what constitutes evidence, how reliable is the data? What is a good experiment? What are we going to do about it? What is the right policy measured? Each of those questions is like thorny and difficult. But wouldn't it be cool to be living in that world where when somebody said, hey, hey, you all, we think that this is happening. But really, if you look at the stats, it's not it's kind of this thing over here that's happening, right? I think that I think that'd be really pretty interesting. Yeah, I think that people should be free to explore science, the way that science is meant to be studied. I don't think that that's necessarily happening. Yeah, when it's say that as a scientist myself, going through university that I was really encouraged to challenge the status quo by any stretch of the imagination. Yeah, yeah. Well, the whole process of getting like getting a doctorate degree is the process of finding your facet of the fractal leading edge of your discipline, and being an expert in that thing. And every so often one in 1000 of those people bends the discipline in some new direction, right? Change changes the whole discipline. But mostly, everybody's finding their voice and their way and their their slice of expertise within the general ongoing view of the discipline. And it's hard to find advisors who will back you if you're bucking the discipline. Right? You won't make your way through so easily. Yes, it's interesting. So how do we solve that as a general purpose thing? Well, I mean, I know for sure what we were saying kind of before we started recording is the divisive nature of these narratives, right? And so it's like, how I was saying with the consensus is that the systems aren't working very well. Most people agree to that. And so the fact that we can get most people to agree on something that's, I think that's powerful, right? But the problem is, we are pointing fingers, and we're not coming from a place of unity, we're coming from a place of separation. And so that's why I kind of say the word conscious again, some of these newer terms, like awareness and wake up, it's just like it gets convoluted. But but the point of it is that an aware intelligence of being has a broader scope of view of what's happening. So it's like, it's just the scale at which you observe, right? Because, you know, in science, we try to we tend to draw this imaginary box, and we're going to say like, we're going to study everything in here, and just make the assumption that it's not connected to anything outside of this imaginary line that we've constructed. Right? So I think that's where the fundamental flaw is happening. Exactly. So, so here's in my brain, Keteris paribus and then underneath it, Keteris paribus is bullshit. I'm not sure what Keteris paribus means all other things being equal. So when you set up an experiment, you often say, we're going to look at this, all other things being equal, then we're going to and it's like that assumption was a really bad assumption because those other things are also moving and also affecting your experiment. So that's partly what I guess this article is saying knowledge, confusion and manipulation, a talk by Felix Stalter. Yeah, it looks good. So interesting. I forget that I even put this in one that I put this in 2019. I'll connect this to today's call. And I know going back to what you were speaking in relation to ergonomics, you know, ergonomics in the pilots and fitting in the size and stuff. I think that is also true for how we interact with our devices, excuse me, our online spaces spaces aren't ergonomically customizable. So I kind of envision this modularized components where you can have a user interface or the same application be different for different personalities and different learning styles and things like that. But we have we have seen that with ourselves so much yet, it's just like here's the UI, right? It doesn't work for you. And it's, you know, and so then we're bouncing around a bunch of months, a bunch of different applications that are only accomplishing part of what we want to do. And so and it's very siloed, you know, you can't your behavior amongst one app like Yelp doesn't affect Uber doesn't affect this, you know, imagine if there was actually a universal single sign on that could bridge those silo gaps as well as a database that could be collectively shared, still maintain the privacy that we want to have in the security. Right, right. There was a time some a decade ago, maybe when skins were really popular. And you could skin your Napster app to look like whatever or your instant messaging app and all that and gave a lot of customization. But that that moment seems to have passed a bit. Although like Gmail has themes, I just don't know how many people notice or realize that Gmail has themes and you can change them. So my Gmail background changes with the weather all the time. So yeah, so my Gmail frame looks like what the weather is outside. I don't know why I like it so much. But we don't get a lot of customization. And there's a lot of conversation happening around OGM and around us in terms of those boundaries between different applications. It's a little bit what you just said about why don't I get to choose which of these is my favorite to use and how do I compose a work environment from