What's up everybody? Jason here for jasperjase.com. We just sold out another brand new release today, guys. 2223 Bowman University Inception. This is a four box random letter break, which is random first letter, first name, number two. So you're getting guys 19 spots, that we're getting a letter from the list below. Remember, I think that's how you get letter B and we get a Bryce Young, that is your card. So here we go, guys. Here's the dice roll, let's roll it. Two and a six, eight times. Good luck. Two, three, four, five, six, and seven, eight. Jerry, down to Matt Smith. Eight times here. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight times K, down to D. All right, so Jerry with K, Matt with TR and then GI combo, Tristan with Z, as well as the NO. Matt with C, Tristan with M, Matt with S, as well as W. Tristan with A, down with XL. Tristan with H, Mickey with P, as well as Tristan with P. Mickey with B, Tristan with P. Mickey with EF, Tristan with J, V, and then Matt with letter D. All right, well, I don't know if there'll be any trades. Usually not really for letters, but I'll give you like 30 seconds. Wow, big is on right now, guys. On AMC. All right, guys, trade window closed in. All right, and also two guys will randomly generate, so there's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12. Let's generate four more numbers here. Now there's only possible one through 12. 10 is all number 10. Seven, six, seven, seven again, no. Seven again, no. Four, and then one more. All right, sweet. Seven, I can't really tell if that was seven. All right, guys, here we go. All right, we got camera rising for letter C. Mark Mitchell, letter M. Lauren Betz, letter L. And Ernest for letter E. And Jordan Addison for letter J, 87 out of 299. J that's gonna be Tristan. And we have a Kyle Philip Kowsky, or sorry, Philip Kowsky. Not Philip Kowsky, Philip Kowsky. Letter K with that one, 55 out of 75. Letter K is, where's K? Is there no letter K?  Oh, yes, there is. Jerry, what the hell? Why can't I see that? And then we got Jordan Addison, 34 out of 75. Letter A going to Tristan, or J. All right, next one. What's up, Brad? Aiden O'Connell for letter A. Khalil Ware for letter K. Jordan Travis for letter J. And then Tyler Bookner for letter T. Anthony Blacktooth, 75. Letter A is Tristan. Brandon Murray for letter B. And that's Mickey. And then Felix O'Kara, letter F. Mickey with that one. Oscar for letter O, will love us letter W. Armando Bicca, and then Don Tevion Wicks for letter D. We have Clayton Toon for letter C. Matt Smith, letter C. And then we have another Clayton Toon. This time it's a patch auto. 32 out of 199, Matt Smith. And then Brandon Slater to 75. Letter B, Mickey with that one. K.J. Jefferson, Trace Jackson Davis, Brandon Miller, and then J.J. Starling. B. John Robinson, 159 out of 99. Letter B, Mickey. Then we have a Rakhine Jarrett. Letter R, Matt Smith. Caleb Love, last one here. Letter C, by Matt Smith. Folks, so no Victor, no Kate and Clark yet. But again, we have more boxes, of course, out of this case that we still have to open up. So, appreciate it, folks. Again, another one is sold out. One through six is sold out. So, number three is coming up next. Jaspy'scasebreaks.com, guys, thanks.


This would be a Chinese world, an American, a Chinese world, and Russia would be a non-entity. And it would be very clear to the Russians. Russia alone cannot sustain a battle against the West. Russia has to have China. I'm not sure that China has to have Russia. The advantage that China has in having Russia is that Russia can keep Europe and the U.S. occupied in Europe, and China can work to try to dominate Asia. And that's why China would like to have Russia. But Russia becomes then a satellite state. Putin becomes a satellite of Xi. Xi becomes the dominant player in the world outside of the United States of America. So Russia loses no matter what. Even if it gets Chinese support, Russia as a power, Russia as a force, Russia as an entity that needs to be dealt with in the world is finished, basically.


