Hashing It Out
Hashing It Out

Episode 126 · 1 week ago

Hashing It Out Personals: Corey Petty

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

In this Hashing It Out Personals episode, we flip the script and talk to Hashing It Out host, Corey Petty.

You can also watch this episode on YouTube.

We are working with Infinity Keys to give listeners the chance to get a free NFT.   

Listen to the episode for the password and use it at https://www.infinitykeys.io/puzzle/hio-personals-corey-petty.

All right, so welcome to the podcast Hashing it Out. I'm here with today's guest, Corey Petty. Can you introduce yourself? It's so weird. I like the Jesse turn my job. Even though I am here and even Camber today, you just rolled right into it. I liked it. Yeah, you did it well, cool things. Who are you? Yeah? So are you? Once? I am being interviewed and I had to do an intro. My name is Dr Corey Petty. I do a bunch of things. I wear many hats, and the current hat that I focus on is um research and project management and aiding what we would consider its status public goods infrastructure. So I basically run a number of teams that focus on building the pillars of decentralized infrastructure. So a bunch of projects, like individualized projects that do that and try and make sure that they're all kind of going in the same direction, working on kind of the overall mission and identifying which ways they work together, which ways they don't, how they are independently verified, like independently viable and um yeah, A bunch of that stuff and a bunch of other peripheral things that have come from my historic time spent in all the different places of crypto. M cool. I want to take it back. I wanna. I want to take it back maybe a decade, and I want to rewind to when when Corey was probably doing his PhD. So you want to tell me a little bit about how you progressed through your education and what led you to crypto. Mhm. Sure we can go back here further than a decade to kind of give some motivation as to like how I ended up in the field that was in in the first place, and how that ended up being used full for or an interesting for crypto. UM. I've always loved computers, and I've always loved taking things apart and understanding the individual pieces that go together to make them work. So like, for instance, I like for any toy or chronic that I had, I and invariably took it apart to understand how the pieces were put together and what he piece did and things like that, and I always put it back together or tried to, with always a few extra screws leftover that I forgot to put back in. UM. But I had a computer at a very young age. I probably built my first one when I was seven, before the internet I got to witness the internet. We had the Internet in our house at a very young age, UM, and I had the computer in my room with the Internet at a very young age. So I was always on computers and doing things and trying to kind of figure out how they worked and take them apart and missed the operating system and whatever. And that then eventually led me to doing a physics degree because, um, reasonably speaking, it's just problem solving skills and a lot of the same thing of how do I take this thing apart to its primitive pieces and then put it back together so I understand how things work. Um. And when you mix computers and physics, you end up in the field that I was in, which was computational chemical physics, which is reasonably, I guess in a the easiest way to put I was solving physics and chemistry problems, solving chemistry problems using fundamental physics on supercomputers. UM. So I got to kind of like bastardize or piece together all the things that I liked into UM my field, which was just doing a bunch of really hard problem solving on computers. And part of that part of that skill set that I developed In the process of doing my PhD was UM thinking about how you can optimize software, optimized softwareware to work really well on on hardware, so that that linkage between UM, how do you make software work better based on the hardware that's running on UM. So when you're because when you're trying to solve these really really hard problems on supercomputers, you end up with this UM parallelism problem of how do I break a problem of in such...

