Hivemind: Peak Macro Uncertainty, Hyperliquid Bull Case & the New Era of Programming

The big FUD about Hyperliquid is like, this is a dYdX 2.0, but I think it's reached like, you know, we're talking about 25 to 30% of Bybit's volume, like 10%, even higher of Binance's volume on like a monthly basis. It's like reached this kind of escape velocity. So if you walk that market share up to, you know, from 10 to 20% and you have a little bit of a multiple expansion because like it's seen as not going away anymore, like you can pretty easily get to like $40 or $50.

Nothing said on The Hive Mind is a recommendation to buy or sell securities or tokens. This podcast is strictly for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely our own opinions, not financial advice. Hello everyone. And welcome to another episode of the Hive Mind podcast. The goal of the podcast is to provide an inside look into what we like to call the Delphi Hive Mind, bringing together some of our brightest minds from each of the divisions to share insights, alpha, and shitposts. Today with us, we have the usual crew: Ceteris Paribus, head of our institutional research arm, Jan Lieberman, managing partner at Delphi Ventures, and ventures associate— actually, shitcoin scavenger Duncan, also known as Flood Capital. What's your title at Ventures now? You're scout or something?

Yeah, I don't know, Jan, what's my title?

I don't know, Duncan, what's your title?

Jan's personal assistant at Ventures.

I like scout too. Like Boy Scout for Ventures. And yeah, I'm José. I lead Delphi Labs, our protocol R&D arm, focused on incubating new Web3 primitives. Since we last spoke. When we last spoke was after Denver, right? Um, it's been pretty brutal markets, uh, choppy, generally down. But as we're talking today, Bitcoin's at $84K.

Are we not up from then or no?

Bitcoin might be flat, but like stuff like ETH and SOL are definitely—

total cap is definitely down.

Yeah. I feel like we're down. Yeah, I'm definitely personally down. But as we speak today, ETH's bounced back above $2K. Bitcoin's at $84K. HYPE's above $15. What are we thinking? Is this— is the bottom in? Like, or what? It's just a bounce. What do you guys— how are you guys feeling?

I feel— well, the thing is, Jay Powell speaks after this pod today. And that's gonna probably be the material driver of where we go next from here. So I don't know, for me, over the past like few months, ever since all this tariff stuff and trade war and just macro uncertainty started, as I said, I've just kind of been going with the flow. No strong opinions, it's just like not my place.

Chris Burniske style, riding the wave.

Riding, riding the wave. It does. Like, I was thinking yesterday though, like, wow, I really forgot how it kind of feels with prices going up every day. Like, if you think about it, even in 2024, beginning of the year is pretty good, sure, but then we chopped until the election, right? And then we just got 2 months of craziness of up only every day. And you're just thinking, wow, this is never going to end. Everything is perfect. We're just going to keep going up every day all 2025. And now it's just, yeah, now it's just been down only. And it feels like we've been chopping for the last week now.

Here's a good snapshot in time. I remember in March 2024, I was like criticizing WIF and our head of HR called me a moron in the full, full Full company chat. So that's what it feels like when, when prices are going up every day.

Yeah. Um, so yeah, what do we think? I mean, there's a lot of people— I feel like I've seen more macro threads than ever, which is generally like close to a bottom when people start— uncertainty's coming, go to cash, uh, you know. Tariffs, etc.

But also, I did see— well, I did see this actually, this chart yesterday, that the, the amount of articles in the news on like the stock market and economic uncertainty, um, it charts it from like back in the '70s or '80s or something, right? Every time there's kind of like a big crisis. And the— right now is the highest it's ever been, articles on like economic and financial. So it's always like It's getting more attention probably than what we've actually seen in the market, right?

Well, yeah, the biggest dislocation basically between like sentiment and data is, is right now. Like everyone is max bearish, the economy's in a pretty decent spot, inflation is, is like surprising to the downside. Um, so I, I think, you know, these are pretty good setups to take some swing. I don't know if it is a bottom in, it's, it's hard to say, right? Like, you know, it's— the future is kind of a probability distribution, and, and so there's always a chance that, um, you know, their, their interest in, in getting rates down, uh, supersedes like their support for the market to the extent that, you know, asset values come down. So basically like the market and the economy is kind of propped up by the highest spending demographic, and, and the highest spending demographic really did that because asset prices were very high. And so you have the risk of kind of like, you know, reflexivity to the downside as the prices come down, spending comes down, and it can get bad that way. So, you know, that's kind of what can cause a recession realistically, because other than that, data looks pretty good. So, you know, if that doesn't happen, I don't see there being like a lot more downside. I don't necessarily think we're in a world where we go up. But, um, I mean, I think in the long run, $84K is a pretty good entry on BTC. Um, yeah.

Oh, what are the kids calling it these days? A vibe session.

Yeah, but no, there are like— I think for if you like corporate America, um, the reason why they're all worried is because the uncertainty is so high, right? And from their point of view, they need to know, is that— is the tariff thing— for instance, like the aluminum industry, they need like 8 to 10 years to onshore that back to the US. And so from their perspective, it's like, okay, we'll build 10 years. I don't know, but like, what?

That's cap. The US went from like being a farm country to the biggest industrial power.

I know if you listen to people in the— okay, I'm not an expert in the aluminum— I'm not an expert in the aluminum industry, but if you listen to experts in the aluminum industry, they say it'll take like 8 to 10 years. And so that's kind of like the biggest uncertainty, uh, because even I guess if you get like a 4-year commitment from Trump, right, then you kind of need Vance to win too. Or you could see maybe the Democrat— that's the whole uncertainty in the economy right now is people don't know, should we take these very long-term capital-intensive, lots of upfront cost investments? Can we get assurances that this stuff is going to be permanent now for at least the next— at least the whole term? And so I think once that gets more clarity, That's what the market just wants. It just wants clarity, right, on like the absolute direction. And that's what it seems like a lot of people are waiting on, at least from like corporate, corporate America.

Yeah, it's tough because if you, if you, if you like threaten tariffs, then you need to be willing to follow through with it, right, at some point. And to follow through with it, it does need to be like a long-term commitment because you're promising companies that they won't, uh, face tariffs if they build in the US and stuff like that. And those are, like you said, very long, expensive commitments and likely to be uncompetitive if tariffs get like revoked. So if he's just trying to use it to get reciprocal tariffs, which it seems to be what most people think, um, then companies— it's tough for companies to make a, make a real commitment unless they— until they know what the, what the actual rate is, right? Because like 30% or 40% to 10% is like massively different in terms of the number of investment profitable, like investments you can make in the US, right? If tariffs are 40%, then probably a lot of production can be onshored, right? You have like a massive margin to play with. If it's, if it's 10%, then it's like totally different. Yeah, I don't know.

