I was hoping they were responses on the other end and not just auto joining applications at the time, good morning. Looking forward to your presentation. It sounds really exciting. Yeah, it's some I've had a few personal notes from people to say they didn't realise future meetings would be at this time. So there's some very, very sorry, apologies. But we'll send them we'll send the recording, so no worries. Welcome Deion. Welcome, Lance. I think we might kick off anyway. All right, well, I'll just open it up to the group did you would would you like to report back on anything that you've observed in the last few weeks? Pleasure, now you've got an article that you wanted to talk to. We'll spend a little bit of time just catching up and then the demo will probably take 10 to 15 minutes or so. Or we can do the demo and then do a little bit of an update. Thumbs up. Thumbs up for demo first. Or clap for update first.
Looks like we're doing demo. All right, here we go. So let me just sharing my screen.
All right. Can you all see that? Yeah, okay. Okay, great. I've lost the video for you. Also. I can't see faces for the moment.
Oh, is that still sharing? Yes, yes. Okay, great. Now, just before I do this, I want to make sure that it is being recorded
okay, you should all receive a pop up to notify you that the session is now being recorded. But if you do have any issues, then we can edit the recording later with you being seen or heard. So alright, here we go. Let's get into it. You hopefully have all seen the basic requirements document where this this is the main proposal standard which we will work back to but a lot of the groundwork has been happening with the requirements table. So let me just while whilst I'm sharing the demo, I'll also get that the Google link to the requirements table for any of you that haven't seen it yet. Because it does set out more of the detail about the approach. So you go to a corporate registry. In Australia, it's Asik. You know, in the US there's the division of corporate registries or similar name for various states. What you do is you just put in the company name and you retrieve a certain level of basic information. And that's company name, the unique number, which type of company it is, whether it's a private or public, its status or whether it's registered or deregistered, or are in liquidation. And so, for this first screen, this proof of concept, we're seeking only to retrieve that basic information. But as you each know, a dowel doesn't necessarily it's not exactly equivalent to all of those fields. So we've had to make some variances to the approaches to describe in some cases, where the Dow needs to demonstrate a few things to prove a particular element so this this is just a demo site. You won't be able to see this by visiting Tao star is a live website. The it's called Live at the moment but we might change it. But what we're going to do is I've prepared one earlier. So Lo Fi Tao is is just a test down here, but I'll take you through the process to register a down but the sizzle factor here and we haven't developed this yet is this little button Show AML AML, CTF certified Dows only. There can be other buttons here that demonstrate other particular things such as show tax compliance module, show privacy module. And for each regulatory regime. Ideally, there's a separate module or even multiple of them, that Dows can opt into. And it makes it very easy for the public to search the Dow's based on that criteria. So, I'm just going to click into Lo Fi down in a second, but just when you visit the main lab page for all of the details that do register, there'll be multiple records that you see on visiting here. And this simple summary on the main screen is supposed to be that plain language, easy summary for the public to to see and get a quick sense of, you know, what is the Dow what is my degree of confidence or where were its official links and where's its basic information. But the really one of the exciting things is this dow ID. So, when you go through all the registration requirements, you get your doubt start designation and ideally, when we move through to MVP, that is actually an NFT. So each Tao will have a unique token ID and that would be ideally displayed here. And and that's a unique number to the Dow that has been issued. It can expire as well if any of the basic requirements fall to be unmet at a particular time, or if certain other things are not done. One of the things of normal company registers is that a company is reviewed by the regulator at least each year and it's not so much review by the regulator but the directors and officers are required to look at the details of the organisation fill out a form to say that they are still correct and pay the registration fee. In this case, we're not proposing to charge any registration fee here but there is a reporting function to be had by requiring a dowel to review the information that it's included and make sure that it is correct. So a year might be too long in the life of a doubt. But at the moment, it's a self select option. So the fields that we've chosen in this basic POC include Dow addresses, and this is a combination of the Treasury address or addresses, token addresses and factory contracts. So not all of this detail is correct in the case of Lo Fi Tao because we don't have all of these things yet but it's just filled in for illustrative purposes. The fields is of description is also to give you a sense of you know it is a treasury address but who controls it and because this is a basic POC ideally we have radio buttons and things that are cryptographically approved, but a lot of it is manual entry just to show the point of the kind of information that could be displayed and that we can retrieve from the multisig contract or other sources. The next one is formation and status. Where does the governance discussions where do they occur? And where does does the voting happen as well so you'll see links below Vidal's console and snapshot here. But data formation