...a way that it UM can run on this on a bunch of different places on a supercomputer so that you're not spending too much time pushing all the messages, pushing all the information out and then not doing been doing a little bit of work and then doing all kinds of time to push it back in so you can gather the answer you want to balance those two things between communication and computation. And that was a lot of the like stuff that I learned and paradigms that I learned on the process into my PhD. So when I learned about bitcoin through like a TED talk during my PhD, I was fascinated by the computational problem that so to solved with proof of work and the longest chain role and how you were able to remove one of the previously thought fundamental pieces of value networks, that is humans. You could remove a human like trusting humans, and the in the in the process of making money, like the literally making money, like printing money or even sending money. Uh. And that was a computational problem that was interested in. And then that just flew me down the rabbit hole of all the stuff, all the technology involved, because I'm doing the same thing, breaking into many pieces of like hey, I'm trying to understand how it works, and and then there I am. I've just been doing that for the past ten years. So in super computing, I guess you were working with clusters, but you don't. You don't really have to worry about security, right because you're not worried about anything other than like fault uh, fault tolerant related problems rather than like byzantine problems within within that realm. So how did you how did you and um, where did you pick up the knowledge that's necessary to do security in the ecosystem. Yeah, that's a that's that was an interesting I didn't expect to enter into that field. It was kind of a happy accident, I'd say, Um, the process of having complete understanding of how something works is really useful when you're trying to figure out the ways in which something can go bad. In fact, like my favorite definition of expert is the person who knows um the most things not to do. Uh. Basically, they know how to avoid all the gotchas that that a novice would stumble upon eventually so that they're more efficient to the job or they don't break things. Um. But when I left academia to pursue blockchain full time, I went from a data science person effective, Like that was the route that I took because it was a valuable, like a well paying job that had a lot of demand, and the skills that I had learned and academia transferred over really nicely. Like a lot of the analysis that I had to do for the problems that I was trying to solve was was data science, and all the math that I knew was um more math than you need to be a data scientist. And the type of software skills that I had learned was the same thing, like a lot of optimization and statistics and probability. So I was like, I'm gonna go do data science and try and finagle in bitcoin and blockchain to my my job like like being by proselytizing it to whatever company end up going to. But fortunately I stumbled upon a job that needed people to give them UM kind of an educational resource for the technical bitcoin technology UM as well as doing some underlying data science for the software development they did within the organization. So I got to do both from like from the start. So I wrote UM educational courses for people who had clearances and worked on probably I don't know exactly what they worked on don't have a clearance, but I would imagine elicit finance related stuff in cleared spaces, and they didn't. And then the government was trying to understand what to do with bitcoin or like how to approach it, how to understand it, and there weren't there weren't good resources on how to understand it very well. And coming from somewhat of an education background doing I did a lot of like graduate teaching, and I've always really really cared about pedagogy and my mentor really really cared about the process of teaching. So I got to learn a lot from him, and I was able to make I'll be able to explain things really well. So that was fun. I got so basically right courses explaining how the stuff works and all of its components to two people...

...who we're trying to figure out how to solve hard problems that I didn't get to know about UM, And that was like a That company was a government contracting security related company, so in the process of being there, I learned a lot from the people who were there. I then moved to Boozell on Hamilton's doing what I would call offensive security, breaking critical infrastructure like uh industrial Control systems i c s and SKATA systems which run critical infrastructure United States. So finding weaknesses those things and coming up with novel blockchain based solutions to fix them. So I then got to move into a company where I was with like the cream of the crop of hackers in the United States, that we're using their skills to create products that solve problems that packers could break things with UM. So I learned a tremendous amout there about the concept of security, what people care about, best practices for solving things, and stuff like that. So like the combination of me understanding like having core understanding of the technology, and then UM being exposed to a lot of like best practices and security for those two companies. Gave me a good background to start thinking about the same type of stuff in the industry, because at that time there wasn't a lot of focus on security because the it wasn't big enough. It wasn't the industry was then reached that threshold of legitimas legitimacy, where like traditional security folks are paying attention, and so I just think it happened to have a reasonable background and skill set to start contributing to that type of stuff. Christian, do you have any questions? I honestly was just thinking you were helping with the security measure when you didn't have the clearance to know what you were actually working on. Was that like part of the creative process or I feel like that would drive me insane. But the requirements were really simple back then. It was we need to understand how bitcoin works so that we can find its weaknesses or do the work we need to do. Two do whatever the hell we're doing inside the space. So the request for me was teach us about bitcoin. How does it work, what are the cork technologies, what are the implement like uh, the like um sort of looking for implications, how can you how can you do forensics in the blockchain? Because, like we had, the company had a lot of data science products projects, so like entity analysis was a large part of some of their software offerings. So looking at the blockchain and then using that source of information to try and glean as much information about the people doing things is ostensibly a data science problem. How do you do entity analysis on um transaction transactional data to try and group people to see who's who? And so they wanted to know transaction formats and put output formats what you know, what a specific type of activity translates to when you look at the trend, the blockchain and the data inside of it. So you can't do that type of work if you don't understand how those core components fit together and what technolog is being used, Like if you don't understand what the U t x O is, then you can't do that work. So their job is they asked me and just like make a course to teach us all the ways in which bitcoin works. Interesting, So you were like the the you to me professor before like you know, courses popped ub on. Yeah, but I couldn't share it which was which kind of sucks. By now if they're still using that, which they may be, it's incredibly out dat I mean, like some of the court techn oologies and same thitcoin hasn't changed that much. But trying to do that work today and using that as your point of reference would be a terrible idea. But there's much betterer courses out now than what I did, as somebody who's taken some courses from these online learning platforms about you know, how bitcoin works, and then also in the past done podcasts on how bitcoin works with d UM. There there's a there's a better understanding, not complete, I would say, because like I am not a network engineer, Like I wouldn't know how to implement some of the messaging U that's involved in bitcoin in terms of communication between notes, But I think I have an appreciation for the complexities involved at least um. And then it's it's only it's only the appreciation is only greater for people who are building out pos networks, I guess, and trying to scale then the...