Yeah. But I think on the tariff side, you know, yeah, the goal is to, you know, you have to actually follow through the bark with bite and implement them. Otherwise no one will kind of, you know, rescind theirs. But I don't know if it's— he's— that is necessarily being applied to all of them in the sense that there are, I think, more permanent-like tariffs on industries that he wants to onshore in the interest of kind of, um, you know, long-term health of the US. And independence.

Yeah, I think if we go back to the last episode, what we talked about, like the 3 things that are kind of scary, or, you know, this tariff stuff we just covered, the refinancing cycle coming, re— coming up where it's like, you know, rates were at basically 0% in 2020. Now it's like the first 5-year mark and rates are much higher. So if people have to refinance at this higher rate, like that could cause it deleveraging, and then also the Dogecuts, which like, I don't think we've really got a ton of clarity on any of those. So still probably like, yeah, like Jan says, I think there's not a great case for up on US equities, but like, you know, maybe Bitcoin could hang in a bit more, start to recorrelate to gold a bit. I think alts got really smoked, crypto specifically. And there is like some coins that just got down to like a valuation that, that is attractive, even if like there's a longer digestion period of like uncertainty in the market. So yeah, I do think crypto kind of got overly bearish on some coins. Obviously I think a lot of coins are still super overvalued, but there's maybe pockets of opportunity. Yeah, so I guess that's kind of my, my thinking. There's still like these pretty big uncertainties, uh, in macro land, I guess.

Yeah, I don't think there's a lot of uncertainties within crypto. I have a pretty clear idea of what's going to— I think I have a pretty good idea of what's going to happen over the next year. Um, and like, it's pretty— I think it's also pretty clear what kind of like coins will do best if we go back to being risk-on, right?

Um, well, I don't know. Do you think memes are gonna do the best again?

No, no, but I think like SOL will do well. I think HYPE will do well, uh, because these are all kind of just trading coins that kind of make their profit off of like just trading activity. Right? There's more activity. And so obviously people will use— people trade like perps and stuff when prices are going down, but it does hit a point of like apathy.

No, people love perps in the chop.

Like, yeah, but you still get more volume happening and everyone's a gambling addict.

But I guess, I guess—

no, but it is euthanasia roller coaster though, because, you know, people are getting chopped, they're losing money, and there's not new money coming into the space. So like, it, it's still high, but it's, it's declining.

But I feel like, like this level is like, is like pretty good, right? We're not like raging, but it's like there's been a lot of volatility, there's been a lot of volume on, on these things. Like the, the meme coins have gotten hit pretty hard, but I don't know, as my proxy for how the meme coins are doing, I watch like the PumpFund revenue and Banana revenue, and it seems to have kind of bottomed. And you know, it's not, it's not terrible. Um, so I, I think crypto specifically, and that's what makes this hard, is that crypto specifically there's been a really like a ton of bullish catalysts, like all these lawsuits getting dropped, you know, market structure bill, the strategic Bitcoin Reserve. Like, that's huge, I think, long term, uh, like really, really huge. But it's just like been overshadowed by the macro stuff. So I think if like Bitcoin can maybe recorrelate to gold a little bit, which is like pushing new highs, or just like other equity markets around the world have been doing decently, um, then I think, I think you know, we're not in a terrible spot, especially for some of these coins that have just gotten hit really hard. And, and, um, like, you're trading at somewhat attractive valuations.

Yeah, I think it would probably be good to, you know, uh, which Cedrus mentioned in terms of, you know, having a good idea of what's going to do well when things start bouncing again. Might be fun to dive into that a bit. But more specifically, I guess you know, you, you do have the, the kind of the, um, assumed blue chips now, right? Like you mentioned, uh, Hype and, and, uh, SOL and some others. And so if memes don't necessarily do well, you don't have the dilutive effect, and you kind of have the majors potentially getting an outsized bid relative to everything else, which is, is I think constructive for the space because we don't necessarily want everything to rise. We'd rather have good things do well because that motivates new capital to come into the space because there's logic to what does well and what doesn't and makes people confident that they can kind of rationalize having an edge. Um, and then the question is like, I mean, memes probably come back.

Um, they definitely will, but it's not gonna be the same ones. It's gonna be a coin we don't even know about yet.

Okay, but that's different than saying a coin, right? Because that's not That's not memes coming back. Okay, well, I think there's gonna be like broad-based rallies. I think, yeah, I guess we can chat through how people see the memes.

I think WIF is fully dead. I think WIF is just cooked. Sorry, Jason. But like, something like that is not coming. I don't think it's coming back. Or like any of these old memes that had like insane runs. Like, I think it's like gonna be a Bowdoin type scenario where they had a crazy run and they're dead, and it's like you're gonna have different new, new, new ones come back.

Or do you think though that new memes can get back to these like billion dollar valuations?

Yeah, because like, for instance, at all-time high, yes.

Like the liquidity on them is so thin. Like that SPX 6900 one, like when that was pumping, it's like a billion dollar market cap with like a $3 million liquidity pool or something before it got any sex listings. And it's like those, like, you know, those things get to insane value.

I don't know if that's the, the perfect way to look at it though. I think, like, liquidity matters, but that's more so, uh, the size of the door on the way out, right? But in terms of overall activity, it's just volume. Like, how much money is churning in and out of that thing on a 24-hour basis is, is more important for the context of, like—

but it's easier to push it up, I guess.

Like, yeah, but it's, it's like, if you have, you know, $200, $300 million worth of volume, that means a lot of people are dumping into this, right? So it's like, yes, it's easier to push it up, but you still need to offset that selling.

Like, the delta between the two usually isn't huge, but you also can just like create these massive candles. Like, one guy comes in and buys like a few million, but it's like up 100%, and then it's like the whole reflexive nature of like people will pile in, and then it just like, oh no, this is worth a billion dollars. And it's like the whales or the devs who like bundled it or just like kind of slowly distribute, like they don't, they don't full stack.

One way I think you can rationalize memes coming back is if the blue chips appreciate to a point where it's like, all right, I don't know how much more juice there's left to squeeze out of this play, so I need to go further out on the risk curve and, and gamble.

Yeah, like that Giga coin, the Giga Chad coin, like apparently that was just— I don't know if this is true, this is a complete conjecture, but apparently this is like super supply controlled and they just like walked this thing up like every month. They had like 12 monthly candles closed green, and then it just like went to zero. Because like the people who own all the supply like know that there's a lot about perception and stuff. And it's like you buy— like the whole thing with the meme coins, like you buy it if there's good memes and the price is going up. Like that's the fundamental. So like if they control the whole supply and walk it up slowly over time and just like slowly distribute, then I think like that, that'll definitely happen again.