my favorite elements, right, the composability or modularity of elements. And we spent a bunch of time on this, I guess yesterday in the FreeJerry brain call about swapping out Zoom chat. Right. So we tried many moons ago. We have Mattermost servers. You're on those. And we tried to get everybody to stop using the Zoom chat and to just chat over on Mattermost. In the calls chat for the calls and I mean, most of our standing calls had their own channel on Mattermost, which is lovely because then you can go back and you can scroll through every time you don't have this separate little text file that's context free. Except not everybody who'd show up for the call was on Mattermost. So getting hurting people over there was hard. And then we just we just the discipline was too hard to maintain. So we don't do it anymore. And my my assertion was, if Zoom permitted you to swap out this chat for some other chat you like, and it just bolted in, it'd be a no brainer. Because then when you set up the call, you configure it to whatever chat you're using and they basically bond when you show up and you're on your way. But but it doesn't do that they don't do that. And I'm trying to figure out how you encourage vendors to write for that. How do we how do we get a composable environment out of some of these piece parts? That's what drew me to the community that I'm involved with now, which is hollow chain and taking agent centric approach. So instead of the global consensus, like we the ledger has to be full synced on all the nodes and everyone has to agree to some universal, you know, truth. Yeah, an agent section approach and they that framework is also allows for modularity and ways that are unprecedented. And with newer web three tools that will be coming out, the way I envision a decentralized architecture now opens the door for bridging those what were previous silos. And so now instead of 25 apps that you have to have, you can have three or four or five mini operating systems that are all run off of the cloud, they're all a decentralized backend. And so really, it's like you're just downloading a mini operating system as opposed to like some siloed application. And I think that that has huge implications for the future of the internet and how we interact with software. Interesting. I'm friends with Arthur Brock from way, way long ago, but I'm really not caught up with holo for a long time. How like, where's the project now? I'm not sure they just came out with a roadmap. And so that's probably the best route to just take a look at their that the devil's they do. They do a good job of updating developers. And, you know, they came out with a newer roadmap after they did a code rewrite and everything. And so now it's like, there's a lot more additional features that they rolled out with. But I don't I don't follow that so much because I'm really just my focus is on developing applications, hollow chain applications, and other tools open source tools for recognition. Right now I'm working on a project called trust graph, which is on I can post that. Thanks, which is, you know, related to this idea that we've been talking about is like, you know, how how do we how do we handle this kind of stuff? So is this link the best link for their new roadmap? I'll check it out. Thanks. Yes, that's the one. Sweet. And have you heard of an app called Adam, the agent centric DAP meta ontology? Yes, that's also another project I'm looking to get involved with. Oh, no kidding. God damn. Okay. I'm working with Nicholas luck. And I'm waiting to continue that conversation. Harlan and who I'm working with on trust graph is going to be collaborating and very interested in collaborating with him. So it looks like they're, you know, I'm hoping there'll be some synergy there because that's a great project. It's really, it's a spanning layer. So it's a meta ontology. And the big like passion I had when I first jumped into hollow chain many years back was sector. And so sectors describing this decentralized operating system I'm talking about. And it's an it's an artificial neural network. And so, you know, Adam is in conjunction with that given that there's this meta ontology in terms of how these different ecosystems can communicate with themselves. So the idea is to really actually bring about a system for interoperability, like true interoperability. So here's sector in my brain here. And I met with Eric Harris Braun and Arthur back in the days of their meta currency project. And was listening to that. And and sector was a spin out from that and hollow chain is a spin out from that. Each time I think cleaving off pieces that seemed doable to go build, but meta currency ran really, really deep. I mean, I think, you know, when they dove down the rabbit hole, I couldn't dive as far down as they were going explaining, you know, what this thing was and how it worked. But they're building from those philosophical foundations. And here's how I found Adam is that I had put in this ontological project by this GitHub user. But I know very little about it, except it got mentioned on one of our free juries brain calls a while ago. That's why I even know about it. Yep, it's a it's a back end agnostic tool. So it could, you know, use hollow chain IPFS, any of the, any of the databases that doesn't