...nodes beyond you know, thousands too, hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions. UM. So it's one aspect, guess, But like the rural problem with a lot of the content is the structure of it and the narrative they play, the narrative of the story they tell in the process of teaching it, like helping someone who doesn't understand something like how you come up with the process of teaching them because you already know it. Teaching something to somebody who doesn't know what you know and not teaching it as like as if they should already know it is really hard, and most of the content is like I'm teaching it the way I think about it now, not the way I need to start thinking about it in the future, using concepts that I already know. And that's how most teaching done is general. It's why people hate math and physics and things like that. It's because teachers teach it as if you already know the concepts. And that's the hard part for this is because the concepts are so different than what people already understand. You're not teaching it from those perspectives, then it's people are going to get it. Yeah, you. I think a good teacher knows how to watch the facial expressions on a student's face and when they explain a concept at a level that maybe too senior. They'll make it more junior on the fly and then explain kind of missing fundamental concepts that trigger that you know, ah ha moment in in the students um expressions at least, and then the student can kind of buy better feedback in terms of do I understand this or not? UM, but yeah, I agree, UM when it comes to your current work, Um, what is the what is the state of infrastructure in terms of the ability to scale messaging to you know, a large amount of you know, nodes? Is that even possible? How about for consensus? Is you know, is having a sub second uh finality consensus mechanism um possible without having um, you know, application specific you know machines. No, I mean we have there's there's there's like fundamental limitations to some of these things, and so based on and it's always like you need to optimize for something. And when you look at when you add this aspect of a large portion of the people participating in this network, our act could possibly be actively trying to thwart the process, it makes things so much harder. So even just like take that take them out of the whole equation together, right, we're just gonna talk about, um doing a process in a distributed manner, and what plantations happen there? Right? You already you are already limited by the speed of light in a wire. So how long it takes a message to travel from one noad to another, And if the scale of distribution is the globe, then just go ahead and take your baseline to be the like the longest route for any given message. Right, however long it takes a message to travel across the Internet, because we're still using the internet, right, we still have to use the like the infant like the physical infrastructure of the Internet to do these these these networks. Um, we can't tell the point and and the associated like guaranteed process that some of those messages aren't gonna make it so like we just have hardware failures and there's there's no like malicious necessarily created with it. It's just some of some messages get dropped because causing crais and ship uh. Like you are already hitting limitations there, and so when you try to scale the number of people participating, and you want to have some level of synchronicity, meaning that one event happens after another and like everyone's in the lockstep agreement, like this thing can happen till everyone's at this state, this thing can happen to this day. Right, then you have to wait for all those messages to settle. And the more people you introduced into that process and the number of steps in that process that need to be done until the whole thing is over give you fundamental limitations. And if you start adding layers of security and encryption, then you have computational resources coming into play. Like there's so many cycles that might CPU needs to do in order to decrypt this message because you have to encrypt it so that other people can't get access to it or whatever. Right, there's like anytime you add an additional requirement or complexity into the process,...