Yeah, I legit don't know if I'll buy another meme again.

Oh my God, you remember when you were shit-talking me about GOAT on this podcast?

I mean, GOAT did go to like 1.5 billion though.

Yeah, it did, but now it's at zero.

Yeah, as is everything.

That's good to hear though. See, that's what we need. We need the market participants to be like, okay, I'm not touching memes again.

Yeah, I think memes will probably come back. I think like SPX I've been looking at actually, um, just like the Murad— don't want to fade the Murad cult.

Is Murad even tweeting though, or does he just have auto tweets on that are just like—

they read like auto tweets.

Yeah, believe in something.

Um, he showed it to me at like 25 mil market cap. In, in, uh, Token2049. I did not, I did not buy.

All right, do you want to talk about like some of this other stuff?

Wait, but yeah, one, we want to go through Hyperliquid.

Can we talk about the meme coins? Like last point on it. Yeah, and just curious for people's take. So let's say like Bitcoin goes back to $100K like next week. Do you think enough time has passed where people like have kind of forgotten how they got on meme coins, where like, look, there's still appetite there? Or like, do you think it's like something like, okay, this will re-emerge in like, you know, 6 months from now? I kind of think there needs to be like a time digestion.

I don't know, I think people are like, make it all back in one trade, we're going to all-time highs, animal spirits. Like, people forget very quickly. One pump and it's like, oh shit, like, like, what's the next one?

These memes are just still so cooked though. Like, if Bitcoin goes up to $100K, like all these units are still going to be down 90%.

Yeah, so people are going to see that as like, oh, they got tons of room to go cheap.

Oh, okay, let's see. Okay, that was my last thing.

Yeah, but maybe like, I guess, what are people bullish on? Maybe we could do a quick round of that. That's what people really care about, obviously. Yeah, uh, maybe we could start with Hyperliquid. You did a big post about it, Duncan, um, that got a lot of views among your your Scavenger followers. What did you, uh, what did you— yeah, you want to give us the TL;DR?

Yeah, I put this out a couple days ago, um, and yeah, so HYPE got down to like $12, and I was just like playing around with the numbers and its growth, and I was like, okay, this becomes like really attractive here. I think so. Right now it's about 10%, and I'm doing the market share— I'm doing like the volume numbers based on like market share versus Binance, so it's like, as a good reference point, because I think that shows, like, the escape velocity it's reached relative to, like, all these other DEX plays. And it's like, because I think the big, the big FUD about Hyperliquid is, like, this is a dYdX 2.0, right? Like, these volumes, like, someone's gonna come out, you know, launch a new DEX, and then all these volumes are going to disappear. So, like, how are you putting, like, you know, any sort of multiple on it? But I think it's reached, like, you know, we're talking about 25 to 30% of Bybit's volume, like 10%, even higher, uh, of Binance's volume on like a monthly basis. It's like reached this kind of a, a escape velocity. And also like, you know, those exchanges have a lot of volume that's like at a very, very low fee tier, like even like negative rebate. So every, all the fees on HyperLiquidator are pretty transparent. So it's actually probably like for fee paying customers, like at that fee tier on the PERP side, it could be an even higher percentage. Um, and basically at like, you know, between $10 and $15 and the 10% of, of market share, if you add the circulating tokens plus the team tokens, so not the treasury tokens, you know, Hyperlinked is trading between like an 8 to 12x multiple, which is, uh, pretty attractive. And it was only at a 2% market share, you know, 6 months ago. So if you walk that market share up to, you know, from 10 to 20%, and you have a little bit of a multiple expansion because like it's seen as not going away anymore, like you can pretty easily get to like $40 or $50 at like 15 to 20x multiple on 20% of Binance's volume, like 15 to 20% of Binance's volume. So I think that, uh, and then it's like, okay, like what's the case for this happening? Um, I think that the buildout of their, their spot markets is really big. So this protocol HyperUnit has essentially like onboarded native BTC where you can trade native BTC on HyperLiquid. It's not native BTC.

You can't say that.

For people who don't care about it, it's native. You can deposit and withdraw BTC on HyperLiquid. And then native is—

yeah, I mean, yeah, it's not native at all.

I know, but it's not a wrapped version.

Yes, it is. It is wrapped. It is wrapped.

Wrapped by multisig. Yeah, instead of a custodian.

Because it's not tokenized doesn't mean it's not real.

People who don't care about this stuff is like, oh, I can take BTC with no KYC qualifier and deposit it on HyperLiquid. Like functionally, day to day, obviously the security guarantee—

you could say that about WBTC though.

No, all the versions of Bitcoin, uh, to, to get KYC-free leverage with WBTC, you can borrow against it on Aave, but I don't think there's nowhere you can use it as like, um, collateral, which is the, the plan. So they have BTC live, they're launching ETH and SOL, and then stocks next. And once those things get like liquid enough, then you can use those as margin on HyperLiquid, which is like a huge, huge, huge market, which I think kind of like goes to like the house-all finance blockchain. Sorry, they're launching idea stocks.

Yeah. So yeah, HyperLiquid is very much like a Zero or 100 type Protocol. Yeah.

So it's basically that is gonna help on the perps volume side. And then, you know, the other side is if they have all this liquidity, right? And like this really amazing product on the perps side, and then the spot side, it's like an order book as well. Just like fundamentally those technologies are like better than a Jupiter Perps or like a Radium. And so I think a lot of teams who choose to build on EVM are gonna choose to build on Hyperliquid cuz they have this product and build off of that product. So like to think it becomes, you know, number 2, like the 3rd large, like most used, or 4th large most used chain, I don't think is insane. And that could be like another $50 on the price of HYPE. So that, that could get us up to like a $100 HYPE price if things just keep on trending the way they're trending, which, which is the bull post.

The, the main thing also I'm excited about with, with Hyperliquid is just like you have kind of like the perps opportunity, which, I don't know, depending how you, how you value like Binance and, and all these, like a $50 to $100 billion opportunity. And then you have like the L1 kind of opportunity on top, right, which is another, I don't know, $100 to $200 billion market depending how you, how you take the, the, the current incumbents. Um, and then I think eventually they'll also do a stablecoin. I'm kind of not sure.

