Subscribe to the RCast podcast: iTunes | Stitcher | Google Play | Spotify
or listen here:
Fri Aug 21 • 43:30
Wildfires discussion starts at 1:02
Greg describing the 3 approaches to Game Theory starts at 21:47
Transcript:
Nora Germain 01:18
Well welcome everybody to this week’s climate in coordination, RCast, we’re very happy to be able to continue showing up and doing these conversations for you. So I have planned to talk about a few different a few different pieces of news within the blockchain and sort of environmental movement and science space, but it turns out that there has been some pretty severe breaking news, which is way more important. So I’m going to focus on that and then turn it over to Darryl. So the first piece of news today This is really insane. We have more than 300 fires in California now. There’s about 30 major fires, but there’s about 300 fires total. And I believe last year there was more than that. So it’s probably going to go up. But here’s the first link. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/08/20/us/california-vacaville-complex-fire.amp.html This is from the New York Times. This is called wildfires, a heatwave power outages and a pandemic in California. So this is a really serious situation. And I have a couple of other articles that I wanted to talk about, which explains sort of why it’s really why it’s serious situation. But first off, let’s just look at this article. So basically, the fires are all up and down the state of California. They’ve been caused by a number of different reasons. But right now seems like the biggest causes lightning strikes on extremely dry land. They’re running out of firefighters to be spread out across the whole states. Obviously, we’re in a pandemic, so people breathing in smoke right now is a really bad situation. And the lightning strikes have been very, you know, numerous there’s been apparently over 11,000 lightning strikes, which has caused a lot of this. A lot of this calamity but also they think that because the growth I’m just so dry. And because there was extra growth from the rain that happened before, because we go for really long periods of time without getting rain, and then we get a lot of rain. So it’s like there’s growth that happens all of a sudden, rather than gradually, there’s like an enormous amount of kindling. So anyway, this is a really good piece because it just explains where the fires are and how they happen. And it’s very scary, but I wanted to also explain in the next article that I have. This is from the LA Times and this is one of the reasons why the fires are so scary. There’s obviously California is home to the redwoods, the redwood forests, which is a group of forests that are on the you know, not the West Coast but little inland from the west coast and I think they’re the biggest trees in the in the world. If not the biggest trees, they’re probably close to the biggest trees and I’ve been there The redwood forest and there are trees there that are older than Jesus. It’s very interesting and they’re very beautiful and you feel like a little tiny ant in a Pixar movie when you’re there. Anyway, this is from the Los Angeles Times. From yesterday it says wildfire damages much as big bass and redwoods State Park fate of big trees unknown. So this is a very, very, very scary situation. Because we know that the older trees and the bigger trees, especially the older trees, they store the most carbon and this entire area, the big basin, redwoods state park is home to a lot of these Redwood sequoia trees, other types of really, really old really, really big, very powerful carbon storing trees. So this is really, really dangerous and everybody’s really hoping that the trees can survive because obviously they’re So big and their roofs are so old. But the fires now in California are not just more frequent, but they’re also extremely hot. They’re a lot hotter than they used to be. So they’re becoming a lot more powerful. And so there’s a concern that some of these really large trees could die. And that would be, I guess, something like a catastrophe. And also, I’d like to say, there’s a really interesting Facebook group. It’s called ancient forests, I think it’s, I think it’s called ancient forests. Anyway, it’s just a collection of people posting beautiful, amazing photographs from the most rare forests, and they’re really, really, really beautiful. So I just highly recommend the Facebook group because it just makes me happy. So anyway, that’s my first two little clips. I have two more than I wanted to share. But I wanted to pause and see if anyone had any comments about this because I don’t know if it’s making any kind of national headlines right? Now
Darryl Neudorf 07:03
well, you know, to me, it’s probably linked to climate change because
Nora Germain 07:08
Oh, absolutely,
Greg Meredith 07:09
yeah.