matter, which people are using for the back end. It's really just a connect connectivity. So interesting. Yeah. Yeah, it uses the RDF triples. So the subject predicate object, in terms of creating, you know, graphing and relational databases. And that's what I'm very interested in doing, like in conjunction with trust graph, and these verifiable claims, these trust claims that people can cryptographically sign. And so it helps like protect sources, private sources from people. Is this the right trust graph, by the way? Yeah, I think so. Okay, I connected to our call. Yeah, trust Adam. I connect Adam to our call. Yeah. I mean, part of the part of the issue with hollow chain has been a platform, a stable enough platform for people to write apps on. And I think it's gotten there. But I'm not actually sure. Yeah, I mean, they have they have working hollow chain applications, for sure. What I would like to see is I'd like to see a lot more open source code. And so that's what the mission I'm on is to, to write it myself. Now I had to learn a new language. It's written in a language called rust, which is not as many people are familiar with, but it has a lot of advantages. I'm a huge fan of it. And so I had to learn that and study do some studying, plus I'm newer to software development. I mean, So you're a restation now? Yeah, I'm a restation now. I had coding experience from engineering. I mean, I taught myself how to code on my TIA three calculator when I was in junior high. Yeah. And I've always played around with circuits. I'm an engineer is my background. But when it comes to just software development, specifically, I'm like, I was a total new. So I've been spending many, many months now studying. And now I'm actually ready to go ahead and begin the work. And so yeah, my, my plan is to continue to contribute to the hollow chain open modules. And so they have these different things that people can take and build, right? And what I want to do is automate that process. So I'm a huge proponent for low code, no code tools. Yeah, because I believe that if the that non technical people have the ability to create applications, we're going to see a totally different shift and how things are going because Yeah, I don't know if you in the OJM community, a mutual friend of ours has been sent arena, who's fresh out of school. And he went and first used air table. And now he's using bubble. But he's used low code, no code tools to build out a really big, beautiful directory that goes really quite deep. Yeah, I think he's done a really nice job. And so yeah, with Trove and everything. And so yeah, that's those tooling, those tools are very fundamental. What we need to be able to synergize ourselves on a broader scale. Yeah. Yeah, I'm glad that he's doing that work. So how can I bring myself up to date on that part of these architectures, like, and I'm not a coder, I mean, I can program Hello World and probably I used to be a little sorry, my first computer in the world was an Apple two plus. And one of my questions back then was why are there so many programming languages. So I started collecting interpreters and pilers. And by the time I retired it out for the first Macintosh, I had, you know, a couple of Pascal's and fourth and mumps and modular to and I don't remember what the hell else was really fun. And I could write Hello World on all those plus I could write Hello World on IBM mainframe and make it run. And beyond that I've done nada. But but but just that context has been incredibly helpful to me in understanding what else is going on and being an analyst, a tech analyst in the software, you know, software world and all that. But I'm trying to figure out how to jump into the middle of these conversations about modularity, agent architectures, composability, model view controller, I don't know, there's a whole bunch of things here that different communities are trying to solve in different ways because they have different philosophical perspectives on what's right and how to fix it. And I don't need to master all those things, but I'm trying to make wise choices between them. Yeah, well, I mean, experience myself, and I don't use social media and pay attention so much. I have not worked for corporations really. So like, you know, I've been unplugged. And so I don't know how to answer that in terms of like the industry level and what's out there and what's standard, how to because I'm lost as well in terms of how to like assimilate into this. I'm more of an algorithm person. My background is like math and data and analytics complex systems theory. I had experience, you know, researching and doing reports for cryptography. So I'm more knowledgeable blockchain cryptography, as opposed to, you know, really where the tech industry is in general and these different tools, I will just say, from my view, it's convoluted. And I tend to just like any time I see something that's really like overtly complex, I tend to think that maybe there's just alternative options because, you know, like I see these white papers like, and we're going to do this, we got this and this and there's all this fancy math. And like, I understand what the fancy math is saying. And I'm reading them and I'm like, do they even know what they're talking about? Like, what is going on? Like, but if you