As you can see, I'm probably from a slightly different background. My work is mostly coming from design thinking, discipline. On the other side, a civil organization. But I think these cross paths of different disciplines is quite interesting because, for example, civil organizations, GovZero is a civil organization of 11,000 people. And we have a lot of contributors making projects throughout the past 10 years. We've made a lot of amazing projects. And incentivizing contributions without pay, without tokens for two of these contributors, how is that achieved? I think that can be of some reference to the audience here today. All right. So, if you haven't heard about GovZero before, GovZero is basically a civic collaboration and experiments in Taiwan. So, this is our 10th year. We will be having our 10th year anniversary very soon. We have over 11,000 contributors. We've done over 50 hackathons in the past 10 years. We have 800 proposals, hackathon proposals in the past 10 years. 700 of them made a Slack channel trying to sustain those proposals. And we have a wide audience in Taiwan. And there are a couple of different projects that may be worth mentioning because the whole organization, at least in the earlier stage, is all about open data. So, during the early stage of the pandemic, one thing they did was to ask the government to release the data of how masks are being distributed to pharmacies, how the masks are being distributed to the convenience stores and all that. So, GovZero projects, these project owners build real-time maps for people to find these masks. That's one thing that the ecosystem did to help the whole society combat the pandemic. The other examples, including the working groups that's trying to basically do fact checks on fake news to fight against fake news. And the other thing, they are like experimental education initiatives inside the whole ecosystem and organization. So, as you can see, it's a very vibrant ecosystem that's supporting civic innovation in a way. And we're here basically to find out why they did this and how we can basically supercharge the whole GovZero ecosystem. So, DaoZero is an initiative that we just started a couple of months ago where we defined our mission to supercharge GovZero, to supercharge these social impact projects in the future. And Taiwan is a very special place in a way that it has this open democracy. On the other hand, it has some sense of political urgency somehow. So, the civic innovation, the civic movement is quite active in Taiwan. So, what we're trying to do as DaoZero, we're basically trying to import these global experiments, global knowledge into Taiwan, using Taiwan and GovZero as a field for experimentation. And they're exploiting our knowledge, our learnings from them to the global level. So, the only thing we did as a design thinking person, basically what we did was we were trying to empathize with the whole community. And this is, we've done a lot of these interviews. We've been breaking down notes into what people see, what people say, what people do, what people hear, and basically converge that into their pain points, into their gains inside the organization, inside the ecosystem, and trying to find out what really moves people. And this is a basic example. For example, people see these innovative projects being done as GovZero projects. They see the news, they talk about their mentalities, their mentality. One thing they say for thousands and thousands of times is basically saying that don't ask why nobody's doing something, just be that nobody and get it done. And there are hackathons, there are people who are building hacking government data and trying to release those home data to the whole society. They talk about open source, they talk about duocracy, they hear about their accomplishments in the news and stuff like that. So this is, this builds together to become a whole social movement in a way. So in terms, when we were thinking about bringing Web 3 into the whole ecosystem, into the GovZero ecosystem, we were thinking about a couple of questions that we needed to know in order to simply to design a system that works for GovZero. The first one is we need to understand who we are designing for. The second thing is what motivates or demotivates people from contributing without pay. And what are their pinpoints, what's stopping them from reaching their goals, how are decisions being made in such organization because there are no hierarchies and what are their expectations to Web 3 since GovZero was not a Web 3 organization to start with. So we start with who we are designing for. The question may seem like a very simple one and so we are designing for GovZero. We might be designing for the project owners or the contributors but it's after we've done so many interviews it's actually a lot more complicated than that. There are many different types of project owners inside the organizations. There are project owners who come from a project management background. They know how to divide tasks and distribute them and delegate them. And the other type of project owners come from a background where they have a lot of specific knowledge in a specific topic but they don't really know how to delegate all these assignments or the tasks to different people. And the other kind of a project manager is a lone wolf. They basically pick up a short-term project for two weeks, they did it, they release it to the community, tell everybody and that's the end of it. And we also are looking at contributors. There are contributors who are at the core. They contribute for a longer-term two specific projects but there are also