Did you read the thread? You literally just You literally just summarize it. They're at— that's, that's it. $50 for the perps, $50 for the L1, and then they can also—

I'm not sure whether the stablecoin will be successful just because, uh, that's actually really interesting. It made me more bullish. Athena, like, Binance launched their competitor, right, the FDUSD, um, which was like their Athena, uh, competitor, like yield earning. You can earn yield on your collateral trading on Binance, and it's a year in and the thing's at like $2 billion market cap. You know, and that's the biggest exchange, like, like less than half of Athena, and that's the biggest exchange on Earth. Um, I think it's really tough to do this as an exchange because first of all, like, it's hard to get adoption outside of your exchange, and no matter how big you get, like, it's— there's always going to be other players. Um, and then also, like, you're just incentivized to only tap into the OI on your exchange, which just naturally caps size and makes the yield lower compared to if you tap into all of them. And you're kind of seeing that with all the, all the exchanges other than Binance. I'm pretty sure Athena is in like 3 of the top 5 now, like integrated as, as yield-bearing collateral. But I do think they will do it anyway. They'll do it anyway, and it'll be, it'll be like a decent size. Um, so it's just like, yeah, like, you know what, it's like Solana with, um, like Radium or Jupiter integrated with like, uh, Drift or something integrated, right? It's kind of like the, the TAM. Um, yeah, I know you're, you're, uh, not bearish, but like you have some, some qualms with the—

well, there's just like tons of— it's just like some things are just stayaways for me where, yeah, whatever happens happens.

And that's like, yeah, you also said that you wouldn't keep any money on like L2s. So it's like, I think your risk aversion is pretty high. Also, like, once they get native USDC, I think the risk of like a hack goes down a ton. Why? Because then they can just freeze it instantly.

It's native. The USDC, uh, Circle doesn't freeze unless they get a court order, and by the time they get the court order, the funds are already gone.

What? How can they not freeze They can, but they don't.

They don't. Tether actually freezes a lot quicker, which is kind of ironic.

You tag Paulo on Twitter and he's there, bam, frozen. I think that they would— like, imagine the North Koreans.

I mean, hype, hype, definitely they would have frozen that. Yeah, hype definitely has a lot of upside. Uh, if I were to say the bear cases for some evaluation is that like people might not give it a 30x multiple if they don't expect it to be around in like a couple years.

Yeah, yeah. So it's like a 10x right now. I think obviously with—

there's like a lot more EVM chains coming. Um, you know, the, the hype, the hype, the hype VM and the hype EVM, they don't work like atomically together, right? They're still— you're still going between two different state machines. And so it's not like perfect. And then you've seen like per-protocols come and go a lot, right? And so those would be the main— and then obviously all like the closed source, like you don't really know what's going on. All of those things are other risk factors.

Yeah, I think the— like we've never seen anyone reach remotely this close market share or just like these absolute levels of volume or OI or deposits. So I agree, like that could, that's definitely a risk. If the volume goes away, it's going to go down. That's why I think it's trading where it is right now. In terms of like the EVM thing, it's like, why would you as a user want to go anywhere else? And like, as a builder, right? Like if it's a fast, like people just care that the chain's fast. That's all they fucking care about. So if it's like there's 3 billion or 2.5 billion—

Well, no, you care how much you're going to get paid to build on it too.

Yeah. You care about that as well.

I disagree with this. Like, I, I think a lot of the really legit builders in crypto actually care about the values of crypto quite a lot. Uh, and actually, like, the— there's, there's a lot of selection bias with, like, generally the, the worst ones are the ones that just care how fast the chain is or whatever. There's definitely exceptions.

I think, like, the users have demanded the speed.

Yeah, but there's a reason no one went to build on EOS or, like, these, these other chains in the they chose Solana. Like Solana had to do a lot of like really solid engineering to keep decentralization while—

those are two different time periods though.

Yeah. Like I think people— those are years apart. Like people care about speed. That's the only thing people care about right now. So if you have like all this natively built-in stuff that's like hugely successful and you're a team thinking about where to deploy, like why am I gonna go to a different EVM chain versus this one when it's like they already have all the capital and all the users. People want to be there.

I think it's like, I mean, a lot of people will want to— a lot of people want to build like, uh, trading products, right? And you don't want to build on a chain that's competing with you. Like that, you know, if you— if a lot of people want to build perps, they want to build—

but you literally can't compete with, with what they're doing on the leverage side. Yeah, removing perps, orders of magnitude better.

I think if you, if you're building interesting ancillary financial products, anything not trading, it is compelling to go there. It's not a no-brainer, but it's pretty compelling.

$100 hype.

Yeah, but so I kind of bucket into like— so you have, you know, that the Buzz Lightyear meme, uh, wherever they're all in Iraq saying the same thing, and it's like the case for BTC, SOL hype is probably, you know, what makes sense. And, and just because that's the meme doesn't mean you know, you should be fading it, right? So, um, those are probably just going to be your standout winners, and then people will start searching for something that, that trails, and, and it's going to get activity. So you're like, I, I think it kind of happens in waves where you'll have these run first, and then you'll kind of trickle into some of the other ones. Um, and what those are is kind of where the most money can be made, I think, because those are decently liquid but have higher multipliers than, than, uh, the, those major, those 3 majors.

Yeah. I think like Cedrus and Jose historically, as I've watched you guys, are really good at seeing things like early, like from the tech side. And I've, and it's like not my strong suit at all. I'm just like, look more pragmatically, like what does the market like? So like, so in 2023, I was thinking Solana was completely dead, like 2022, 2023. 3. I remember talking to Cedrus about this because like, you know, FTX was gone, a lot of their support was gone. I was like, I don't really see this coming back. And Cedrus was super bullish on it because he was, you know, thought the tech was great and he was early there. But something like this where it's like the market has clearly shown what it's demanded in terms of like, they just want to— like, people just want a fast chain, you know. This is orders of magnitude more liquid and better than any other PERP product. Spa product, I think it's like pretty clear, like we've reached kind of an escape velocity here versus like, it's not like an early stage thing. Like TIA, I would have no idea on definitely. Yeah.

So this is, I was going to, I was going to bring this up. This is a good idea of understanding how like assets are very different. Right. Um, and I also don't know why TIA versus Hype became a thing because they're completely different like products altogether, but Um, it's like TIA here. I think TIA at this level, over like a 1-2 year time horizon, I think you'll like— I think I'll like buying TIA here, right? But if the market turns around, like, HYPE is gonna wipe the floor versus TIA on a price performance, I would imagine, right? Because it's just very reflexive, and it does have— like, TIA still needs to— Celsius still needs to even though I think the tech is good, like, they still need to prove a lot in, like, actual demand and actual people using it and building out this whole ecosystem. Like, Hyperliquid has this, right? And so if you're talking, like, it's— yeah, I think it's, like, important to understand your time horizon when you're debating different assets, right?