is the next category and it's quite controversial because we don't know whether a Dao forms when its token is deployed on the blockchain or when it's multisig is or when the white paper is published. So in this case, the law find our rules in paper form were shared on the first of July 2022. So that's the date that's been entered in this case. Review has just been put in as one year later, the Dow status selected with governance and I'll show you the various options when we go through the form. type of doubt is a meta category at the moment. All of you would have seen the different categories and taxonomies proposed including the ones in the recent World Economic Forum report. But But despite all of those categories, there's a thought that there's this meta category of is it worth is the Dow working on a public use Protocol, or is blockchain only being used to make the internal operations as well as the voting more efficient using Blockchain technology in which case it might be a member use protocol, but it could be both. So I think that's worth pointing out and here we've ticked AML CTF module is completed, but ideally that would be automated in the MVP. legal representative is a really important field and we've all seen the subpoenas being issued to various people involved in a doubt. And by displaying an authorised legal representative of a dowel to receive legal service well service of legal documents. This can help funnel the Legal Services notices to the correct person or authorised representative prevents multiple people from being served, creating panic but also the sharing of information perhaps earlier than anticipated and maybe not the right information to the public or to regulators more appropriately so so this is a very, very important field and in the absence of specifying a jurisdiction of the Dow or a governing jurisdiction of the Dow, in which disputes would be heard this field serves a number of purposes to give some sense of legal certainty when a person is dealing with the Dow that it can engage with government and regulators.
Jurisdictions is it's a tough one also. Usually in the asset Company Search, the jurisdiction just returns with the relevant regulator and in this woman, in my case in Australia for a company, ASIC is my relevant regulator that comes back as we know, in a doubt, doubt kind of multiple presences around the world. So from this jurisdictional field, this basic requirement, it's had to be broken down. But we may not given based on the feedback that we get we may not include all of these fields for the presentation at Harvard, or even in the MVP, because some of them are quite controversial. So registrations and I'll go through the extra information on the form, presence. So this is where the economic substance the activities are actually carried out. Excluded reaches anything that's been effectively geo blocked. But perhaps if you're limited in your means of geo blocking. This is some public signalling to for a Dhow to rely on but it's not servicing or actively servicing a particular jurisdiction, saying if licences are pending, and legal rappers is trying to get a sense of there might be one or multiple. And because often legal wrappers are ineffective in containing all of the activities of the doubt, the requirements for the particular functions that are covered by the legal wrapper, is again supposed to give insight as to you know, where you might tap this, in this case, the Cayman Islands foundation or the Cayman Islands regulator for further information about the legal wrapper. So some may be more comfortable or less comfortable with this level of information being disclosed. If you've got a very savvy member of the public, a lot of this information can be found out anyway. And so this, this is perhaps just making it a more convenient exercise. All of these are pros and cons to be balanced. And so that's why feedback is really important at this early stage. Let's get into registering a Dao what does it what's the experience lock all of this sort of information and help desk throughout has been put together quite quickly. So please bear with us. But fill in all your mandatory fields below to register doubt. Your doubts designate designated as a down star and associated down star NFT will be mentored to the Dow's Treasury address. Once validated, failure to complete any of the mandatory fields may result in the expiration of your death star designation. I'm just going to put in a lot of dummy data here but we have built in some validating fields such as with the Treasury address, so I'll have to just copy and paste some of the similar Lo Fi down information. Or actually, Bellagio did you want to put in some information for KYC now?
i Good but I'm on a phone so just please keep going.
Yeah, no worries. All right. Well, test out here. We go. I'm not monitoring the chat because I've got limited visibility so please just take yourself off mute if you want me to clarify anything as we go. Forgive me I'm just can't see you all when I'm sharing the screen. So they moved out test our treasury address. Let let's just go here got to quickly go to ether scan and get the address Okay, so unfortunately ens names are not currently accepted. So I can't just simply type Lo Fi down dot eath and it'll read a correct result. We do have to at this stage, put the full address. And like I said before, this field would ideally be auto populated based on the information contained in that contract, the multisig contract and we look to retrieve certain of those fields such as who are the owners or controllers or signers. And in this case, I'm just going to again, put multisig maybe five signers, er eight from a different country
you do, I can address is we'll find out we only have one on the guli test net at the moment and that's not working test. Net addresses are not working. It's just Eve. So again, I'm just gonna look at the top tokens and pick one on ether scan. All right, maybe we'll pick let's pick Matic. Honour, or artwork. Let's pick USDC.