contributors who jump between a lot of different projects because they have a very specific scale. For example, UIUX design or they maybe they do research and stuff like that. And there are like OGs, Bridgers who are trying to connect people together so people can find the right person for them. So understanding who we are designing for is very important. We define the core people we want to design for are the PMs and the contributors, core contributors and as well as the guerrilla contributors. So the second thing we wanted to know is what motivates them without like being paid exactly. So the project owners, of course, the thing they always talk about is about impact. So they want to see recognition from their users, they want to see recognition in the news, they want to see recognition, some kind of positive feedbacks that tells them what they're doing is actually making a difference in a way. But what makes them, what makes this impact so sustainable? Why are they doing this for years and years without paying? There are other contributing factors. For example, one is they're basically they're sometimes, most of the time they are overlapping goals for them with their careers or their lives. This is basically what they may be a school teacher. This is where they experiment with new experimental education methods and the other kind of project owners is basically super responsible, super passionate. But all these two types of project owners are actually really the scarce resource inside this organization because as you can see these two qualities are really hard to find in people basically. So how do we empower these people? How do we empower these project owners to actually make impact becomes a very core question that we're looking at. And the others, what are the motivations for the contributors? They also want to make impacts but it's coming from a slightly different angle mostly. So they want to make impact because they think about the return of their time spent. They want to work on projects that actually make impact. They get the signals from if they see opinion leaders inside the projects. They want to see if the project is in the news, if the tech is cool, and all that kind of stuff. Those are all signals telling them if this project is going to sustain or if this project will be impactful in the future. And also on the other side if you're a Web 3 developer wanting to start learning about smart contracts, they contribute to specific projects that basically as a way of practicing these coding skills. So the pain points for project owners is not funding. It is because people don't pay others basically to contribute. It's the people. And it's not more people, more contributors. It's usually the right contributors. For some projects, more contributors is actually the right contributors. For example, if you're trying to script, something if you're trying to do translations, those lower-level skill tasks that needs a lot of people to contribute, that's basically the type of project that needs a lot of contributors. But the other kind of projects who are trying to build a DID, a stillbound token reputation system, that's not a matter. You need another kind of core contributors. So finding the right people is the biggest pain points for these project owners to go forward instead of funding. And pain points for contributors is not much. The main reason is that they can come and leave as they want. So they don't have a lot of pressure. They don't need to sustain any kind of pains inside the organization. So that's also something quite interesting that we observed. And the other thing that's kind of interesting to us because we think how decisions are being made inside a community, inside a DAO is actually very interesting because that is the culture of that DAO. That is the culture of that community. So in GovZero, we discovered, we call this a dynamic delegation. And basically meaning that a very practical example is that if you attend meetings, you get to sit there and make decisions with the people who also attend the meetings, and the people who didn't attend the meetings basically delegate their decision-making power to those who do. And because people who go to these meetings aren't always the same, so you're not delegating to a specific group of people or a specific person, that's the kind of delegation that people are putting trust in, people who actually are doing something. And this is what they call a duocracy that everyone may have heard about. And for us because we're designing this DID system or Soba token system, reputation system for GovZero. Also something we've been thinking about is also because this kind of duocracy is being implemented or being done implicitly. What if we make it explicit? What if we give Soba token, contribution token to you for every meeting you attend? How would that and reflect that in the decision-making power when decisions need to be made? How does that change the dynamic? So this is the first experiment we're probably going to run in the short term to understand the effects that this kind of design will have on GovZero, on these kind of organizations. And also it's important because they're not people from a background of Web3. So they are usually very nervous, anxious about over financialization of things. So probably issuing an ERC20 token that can be tradable, represents flowing power that might not be the first thing that we will be doing. But they are very pro decentralized society, DIDs and other things. So these might be the sentiment that we're looking at. So we basically, because our goal at GovZero is to accelerate whatever GovZero has been