Good morning everyone. My name is Mike McCoy. I'm the chair of the hyperledger healthcare special interest group and we are having another general meeting session today.  We want to be able to have a space for open ideas open collaboration and different perspectives and experiences when it comes to blockchain when it comes to the technology use and healthcare in my science settings. Please, when you're joining these meetings, please do not down anyone please do not disrespect anyone for their ideas or their questions, as well as do not disclose anything that is under NDA or those proprietary to your business or other business avenues you're affiliated with.  I want to give a space for there's everyone here has been introduced to each other in the group so far, but I want to give time for Guillermo Diaz who's based in Latin America to be able to talk about some new opportunities he's looking the blockchain healthcare space. He's primarily looking for opportunities in Latin America but if, if you have the opportunity or know of people in his either region area or that could use his expertise. Please feel free to reach out to him but Guillermo please tell us exactly what type of employment or what type of roles you're looking for. Thank you very much for for the opportunity and I'm sorry I'm just telecommunicating also in into the streets so basically what I'm looking for is just to apply my knowledge into the blockchain arena, but specifically try to make business here down in Mexico. I believe that we have a lot of potential in terms of solutions around blockchain. Actually, I'm developing with some folks in the US, some solutions around healthcare. I would like to have the opportunity in the next sessions to explain what are the challenges here down in Mexico and how we can apply blockchain because Mexico is a very specific country. We have 42 trade agreements with several countries and that's an amazing opportunity to create some business here down into the several projects, industries, etc. So basically to be more specific is that I'm looking to create that kind of a scenario where blockchain can help governments, industries and part of several nonprofit organizations who are related to IT. So this is the opportunity to create some business with the global IT companies who has presence here down in Mexico and of course my challenge on my duties right now are to adopt blockchain solutions here in my country. So thank you. Thank you, Mike, for the opportunity to explain what we can do here down in Mexico. Awesome. So I know Guillermo is very active on LinkedIn and can be able to answer messages there but if there's an email or preferred way you would like to be contacted by Guillermo, feel free to insert that into the chat and so anyone can be able to copy it and message you offline. So whenever you have the time through the busy streets. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. I will put my LinkedIn and my contact information here in the chat. Thank you. Awesome. Cool. Are there any other announcements or community announcements that anyone else would like to make. Cool. Awesome. I want to move on. I wanted to showcase some of the upcoming events and presentations that are coming on the world of blockchain especially in hyper ledger ones that I added on from last week are blockchain expo in North America. That's having some healthcare topics as well. The University of Arkansas is also having a blockchain for business conference. A lot of their work and research at the University of Arkansas is tied to blockchain at Walmart, blockchain solutions at Walmart, as well as at Walmart in particular. They are looking to use blockchain for some healthcare supply chain use cases such as tracking pharmaceuticals and other things like that. I know they've had conversations and have published some literature about that. And there will be some presentations along those lines for this session on October 8, and then there is a blockchain and healthcare World Summit, mostly based for our European and APAC fans around the world. It starts at 530 Eastern time for American time but feel free to join on to that event as well. There's some chat. Awesome. Cool. And then, like, yeah, Wendy. Yeah, about the University of Arkansas then I will be speaking at that event about governance strategies for enterprises for health related blockchain. The University invited me. I'm really honored because I really respect her work.  The goal is for us to have a true discussion and be able to share our experiences in a meaningful way. Thanks. Awesome. Glad to know Wendy is a part of it too. So, any questions on the events and presentations coming up or does anyone have another event or presentation? Yeah, I have another one. I'd love to invite you to the government blockchain healthcare working group, healthcare town hall tomorrow. When I get into the office, I'll put the link in the chat. Oh, we luckily have that on here. GBA, Blockchain Healthcare Roundtable. Yes, I will be presenting with my colleague Aaron Cohn tomorrow. And our focus is addressing myths and misunderstanding about blockchain and healthcare. A big part of the focus is that organization. The healthcare community doesn't necessarily understand blockchain. So part of it is to get them to think differently about what the possibilities are for utilization of distributed ledger technologies in their environment and help them understand how it fits into their ecosystem. And the other part of that audience will be blockchain developers and those interested in emerging into healthcare and helping them understand that in order to create a viable product for the healthcare space that you have to build the technical safeguards into the technology itself and that you have to have tremendous documentation of all of your procedures. I'm going to be doing probably the deepest dive into my work in life sciences and the regulatory compliance issues. And I am just going to put lots of lots of pieces on the table. The goal is to just create a deep dialogue and get both sides of the community to engage with each other with questions. And hopefully we can just elevate the amount of knowledge in these areas. So, yeah, when I get to the office of Pritzley, it's not already there into the chat and I would just love it if you could contribute some of your experience to. So thanks. Awesome. Thank you, Wendy. Industry news research and group action items. I should put another comma there but English is hard so global blockchain initiative released a paper called titled digitizing healthcare risk and opportunity of blockchain and healthcare system. So I went to open up to that. I found this one fairly interesting. The best way to access it I found was on LinkedIn, they had their own page for it but then you had to download the report, and that was just annoying. So, I figured the best way to do it were to take it on this page. And then go to the full screen so we can go to see it. First off, was anyone else can you see the screen by the way. Awesome. Was anyone able to take a look at this report. I read the abstract might