Alright, in this case, this is going to be our fungible governance token. And because you can get you probably get an array of different responses here and how people describe their token. Again, we want to read particular information from the contract and then hamradio dropped down bottom buttons for the consistency and the integrity of the data that's put in here. So we will have to tackle the hot question of taxonomies or at least basic ones for the POC at Harvard. down factories. I don't think that this is a mandatory field at the moment but for example, if we wanted to be working in bullfight, now we're doing the Peter ally protocol. So I'm just going to put the name there and assume that we've got to get hub formation. So this sorry, governance forums this is what we talked about before. Everybody needs to know where the venues are that they can engage in governance interactions. And then if they proceed to a vote, whether it be temperature check or final votes, where all of that occurs. So forum location could possibly also have a description to it to explain a little bit of what happens in that particular forum. So if I go here, to snap up, just going to put in the snapshot link for the moment. Here and where we've got the Add button, we do recognise that there can be multiple, so put that in often there needs to be at least one entity. date information like we discussed when you need to 2022 July one
edit review I'll actually put 20 2302 28 in a couple of weeks fun status. These this description here is a work in progress. We're trying to give a little bit of a description of each of these radio button fields, and they probably could do with a bit of work, but the key ones to distinguish were operating with governance versus operating without governance. So something operating without governance could be the theory from the east to west rapping contract. It's been put out of the world there's there's no active or at least none that I'm aware of oversight. Question is though, for something like that. Who would actually be an authorised representative to go and get a dowel star designation on behalf of that particular protocol. And I don't know that there was ever a sort of doubt that overseed it maybe it was just a I mean, please anybody on this call, let me know that. This gets into a tricky situation for things that are anonymously put out in the world and without governance. So even though we've got this field here, the likelihood of it being completed is low. But you may get a sense of, you know, something like the maker Dow, where it is their mission to fully decentralise and they're not quite there yet because some things can't be technically decentralised, such as the holding of IP. So in theory at some future point in time, when they are ready to turn off all of the governance, including excluding governance rights of the fungible token holders. That's when they could click this button but but yeah, it's, it's included but for discussion. Most of them would probably select operating with governance because they seek new protections. Hopefully that will attach to a Death Star designation such as legal personality and limited liability. type of doubt we'll choose that we're just a public use protocol this time and that we have completed the AML CTF module. We're going to type in company name, Proprietary Limited and the contact details. Our journey in this case is the telegram handle
email degrees
with a we didn't get a chance to put in some further prompt texts. The expectation is for each contact venue that the legal representative puts there is an obligation for them. To respond or be monitoring the you know the telegram or the email address and be in a position to spot to respond within 20 or 24 or 48 hours. That's often when you know severe legal notices the period in which they need to be responded to so. You can't just easily put someone in as a legal representative it needs to come with some notices of what the expectations are of that particular role. So with our regulatory interoperability group, we might ourselves produce some boilerplate terms around that. Not necessarily, I don't necessarily think that those boilerplate terms can be automated yet, because it would be quite a new thing. Registrations so this is the jurisdictions where the doubt is registered as a dowel and or equivalent has been put there because Malta has sorry, Bermuda has digital asset businesses Malta has the Innovative Technology Enterprise. But those broad words were used to capture doubts but possibly also AR or entities formed with other bases of technology. Now, these are not all correct. We just wanted to put a test batch in but let's just say that were registered in I'm going to put Vermont Wyoming and Bermuda and Marshall Islands in this case. So we've we've really gone Trigger Happy on all of our data registrations in those jurisdictions. Presidents as I said this is the economic substance so we might have many who were the people on this call from the UK and maybe psychological. Literature is definitely the United States.
Finally, legal refers, as I've talked to you through, I won't go through a lot of information here but you can then come up in one or multiple
and I suppose Switzerland There we go. And what's the name of the probably getting them confused? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. And those particular functions are hold IP. In this case, Details section of who's actually filling in the designation. Ideally, this would be replaced with the verification procedure to make sure that a person authorised on behalf of doubt is actually completing this and so we don't get a lot of junk entries from non authorised people and putting in a malicious Treasury address which is not the official Treasury address of a doubt. So this is just here for a placeholder purpose of the moment.