look at, like, you know, nature, it's just an elegant, like there's just an elegant flow and a pattern and a rhythm. It's not so, you know, complicated of a situation. And so I try to think of that, you know, like an elegant equation, like E equals MC square, even though that's probably that example, because it's not really necessarily accurate, but it's just like, in terms of the simplicity factor of it, that's kind of what I tend to think. And so, you know, it's like, if it's so difficult, the barrier of entry is so high to building technology that benefits these corporations, right? It doesn't help us as a collective. So I want to really significantly reduce that barrier of entry. And so I wish I could be more helpful other than, you know, well, I usually just hop into Discord and ask questions. And sometimes people will give you great links, like the hollow chain Discord, you can go in and they'll answer your questions. They're happy to like point people in directions. Got the core concepts now they use like biology. So they've got zones in DNA and the visuals. And so, you know, they're doing, they're doing a good job of helping explain it in ways that like, you know, make sense and have more visuals and stuff. So I love that. Yeah. Thank you. I mean, I mean, you're clearly you're clearly an independent itinerant sense maker, which is, which is lovely, right? And doesn't matter to me that you haven't been inside the corporate world and all that kind of stuff, because mostly they're 20 years behind everything. And you're curious and you're going from community to community like a bumblebee like, oh, look, pollen. And you're a cross pollinator and sort of hoping to try to build a hive in the middle of this that makes more sense. So that puts things out in the public commons in the states. He's been part of a bunch of conversations we've had an OGM about the gender, we call it the generative commons, right? And I love the regenerative frame around a whole bunch of things. But I didn't want to call it the regenerative commons, because like generativity seems like a good thing. Yeah. So we had a bunch of calls. Here's a bunch of calls around trying to create a generative commons agreement or something like that, which you can find here. I'll connect the generative commons agreement to our call today. But I think that the actions that you're the approach you're taking to finding your way through this is like kind of the right approach. It's like, you know, go smell the different flowers, see which ones feel right, feel, see which ones fit the architecture of society that you think needs to exist, right? And then go push them until they break and see where, how solid are they and how broken are they. And then maybe buzz around some more to get broader perspective on what neighboring communities are doing or what might be different approaches to do this. And at some point in the next decade, I think a bunch of these efforts will kind of crystallize and connect to the point where we have a new platform. But I was just on a thought my doubts about NFTs and NFT games. And I have a thought called obfuscation through complexity is a great way to mask fraud or mistakes, which goes back to my diagnosis of the global financial crisis, where ever more abstract securities were impossible to understand, but everybody else was buying them. So others were forced to join. This is like a perfect global scam. Like like the global financial crisis was the perfect global scam because because the math was faulty inside the securities, they had higher returns because they had higher returns, you would get fired if you didn't buy them. And because everybody was buying them, there was a whole big pool of money in the middle that if you got off the merry-go-round before everybody else did, you would do really, really well. It turns out that that smart capitalists don't like stability. They like beta, beta is volatility, right? And that those are the people we have, you know, society is in their hands right now. Sorry, Stacy. That's OK. I have to leave, but see it was a pleasure to meet you and I hope you come back. I really I'll see you on matter most, right? You're a matter most. Yeah, please, please send me a message. Cool. And I hadn't noticed that we can't pass the hour. See you, Stacy. Yeah, and we can we can wrap our call too. But yeah. Well, you know, it's like duplicating efforts is not necessarily a bad thing. Like if you have an experiment, you might want to do several iterations in different branches, but I'm trying to help us like minimize or maximize our resource allocation. Yeah. That flow and to know that if we are duplicating efforts, then it's intentional and it's for we can use that information somewhere else later right now. It's just like you go down this line and then you're there and then we're all that value. It's just so much untapped value just sitting there. So ideally, like minimizing duplicating efforts in ways that don't make sense is really what I'm trying to help figure out how to do because, you know, after I get an idea of this and figure out whether to, you know, where to plug into a team and stuff. I'm just going to lock myself in a lab for quite a while and just go to go after it. So I love that. And I want to know I want to learn what you're