I also think TIA is more of a venture bet and Hyperliquid is more of a traditional, like, liquid markets bet. Yeah, where this kind of— I think there's this interesting debate, um, you know, between sort of Anatoly and ETH people. And Anatoly is like, there's only— people only want to trade tokens. Like, that's the use case for this thing, trade financial assets. And I think if that's the case, TIA is kind of cooked. Like, I think a monolithic L1 or a hype type thing is, is the winner. Um, TIA really requires you to believe that people want to do more with blockchains than just trade assets, I think. And personally, I think that's the case. We're going to find a lot of really cool use cases to do with rollups. So that's why I also hold TIA. But I think for the people that are— I think hype attracts the flood of this world. I'm not referring to you, actually, to the other flood. You as well, but people who are kind of more pragmatic and also kind of like, uh, skeptical about blockchain, about crypto generally, right? I think everything's a scam or whatever.

Um, yeah, so totally, totally, this thing is like these 6 contracts matter and that's it. And I think the bear case on the modular side is that I see people, uh, critique this viewpoint of Toli but they don't have examples, right? They, their reasoning is, I choose to be optimistic and like, I choose to envision there being more use cases, but it's not like there are actually any use cases people have off the top of their mind that are going to come along, right? So it's kind of up to, as of now, totally right. You know, like he's absolutely right that there's basically 6 contracts that matter. And it's kind of up to the rest of the industry, the world, whatever, to actually build things that are truly unique. And for Celestia, you also probably need a bunch of non-blockchain consumers, um, of your product too, like just people dumping data there.

Can you explain what Celestia is really simply? I know it's hard for you, Zetterer, but really simply, uh, we have a really good report on it.

Uh, yeah, it's basically—

you know, you don't like to read anymore.

I mean, the whole, the whole point of— I like— I'm not gonna say the whole point, but like, the original point of blockchains is that anybody could kind of verify that like transactions were essentially legit and stuff, right? And so, and that also has to do with the data being available. Which is what Celestia does. And so all these different blockchains can just dump their data onto Celestia. And then you can do this data availability sampling, which is kind of complicated. Yeah, see, I can't even explain it in like a simple— Oh, try. It's verification. It's like blockchains are outsourcing their verifiability, I guess. Like, and the more, and the more blockchains that use Celestia, the more it scales. Because the way data, the way ratio coding works is that it's like logarithmic, I guess. And so, uh, you can sample kind of like less and less. But the, the, but this is the, the problem with Celestia is that the network effects for Celestia only really come into play when it's massive and it has like a very big economy. And so getting to that point, like if Celestia does reach escape velocity where they have like tons of high-value rollups and applications using it, then at that point you can feel more confident on it. But actually getting from zero to one is something they haven't been able to do. It's very, it's like legitimately very challenging, but I will say on the other side that nobody has really they don't really have a real competitor when it comes to like a pure DA layer. Um, and like people have kind of given up on that as a product, right? As being like a DA layer and just kind of thinking it's a commodity. So the bull case would be if that kind of mindset changes and shifts, uh, like Celestia is in a very good position to kind of take all that demand. If it comes.

So question. So let me repeat it back, my basic understanding. So the current like L2s or something right now have to pay data availability to Ethereum, which is really expensive. And if they don't do that, then you can't really verify the legitness of the transactions.

Well, take an easy example. Say you post it on Duncan's DA layer. Yeah. Okay. If you just keep all that data, nobody can verify what happened.

Got it. Yeah, so no one can see like historically that everything is legit. Yeah, that happened on the chain. Yeah, like change stuff or do something malicious.

Well, you can withhold the data, right? And then nobody can progress the chain. And then you could like charge like a ransom to actually give up the data again.

So it's just cheaper than ETH, right? Like that's the big thing. Like right now all these L2s are using ETH for data availability. Yeah, and there's no—

it's like a very simple— it's a very— it takes the other extreme of like it's kind of like how Bitcoin just does money. Like Celestia just does DA. There's no smart contracts or anything. And so there are people that are talking about bringing rollups onto Solana, but it's a bit complicated to actually use Solana as a DA layer because it wasn't built for that. And there's a ton of like competing transactions. They have all their vote transactions, they have all their smart contracts rolling and everything. And so Celestia just keeps it like very clean, right? No like tech debt. And they just basically are continuing to focus on this one thing of growing the blocks bigger and bigger over time, making the validators beefier and beefier because you can make the validators beefy with like the data availability sampling and everything. And so it's very similar to Solana in the sense that they're scaling with hardware, right? Like they want to use beefy machines. They just want to do it where you can still verify. And so they don't make their blocks bigger until they can keep like those properties.

Yeah, I actually think I did read this report. It's like, if they— if there's a certain— it's like all the transactions are posted, you just need to verify like randomly a few of them to like, yeah, yeah, yeah. The whole thing is legit.

Yeah, that's basically the point. So yeah, we'll see.

I mean, I think that's a pretty good explanation.

They take a very like extreme standpoint. There's obviously still concerns about like, you know, how much you can You know, I think the bull case for Celestia is like a bill a year of revenue. And then what's it trading at then? Is it trading like $25, $35 billion, right? That's like 10x from here. And so I also think when people are like, how can you be so bullish on Celestia and not bullish on Ethereum? It's like, well, they're kind of like moving in the same direction. And Celestia is just very aggressively making a very good DA layer and is very cheap. And so it's like the value—

they need to raise prices quite a bit though to get to that level of—

or yeah, like how many chains in the revenue? Or how—

yeah, they could, they could raise prices 100x today, nobody would notice. It's just, um, that's a good lever they need. But they— right now, right now, I don't think people should care too much about that. You want to see people actually wanting to use Celestia because that's like— hasn't really been proven yet. I think if, I think if you see a lot of new teams start to use Celestia, then you feel more comfortable about them being able to like actually change prices later. They have no bargaining power to change prices right now.

So would this be like, uh, you know, every company has a blockchain type thing and then like they all use Celestia? That's like the bull case. You're like, there just needs to be like a lot of blockchains for very specific use cases of different things and they all need to be using Celestia for data availability.

Is that the bull case? Uh, yeah, pretty much. I also think though that Celestia needs to make, uh, I don't think they've realized this, they need to make their own like TIA DeFi ecosystem. They need to kind of like in-house I think a massive chain that people actually want to use to kind of get the ball rolling. I think we've seen like being neutral and taking a hands-off approach, like their whole model is build whatever. And it's, it's like you have no ideas almost in a sense, right? And it's similar to kind of like Cosmos Hub was like, oh, anybody can be an app chain, just do whatever you want. I think you need to take a more opinionated approach. And I think they've kind of recognized that.