Company Name and role is authorised representative of the Dow. Okay, so finally filled out all of these fields. Thank you for all of your patience. Watching that process. It didn't take too long. If I wasn't talking and explaining everything through, maybe it could have been done within five minutes or less. But these basic requirements for now click Register. And yeah, we've successfully registered. We've got our Deathstar ID. This is just a fake number at the moment, but this is now something that for regulatory interoperability purposes, despite how many blockchains the Dow exists on, despite how many Treasury addresses it has, or token addresses, we finally have a unique identifier that any government agency or regulator around the world can reference. So this is possibly something that could be tied to tax registrations company or like jurisdictions that do recognise a doubt. It's just finally something that is unique across many other numbers you need numbers that are down might have, but by reference to what its legal status might be. So that's it. We registered and then if we want to go and explore explore registered dowels, we can now see I've got two registered and I'm comparing them side by side. If I, for example, was choosing to pick one or the other, and both of them are compliant with the AML CTF module, maybe if I'm in the perspective of Australia, just literally side by side, looking at the differences I might pick the Cayman Islands one to pick on rather than the one with the Swiss Foundation. Because Caymans is known to be a tax haven, and the assumption usually with regulators is where a tax haven is involved. There could also be construct contrived circumstances around the arrangement. So I probably if all things are otherwise the same as between these dowels and one's got a Swiss legal wrapper versus one's got a Cayman Islands Foundation, rightly or wrongly, and usually from the perspective of tax regulators, if they've got someone to pick on, they're gonna go for the ones that are using the tax havens. So that's just one example of how it could be used in a negative way to easily identify enforcement actions. And why a Dhow such as those that have a new use the tax havens in their structure may not necessarily be forthcoming with the Death Star designation. Lance, sorry, I just saw your hand up. Go ahead.
Yeah, thank you. This was a great demo. Um, I was wondering in terms of the storage mechanism for this is this is this stored on IPFS through that data URI that's in ESP 4824.
This is just a PRC and the data is just stored on on a database at the moment. So But ideally, yes, when we get the funds to build it out and support IPFS Yes. Got it. Got it. Thank you. Yeah, I wish I had more resources to build something more like what it would be into graded as but we just wanted to have the sizzle factor of showing the regulators and the politicians at Harvard University the look and feel of what something like this could be and so the back end is completely not designed to be consistent with all the other data star existing back end. So yeah, full disclaimer upfront, just for the POC.
Gotcha, gotcha. Thank you. All right.
Johnny, is super awesome. It's super, super awesome. So congrats on the BOC.
Thanks for all your help.
One question regarding the validity of claims is what if I'm saying that I just set up this though, and Johnny Priya, which is the legal representative and it's registered in Australia. Like what is the mechanism to like validate these inputs? Because that's something that like at the regulator, I would definitely ask. And because selfcleaning is one thing, but we could probably agree that if your name shows up on the registered tornado cash contract, then you would not be that confident on this is the like, we need some like stops and balances somehow.
You're right. And the basic requirements document is literally just the fields and as they compare to the basic requirements as if it was a company, but there's an extra column that needs to be added about the primary and secondary sources of validation for each piece of information that we're drawing upon. So if it can't be cryptographically, or referenced from a contract that's been deployed on a blockchain, then we probably need to go through one or more access levels. So, to check that during a period which is actually linked to that particular company name, then they might I mean, it would be a very vast exercise to have to check with all of the existing company registers. So I mean, we might have to find some workaround approaches initially, or just some test jurisdictions to integrate with their existing company registers, but mean, the more integrations we do, the more that they can probably break or have to be maintained and updated. So it's more a matter of going into what the possibilities are, what the most efficient ways of doing it in a reliable way, without perhaps integrations or their existing API's, then we just identify them then and rely on them but better validation column is the next task. So based on your feedback today and the feedback of others once they see the recording, we will try to and it's mainly me so welcome anybody that's able to put more time into this. collating all of that feedback and documenting what that might look like if we get the funds to move through to an MVP and actually build this thing properly. So So between now and then, we'll have perhaps extra columns in the document. For further considerations. They'll also be a pitch deck, you know, a presentation to prepare all of the support papers, as well as, at least for these basic fields. If there is broad consensus that each of them should be included, the data standard of the JSON LD data standards that go with each of them to allow for that easy retrieval. So there's still quite a bit of work ahead and I probably just need to turn my not my mind to listing at all and updating the main Google Doc and putting it in the telegram chat but
just to kind of like learn and leverage from the existing boats in the space, I think like a relatively easy way would be that the lawyer of the Dow signs off on this I would assume lawyers by now at least in the crypto space starts to have like official blockchain addresses that they disclose also on their website, and kind of like you know, audited by John Apria. Which law firm I don't know what your law firm name but like you know, like, Master and Sons New York based law firm, and they did the confirmation that the data is valid and maybe have like a similar issue registration or not, but like the kind of because the complication is it's it's permissionless it's extremely easy to like scale it and create a lot of havoc, which might cause problem and in our space, there is a number of people who will be against this concept of making legal registrations for dollars. So if if there is like, you know, you have to have at least one offer to confront to actually get the athlete or like get the proof or get the credential. And then the task is more on like approving law firms then rather than understanding every jurisdiction and every mechanism that would be there. And I think there is always going to be a law firm involved. It's registration like, yeah, exactly. So like I think we can expect that.