downloaded the full thing but I was just, it's the one thing you posted that I didn't get to read. No worries. Some of those things that came out from the dangers were transactions stored in blocks, they're cryptographically secured. One of their highlights there was that those blocks and would make a stakeholder or a group that is cryptographically protecting that liable and potentially creating another honeypot or another, you know, method of less interoperability and more complexity, which is why there's some concerns there. There are also some risks as well they mentioned environmental type of hazards or blockchain and the energy compute and all those things which I think that's a myth we've all kind of down a little bit as well. But there's some key limitations I mentioned in ethical concerns. But at the end they said they're due to implementation blocking technology in the health care system. That there will be a little bit more transparency decentralized trust as architectures that could be promising for some of these use cases. The deep dive was more so on cartography and more so on the decentralized type of exchanges, like creating a dex in a way for this type of information so could be potentially valuable. If you want to learn more about the topic that link is there but has anyone else taken a read at this one from the global blockchain initiative. I'm browsing through it a little bit. I thought it was interesting the organ transplant section for use case. Personally that's something I haven't really thought about too much so. Tracking tracing of organ transplants and being able to have a decentralized distributed record of how those they are transit transacted and transported. It was definitely a deep reading I was excited to take I took only an hour to it I was, I was lazy and didn't get that much time to do it but there are types of insurance that will cover the risks involved. Can you tell me more about other kinds of insurance or the risks. Do you have a couple of funds compared to compared to individual pulling of risk and things like that. Elizabeth I can also answer that question on behalf of birthday Q. Birthday Q as a software is a software is a service provider is required by many of our healthcare vendors to carry cybersecurity insurance. As those of you who have been seeing all of the cyber attacks have known that our cybersecurity insurance has gone through the roof, I think our premium skyrocketed this year. So, yeah, many blockchain providers are required now to maintain cybersecurity insurance as well. How does the the blockchain premiums verse regular databases is there any difference. You know, I, I, I don't know how the insurance companies make a determination about the premium costs and the risks. All I know is as a software is a service that we do maintain some of the storage of health information and so we are our customers and clients have asked us to well actually required us to maintain cybersecurity insurance. I think that if there would be a breach of any aspect of our technology that we would help them using our cybersecurity insurance cover the customer or clients costs in dealing with breach. So this is part of the cost of doing business and blockchain for healthcare to and in many industries is that you know if we service providers are responsible for some aspect of the business functioning and there's a disruption we may be asked to bear some of the costs. So, all worth worth considering as we are involved in this space. Yeah, I can say from our perspective to and managing a blockchain consortia is we actually had to get another third party we're all health insurance companies but we had to get a third party to do the evaluation of who's taking what risk and what and who's going to be the steward of that data right. Your question originally Mike was one of the differences between blockchain and compared to regular ones is there's just so many more multi parties and multi stakeholders that when the request of a transaction distributed ledger is being accessed and if that. The maintainer and the operator of that transaction man is held liable for disrupting or disturbing the analysis or the transaction flow of the network. They could be held liable and then all transactions they were connected to are then liable to but a lot of times instead of having to audit and go to each individual multi party to to see what the burden is or the burden of risk is. You then have a more clean audit trail and you can find the discrepancy between the multi parties a little bit easier through blockchain technology and so it. You do have to pay a little bit more for the security prowess and security auditing, but in the end the reporting mechanism is a lot faster in the end. At least that's what I've seen so far. Elizabeth you mentioned about validating false credentials. I haven't experienced anything of a network validating credentials. And that's more of a group from pro credits that can probably answer that question, but that is certainly something I would be interested in learning about more to. I've only handled and saw it from false data claims. Anyone else want to chime in on the topic. All right, cool. Thank you for your input. There was another research paper that came out from jmi are on potential uses of blockchain technology of out for outcomes on opioids and I think a lot of this is related to using blockchain for rewards and mechanisms of the hate of digital therapeutics. Some of the abstract in this paper, really highlighted on the effectiveness of blockchain to transmit information showcase information between multi parties, and they found that clinical trial research pledging management and secondary use of data had the most examples of practice to create better effectiveness of blockchain. And bringing in multi sets of data to create a single event stream on a person and make it easier to be able to learn and to be able to repositive data towards then traditional systems and the way we do this in web 2.0 type of methodologies. Did anyone else have any topics or things from this research that stood out to them, or have any opinions on the research as a whole. Now I, I general love, you know, I have, you know, my company has built a few applications on blockchain and one of the, you know, nice things is of course the decentralization, the immutability of the data, but one of the risks is also, even if you encrypt data, if it is personal information, and you encrypt data and put it in a blockchain because of the nature of the immutability of the blockchain records, and as encryption technology gets broken, thanks to, you know, we all know about, you know, that many of the algorithms are continuously being attacked and quantum computing someday might defeat even our most favorite RSA and so on and so forth, you know, the whole idea of public private key cryptography. The question remains as to, is it a good idea to leave, for example, critical health data in a blockchain, and even if it's encrypted, because someday it might become available to be able to break it right so that's a, I think an important