So like how many blockchains would need to like, there would have to be like thousands of blockchains that are actually used, like hundreds of thousands? Like, how— what are we talking to get to, to that billion dollar number?

Uh, I mean, I guess it depends. Like, for instance, you can fit— I think you can fit 1.3 Solanas on Celestia right now. So it also depends what kind of blockchains. Oh, right. It's, it's all going to be— it's, it's all going to be— it's all going to— at current capacity for Celestia. I mean, Solana has a shit ton of DA, right?

Yeah. Um, so how much revenue would that generate if Celestia was fully maxed right now?

Oh, it still wouldn't, uh, be— it's just the price for the—

it's set very low, like 0.001 or something like that. Yeah. Um, but they're gonna keep increasing their blocks over time.

Like, this is the point of it, right? Is like you keep increasing and you keep— because as a DA layer, you don't have like a ton of bargaining power to raise prices. Uh, yeah. Even Ethereum doesn't have a ton of bargaining power to raise prices on DA. Like, teams are not willing to—

like, so you're bullish on it here at $3? You're a fan? Yeah, is that 3 billion FDV? Yeah, yeah, it's trading at a 3x multiple, Cedrus.

No, I mean, if you— 3x multiple on like a crazy bull—

3x 20-year forward.

Yeah, yeah, it's like, listen, you need to dream, you need to dream a lot with Celestia.

So just let's move on, let's move on from Celestia. So, uh, we wanted to talk about SimD. I feel like, uh, we've talked a lot already. Maybe we could do the RWA stuff, like the Aave and the Athena. Also, actually, maybe the Athena one is the most relevant to the Celestia discussion because it kind of is a counterpoint against the L2 thesis, right? If people keep— if everyone keeps doing their own L1, um, it kind of defeats the, the whole point of like the Celestia, Initia, like AppChain. Well, um, Celestia— more so Celestia and Initia thesis, to be honest, right? Um, yeah, so, so for those who didn't see, uh, Athena announced a new L1 called Converge. They're partnering with, with Securitize on it. The idea is there's going to be big institutions that are going to be validators. Securitize is going to be issuing— I think the wording is Athena is going to be the default issuance. Athena Chain is going to be the default issuance platform for all their assets, which is like the Apollo Credit Fund, obviously BITL, and all the other assets that they issue. They brought a bunch of the kind of DeFi Avengers, Aave, Pendle, etc., to Morpho to build with them on this chain. So they're kind of like— it's kind of a vampire attack on ETH. You're like taking all the best DeFi protocols and then putting like— taking securities, issuing some legit tokenized securities and building DeFi around that, kind of like the grown-up DeFi or whatever.

Pretty big announcement, but the price didn't react that much. Like, what do you think?

I was— yeah, I, I, I agree. Um, it did seem like a pretty big announcement. The price didn't react. I think market's just, just, uh, just bad market.

Yeah, didn't really see it. I think it didn't get like properly digested either. Um, yeah, I didn't really see it making too many rounds on Twitter.

Alpha? No, but I think so. The, the— I think the important takeaway here is, yeah, so Athena's launching this chain, RWA. They didn't choose to do L2. They chose to do their own L1, and the reasoning behind this is that they have a bunch of banks as validators, essentially. And so, could you do this construction as an L2? Yes, you could. But instead of having a centralized sequencer, you would have this shared sequencer with banks validators. And then at that point, you're reintroducing consensus back in. And if you don't care about kind of like doing interoperability with other chains or like if you're going to add consensus back in as an L2, at that point, it's almost like, why don't I just become an L1? Because that's a bottleneck. Like a big benefit of L2s is that you can run one sequencer. Like this is the whole consensus bank chain.

I mean, I agree.

I do think that the Yeah, I think one of the reasons that it didn't— the price didn't move is just that this chain has been announced a few times, and I think people are just wanting— the market just wants more details on, on like what the construction is, what it looks like, because, uh, there's been like a few announcements and it kind of pumped on, on all of them.

Wait, is this different than that Ethereum thing?

Yeah, that's a DEX. Ethereum's like the hyper liquid of Athena, basically. True. Um, all right, it'll it'll launch on, it'll launch on, uh, on Converge. Um, I don't know, I think I'm, I'm obviously like an Athena bull. I'm not going to do the bull case again. I do think that there is an advantage, and I want to wait for the technical details to really opine on it, but I do think the L2 is actually a good construction for what they seem to be aiming to do, where you could still have like a sequencer be the banks and stuff. And you're right that you kind of have consensus anyway. But I think the escape hatch is actually like pretty useful because otherwise you kind of end up with a private blockchain to some extent, right? Where these validators can seize funds. I assume like Guy's pretty smart. I assume he's thought about this and something's going to come out next week to explain it. But for me, it almost feels like, yeah, like you said, if you're going to do an L2 and have to have consensus anyway, why not do an L1 and capture that premium? But I think chasing premiums in crypto is not smart, honestly, like in general, because I think the irrational premiums don't last long. Like, it takes long to build anything. And irrational premiums don't last that long. Like, there was an L2 premium, and then with Blast, and everyone was doing their own L2s, and then Blast got absolutely wrecked. And by the time all these L2s launched, there was no premium anymore to having your own L2. And it's kind of the same with, with L1. I just think you want to do the best thing fundamentally for the user experience. And it does feel like having some form of escape hatch for an institutional chain kind of makes sense, right? Yeah, I don't know.

Yeah, so, so one thing I guess I'll say on the escape hatch is that they don't actually work. Um, it's actually easier to censor by just making people's transactions fail forever than actually like excluding, excluding them. You can go back to the checkpoint. No, no, there's a— there's an article I'll send you on this. There's actually like, if you deposit for instance into a money market on an L2, there is no guarantee that you can ever get that money out. If the sequencer wants to censor you for the rest of time.

Yeah, because you have to get out of the contract first, right? You have to get out, right?

The only thing if you really get out is, is an asset issued on the L1 that is not a protocol or anything. Um, that's the only guarantee you have that you can like eventually get it out. But every other asset you can't. And so it's like, yeah, how are you— what's the practicality if you're trying to get out?