learning. So I want to follow whatever we're where are you? Are you you're not on the major platforms? Are you publishing, posting videos or anything about what you're learning? No, not yet. Maybe eventually, I'm not sure. Yeah, that yeah, because I'd love I'd love to be like in your wake going, oh, that was really cool. But I can tell you that. So my friend Denise, she put on this group of wake and dream synergy. That's how I met a lot of like the conscious technologists that I'm working with now. And what they want to do is they like conversations like this, they can generate an artificial intelligence, can generate artwork from it and then make it with tea out of it. And so in that NFT, you can have additional things is not just necessarily the art, but you can have membership and other access to things or discounts on stuff can be baked into the smart contract. Yeah, it's really cool. I'm thinking like if I was someone that wanted to buy an NFT, if I wanted to sponsor this, that's exactly what I would want is I want to be going to fund people that are having these conversations, right? And you can do that now, right? So you can just like the money goes there and you know that you sponsored this conversation and then your reputation can be built into it. And then then you these, you know, there's now there's a filter into why is someone joining a call or joining a community in a space? And it's not just like who has the most money or this and that, but it's actually like you've earned like access to these different groups. And so what happens in that is the information in the calls is valuable, right? All of the things that we've learned. And so when they purchased that, then now they also have access to that intellectual property. And so it's taking intellectual property and it's collectively stewarding those assets. So I'm totally torn about what you said because it's a blend of stuff I'm thrilled about and completely agree with. And then a bunch of stuff that I'm like, wait, wait, wait, what? So the part that I'm thrilled about, for example, one of the pieces is, I don't know, eight or 10 months ago, my friend, John Borthwick said, hey, Jerry, is OGM a Dow? And then he and another friend on the West Coast basically launched NFTs and they've got a lot of experience on this. And at one point I was asking John, could we have an NFT for OGM? And I think, and I think this is really parallel to what you just said, I think some investor would be really happy to buy an NFT that isn't a stupid pixel art picture of some apes or whatever, but instead is a snapshot of the nascent collective memory of civilization. This is what it looked like when it was like a little fetus with bulb eyes and a spinal cord in the tail. And then as it grows and evolves, you could take different snapshots and float them as NFTs. And because NFTs have some more contracts and future subsequent sales actually generate cash that goes back to the creator, which is not like any kind of art we've ever had before, right? That's a brand new, fantastic feature. I love that feature. I would think that having like a worthwhile NFT that does that kind of thing would be terrific. And that we didn't do anything with that conversation. So you're telling me that this community is doing that already? Yeah, that's what we're looking to do very shortly. They're working with like an NFT team that helps manage that kind of stuff. Yeah. And so what it is is like, as we are figuring out this collective sense making and collective governance, then that's valuable to future DAOs. And so I'll send you the PDF on slides I came up with to kind of show visually show this concept, but the idea is to support DAOs. So we want to help these DAOs start up, but the idea is that you don't want to scale too fast too soon. You have to have the like underlying framework to support infrastructure there to make it happen. And cause right now it's just like, it seems like this crazy mad house is running around, there's just needs to be a more grounded structure to it. And so the more we can get people to kind of like put in their value, put in their intellectual property and collectively have that as a pie, then people can build off of that. It's like bootstrapping. And that's the place where you lost me, where I fell off the back of the truck, so to speak. But I don't know why, but that metaphor I use a lot, which is I'm a big believer that IP should be out there in the open to help everybody. And the idea of protecting it, locking it away, earning your way into getting the IP doesn't make any sense to me. And for me, NFTs are like the autograph, the Babe Ruth autograph baseball card. I support Babe Ruth, in which case when you bought the top baseball card, you weren't supporting Babe Ruth, although he might have gotten a royalty, who knows? But in this case, NFTs can very directly support the communities that are busy churning out open intellectual property for everybody that is perfectly replicable at zero marginal cost. And that's fantastic. There's a bunch of people talking about how NFTs create and enforce scarcity. I can't stand that conversation. It makes me nuts. So I need to understand what you mean. Because I agree and I disagree. So from a fun, like a moral standpoint, I absolutely agree. However, there's a challenge