...then there's a trade off with it. And just the base number of requirements for these networks is large. Like I said, we have to make things that are resiliented to a large group, large subsection of the participants actively trying to keep it from happening. Yeah, I think a lot of in the in the domain of zero knowledge. UM. I know that file coin they use thirty nineties UM like they use UM. They use hardware accelerated GPUs right, UM to provide the proofs UM. So I don't know a lot of the ZK stuff. It does need to in terms of like proof generation needs to be run on Beefie machines. But at at the yeah, at the expense of these beef your machines, you you do allow lighter clients to potentially participate, you know, like mobile clients. UM. Do you see that as a possible direction in which the projects you're working on it might currently explore. I see zero knowledge being the only direction in which these things can actively scale out while still providing the guarantees that we have come to UM, like assumer part of these networks censorship, persistence, privacy, like security, things like that, UM, because that scale of trust doesn't you can't get it through the way in which we've done in the past, which is everyone does everything and everyone's kind of equal within the network. And so the point started with that concept of like one CPU, one vote, everyone participates, everyone has a full copy of the data and can replicate the entire thing from the genesis file to today UM, and they do this on commoditized hardware to what it looks what bitcoin looks like today, which is not that at all. It is very large, high capital firms putting a lot of investment into very specific hardware to do the validation process. That's mining equipment and the underlying manufacturing and distribution and centralization risks associated with that, and mining pools, which is a separate centralized risk, And that's just a subset of the people who do the validation the network. Then you have people who run notes for business purposes and various people that need to do so to run the Lightning network and things like that. And then you have then you have end users which just have a wallet on their phone. So they've already started to make that differentiation of separating players in the entire net work based on what they need to do, while still having the same idea of like, it's a trustless system, right, So you've already made that change from it's trustless because I have all the data myself, and I validate the network and I participate in the mining process too, a very differentiated set of players and associated like requirements in the network to to operate so and and and the method they do it is inefficient, it doesn't scale. So zero knowledge is a really good way of maximizing the efficiency of the players while giving stronger proofs that UM people aren't fucking it up along the way, so you're able to do proofs without It's like the and to backtrack the work being done so that massive capital investment and the competition being done to provide security for Bitcoin network work UH is arguably useless. UM. It's just doing a shot to phantis sis hash or double shots two PtSi ass um just a metric shipload of times until it happens to find, hopefully UM a specific hash that has a number of zeros before it based on what the difficulty level is. And it's basically like it's a it's a cryptographic puzzle that we know is fair. That's it. That's the only thing that's providing. And so if you solve that puzzle, we have a very strong UH understanding of the work that is probably a slee has to go in to solve that puzzle, and we can assume if you can provide a proof which is very small and easy to validate and pass around the network, then we can assume on average that that person did the work because you can't cheat it right...

...and we know it's fair. So that's all that's all it's doing. It's not providing any functional work other than fairness. And in the network, the work being done by these specialized hardware and zero knowledge is not that it's it's real work doing a lot of different complex cryptographic procedures depending on what you want to do. And so you're not going to end up probably in the same scenario you have one thing doing one thing stupidly and a lot of manufacturing going into it, but you have a lot of specialized hardware going into it. Because I don't think eventually graphic the GPUs are gonna be the only thing that great proofs. You'll end up with some level of basic But it's not one asic to do all of it. It's I want to say, to do this one thing that's useful for the network and can't be done otherwise. Uh. And it allows people to make the same guarantees but with a lot more strength and privacy in the process. So I think that like the zero knowledge is the only way in which we can scale these networks that give the same and better guarantees of how the network works and providing the end users, those people at the very end who just want to just use the network and I give a ship a lot more guarantees with much much, much less resources they have to put into the network to get those guarantees, so like they'll be able to validate proofs on their phone really well. Ah, and don't need to carry on the weight of the blockchain. In some cases, we may even need a blockchain at all. We just have because the proofs are giving you the guarantees that the construction of a blockchain and proof of work gives you. I do you do you feel though, as if zero knowledge is kind of wrestling, wrestling the kind of self sovereignty that running you know, a minor on Bitcoin gave you probabilistically is wrestling that kind of power and that potential, that option to be kind of quote unquote self like a self sovereign participant in the network and kind of saying, Okay, we're gonna, you know, build this system that can cryptographically prove that these computations had been have been done, and cryptographically proved that this data exists and is retrievable. But you're not actually in control of, you know, the execution environment, nor you know where the data actually lives. Do you think it's kind of like like technically, it's it's making the process usable and and the experience better for the end user. Because this is I think, how we can get to equally performant applications built in a distributed manner. But I, at least my opinion is is that control is being wrestled from normal people and they just don't know it yet. What are your thoughts? I don't think that's true. Um So, like my I'm gonna I'm gonna keep doubling down on this, Monker, I'm making my thing. My motto and crypto is we're building assholders just in technology. That's it, zero knowledge proofs, and there the incredibly diverse application within the EGOS system gives us a lot more options and efficiency for building better assholders just in the technologies at every layer. Um So, what's interesting about So there's two things that applications your knowledge typically does, and they're almost on competing scales, competing sides of the coin. One is aggregation and compression, so they are able to take a lot of things and compress it into a very small, succinct thing. In z case snarks. The the S and snarks stands for succinct and which means small um or the other side of coins. So you have aggregation and compression, and then you have privacy, and that is something that we've lacked tremendously across the board. So when every any type of privacy that's currently exists, previously existed in blockchain networks has been some layer of encryption on top of the blockchain. So how do we then encrypt the information we're putting into the blockchain? With the majority of that work being pioneered by ze cash and Alternative Route and work being done by um Manarow, I'd say, um So, it's really interesting to come up with an asshole or just in technology that says that that is, you're gonna do this...