Yeah, and this in my other capacity with koala, the Coalition of automated legal applications, the ones that wrote the down Model law in the few governments that they're negotiating with the government's really do like the idea of the accreditation authority. So that could be something like a law firm, or it could be a specific entity that a group of people spin up, you know, in each jurisdiction or it could be a cross border, or like a multinational enterprise in itself. So, yeah, there's there's the concept of that intermediary, the trusted intermediary to onboard Dows in this particular way, is very appealing to governments. But the feedback that I have received from some of the dowels is that they want to reserve their right to have the autonomy to do it without having to go through an intermediary so
I wouldn't be possible I would just say that if you come without a lawyer credential signing up on your registration, and like generally speaking, that's not gonna be trusted or gonna be a lot less trusted. And I'm just like being realistic from like, a regulatory perspective that like, also like, Hey, I claim that I own this cow. Like, what are the proofs like, do I control one of the multi SIG keys or like, what are the circumstances to be able to register now? The good news is that spruce has developed signing mechanisms for for safe so now you can actually log in seem like login with the theory and kind of flow just using your noticing. So there are now two that we can like you know, prevalent this like, you want to see this actually registering and not just like externally registering someone that like oh, I know that to Johnny's out but like I control something in that to be able to do it. Sorry, I'm just like bringing the bringing the question that they think like worth thinking about or having a proposal. I don't know if the MVP is amazing. It's more like than how do we govern it?
Yeah, all of the commercials in and around further building the registry and maintaining it. I mean, we could just stop at the data standard, and not have this interface. Go further to MVP. But my impression and I'm just welcoming your impressions is that the interface is really what will sell it or get the public over the line, including regulators and governments. I'm not sure that on the government side of things and putting down on the opposite end of the spectrum. I'm not sure that a data standard would just be enough. So there there is a level of commercials and business strategy, political strategy, geopolitical strategy that needs to be thought about in relation to this effort. Sorry, yeah, I hear you loud and clear. The last show. I appreciate your purpose of
the of the APL for I don't but like if anyone on the call would have context to dimension the aforementioned regulatory agencies, I think it was like Wyoming has like Marta Weber has like remotely some bow regulation to actually get them to like, Hey, give us your public key because they definitely have some kind of like crypto presence and then kind of have that if you are Wyoming this key has designed this you know, like kind of like that hey, there can be like a regulatory that the regulator signs off that this is registered with them maybe but also the on chain signature, or there is a lawyer or you just don't do it because like you're super like centralised and but if you're super decentralised I don't really don't think like I mean, I don't know. Well
over the course of the next two weeks, and Dion, looking at you because there's a meeting hopefully to be scheduled with the UK, which I would love for you to join me. But but the over the next few weeks, it's just selective demos too friendly. Regulators or policymaking bodies to do exactly that to get their feedback and what their initial impressions and ideas are on. What what appeals to them, really, and how we could best integrate with systems. So So yeah, that's, that feedback is, is happening. But my my also, my experience on the koala side is the first thing that they do want to do is is fund their existing corporate registries to build something like what we've just built in this POC. And my fear is that they're not going to do that in a privacy preserving way. And the next task for this POC is to deal with the equivalent of the directors and shareholder details. And so that is going to be really tough because I think a middle ground approach is just to at least request a person's jurisdiction of residence or tax residence, and that that's a form of proof or credential that sits in the same wallet. As perhaps their governance token. Or perhaps another token, depending on how many tokens a Dao has in its ecosystem. But that could sort of make its way through in the AML, CTF module and the tax module and privacy module. You can see how jurisdiction or residence has multiple applications. And it's a design consideration as to whether you build sort of our own. It's not beneficial ownership. Part of the registry. It's more just geographic spread of the registry that supports instead of a manual entry of where in the Netherlands were in Australia, where Germany that fields should be auto populated by calling upon the jurisdiction field or the jurisdiction proof that may be at everybody's wallets. But that may only be possible if they're compliant with one or other of the tax module or the AML CTF