and this is what I'm trying to figure out. So maybe you can help me because open source projects have trouble gaining momentum and getting funding. It's very difficult to get that funding. And so on the one hand, I would much rather everything be open. I don't patents and intellectual property. I don't agree with that, really. But the problem that I'm seeing is that it's hard to incentivize people to wanna sponsor those projects. And it's hard to get funding for that. So if we can find a way to get funding, then great. But I'm just seeing it like this is if we have this like circular thing, okay? And it's not centralized. So it's not subject to the same corruption. So it's transparent and it's collectively owned. Then instead of being open source, it's actually like any organization that wants to have access to it can do, they could still have access for free. It's not necessarily that we have to charge although we could. But the idea is that they're saying, well, but we buy sustainable products. We are fair trade. We treat our employees this way. We are transparent into where our money is going in our organization. So it's kind of like on the one hand, it's great to just get open free everything to everyone, but it's still not necessarily empowering, right? The proper movement and groups and communities because, so I kind of like I've always been terrible at debate class because I'm always like, yeah, you know, I can see both sides. And this is one that's really tough because on the one hand, I have many friends that are doing some amazing work in open source projects and I'm very much looking forward to contributing as much as I possibly can to those. But on the other hand, I'm really tired of all the wrong people having all the money. Like I'm just really tired of that. So like I'm trying to figure out what can we do with that? So, you know, I feel you, but I just like at the same time I do want to see the right people being able to like take care of themselves and have the resources they need to really get the ball rolling on this stuff. Totally, I totally agree. That makes total sense. So, and also one thing that we talked about, you know, GM over time, especially in that generative comments thing is that high well-functioning comments need some boundaries and need some protections because when anybody can go riff on the thing and copy it and then mash it up or drop some malware into it or whatever else, that's not actually functional code anymore. It gets confused and you lose whatever the value was that was created in the middle. It's easy to bury or drown or whatever or corrupt. So, stewardship needs some boundaries. On the other hand, if I had a choice between an NFT where, if I had a choice between one where the property IP was locked away or the IP was completely open, I would buy the NFT that was completely open and it would just be a choice between NFTs in the marketplace. Like, to me, it's like, why not try to float NFTs around completely open IP and see if people will invest because you're investing in the movement, not in the IP? Well, that would be the most ideal situation. Yeah, but has anybody done that? I don't think so, but you know, what you're talking about could be a huge opportunity for crowdsourcing because you don't need a million dollars from one person if you can get one dollar from a million people, right? Bingo, bingo. I think you're on something with that. And I definitely would be like very interested in figuring out how could we make that happen to get a bunch of people to put in a little bit to sponsor some open tools and intellectual property. Yeah, heck yeah. So, yeah. So if you're getting close to a conversation with others about this and whatever, like can you ring the bell and I'll like shine the bat signal and I'll show up because I'm really, really interested in this. And I think that there's a pony here. I think that this is a really good way to fund open source communities, artists and others. But for me, it's not about scarcity and protecting the IP. It's in fact about releasing it. And I think, and this is an experiment we can run, I think there's people who will invest in those NFTs with that premise for those ethical reasons. I mean, that would be the most ideal. It's just so far my limited experience recently because I've only recently come back into like the real world. And I've been away or you can think of me like a caveman. And so, my limited experience is just tough to get money for free stuff that you're free. It's hard and you can't blame people for not being as incentivized, but I know that they're out there. I know that they exist. Yeah, I don't know. How can we connect those people? Right. I mean, Wikipedia exists and yet if you had taken a business plan for Wikipedia to any venture capitalist 20 years ago, they would have laughed you out of the room, right? So some groups are doing it and I know those people are out there, but I don't know, that's one of the questions I maybe would be a good question for people that have more knowledge and experience. Like I want to hopefully talk to Peeke and Missy sometimes and ask them some questions about these things because like I'm trying to figure out exactly how to make this happen. Cool, me too. On the same quest, on the same quest. So who else is on