Darryl Neudorf 07:10
Like record record temperatures in August apparently in California.
Nora Germain 07:17
Yes. Yes. Absolutely. We’re in a terrible heatwave.
Darryl Neudorf 07:23
Yeah. So yet another another thing to add to the pile of the urgency of about all of this,
Nora Germain 07:35
right. Yeah. Exactly. And this is one more thing. This is sort of, I think it’s really important that in these climate scenarios, we understand like why they’re so serious and I mean, like a lot of people don’t understand like the compounding effects of all these things. Like for example, you know, When the glaciers melt, they add fresh water to the salt water. And then it can cause a problem with the ocean conveyor belt which oxygenates the ocean. Like people don’t really think about that. It’s not just that the sea level is rising, it’s that we’re, you know, we have a problem getting oxygen to, to the lower the and hold levels if there’s too much fresh water, for example. But here’s another one of these. This is from CNN, and this is talking about and I remember, this happened last year, too. Apparently, you can now see the smoke from California and other western states in space. And it makes the air quality in California really, really bad. They say it’s the worst in the world right now. Which is really saying something. And you know, we’re in a pandemic and people it’s a respiratory pandemic, and to have smoke, and soot and all this stuff in the air is really dangerous for people who either might get COVID or half COVID have gone over COVID causes wheezing causes problem with Airways, and hospitals are already strange. So this is really like a dangerous thing. And a lot of people don’t really talk about the effects of asthma climate crisis. But you know, these fires do not help people that have chronic conditions. Um, and yeah, California has very unhealthy air quality now. And it’s, I mean, almost across the entire state. It hasn’t come down to Southern California quite yet, but it definitely will. It always does. Right now. It’s more Northern California and central California, but it’s creeping down. And there’s an amazing satellite picture of smoke, which appears 600 miles it says here off of the coast, which, which NASA took on August 19, two days ago, and there’s also a little video – a GIF, which explains that so I think that’s a really interesting thing to look at. And finally, finally, there is another concern about the water supply. And this final little piece is from the Colorado sun. And this is from August 19. So this is just probably 48 hours ago, maybe a little less. The headline is “The Grizzly Creek Fires Threatening the Colorado River and Water for the Entire West.” https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-20/weve-lost-an-old-friend-blazes-damage-much-of-big-basin-redwoods-state-park?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true So basically what happens is because there’s so much sediment and debris and soot and smoke, it’s going into the Colorado River and the Colorado River river supplies water for 10s of millions of people. So even though the Colorado River is not, you know, near California, there are other fires that are all over the West basically. And this, this one that I’m talking about is called the Grizzly Creek Fire, which is happening in Grizzly Creek, which is a part of Colorado, kind of rural Colorado. I don’t know exactly where it is. But anyway, that fire is potentially contaminating the Colorado River, which is very dangerous. And I don’t think that people always think about these compounding effects, but I wanted to bring it up today because, um, this all kind of started. Well, the fires didn’t start a couple days ago, but now people are starting to realize how serious it is. like they’ve really expanded in the last 48 hours to a totally new level of kind of situation. And it’s going to be hard to find enough firefighters to deal with all this. Especially because a lot of firefighters for these are there. They’re working. They’re they’re prisoners. They work on basically slave wages to put out these fires, they’re not very well paid. Because we obviously don’t have enough regular firefighters, so we have to hire thousands of other ones to help. So and that’s been a big criticism of one of our wildlife, wildfire relief efforts is that we should we should pay the firefighters more, which I agree because they die in these fires sometimes. And it’s a huge undertaking, which can last weeks and months. So that’s what I have for today. This is breaking news. I’m sorry, it’s not Sunshine here. But I felt it was really important. So I’d love to know if anybody has any comments about that.