doing. So we basically mapped out these flywheel, start with great projects, great proposals. They need to find people. We need to help them define and find the kind of contributors that they need. And try to find a way to encourage them, to incentivize them. And at a certain point, the project needs to scale. So they will need funding, they will need more contributors. How is that done? And then they need visibility somehow. So when they are being seen in the news, when they are being seen somewhere, then they can get more contributors and they can get more project owners into the ecosystem. And basically all these colored points, as you can see, are the places that we think we can somehow design for. So these are some of the things that we thought we can design for. We use this thing called How My Ways to define the problems we're trying to solve. For example, how do we, and we overlap with something Web3 is really good at, which is incentivizing and distributing. So how do we find, attract, and incentivize contributors to make more contributions inside this kind of ecosystem is one question. And the answer may be, so-called talk, may be the ideas that we're going to build next. And the other one is how do we distribute funding or infused funding into the right projects going forward. This is, and the answer may or may not be project funding or others. So these are the things we're basically looking at. And to design an organizational chart for this specific purpose, what we did is that we have our user research at the fundamental level as, because we define the things that can help us reach our end goal wishes to supercharge.zero. So at this base level, we will, for a project who contributes to these community demands, who contributes to these specific goals, we infuse funding, we infuse resources into these projects, so we make sure the flywheel keeps flowing. So in the end, what we're trying to do is to supercharge Gov.zero to be an impact accelerator of societies. And this is the first experiments will be in Taiwan, and then if successful, we'll export it to other places. So that will be my presentation. Thank you. So it's more of a general question, but based on the approaches that you sum on the crypto con so far over the last two presentations, what do you think it could be the leverage points, for example, to applying that to accelerate the implementation of the DAO and so on? What I mean is, given the crypto con methods, what do you think that are the low leverage points to accelerate the development of the community? Right. So just to make sure I understand the question is, how do we accelerate the contributions to the community? Yeah, it's sort of an open-ended question, the sense that how can crypto con methods help the success of the DAO? Of course. So I think the relevance is when we define how we, so now mostly people are using crypto economics on tradable tokens, right, for to incentivize people financially in a way, right? But if it's not based on financial incentives, it's based on reputation incentives, so or decision-making incentives. If we, for example, the decentralized society structure, the decentralized ID structure, if we do sobound tokens to others, how does that incentivize people, does that, first of all, does that incentivize people to do more? How does that incentivize people to contribute more? Does that need to be reflected only in their status or does that need to be reflected in their decision-making power, in voting? Or does that contribution need to decrease over time for a while? That is to be designed. Basically, what I've been doing here is trying to understand the original culture and the structure decision-making process, so we can design something for them. That's basically it. And so I think that's also when we talk about we're turning implicit duocracy into explicit duocracy. How does that affect the culture and how does that, we don't know the answer yet. The experiment is still to be done, so I hope that answers your question. Please. Hi, thank you for the presentation, really interesting. I'm wondering if you have any thoughts around how to measure contributions or if it's something work in progress. Right, that is something work in progress, but there are very centralized way to do this and there are very decentralized way to do it. I think the most centralized way is for they call it pod owners to evaluate. Of course, that's one way, but the other rather decentralized way is peer review of some kind. If, for example, we're in the culture of Gov Zero, basically, if you attend a meeting, they give you fried chicken to eat. So if there's virtual fried chickens that has ERC20 tokens that you can give to people and maybe the distribution of these ERC20 tokens, the pod owners can maybe have more. The contributors can have less. The more you contribute, you basically accumulate these tokens that you can give to each other. That can be an experiment we might be able to run. We're not entirely sure how, so this experiment needs to be in a progressive way. We'll see, but peer review or even reviews from either donors or other community, the people who are being affected, how do we give them tokens to give away to the contributors? That's also something we've been thinking about, but I think one of the challenges, because the variety of projects is so different inside an organization like this, so unify them, standardize them, can be a little tricky. So that's also something we've been thinking about. That's a very good question that we need to do more. Maybe I'll share in the next cryptocurrency update or something. Great, thank you. Thank you very much.