It would just be you can get your crypto assets out, right? Yeah, I know what you mean. They're going to be regulated institutional assets anyway. You're not going to be able to get them out anywhere. But I guess the idea would be, you obviously, your securities and stuff get issued straight on the L2. And so, but it doesn't really matter because they're securities anyway. You can't get them out anyway in any meaningful way. That's the thing. But the crypto assets would be on L1 and you bridge those over. And like, in theory, if they're not encumbered in any contract, you could take them, you could take them back to L1, right? Like, um, but I guess what's the point of having them there if they're not in any contract? I need to read this article. Yeah, I haven't like caught up on the escape hatch mechanics in a long time.

Okay, so on it, like, that's pretty cool. They're building a lot of stuff.

This— yeah, they're crushing it. Yeah, I mean, with this plus Ethereum plus, um, yeah.

So is Ethereum gonna be a token though, or— yeah, it's gonna be a token.

Are they all No, this isn't— will likely be ENA secured, and then, you know, will be the all-one token.

Ethereum itself is a new token, but it's going to be distributed to ENA holders similar to like BNB. He sees ENA as like BNB, and the idea is like a lot of stuff's going to launch in the ecosystem, and, you know, stakers get, get a share of all of it or whatever.

Yeah, basically. I see how you switched TIA with BNB there. Yeah, wasn't that the whole thesis? Buy TIA at $20 and stake it for airdrops?

Yeah, but that, that, that was not a good thesis. I know, I'm kidding.

No, it sounds like it actually played out pretty well.

Like, if you do the math on BNB, like, launch pool APR, uh, was— it was absurd. Like, because you got it— it's— you're actually the only person that gets to dump, like, the high FTV token, and they ask for a lot.

Like, BNB drops like 3 to 5% to those guys.

Gave like 10%, I think. Yeah, yeah.

And literally the launch pool guys just dump on everyone, you know, like they're the only ones that can realize the FDV. Here's—

okay, here's why the funding— that's why the funding situation on BNB is always so funky.

Here's a question. Some of these L2 tokens are getting like— they're starting to get more cheaper and cheaper, right? Um, Scroll, for instance, is trading out like—

I just found an absolute value, they're getting cheaper, not unlike any sort multiple or anything, right? But at a point—

and like, I don't know if this is the right answer, but let's say for instance the EF could buy Scroll for like $50 mil and nationalize it. Is that a good move, or should they just like— I, I kind of feel like the EF should launch their own rollups and just have all the sequencer revenue go back to L1, right? I think the reason why they haven't done this is because they didn't want to take— they didn't want to like play favorites. And, um, and all this. They wanted to be— they wanted to be— they wanted to be new. Well, yeah, but base rollups— yeah, but base rollups can still be— you can still have some of the funds going to another party. But yeah, like Tycho, for instance, the reason why it's so expensive to use Tycho is— and the reason why they pay so many fees to L1 is because they're based, right? But no, I am like starting to think, you know, will Ethereum actually nationalize some rollups at some point where it's a rollup but it has no own token of its own? It's just sequenced by Ethereum.

Um, yeah, and then nationalize the Perp DEX on the rollup as well. And then isn't that—

and the spot exchange— it's not like— yeah, it takes away from the whole credibly neutral thing, right? So that's why people haven't done it.

But that's why that was a big argument in the Cosmos days, like the Atom days, right? Like the Cosmos and whether they should implement Cosmos or not. There was things about them acquiring various, uh, like Osmosis and stuff like this.

Yeah, I mean, you're a lot of times like, these guys aren't practical. I don't feel like they're practical in terms of what people want. It's like very idealistic. I think maybe that is gonna end up being the vision, like that's realize, but I just feel like going for like practicality of like what people want right now and then building that is a much better route. Like the ENN Hyperliquid strategy, build an app people want, build the product people want, and then build all this other stuff. It's like way— makes way more sense to me than the other way around.

Yeah, I don't see the AF doing this. I think at some point it would be a good decision. I don't know about Scroll. Uh, yeah, but some kind of hungry team like MegaETH would have been awesome if they could afford something like a team like that. Um, just by—

I mean, my ETH is really hyped right now. Let's see how it goes.

Yeah, I mean, something that's, that's like, uh, has a narrative that, that's comparable to like a Solana, you know, where it can be super fast.

But on ETH, I, I saw on the talking list the Vibe coding thing. I want— oh, you want to talk about that? I thought that was kind of cool.

I asked ChatGPT, I saw everybody talk about vibe coding. I asked ChatGPT what vibe coding was and it was like casual coding, writing coding for fun, low-fi coding sessions, putting on some chill music and getting into the zone. I'm like, all right, I'm pretty sure this is not what everyone's talking about.

It, it's a term coined by Andrej Karpathy about just like coding with LLMs, like coding with Cursor and Claude, where you're basically like not really coding, you're just instructing the model on how to code. And it's a super crazy experience. Like, I'm not a coder. I haven't written code in like 10 years, and even then it was like some frontend, like CSS stuff. So this has been like a learning curve for me, but it's crazy the stuff you can build, how fast it is. And like, there's a lot of shit that's crazy about it. I mean, the one really crazy thing is it has taste. Like it has the taste that a product manager would have when you're deploying a product. Like I did, I like normally the product didn't, when we're doing labs, we like wireframe stuff internally, either on paper or using like wireframing. I like to do it on paper, which everyone gets really upset about cuz I can't draw. But people do it with software and then you give it to a designer, they turn it into like designs. And then obviously like once the designs are final, then you need a frontend engineer to put them into CSS. right? And then to link it up with the backend, all this stuff with this, it's, I literally described my app idea in one paragraph and it derived the UX that was like 80 to 90% similar to what I had drawn out. Like it was wild. Like the thing has taste. So that's really crazy. And then the other thing that's crazy is watching, cuz I've been doing it with a friend of mine and he's like one of the most beastly live coders I've seen. And it's also really interesting. There's like, niche live coding community on Twitter who are on the bleeding edge of this stuff, like using all the crazy new tools. And some of the stuff these people build, like insane games, insane websites, like with LLMs is crazy. And the process, like another interesting thing is the process of debugging and working through problems is so interesting because— there's some background noise. It's so interesting because you don't actually know the code, right? So like when the thing doesn't run, you get like an error message. You have no idea what the fuck's going on. And so most of the time you're like sending the error message to the LLM and just telling it, like basically coaching it like, hey, I got this error message, come up with, yeah, I mean the please fix this is, doesn't work that well often. Like what, and the better people, what they do is they literally coach the LLM. So they're like, analyze the error, come up with 5 to 6 different solutions. Like think about the trade-offs of each solution and just send me that. Don't execute anything now. And then you're like, okay, now of those solutions, which one should we try first? Like, and you're, you're like literally like a coach to this thing. Like a, like a teacher/coach just helping it work through problems. And you actually like, what, what you bring is just, and like the better the coder, the better intuition they have for how to solve problems. And so they're much better at coaching these things, which kind of like a post I did today that, you know, like Tiger Woods has a swing coach, right? Like no matter how good this thing gets at coding, it's still going to benefit from a coach, what one would hope at least. But right now it does seem like that's the case. And the shit you can build, like I'm building just like an MVP of this idea I had and it's like in 2 days the progress, it's this MetaFeed thing. It's like a longer, conversation, but it's basically just like, like right now to keep up with the world, you gotta like catch up with podcasts and Twitter feeds and group chats and like article subscriptions. So the idea with this is you just have, I think in the future that won't be the case. You'll just have an LLM that reads all your favorite content and gives you summaries. So like you just tell it, these are the people I respect in each field. And you just ask like, okay, macro, I want a weekly report with like what? Arthur Hayes and Zoltán and like all the, whoever the people are, I respect are in macro. And it just gives it to you and then you can also like chat to it about it, right? It just keeps it all in context kind of thing. So I'm building this initially for just like YouTube and podcasts. So you don't have to listen or watch all of them. You could just like ask for a summary or chat to it about the content. Like you don't need to watch your 8-hour Lex Fridman or whatever. That's a good idea. Yeah, I think so.