the top of the list of people who would be wise on this? Well, just XR engines and open source community, creating open source metaverse tools and they're all incredibly passionate about open source software. Huh, okay. That's some people I kind of talked to and asked questions here and there. Like I was even asking a question about like the protections that you'd mentioned stuff and so I'm trying to, you know, here I'll post their link as well. And then, you know, Holochain. Again, I haven't talked to them so much about these kinds of things because like I really want to focus on being able to code and to engineer. So my bandwidth for like the funding stuff and non-technical ideas and activities, I'm just, I'm more limited at the moment just because I simply feel like the best service I can do for the collective is to be, you know, getting my hand dirty, jumping, diving in. Makes sense, makes sense. Cool, cool, cool, cool. But I'm really glad because like, I just want to make this happen. Yeah, exactly. And I don't care about anything else. Like it's not about me, it's so much bigger. It's just like the result. What is like, can we, you know, achieve this outcome as a society? Because I believe in unity. I don't believe in pointy fingers and divisiveness. I really try to approach things from a place of compassion. And I would really like to see more people doing the same thing, you know, it's heartbreaking. And so, yeah. It's totally heartbreaking. Where did you grow up? In a small town in the Midwest. Uh-huh. Normal, Illinois. Normal, I've heard of normal, never been there. Never been there. Closest I've ever lived in St. Louis. I could say I'm far from normal. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And I can say show me. So I feel like living, I feel like living almost three years in Missouri gave me the right to use their motto. This is super cool. I'm thrilled you're here. Thank you for showing up. Let's keep the conversation going. And anything I can answer for you right now? Yeah, well, just I want to figure out how can I onboard to OGM? Because I'm just not even sure if I totally fully understand exactly what it is. We aren't either. So you're on the Google group and you're on the matter most. Those are our two principal platforms. So you're seeing all the conversations. We have a Thursday morning call at 8 a.m. Pacific every Thursday. Is our standing group call about 25 people usually come in. And we alternate between two formats. One is the traditional format of checking in where I just look at my Zoom gallery view and I walk across and just I ask people what's going on in your life that has anything to do with OGM. And then when they say something that sort of sparks a little bit, I'll dig in a little bit. And we might spend 25 minutes on the thing that the third person raised and that's perfectly okay. And then the alternate format is a topic and I think this Thursday is another topic day. And so we've been picking different kinds of topics. We had a couple really good calls on the metaverse and I'm a bit of a metaverse skeptic. I don't like Mark Zuckerberg's vision of the metaverse and I don't really like the web three version of the metaverse. And so I bought the betterverse.org. And on the idea of why don't we design a metaverse together? Yeah, I like that metaverse. I've heard of Holoverse, but that's like too associated with Holochain and company. So metaverse is great. Yeah, exactly. So if you wanna think out loud about that kind of stuff and you wanna post on the metaverse site or it's just a Google site, it's really simple to edit and post stuff on and so forth. Let me know like if it appeals to you. But I feel like I've had, I've got 24 years using this brain thing. And I feel like I've been at the coal phase for 24 years by myself. And it's like, hey, everybody, this is really fun to do. Where are you all? Right? And why can't we build something like Wikipedia, but with opinions and narratives above Wikipedia and all the other assets out on the inner tubes? Why can't we build that thing together? Yeah, yeah, that's what I wanna do. And then tell stories on this medium and figure out like what to do. I wanna build that sucker. That's exactly what I'm looking to do. Okay, so I may have just gotten some funding to build some a little lightweight straw man prototype for some part of this. And as soon as I've wrapped my brains around it, I'll probably come back and talk to you. Cause I've like, if you're enthused and this is like a common vision, then. Yeah, for sure. Definitely. I mean, this is really the crux, right? Yep. Yeah, this is what makes sense. And, you know, I haven't unfortunately been able to attend any of the massive Wiki calls. The mornings are really tough for me that early morning. So, but like, I do wanna figure out like, what is in conjunction with massive Wiki? I have been talking a lot with Wendy McClain. And so I know there's a ton of overlap with what she's doing with tapestry and everyone's wisdom. And so I told her, I was like, you have the front end for what I wanna build the back end for. So like, seems like maybe- Let's figure out how these things fit. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly. Love that. Cool. Awesome. Thank you. Yeah. Pleasure. Nice to meet you. Appreciate it. Bye.