...work and we're gonna pay you for it. That just proves that someone played by the rules. That's it, that's all. That's all a privacy focus your knowledge snark does is you define a set of rules and create what's called the circuit, and then you can create proofs you can do something within that within that game of rules, and you can create a proof that says I'm going to do this thing. You don't get to know what I did. You're gonna look at the encrypted piece of data that I give you and an associated proof that says I played by the rules, and you can validate that. You can show like, you can show that I did everything that was legal inside the system, but you don't get to know anything about what I did. Now, if you build that, then it's really hard for someone to be an asshole who's proving things right. They can't manipulate anything that you've done other than deny use service saying like I'm just not going to validate you. I'm not going to process your transaction because they don't know anything that you did, Whereas if you look at things now, people like the point of validation in bitcoin is to process all of the transactions, understand what everyone did, and then order them in such a way that you're maximally going to profit by what transaction you include into that block if you get the chance to add a block to the network. But if you don't get any insight to what happens, then you can't order those transactions in such a way to maximally benefit things other than just saying like how many fees am I gonna get of this um. So, if you have any type of desire to stop someone from doing something or stop a certain type of activity, you can't do it, And I would call that asshole resistant because my definition of an asshole is someone who wants to do something at the cost of other people. And so like it's not taking control from the end user, it's keeping the control from the people who currently have it and giving it back to the end users. I guess if you look at like somebody like like an entity like polygon right where you can't run any of the validators, I think right, or like a like a like an L two where centralizing that role to a small subset of people right, well, because because of I don't need to trust them anymore. That's the point, as long as it's what I would call sufficiently differentiated mhm um, meaning that one person can't do it, like if one person screws up, there's another person to just take their spot immediately. Yeah uh. And that happens enough such that, like you can trust that something's gonna get done in the right way. They don't have the they don't have the capability of taking control. So as long as you have confidence that it gets done, then you don't need to do it because in realistically speaking, in real life like access to resources isn't equal, or the care to do everything all the time isn't equal, So requiring everyone to do everything from the get go is a is a poor design, I think to your point, and encrypted men pool and encryption in terms of transaction encryption UM will definitely play a big role in protecting people's privacy and is definitely what zero knowledge stuff will be used for. I mean, that's that's that's the goal. I think in a lot of what we're trying to do is rethink how we've built this stuff in the past and come up with ways in which things can't be messed with at the layers below, because we just assume, like a, we took trust out of it when we took trust out of a process a part of it. But the problem the way in which we did it added added quite a few abilities to still manipulate that process. And now we're trying to find ways to do it. And turns out this brand of cryptography is really really useful for it and it's new, so we didn't know that at the first time. Like zero knowledge has been around for a while forty years or so, applicable zero knowledge is not so like it's the it's the succinctness that's the new part. We're able to do this on commodity hardware in a timeframe and data size that's reasonable for a dissuguate system like it used to be. You know, huge pieces of data for proofs. You can't pass that around the internet. And and like the time frame, we need to come to consensus. So like it's it's the it's the advancement that these things got efficient enough...