question to consider. So one of the ideas that, that I have been kind of exploring, you know, in my organization, and we are trying to build something is to the ultimate answer might be wallets right. Good easily usable wallets. Now we have new techniques such as threshold cryptography and others, you know how wallets are really painful to manage for an average user and that's the reason why wallets are left at Coinbase and you know people hack them and you know now this kind of stuff. There are good ways with good cryptography that you can secure your records, either in a cloud wallet or some wallet which you know you have good control off, and the chance of losing your private key is low because we have new cryptographic techniques. So maybe the area that might help us truly make your health data available to just you and quite frankly, almost if you can then think of this whole distributed model of computing right for example everybody owns their own data in some kind of a wallet, and you know, then negotiations are done by bots, which anonymize this data and give it to a provider or you know payer. In other words, the data sips spread across available to each person, and then the compute model is going to run around and pick the data that is needed, of course seeking your permission. You know I mean that's kind of an end state that I often think of, I don't know how feasible it is to make that work but that may be the answer in my mind to this, like, you know, I would think quite a big risk that we are putting all these so called immutable records and they kind of could be, you know broken at some point in time. Anyway, that's just my opinion so just wanted to bring that up. And Mahesh that sounds great so I want to be very positive and supportive. Up until the point that I tell you 49 out of 50 states say that the EHR owner is the owner of the data in it, and that our legal constructs either at a state level or at a federal level. I don't really allow for a patient to own their own health care data they obviously under the Cures Act have full legal empowerment to share it, but ownership still resides with the health care system. That's a good point, Jim. And I think this whole, it probably extends to almost every domain right and in this case, thanks for that clarification in terms of health data. If you think about all sorts of PII data right across the board. I think we are in various stages of who owns it type of a question I like you said in health care at, you know, it's already the way it is like you point out but yeah I think there is a larger debate as to how do we solve this lot, this problem of personal data, and you know all the other things that we face. And I know we are always actively debating here in the Linux Foundation with newer concepts from verifiable credentials to you know all the things we do so yeah it's going to be a continual you know kind of debate, I'm sure, as we go along this journey. Ash, I wanted to ask you that you'd made a comment about data being in an immutable record and the potential down the road for it to be, you know, if we the encryption could be broken wouldn't. At that point wouldn't the encryption of a wallet also be vulnerable wouldn't all of our systems be vulnerable at that point. You bring up a great point Jordan, but the advantage of wallets is that the one of the first requirements of a good wallet is interoperability right. So we should be one like you know an immutable ledger wallet you know literally like our own wallets you know it goes bad after some time you know our physical wallets we chuck it. We take everything out of it put it into a new wallet nice and shiny you got it for your birthday and you use it for the next day so that's the advantages. You know again this is this you know if it is to me that the question is the record which is put on the ledger right, even the technology for example Bitcoin and others are well aware of the problem of you know lack of quantum resistance to some of the current elliptic cryptography, but what will happen is you know again remember we use wallets to sign we can change that technology right the wallet technology can be changed so basically the public private key stuff you know like for example right now we have quantum resistant cryptography called super singular isogenic you know key encapsulation and if the helmet. These are new techniques even the NIST has published a recent paper about it so they are constantly coming up with it. So the cryptography of the wallet can be changed. No, you know I mean yes we need to find some way to export and import it, but you know we cannot change the once encrypted and stored right that part, you know, literally, you know is always available to somebody, especially in public ledgers private ledgers I guess we can all collectively decide if there is a private ledger in the sense that it is a set of organizations I guess we could all collectively upgrade everything and all promise to delete everything and so I mean just get rid of the whole blockchain and recreate it with new technology right so those are all not, but but the idea is to use public chains or you know quasi public block chains, then it becomes very difficult because people have copies of it, and they could use it or misuse it for other purposes. It's really interesting. Thanks for answering the question. Jim I also wanted to ask you about your comment about data ownership. I hear different things from different people about who owns about patients owning their data hospitals owning the data, HR vendors owning the data. I was under the impression that by that by HIPAA, the patient is the owner of the data and the hospital is the steward of the data but I maybe I'm wrong on that I'm interested, I see everybody I'm muting. I'm interested in your response. I, I refuse. Jim you refuse. Oh, of course, and his big point. Yeah, right. Zoom pulled the rug out from under him. Anyone else want to go I have a statement on that as well. I was just confused as far as the ownership right so if you share if the writer shares it with the patient, how do you identify as ownership at that point. ownership ownership and my Doug probably has some thoughts on this to the ownership is when who actually enters in the data to the portal platform or application. That is the original owner so like when you use terms and agreements and conditions like with Epic or some of those other platforms. And so Epic is liable and is the covered entity of hosting that, but it is then the hospital that is inputting the information so it's most of the times the hospital that is responsible and second day really then it's the platform, which is like epic. And then thirdly, the patient is never held liable because you don't want to have people liable for things that they may not have like full control or understanding of because most of the population doesn't understand clinical data, how it's being used, why it's being transmitted. And, and that's where the most of the liability lies. Doug, do you have a comment on this sir. Well sure, I mean we could go into much deeper