module. So you can see that that Lego effect or that we need to go a little bit further to figure out what the full scope of the base requirements should be. From the perspective of regulators and at the moment, the exercise is very much what what do the regulators want? And we all saw probably the announcement from the banking sector that because of the anonymity or pseudonymity of tokens and lack of KYC the banking sector just can't support the crypto industry because it's it doesn't support safe money and fair, orderly and transparent markets. And so that that is a shocking blow to the industry and all of the potential of the technology just because there's no KYC so if we can come out swinging and show dowels are capable of complying with an AML CTF module that's actually privacy preserving, and that could actually prevent, deter and eliminate money laundering. Terrorism Financing on blockchains or at least the activities within the day all that are registered here, then this could help Dows not just interoperate with regulatory systems, but with the fiat money in the banking systems, which is access to more capital, its reliability, it's more institutional access into the Dow. I mean, you might say you don't want that maybe a Dow or a subset of didn't don't, but that mainstream support is one of the key missions as I understand of Dow stock. So it's a constant balancing exercise. Yes.
Maybe one thing, just given that I've heard a little bit more on identity, I think, as Goldstar I will also I'm happy to talk about it with a bit bigger audience. But in general, we should not push personal credentials to be present on chain like having the credential in an off chain environment where the wallet can be valid owner can prove certain things like country of residence or tax rates this is good, but why having a public registry of a company is a common place having a public registry of your residency linked to your email address, for example, it's not really the fact that it might be public by now that's an it's a fact that the internet was not designed with privacy. But it still needs some resources to access it if it's like literally living on your wallet forever. That is extremely dangerous from a privacy perspective because it can quickly quickly lead to segregation. And of course there is sanctions. And there is then the segregation. And I think the benefits of like pseudo anonymity. It doesn't mean that like you don't need to prove these credentials, but like if we're talking about like, verifiable credentials, are there other technologies that can achieve something like this, which are provably linked to a wallet but the it's on the chain of chain sorry, that I think is something that like, sufficiently solves the problem without like, releasing the information because the other part of that is that that information is not GDPR compliant, neither CCPA compliant. So while we are solving a problem we are also we'll be creating another bomb.
I think yeah, yeah. Let's you and I tic tac on that because I've got you marked down at the top of my list for the AML CTF module, which goes to identity. You and I'll be talking a lot about that to come. Alright, well, with 10 minutes to go. I'll just welcome any other feedback. Otherwise, we can do around the ground. Updates from everybody. Pause for a second. I won't pick on people because I know that it's an awkward time and you might be driving or cooking dinner or home with kids. So no worries. Okay, well
when I was just gonna mention the safe for Dallas project. We will from primerica we have a article coming out. I know Josh was on vacation, but the smart contracts are just about finishing at least the first version definitely looking for more detail on that. So if you're interested in the project, you can shoot me a message on Zoom. And I'm also in the middle of slack.
Right. Do you want to put your I think everybody's on Slack but
yeah, I'll put my elbow my email to.
Yeah, that might be helpful for anybody that wants to get in touch. Oh, and I'm just seeing the meeting chat now. Vic. Sorry, I didn't see your comments before. I'm just looking up to see what else I've missed. Blockchain address for lawyers is amazing. But having a professional services provider let alone an in house lawyer dedicated to it appointed to the Dow is rare. Yeah, I agree with you big. Great. All right. So Lance, you've got the details there. Fantastic. All right. So if there's no further business, I can call this meeting to a close at this particular time won't necessarily hold going forward. Because I think a number of people have replaced the time and their diaries now. So if we do need to call a plenary meeting, it might be a couple of hours later, but we'll still try to have it on the northern hemisphere. Tuesday and sort of southern hemisphere Wednesday. And, yeah, for what it's worth, please engage with the Google Docs, give your feedback. There'll be a lot of work between now and the fourth of April to make it look very pretty. Bring it all together. Put the business case around it and scope for either PRC to or actually going forward to an MVP if we get enough buy in from the Dow's that are members of Dow star in part of the medical framework, because we need enough buy in from our dowel members as well as from these key regulators and governments that we're going to be talking to