...that we could use them in a distributed way when they started become becoming useful for us. But like the field's been around for a very long time. Ashing it Out is working with Infinity Keys to let you claim a free listener n f T for this episode. You can find the Hashing it Out challenge on the Infinity Keys dot io puzzle page or use the link in the show notes entered this week's past code just petty that's j U s T P E T T Y. Then claim the n f T on Ethereum, Avalanche, polygon or optimism. So I had a question about dev Coon, you know you had Jesse both went just what did anything blow your mind? They're like, did you see any good look like concepts or people or anything. Just what was your experience like there, I'll let you go first. Mhm. It's hard to blow my mind now. Uh. Unfortunately, like that brought eyed bushy tail, like everything is awesome. Phase of being in this industry is hard for me to experience now. And zero knowledge actually is what gives me a lot of it. It's like you could do what how, and that that lack of understanding is is exciting to be but um, Unfortunately, also the process of being in being around so long and going to these things for so many times is I don't see any talks. Uh. I end up trying to go to a talk and then running into people on the way and chatting with them or taking like because like and I think these these the conferences are. The value on the conferences is more in the fact that there's a bunch of people that I want to talk to in the same place, the same physical place, at the same time, and so I tend to spend my time talking to people more than talks because I can just go watch them on the internet later. Uh. But there were a few talks that I really did enjoy. Um. One of them was Eaton's talk Eaton's talk from from Nimbus the Nimbus team about AH an interesting way to provide a lot of security and making like clients feasible now based on some consequences of the merge and the move from Etherean's proof of work to proove of stakes. So you're able to like add a lot of security to a light client, which basically means someone who's trying to get in from information from the blockchain without running all the infrastructure themselves. They just asked someone for it. But like, how do you know? What? How do you know? But from what you've got is what's actually there from the person you asked. So like we're able to prove those things now and a really really efficient way. So that was a talk on that and I really enjoyed it. Um. We also rented this guy who is who had a radio tower on his back He was running around demoing uh this like proof of concept that he had come up with on basically creating a self sovereign radio network in the United States that you can use crypto too, AH pay for and he just had he had a he had a little radio cower in his backpack that that did. I think it was five G four G and he had basically like a hacked simcard in old pixel and he showed us the whole process and then had in and out of his phone. You could I could use my phone and log into the WiFi that he was broadcasting you basically like you know, you turn your phone into a hot spot. So it took the four G hot spotted wife five from his phone, and then I was just browsing Reddit off this like hacked radio network and that was a really cool thing. So like you can end up building these self sovereign radio networks that allowed to like leverage smart contracts for participation anyway you want. And I think that's really cool, Like and this is just some dude built it out of a hobby and was running around with it. Damn, that's super cool. I was. I was going to the booths trying to figure out how to start an Ethereum node because I wanted to run one. I have an old laptop and that I upgraded recently um to run an Ethereum node. But yeah, I went to the adapt node booth and uh, I saw po landski or and then I saw at the water though, and then I went to the other booths stere Um, and then I I went to the the public Goods infrastructure booths UM Life. Pierre was there and a few their entities. But yeah, and then I went to the...