Not just a hat rack over there.

Yeah. And like, I think it's gonna change just how you, I think LLM wrappers are actually gonna be like insanely valuable. I think most of the value will be in these wrappers. Like people used to hate on these wrappers, but I think people are gonna be able to just build like automations of workflows that you do with LLMs like this one, right? And just make them way simpler and charge like massive margins on your cost of inference. And, and indexing the data. I think you're gonna have like massive businesses that are literally just wrappers. Um, yeah, and I recommend all you guys try it, like just, just spin up Curse. Ideally have a coder friend because otherwise there's a lot of like frustration that, that comes up with just like random—

yeah, you get stuck on just little things. I, I've tried this before to, to make a bot to pull like stuff from CoinGecko, and my friend was able to do it like 5 minutes. I was getting stuck on He's like little bugs. I know nothing about—

were you using Cursor and Claude? Uh, we were using— was this before LLMs? We were using—

no, no, we were using an LLM. I think we were just using ChatGPT like 0.1 or something. Yeah.

Claude's also a lot better, weirdly, than all those. Like I kind of compare them and most people who vibe Claude, like are just Claude maxis. Um, yeah. Yeah.

I feel like on this, there's Adelphi invest in this company, but, um, it's pretty cool. Uh, Hytopia, it's like a game where there's like these, you know, people are vibe coding these websites and stuff, but they're also vibe coding games. And so the, the founder just posted something on his Twitter, uh, his Twitter handle is @iamarkdev, but he basically like vibe coded this Fortnite-like COD deathmatch type game in their engine. And he said this took him like 15 hours to do. And, you know, it doesn't look obviously like, you know, a Warzone. It's like kind of like a Minecraft voxel style and game engine. But like, it has guns, they run around, you respawn, you pick up loot. Um, you know, it's pretty cool that they can make this in like 15 hours. And their whole idea is that they're gonna make like a marketplace, um, to allow like content creators who are like doing this vibe code and game stuff to make a game, you know, monetize. And then like, instead of just like messing around with this for a day, because it's fun to post on Twitter, like you can actually put like, you know, a couple weeks into, uh, into these tools. And, you know, I have a friend who's building functionality for it where like you describe in plain text what you want the game to be and it'll actually work on that, like in the engine, it'll like create that game in the engine. So yeah, Delphi's invested in that.

And it's just so early cuz like there's even, there's a bunch of like prompt scaffolding that makes the LLM so much better. Like for whatever reason, if you tell it like, imagine you're a X, like senior software engineer or like economist, depend if you're doing research, it'll just do a way better job. And like there's, there's just prompt scaffolding you do that, that makes its responses way better. And like people are only just kind of scratching the, the surface of that.

And, and like when you're coaching it, does it actually get better? Like for future use, like when you say like, okay, think through this and then like the next time, like would it know how to handle that error more easily?

Uh, no, I don't, not right now. Um, they had, I think they are like Cursor and Claude are definitely using the data and like they have a bunch of people just, uh, like sending basically pair programming with the LLM and sending like labeled datasets to it to make it better. But I don't think. That's actually an issue right now with it. It's hard to have the thing you'd have with an algorithm where it can improve or learn your preferences. The context window is the only thing you can use for that.

But yeah, because I was talking to the Hytopia guy and he says they're basically doing the same thing where you have a text to games. You type in, like, this is my game mode idea, or this is the world I want to build, and then the game game will create it. But as they have, like, but that pulls, like, references from other games that have been created. So as that library, like, gets bigger, then, like, you'll be able to do more and more complex things by just saying, like, hey, you know, spawn me in this map with, like, this gun. And so I thought that was cool, that it's, like, iteratively building on each other. It sounds like the LMM's slightly different thing, but it's pretty cool.

Yeah. It is cool, guys. You want to talk about anything else? Do you want to talk about the Aave thing or SimD or, or more AI stuff, or should we call it?

This is good right now. Probably just, yeah, call it.

Yep, solid 15-minute Hyperliquid chill.

Oh, the other thing is, if you're building something— and just the last thing— we're doing the accelerator. We're doing an accelerator with Delphi Labs, AI crypto accelerator. it's backed by Solana, Ethereum Foundation, and Base. So basically have access to everyone in the top crypto ecosystems. Um, you have a bunch of top mentors, you get up to $500K in funding, no ownership required to give up to just join the accelerator. And then there's a demo day at the end with all the top investors in the space. So we did our last one with Near and companies raised like $20 million plus off the demo day. So Highly recommend applying whether you have an idea or not, or whether it's just like, we have a bunch of ideas for stuff you could build with AI. Yeah. So if you're building something in AI, building something in crypto or in the overlap, please apply. You have until the 26th of March to do so. Yeah, definitely worth it. Sweet. Sounds cool.

So $20 million last time in funding. That's it. That's it. Yeah.

So how many projects was that? It was 6, 6 projects.

Nice. Yeah. And is that like a mix of Delphi and Near or like other VCs?

It was actually A16Z did some, Cyberfund did some, I believe Dragonfly did one of them. Um, so they raised from a few different people and then a bunch of other smaller, smaller VCs too. And we did some too, obviously. Yeah. All right, guys, thanks very much for tuning in. I thought this was a good one, actually. There's some stuff we can clip here. We should, we should make sure we do that. And, uh, yeah, see you all in 2 weeks for another episode of the Hive Mind.

Cheers, everyone. See ya.