Greg Meredith 12:47
Well as as we were talking, what was showed up from me what what arose for me is, again, connecting it to my own inner experience. So, in my, in my crazy inner world, the forests are the lungs of the planet. And if you if you stop and look at the structure of the bronchi inside the lungs, and you look at trees, you find this astonishing correspondence. And so, you know, for me, I was just experiencing, you know, what it’s like to have my lungs on fire, I know what that feels like, I know what it feels like to be in a situation where my lungs are just burning and aching. And I think about or I reflect on or contemplate, you know, what are the what are the actions and efforts that it takes me to move to a place where my lungs are not on fire. And I think that, that there’s a there’s a an analogue in terms of, of what we do as a society, to to move to a place where the lungs of our planet are not on Fire. It’s, it’s actually it’s one of these things where it’s simple, but it’s hard, you know, where simplicity is an incredibly hard thing to do.
Nora Germain 14:11
Yeah. And actually, I got into a heated debate, I’ll say, with someone that you know, Greg, last year about this, this sort of meme about the lungs of the planet. And obviously, that is such a good metaphor and so important, but apparently, there was a big uprising amongst climate skeptics and just general fact checkers. Because of, you know, just the explosion of media about the Amazon burning last year. That was the big story. In terms of fires, even though there were tons of fires in the Arctic and everywhere. And some people have been trying to figure out if we really lost all the trees would there still be enough oxygen? And so that was the that was the core of the debate. Are they are the forests really the lungs of the planet and, and I think that’s so fascinating and, and insane to say well let’s calculate if we can live without the forest. I just think that isn’t the same. But I don’t understand why someone would do that. But apparently people are apparently we can potentially have enough oxygen to breathe because plankton and there are other sources of oxygen,
Greg Meredith 15:33
but oh you mean the plankton in the oceans that are being ???
Nora Germain 15:39
Right but like I don’t think we should play this game of like, “oh, let’s see how little of oxygenating like material we can like leave on earth and still, like, have air.” I don’t know if we should do that. And I mean, it just seems like saying when i when i when I’m moved to New York City, yes, I can still breathe is the air quality worse? Have I looked at the long term effects on my
Greg Meredith 16:05
on my mentation and other capacities, when I’m in a situation where the air quality is terrible? I have to, I have to say it’s been a long, long standing practice of mine to observe, you know, all the effects on on my mentation, from my environment. And, and in particular, one of the things that I’ve noticed over decades of observation is that air quality is one of the biggest factors in my ability to think clearly. I’m a very, I’m a bear of very little brain. And so every tiny little percentage point of clarity really makes a difference in terms of my ability to deliver on just the promises I make to people every day. And and, and so, you know, I am constantly Looking at the various factors that impact that, so that I can, I can be an honorable person with integrity. And when when I’m in a situation where the air quality is degraded, everything degrades, my entire performance degrades. And so when I think about the idea of degrading the air quality of the whole planet, so there’s nowhere we can go to get the right to get to get better than it’s a downward spiral.
Nora Germain 17:33
Right now, it’s completely insane. And I also think it’s totally insane that people will say, No, but we get oxygen from other places in the forest. Oh, great. Well, that’s just perfect. Let’s just test it that let’s just go right up to the end, just like Dr. Seuss with the trucula trees. And let’s cut the last one down, and then let’s just see how it goes. Like the only reason the forest exists To provide us with oxygen, obviously, they provide us with about 50 billion other benefits. Like for example, we find lots of life saving medicine in the forests. And there’s so many more benefits but I just I don’t know I we have definitely got to find a way to save to save the forest. I mean, I don’t know if there’s any other way we can really say it.