Hacker Basement try to get try to get it running. It didn't run, uh, so I kept going up back upstairs and asking for help um but ultimately I wasn't able to get it running there. But I was able to get it running at home. So and then yeah, in terms of talks, yeah, like Corey said, Eaton's talk that was really great. I wasn't able to watch it in person. I went to some other talks. I went to one on the the DAZZ research that Ethereum is doing to try and yeah das uh was it data availability sampling? Yeah, so that was that was a lot of birds talking about a lot of nerdy stuff. Well yeah, he said Hacker Basement as if that was like something like, oh yeah, I went to the Hacker Basement and I'm just like it was the circle back to this. Oh so like they took the the this is actually really cool and they do this a lot in these events, um, which I like a lot. Um Like it's not just conferences, but they make a lot of rooms for people to basically do work. Actually in the day after the conference, they use the entire venue or the first floor of the venue as a coworking space, so you could just stay there and then go do work with people or beat. But yeah, they turned so they use the convention center in Bogata. I think it's a convention center, um, And they in the basement layer is a parking lot, but they just said, no, we're going to turn this into like a hacker basement. And they put they turn all the lights off. They put a bunch of neon stuff and music and screens everywhere and sofas and tables and electrical outlets and WiFi and snacks and people just sat down there and work and it was like a really cool setting to just sit there and get stuff done or relax for a bid. Yeah, they had bean bags, they had wooden box blocks that you could ask They're really like there. The events are super fun to go to, not just for the talks, but for just the the setting. Like you meet a lot of such a diverse set of people, cookie people, smart people like people like the I guess the people you would consider like titans in the industry, like the leaders of all these things, and they're it's so open that everyone wants to talk to you or tell you what they're doing and so on and so forth. So like but like if you you can usually get whatever you want out of these venues, depending upon whether or not you'd like to chill, see talks, meet people, be exposed to new stuff whatever by things even sleep and they have like green rooms that are dark but like have under under lit green dark green rainforest theme and then you can just uh just take a nap in a hammock. Um. Yeah, I have some pretty neat stuff. We need to have more of those in real life, Like why is that not like an availability just like out of the grocery, like like a kind of idealistic nerds together, you know, and then make an event and it's usually what it comes out to like just be weird but good. Nop Okay, what else you got? Let's say my thing is Jesse's got all the technical ones and I've just got like all the old general guys, Like what do you oh, actually there is one what is the concept or something that you're like, why are we not using blockchain for this? Like is there something that you're like, life would be so much easier for everyone if we would just use blockchain here, mm hmm, what's an application of block chain that people aren't using that should be used for? Right? Uh? Access control? No, people do not really access control? What do you mean? No one uses No one does that. That's that's that's that's that's that's that's a concept that has just now started to kind of enter into the mainstream, if you will, of like, oh, you can do this and it's useful, right, But like if you think it was all the rage though with the me bit like the r C ME six, but on Discord, you know, all the people making their custom bots on Discord starting integrating n f t s as access points like to join Discord chaninel. That's like a they're not you're not really it's it's it's almost like a shitty version of it, but it's it's that is a that is a indication that people are catching onto This is one of the in my opinion, main use cases of this technology. So if you think about...

...what a blockchain is or these blockchain networks, it is literally just an ordering of events and a ledger of who has what that is very very very difficult to manipulate. So you have digital ownership and a record of that digital ownership, and the ability to make assets digitally stick digitally scarce assets in a programmatic way, and then when you add smart contracts or this, you can then add arbitrary rules to how those things get passed around. So the first thing we did was made money. We can make digital assets, and we have a very difficult thing but very very difficult to manipulate ledger of who owns what assets in a way for them to transfer them to each other without requiring middlemen to be there. That's an obvious first applic as his money, but a real more interesting one when it comes to like how humans interact with each other, because money is just the way in which a humans interact with each other. A shrancefer value because they made a deal, and there's a lot of other things going on around, Like you know, money is a proxy for influence or paying for goods and services or whatever. So like, in terms of money, it's a reasonable thing, but you're only getting a portion of the human relationship. But if you generalize that a bit more and think about how humans have relationships with each other, like we kind of section off access to things based on who needs to see or do what. Governance um like content creation and influencer markets and building a community and sectioning off like responsive roles and responsibilities for people to do stuff an organization. If you just look at what Discord does or any business management software, like the primitives that they have are who has access to what and what controls do they have when they get there, And that's a much better application for this decentralized hard to tamper with things that allows you to understand who has what and what access they have. Right, It's just that it's it's it's just an obvious use of blockchain, like we can programmatically say this part only people with these things can do this stuff, and it's really hard for anyone to manipulate that or change it. Or we're basically using the optimistically using our assumptions that cryptography works, and that's the little security you get the stuff shaded with it, like you can't break this unless you break cryptography. And that's way better than the way we do it today, which is I assume Discord is going to not let the people that I've set up rules for do the things they can't do, but if they wanted to, they could. And with almost every single instance of technology that we use for permissions and access management has that ability based on who runs this, who who's running the software that that sets those things up. Blockchain allows us to remove, once again, remove humans from the process of doing that thing. What pops into my head is right now, like ticket Master, fourteen million people trying to get Taylor swift tickets. If instead of these passwords, they had implemented this and then like n f t s, then this whole thing could have just not been a thing. I mean, it's it's it's actually kind of funny when you bring that up, because we were talking about this, Aaron, my wife brought this up that like Ticketmaster went crazy and broke and then the price of fift tickets went to like thirty seven thousand dollars or something ridiculous. Um, and it's it's funny to me. And this is this is an indication of all hard these problems are. We still don't build web two technology that works at massive scale in terms of like massive change of scale if you will, so Ticketmaster runs real smoothly, if the process if the number of people trying to use it is under a certain amount. In the moment, you have a massive spike of people trying to use something on the internet quickly always bricks without fail. You ever tried to buy a p S five when they came out? Good can luck. None...