philosophical conversation going back to Larry less or even the, the double spin problem that the blockchain itself was designed to address. But without even going that far they, you know, there's an important nuance between ownership and having and having rights to, and the problem or the double spin problem is alluding to is information has this unusual quality of when it's shared it's, it's not conveyed. When, when a patient acquires their information from the HR, which they have full rights to do with very limited but some restriction. They can do anything they want with it. However, the same information can tell to within the HR is heavily restricted and regulated so who owns it to me is a practical matter. As a visit is a further practical matter the patient has more ability to use it in any way they please than the HR so it's a, you know it's an interesting discussion I mean the legal statutory treatment of information is problematic throughout. You know, whether you get digital rights management legislation and whatnot have chronically failed, you know, to handle that problem of replicated, you know, do hold multi held information. And I guess where I come down on it is, you know, you can make a legal argument that the HR has lots of responsibilities custodial responsibilities and have have some rights to use the information subject to HIPAA and other things. The HR has virtually access to all the information without the restrictions so I would say that as a walking around matter, the patient owns the data, or has the data. And I won't call that an incorrect summary but I'll simply say that with the exception of live free or die New Hampshire, every state has it codified that that the HR system owns the data. And, and, and I will agree with you Doug with regards to what we might consider ownership by default by the patient. At the end of the day, especially now that they've had to pass the information blocking rule. If a health care system just says we're not going to give you access to your stuff, they're not going to give you access to your stuff, and, and you have to sue them or file a complaint with OCR, or stomp your feet and wave your hands in the air, but but either way, they don't have access to your data so so the law now allows you to correct it provided the health care system does it. The law allows you to share it provided the health care system does it. You know, if the health care system says we're going to give it to you on a DVD and you have to like it that way then you have to like it that way and you can complain about it again as a as as electronic sharing but but the health care system by virtue of the fact that health care systems have separate liabilities with regards to providing care and managing care, which they are not excused from if they extend you quote unquote ownership of the data, then that's it so yeah. Well, it's something of a conundrum but I just wanted to augment the discussion, I think that word. What happens is that we get the terminology conflated. I really appreciate Jim's Jim Sinclair's points dead on ownership is a legal construct and what we really mean is control, which is an ethical contract construct. Jim is totally right on about what the state laws specify and that HIPAA has no no consideration at all for ownership of data for patients patients really only have the legal rights that he had mentioned pertaining to privacy viewing and accessing their information getting copies and requesting changes but they do not have any legal rights for even deleting their information because state statute specified the necessity for continuity of care. We also provide repositories I think Mike Pica put a note in there to do that for academic organizations like sciences organizations to allow patients more control of their information of how it's used for future uses, but the pharmaceutical company always owns the data, unless they create a new legal construct for their situation. So thanks. They should clarify all that for me everyone that was really helpful. Very helpful everyone and I know we went down a rabbit hole data ownership. But I think it's very useful for everyone to hash these together. In particular, I found these use cases very valuable so if you want to be able to understand or learn more about how blockchain applications can help in opioid research challenges. This is just research this isn't in stopping anyone from using opioids or anything like that this is just on the research and the challenges of accessing information distribution of goods etc. I highly encourage anyone to take a look at that research and to answer and to answer Elizabeth's question there is no consent revocation model. In fact, to Mike's point, the issue of consent around CFR point to data which is what opioid use or misuse falls under. I don't know another kid will fish but it's exciting there's a couple projects project you know five pp2p I leave a few others that I'm involved with in the healthcare side that don't currently involve either blockchain or identity but I'm working on that. And those are trying to address different consent sharing models which again very on a state by state basis. Great coverage everyone. As always, we have the best experts in this field for sure that come to this bi weekly meeting or every two weeks. So why don't want to also highlight Mike because recent post on LinkedIn, advocating for open science dows and if you want to be able to go to the link here it is as well. But, Mike, would you want to summarize it up for us. Sure. And in most of this, the thinking comes from Sean Manion's book of blockchain medical research. What he would get into is like one of the main problems with the, with is a PhD system. We have like a growing amount of PhD candidates and only a limited amount of professorship and PI roles to have to complete compete on publications to kind of get ahead which leads to bad science and the fear of like getting scooped. Basically someone publishing your results before you can. Makes it so you don't share ideas and creates a lot of duplicate work. The thinking is we can put it on the blockchain you can prove a proof ownership and then freely collaborate. And this forms like a gig science economy where you work part time and a few areas of research you have to stick to what you're currently doing, and it gives them like an alternate career route so instead of just being like, just in the lab the whole time being underpaid and over overeducated, you can work on other things to get ahead. So we're thinking that you'll have a lot of Dallas form from this. The last thing we discussed the last, that's how we met is the molecule organization, doing the first IP as an NFT. So they didn't get like dows, like metallic sin, all breeze, did a Dow on longevity, those types of things conform. So we use more people into the profession. Instead of working on central and centralized labs that require credentials. I think it is you can innovate a lot faster and not be held to institutions that are starting to cause a lot of problems. Very well said, very well said and we had a