Yes,

it goes back to your point about why it was hard to figure out investment in the beginning, but it's also why it's hard to control and hard to figure out what to do with it, righte it's the that that that whole point of who is it? What is it? Where is it? The questions are er. That's what, that's what gives it both its its mistake and its its scariness and its appeal, right? All wrapped up into one. Ok? So i found this quote from john macate, who, of course, has a competing a, don't laugh. But he said, in his view, face books libra is an abomination, a twisted perversion of crypto currency. By its very definition, crypto currency wants to free us from control, but lebra is nothing but control.

Hat fair. I

might not go so far, in the fact, to say that t facebook is the end all and be all evil. It is that it is. However, i will say from the fact that it is very opposite what many of the ideals that a lot of people in the bighon world share, in the fact that, you know, in the facebook world, it would have to be mediated. It would go through big company, or multiple sort of big companies, or a part of the ociation. They would effectively get to see all the transactions that were happening. They could probably do no more target id ads on you based on what you're actually buying and selling. You're transacting with. So yet, i don't necessarily agree with many of the things that mc affy has to say, but to some extent, like people in the bitcoin space, do feel that lever is opposite towards many of the ideals that they hold very strongly. Does

that explain why you've had such a reaction to it? When one thing i've found interesting, as you had so many people signing on to it initially, and then now you've had everybody saying o stepping back. And is it because of push back from regulators? Or is it because they've figured out that it actually is just part of face books on going bed to rule the world? Personally,

like i've been somewhat critical of the facebook leaver story. So on day one, when they made the announcement, i wrote this long post talking about the ment. And my main prediction at the end of it is i thought that they would be delayed, not for any technical reasons, but majority regulatory reasons, just ecause the facebook is a very unloved company, for, for lack of a better word, osects. You really surprised when you actully look at the n p s core for a facebook. I think it's negative forty seven a like it's really, really bad, like, actually worse than most finential institutions.

And so that's

tounding accomplishments. Actually, yes,

i thought there was no way that they'd be able to launch us on the time scale that they they initially set out to do so, and it's looking that is likely to be the case. To say the other side, i think many people in the crypto eco system were very initially excited about libra its because one of the the biggest questions that a lot of people ask in the spaces, hey, when is real main stream adoption going to happen? And fasbok had the answer was, well, we have, it's

about as main stream as it get

et right? You know,

we have, i don't know the exact stats, we have two to three billion daily active users. So if, you know, we really create this crypto currency, put in everybody's wall, it's put into messenger like, we can push it out to to many people. And i think many people in the crypto space wall might not necessarily love that per se. They might have liked the fact that, hey, if you get this in the hands of enough people, a certain subset or portion of them are going to say, hey, now that i have this digtal asset. Well, hey, what about this bicoin thing? What about this etherium thing? It kind of gets them crypto curious

for for for lackat crypto, crypto curious as the best phrase over for lack of a better phrase,

i think it's dangerous. S again, you're giving up a lot of those ideals for the hope of distribution and adoption. But then also, like, my personal takeaway is i think the sole reason why feik was doing this from the beginning was not necessarily to create a new, open, desentialized sort of finance ecosystem. If they did, they would have just bought into bitcoin very so much like what square and jack is doing, i actually think they did this more for ntiation reasons. For facebook itself. My two cents. I don't know if this is true or not, but when you look at the actual l t v of a user, most of the valueis coming from all their us. Users. They

have a lot of users outside of the us. But the thean l t v, mean long term value, just

s sorry for the anims bat, the value per user is much higher in the us. And when you look outside of the us, ittends to be lower because om the ad rates and that sorto ad purchasesum is a lower amount an. So my opinion, i think facebook has always had this dream that, hey, if we can actually get into the payment flow, an the monetary flow of particulary users outside of the us, then we can increase the value per user for all these other ones. So when you actually looked at facebook's history, they actually did like a facebook credit system that they were doing, like things with papol and david marcus from before. This is kind of just another iteration on the chain that they've been following. And i think this is actually a much more inherently facebook revenue monitization sort of story. They just kind of coopted bit coin and crypto and all other stuff in order to push their narrative. I think it's smart and sort of sneaky at the same time. But at least for my opinion, i think that's the larger reason why they did it, not necessarily because they're bought into this new, know, financial system.