...of the stuff we've built deals with that change in scale very well. Uh. Blockchain basically handles it by in a few different ways because at least the way current block chains are implemented, you can only fit so many transactions and per second on the chain. Uh, So two things can happen. If you're gonna pay the same amount to do that thing, then you're gonna wait. So you've basically built up a queue of I want to do this thing, but so many, so many want to do it that you're gonna have to wait a while before your transaction its process and then eventually added to the blockchain. Um or you pay a lot more because you've built up a digital scarcity. The digital scarcity is the number of transactions you can fit in a single block within a specific timeframe. Uh, if I want to do it now, then I pay more to you end up with the fee market of some sort, and there's are two reasonable things to do if you would like to set up a global resource that everyone uses. But yeah, that's a really good application, Like but we still were not near the scales. I don't think yet we will be maybe with roll ups and some of the other scalability solutions available to start doing things like that. And it making sense because like, at the same time, I don't need my Tailor Swift ticket to live on the blockchain forever. I need it. I needed to live there long enough for me to use it and then never again, So I don't need every hard enough the fact that I bought a Tailor Swift ticket. It's an inefficient use today, but eventually we'll find ways of doing it better. What did you say is that those swifties are going to keep that at FT forever are Yeah, there's an aspect of like you're not a super few there, and it's need to have that level of like historical access, but at the same time, requiring the resources of a small nation and everyone to hold onto it if they would like to have any piece of information on the blockchain is a bit insistent. Yeah, I agree, I think that for it was like Coheed and Cambria, I could probably get behind it, but like Taylor Swift, yeah, definitely not swifty. All right, well, do you do you think we have covered everything? Or do you have any questions that you think you may have wanted us to ask but we didn't ask. M you're wearing that, you know, that's a that's a disarming question. I've asked it. That's that's I go to question, and after receiving it, it's a disarming question. Uh. I didn't have an agenda when I came years so no, UM, nobody does. It's the key question on podcast People who come on podcasts tend to say yes because they have an agenda and they want their voice heard. If your line of questioning doesn't hit it, they're like, oh, thanks for asking, I really wanted to talk about this. Come by my product, you know, or whatever their spiel is, right, it is usually prefaced by oh, what a good question. Let me think yeah, And unfortunately I did the exact same thing because by it it's my fucking question. What we did have h D sending in request to ask your favorite ice cream flavor? So if you want to give up, that's a good one. It's a good, good question. Thank you. Um, there's been a new flavor of Bluebell. For those of you who don't know who Bluebell is, you're clearly in the north, and I'm sorry you have never experienced this in your life. Uh. Blue Bells a brand of ice cream that gave a bunch of made a bunch of people sick once, but other than that, has been the best brandom ice cream in the world. Uh. They created something called h Cookie Too Step and it is a mixture of cookie dough and a cookie. Oh and it is absurdly good and I can't stop eating it. But it's really hard to find. It's like a it's like a new thing that they're I guess sampling, and everywhere I've ever been is always sold out of it. So I'm hoping that they just ramp up production. So good. That sounds really good. It is. It's everything you want more. I'm got to see if I can find it. All right. What a great interview. Thank you Corey for being our guest for today. Thank you for having me. It was a pleasure to be here. Guys,.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (127)