presentation I think before you joined us more frequently from Patrick from research hub, which is a coin based sponsored project that solves this exact problem of there too many too many PhDs track students that do have talent, but don't actually get incentivized the right way as they should. It's a decentralized marketplace where you can reimburse others and hub tokens I believe they're called for their type of research so I highly suggest you check out research hub and if you want the contact Patrick. Please reach out to me separately Mike I think it's a. Yes, you can have. Thank you. What would you say was hub research research hub research hub. You mentioned. I'm relying lagging state level statutes or so. Okay, let's stay blocking. Okay, any questions for on Mike's topic and his presentation. I think I would go ahead. Yeah, which longevity project you interested in I'm going to put one another one in the. I did out by molecule, a bunch of times in the group, and I think that's the one he's mentioning is the longevity one the world fairly familiar with. If I do a search on the word molecule it'll come up. You just sort of molecule that I know I can I can put it in the chat. Yeah, thank you. You're welcome. All right, onto our next topic. And this is all for Wendy hopefully she's on her computer now and she recently with PECB insights was able to add a chapter in for the Alliance between AI and blockchain in particular her page covers blockchain innovations and healthcare. I think that for us that'd be very helpful. Yeah, I'm happy to do so. I was honored to be asked by this magazine to contribute a little article. So what their focus wise was asking about some. Oh yes, there it is. Some real world examples of how blockchain and AI are creating innovations and healthcare. So what I did is I shared some of the experiences that we had done at first IQ. The primary goal of this article is not just to talk about benefits in theory, but to talk about benefits in practice and educate the community that many of these components are not just in their infancy, but they have been implemented that they are making a difference today. And so we hope that this is more of a user accessible article that you know we all in the blockchain community can use as a reference if people want to know if there's something being done today. So I am here for your questions too. I read this article, and I was really fascinated and enjoyed it mentally. Thank you for writing it. I'm pretty familiar with blockchain technology I've done a lot of research to understand the mechanisms behind behind the scenes. And you talk about the difference between private and public. Blockchain is how that distinction has become kind of obsolete. I'd like to better understand. You mentioned permission permission to blockchains. I'm very interested to understand this concept, a little bit better. Yeah, so the new one. Wendy, Wendy real quick. Could you either have your mic closer to your we can't hear you as well. Let me see if I can increase my volume. Okay. I might take me a second to do that. Otherwise what I can do is. Let's try this. Is that perfect perfect. Okay, good. Okay, so, so think about how the first, the first blockchains in the modern era and I always call it the modern era because there was an earlier phase of blockchain like activity in 1991 where there was attestation and proof of evidence of documents and activities. So in the modern era, more organizations are familiar with the mechanisms for cryptocurrency which became both public and permissionless. But then, over time, then we're seeing private consortia and hybrid situations, but the internet has also evolved. So think about how now with Ethereum, which is probably one of the most popular public blockchains used as an underlying infrastructure for a wide range of industries that they now have permissioned modules. So think about private Ethereum and Ethereum enterprise, which allow for some permissioning for access. There's also a hybrid permissioning structure where some organizations have set it up where everyone in the world can read information but only certain organizations can write information. So what we're seeing is just a blurring of the lines that we previously had recognized and we're seeing more flexibility as organizations are developing new products in order to make those products better meet needs of industries. So these permissions are granted through the network as like who governs the permission structure. It sounds like this is a common concept that comes up when people have their, their thinking really grounded in public blockchains. So as the private blockchains have moved forward, the governance structures are different than what you might be used to where they've had to centralize some features. I know that centralization is anathema to some, some people in the blockchain community, but the reality is that organizations are doing this and to imposing more controls for access permissions, like in a consortium for a blockchain or a private blockchain, for example, they are supported by the organizations using it. And so they determine rules of governance for how the blockchain is maintained and accessed and what mechanisms they want for privacy and oversight. While blockchains used in healthcare and life sciences, they have to meet all the regulatory requirements, including having antivirus and firewalls and, and specific audit trails that go beyond what a blockchain would normally do. So these activities do require some centralization. And so, for those of, I don't know if any of you are on the IEEE governance committee, but this is something that we have been struggling with and trying to create awareness of how governance itself is over the different types of emerging technologies that fall under distributed ledger technologies and create guidelines and standards for how we can think about governance differently, how we can think about all of these related underlying structures differently and best create a technology that meets industries needs. It seems to me that I hear a lot of, there are a lot of evangelists out there that are blockchain, blockchain, blockchain has to be, you know, we have to leave, you know, Web 2.0 completely behind and it seems to me more and more that really there's an important mix of some of these Web 2.0 Web 3.0 features.  Is that, is that, do you agree with that? Do you feel like that's true? Personally, I'm not going to take a position on what is the right definition. I serve on committees that are agonizing over creating definitions and there is no solid consensus. The only thing that we can do is be aware and recognize that organizations within the blockchain community are using blockchain in new ways. So these are really going to become market driven forces and market driven definitions. And so it's just that we have remain awareness and of how the terms are being used, how the technology is being used and recognize that it will continue to evolve based on market needs. Interesting. Thank you. Appreciate your comments and thoughts. Awesome. Any other questions for Wendy? I do want to try and move on. Any questions? Yeah, I do want to add 30 seconds to Wendy's outstanding summary and just say that a high level, there's the biggest differentiation as she summarized is between decentralized processes and decentralized governance. Religious zealots out there believe everything, including governance is decentralized, but as Wendy captured very well, I can't convince HHS, DHS and Department of Commerce to have a completely decentralized autonomous environment operated off of Bitcoin for various reasons. But that doesn't mean that processes that they share can't be decentralized and take advantage of decentralization as part of it. Totally agree. Totally agree. Awesome. So I think for the rest of our session, I did want to get to this like what questions in space do we want answered and what teams can help educate us on topics we want to learn more about. This is one of two things I wanted to highlight here. One, I think it'd be valuable in the next coming months to have presentations from Jim's group at Lumetech. And then also Wendy's group at First IQ, if they could help answer some of these questions or whatever topic or concept they believe is needs answering from their expertise or from their solutions. And then we'll have a presentation the next coming months from either of you to help educate us on more topics. And then we can talk about offline to I had some suggestions in my mind but we don't have enough time for that today. The rest of the session. Also, I want to get your permission to do that to not just put you on the spot. I think it'd be valuable for the group as well. On the other side, I'd like us to review for the rest of the time here may not be able to get to it or we may be able to. We have these blockchain use cases we have here. Within the use case development group seconds loading. We put this together last, I believe it was April and March and I want to take every six months to review these. I think there's new opportunities and new use cases we could probably put down around the NFT and ownership space. But generally this is the output this in the chat to so everyone can access this themselves. But generally these are the use cases I found to be applicable and meaningful in the healthcare space would love to hear any others or any other use cases that I might not have on here that I should add because I don't know whether we should as a group might have have. I mean, it doesn't seem like we are necessarily in sync with Stephen Elliott what he's doing for the fabric healthcare team may be inviting him to present as well in the use case he's developing. He meets on he has his meeting on Monday mornings. Anything else from the use cases in particular. So clinical trials so clinical trial management would that be recruitment during blockchain or is this. Do we am I not covering more so like the different situations of how blockchain can help clinical trials. I guess I'm not really doing. Do you already have fine green consent or consent management generally. No he doesn't that's a that's a good addition. Yeah, you're right. So, I'm going to volunteer to add Doug to the agenda because I think that their platform from it from a decentralized perspectives about the most sophisticated decentralized consent management approach. Yeah, yeah, yeah as a differentiation from the medic where we're focused as part of the decentralized identity community with a healthcare application that's different than it can consent management. Well, I'll return the favor of the compliment that the medic is the most advanced on the identity piece decentralized healthcare. Oh guys we're getting along. Now that's awesome. We should merge. Hey you just got acquired. A little late now to have that conversation. Consent management definitely. This is something health variety does as well. I think I had something around that only mentioned that they're part of. Oh yeah patient identity and ownership. Yeah I did have consent management on here for that. Yeah, there it is. The broad scope though. I should have fire blocks under that though. Oh, but put ever name in there. Yeah, doesn't have a consent management doesn't doesn't. But is that sovereign or. No, well, I mean ever name is its own company. Yeah, and sovereign doesn't sovereign doesn't enable consent management. All right, is I think there is an opportunity for the NFT stuff. I would even call that separately instead of just genomic tracking like NFTs for health charity or causes. That's definitely something that's become mainstream so you guys are going to let them collect hard stop. No worries. And that's why I don't know if this is this is enough time to get into this but I think for our next sync. I want to highlight some projects we want to help present to us in the future. These are three and I'll talk to Wendy and and Jim offline in particular, and we love you love to have Doug fire blocks. I'm going to do that as well and update on what firebox is doing if you're allowed to do so. I know acquisitions may make that rough, but cool. If anyone else has suggestions to feel free to message me or you have my email that comes in every week. Feel free to leave a suggestion there, but are there any other questions or updates, someone like to mention before we have one minute left. Thank you everyone. I always learn from this group. So thank you for all of your wise comments and questions. I can say the same. Everyone's very smart and we're all very humble and intelligent and everything so thank you all for the time. We'll see you in two weeks and remember if you have any suggestions feel free to email me message me on LinkedIn or on rocket chat to we rock as well so nobody uses rocket chat. This is true. We need to all get better using rock chat. All right, thank you. Thank you Mike. Thanks everyone. Take care.


This is The Big Picture, an official television report of the United States Army, produced for the armed forces and the American people. Now to show you part of The Big Picture, here is Master Sergeant Stuart Quain. In the fall of 1907, the United States Army purchased from two bicycle mechanics named Wright, the first military plane. Guarantee to remain aloft for one hour, it carried two persons. At an airspeed of 40 miles an hour, it was light enough to be transported in an army wagon. Fifty years have passed since 1907. The miracle of flight has become a common place reality. There seems no limit to aviation progress. This is the Army's tribute to the pilots, the mechanics, the engineers, and the countless others who have given wings to man's dreams. This is the age of flight, the air age. Today, air power is a dominant factor in the American defense program. Far out from all four corners of the United States, Navy and Air Force radar planes are spreading an aerial umbrella across the sky. Careful men, guarding against any sudden attack. They are a vital link in a radar team that includes the due line early warning stations in Northern Canada, Texas tower installations at sea, and Navy picket ships. America has a shield of radar which will search out unknown aircraft long before they reach U.S. borders. But it is upon our airmen and modern aircraft that we must rely in case of enemy attack, and our defense, a magnificent full work of aircraft whose speed, strength, and dedication provides us with air power. But it wasn't always like this. For centuries, man gazed up at the flight of the bird in hopeless end. How easy it seemed. If all it took was wings. Alas, wings alone were not enough, as many bird men proved. Despite ingenuity and determination, they flapped and flapped in vain. And although the spirit was willing, it remained for Orville Wright and his brother Wilbur to point the way. On December 17, 1903 in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, Orville won the flip of a coin and immortality. With two bounces, he was in the air where he hovered for 12 seconds at 31 miles an hour, covering 120 feet. But there were other early flying machines. Some that taxi, and some that hop, some that didn't do much of anything, and some that, hey, watch out there. In 1907, the Army recognized the potential of aviation, and in 1909, it purchased the first military plane. The U.S. Army Air Service was founded under the supervision of the chief signal officer. Early Army pilots were assigned the task of testing and improving the piano wire and canvas airships. They flew test after test. Not all of the flights were successful. The first man to die in a plane crash was an Army lieutenant. Now, planes were getting bigger. By 1910, an unknown enthusiast named Glenn Curtis was building and flying amphibians. By 1914, the fledgling Army Air Service had expanded to several dozen planes. At first, planes were used only for aerial reconnaissance. But in time, bombs, and then machine guns were added. Pilots who had once waived at each other as they passed, now shot to kill. These were the days of the Lafayette Eskadril and Baron von Richtofen's flying circuits of Billy Bishop and Eddie Rickenbacker. Americans learned new words, the Spad, the Pocker, the Jenny. With the end of the war, numerous new experimental planes appeared. And a new kind of scientist emerged, the aeronautical engineer. There was even a new kind of aircraft. It was called a helicopter. By the middle 20s, there seemed no doubt that the helicopter would fly. The only question was, in which direction? Some early four-bladed helicopters actually hovered, while others only bounced. Before long, however, there was evidence enough that the helicopter was here to stay. Now, man was finding first one method, and then another of flying where, for thousands of years, he had been able to do little more than watch the birds and free. These were the days of the stunt pilots, the barnstormers. When the thrill of seeing a parachute open was new, records were being broken. Alcock and Brown became the first to conquer the Atlantic. Then, a few years later, a small Ryan monoplane, the spirit of St. Louis, soloed the Atlantic and captured the imagination of the world. Meanwhile, the army was flying the males. In all weather, around the clock. And army test pilots were stunting and looping in new, improved by plane. The auto gyro was having its day and opening the way for today's American helicopter. Commercial aviation was developing. Gasoline octane ratings were going up. Passengers were now carried on regularly scheduled flights. This luxurious airliner of the early 30s carried eight. Some people even thought commercial aviation had a future. By the late 30s, however, the biplane had almost completely disappeared. The army air service given way to the United States Army Air Corps, and although hard-pressed for funds, had developed the nucleus of a modern airport. But it was only after Pearl Harbor that America's factories started rolling in earnest. Now, we needed planes not by the thousands, but by the tens of thousands. First and foremost, was the B-17, the world-famous flying fortress. She packed a wallet in the pilot, and soon the planes were ready. By 1942, vapor trails were over France. The air war was underway. These were the men who flew with death. The pilots, the navigators, the gunners, 48,000 pounds of steel, 10 men. Swiftly, they streaked toward their targets, mission to destroy the enemy's ability to make war. They did it. A plane is a beautiful thing. Ten men's lives are beautiful. A bomber going down is not. But the odds were good for American pilots. The planes they flew were fast, rugged, superb in combat. The pilots gave a grand account of themselves in Europe. Enemy from the air, scapes like this were few, altitude strafing, enemy ground installation. Remember the Memphis Bell? The celebrated lady from Tennessee survived many a perilous assignment, returning home scarred but happy and proud to be back. In the Pacific, many Navy ships were carrying planes. Buridious Navy pilots mastered early catapult launching devices. And aboard aircraft carriers, they overcame an additional hazard, a rolling landing field. Air power was a major factor in the planning of the Pacific campaign. These tough fighters outfought the best the Japanese had to offer. They spearheaded the island-hopping Allied forces across the Pacific as the war moved closer and closer to the Japanese homeland. Only a matter of time, B-29 bombers were visiting the empire of the rising sun with ruthless regularity, often in hundred-plane raids. B-29, the Enola game. In the years that followed World War II, even greater progress was made in aircraft design and development. Army aviation separated in 1942 from the Army Air Force Corps was experimenting with helicopters. The rotary wing aircraft with its hummingbird qualities offered amazing possibilities. It provided the extra speed and mobility needed by an army no longer content to move only along the ground. Aerial cargo carriers capable of supplying frontline infantry troops with heavy equipment quickly and when needed. Coming in a variety of sizes and shapes, these are H-21 flying bananas, the helicopter added a new dimension to aviation progress. The Army's foresight and industry had been building air power for 40 years. In 1947, the Army Air Force received its greatest tribute. It became the United States Air Force. Now from experimental labs and drawing boards, there came yet another aviation miracle. After many years of study and research, jet-powered aircraft was a reality. More powerful than any plane previously conceived, the jet opened up a new vista in aviation progress. By October 1947, a milestone had been passed. Test ship, the Bell X-1, became the first aircraft to crash the sound barrier. It reached a speed of 780 miles an hour, already obsolete. This ship is now on exhibit in the Smithsonian Institute. From such research came a host of modern Air Force jets. This is the F-84 Thunder jet, which went into mass production in 1948. One of the earliest jet fighters, it was also one of the best. Maneuverable, heavily armed and deadly, these F-84s packed a real punch. Jet bombers came right along with the fighters. First accepted was the B-45 Tornado, powered by four engines with a top speed of over 500 miles an hour. Next came the sensational B-47 Stratoget, driven at over 600 miles an hour with a range of 3000 miles. America was building an arsenal of jet bombers. One of the most unusual test planes was the B-49 flying wing. Of a completely different aeronautical design, it did away with the conventional fuselage and tail in this radical experiment. It maneuvered in air like some giant bat. Side by side with Air Force developments went experimentation by civilian birdmen, eager to try out the new jet power. But it remained for Korea to demonstrate the real value of America's jet aircraft. They proved themselves in combat. Squadrons of recon bombers were able to fly almost unmolested over enemy territory. Cruising at over 600 miles an hour, armed with bombs, machine guns and rockets, they out flew out fired and out fought the best Soviet fighters that the North Koreans could put in the air. Looking up to 32 five-inch rockets, coordination with the infantry, time and time again they destroyed enemy build-up centers. In this operation, the Air Force was not alone. Navy and Marine pilots flew many of the sorties flown in Korea by American forces. Close support for infantry troops was a specialty of Marine airmen. Working together, U.S. airmen of all the services gained control of the skies. For low-level aerial reconnaissance, however, Army aviation was used. In World War II, light planes like this were first assigned to infantry units. The effectiveness of the early scout planes resulted in the formation of Army aviation. In Korea, they were invaluable. For these planes were best equipped to cruise slowly through the winding mountain terrain. Light, rugged and versatile, they could go almost anywhere. Where nothing else could go, helicopters went. The second half of the Army aviation team, they served as troop carriers and evacuated the wounded directly to rear-line hospitals. The Korean War found the American Army more and more airborne by transport, by helicopter. By C-119 cargo planes, American soldiers took to the skies. C-1 saw the introduction of military aviation. Korea saw it carried to a new peak of combat performance. Korea over, experimentation went on. The H-37 helicopter and the L-17 Navion were added to Army aviation. The Air Force was setting new records. The Bell X-2 rocketed to many times the speed of sound. This is not a jet aircraft landing. It is rocket power of flying laboratory built for supersonic flight. With aircraft like this, research was moving away from Earth into the borders of space. The Air Force Research and Development Program requires a lot from its planes and a lot from its men, the test pilots who take the chances. As planes were getting faster, so they were getting bigger. This is one of two decks aboard the XC-99, the world's largest cargo plane. This extraordinary aircraft has a tail larger than the entire original plane flown by the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk and its fuselage is longer than their first flight. Looking at it, who would believe it would truly fly? But it does and with a range of 8,000 miles it can carry 50 tons of cargo or 400 fully equipped infantrymen. However, it requires only a five-man crew. The six engines push it forward at over 300 miles an hour. In recent years, the Air Force has brought out even newer jet aircraft. The swept wing F-100 Super Saver unveiled in 1953 was the first of the supersonic fighters, fighters capable of operating regularly above the speed of sound. Newest of these supersonic jets is the F-104 star fighter. As the missile with the man in it, it made its debut in 1954. This fantastic fighter flies more than a thousand miles per hour. A true mammoth of the sky, largest and fastest jet bomber in the world, is the V-52 Stratofortress. Pride of the Air Force, this giant bomber with its 6,000 mile range can reach any target in the world. Today American air power with its arsenal of atomic weapons is one of the chief deterrents to war. On this 50th anniversary of military aviation, the V-52 is a shining symbol of American aviation progress and still the experimentation goes on. This is the Army's converter plane, now being tested. Its propellers are designed to lift it as a helicopter and then fly it as a conventional plane. This is one of several converter planes presently undergoing study. At the same time, a variety of small one-man helicopters are being developed. One day, this device may be standard equipment for all infantrymen. It has passed all tests to date with flying colors. Here's another version of the same idea. The Army, the Navy, the Air Force, all three services are experimenting in this area. One of the most unusual recent developments is the aero cycle. Similar in concept, the flying platform is another recent innovation. The operator is standing directly above two revolving ducted fans. He is literally standing on a column of air, an astonishing new principle of flight. One unique flying machine is the Navy's aerodyne.  Another way of riding on a column of air. Exactly where the future will take us, no one knows. But Army scientists predict an aerial jeep using the principle of ducted fans and an aerial assault vehicle. Within the next few years, these drawings will become realities. But in the years since World War II, perhaps the single most important research program has been in the field of rockets and missiles. Here may very well lie the future of air defense. For once perfected, rockets and missiles may offer a far better defense against enemy aircraft than exists today. And long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles may replace today's long-range aircraft. At the present time, the greatest armament race in history is being conducted for space superiority. While the time has not yet arrived to phase out all fighting aircraft and replace them with rockets and missiles, already the three services have adopted numerous small weapons of this sort. The Army has an integrated team of rockets and guided missiles. Here is the dart. Nike Hercules. Honest John. Corporal. Redstone. The potential of the missile seems unlimited. Already we have submarines and cruisers equipped for missile launching. Accurate and powerful, these missiles can travel through space at incredible speeds up to thousands of miles an hour. Tools in many sizes and shapes may replace conventional air defenses. It can everywhere look to planes which fly, the arsenal of army missiles to guard America against attack from the sky. It's built its air power second to none in the naval air arm, the Marine Corps, the Air Force and the Army. The big picture has paid tribute to the courage, tenacity and skill of the men and women who have served the nation through 50 years of military aviation. And on this anniversary, the Army salutes its sister service, the United States Air Force. Now this is your host, Sergeant Stewart Queen. The big picture is an official television report for the armed forces and the American people, produced by the Army Pictorial Center, presented by the United States Army in cooperation with this station.