Greg Meredith 18:29
No, no, you’re right, those those ecosystems are so rich and beautiful. And the interesting thing is, this is what I keep trying to say when I talk about, you know, learning from life, they have so much wisdom to impart in other ways. One of the reasons I study the mathematics that I study is because it makes it easier to elucidate to record and elucidate alot of the wisdom that comes out of these ecosystems in terms of defense patterns and predator patterns and immunological patterns that then can turn into security for a blockchain – these kinds of things – and there’s much more wisdom to be gathered from the forest. And then then we, we might imagine that first first blush
Nora Germain 19:25
absolutely, absolutely, I mean, not to mention the benefit that it has to the planet when humans don’t even go visit it, like not just what we can extract from it, but just the presence of being there. And also the joy that humans get from, you know, these experiences like I was, I was lucky enough to go visit some of these ancient sort of places and, and there’s nothing like it to be honest, it’s just nothing like it and you don’t know how you feel until you go there. And so, we’ve just got to say these places we got to……. Sorry, I just muted myself. Apparently, I I was reading an article about the redwoods. And there was a really, really big fire there about 100 years ago. And they say that it did recover. Although the fires now are much more severe than they were 100 years ago. But there is hope you know, so we just
Greg Meredith 20:18
I just want to balance things out. One of the things that was so remarkable up here in the Pacific Northwest, we also have rain forest, the Olympic National Forest is a rain forest. It’s not the way we normally think about rainforest but it is in fact a rainforest. And the air is so much richer there. It’s positively hallucinogenic. Like when you go into the
Nora Germain 20:48
absolutely
Greg Meredith 20:49
it’s just incredible. I mean, my my dreams actually changed.
Nora Germain 20:53
It’s like It’s like nourishing, like every it’s like like the cleanest water you could drink like every breath you take is like nourishing Your body like with nutrients. Yeah. And it’s like healing you like you’d almost be you could almost go there sick. I mean, this is not true but you can almost go there sick and just sit down and you would like emerge at least a little better somehow.
Greg Meredith 21:16
Oh yeah, I know I know what that feeling quality that you’re talking about? Absolutely Yeah.
Darryl Neudorf 21:21
Yeah, I’m aware of that feeling too – hiking in the rainforest and the, the kind of the the oxygen high that you get. It’s a it is a great experience.
Nora Germain 21:35
Yeah. So we need to just make sure that everybody can have that in life. And with that, Darryl, I’m happy to turn it over to you.
Darryl Neudorf 21:48
Okay, so I’m kind of coming more from the coordination side of this call today. I have some questions about proof of stake and how we’re applying the idea of game theory. Um, and I guess, so I might be way off here, I’m going to show a video of this documentary by this guy named Adam Curtis. He’s kind of like this postmodern doc filmmaker who did a few series and he had access to all of the BBC archives. So he kind of like cut up interesting. In a postmodern way he kind of cut up interesting things to kind of throw in and anyway, he made them some really great I think some really great documentaries and one series was called “The Trap. What Happened to our Dreams of Freedom?” And in that doc he talks a bit about game theory and kind of how it originated.
Greg Meredith 23:00
if I might, if I might interrupt. Yes, I want. I just I just want to point out that there’s not one game theory. There are in fact, three very well known high profile game theories. One that’s probably in your video is the the Nash game theory Nash von Neumann game theory.
Darryl Neudorf 23:28
Yeah, yeah, that’s the one.
Greg Meredith 23:29
Yeah. That’s that’s that’s the one right so, so but that’s that’s only one. There’s another one that was developed by john Conway: Conway games. And that also has groundbreaking so the the game theory of Von Neuman and Nash is is really, really well known for the Nash equilibrium theorem. Yeah has to do, right. So that’s something that plays out. But the Conway game, they give us an insight into the structure of numbers. So in particular, Conway not only was able to sort of organize in a single data type of Conway game, all the numbers that had up to that date been discovered all the different kinds of numbers. But also, he discovered new numbers that people hadn’t, hadn’t thought about. And, and so so it provided this kind of organizing principle for four numbers, which are deeply, deeply mysterious. And so providing these kinds of organizing principles is really, really remarkable. But, but then the third kind of game theory was originated by a group of researchers that were working at Imperial College and Cambridge and Oxford, and that’s the Abramsky Hyland Ong game theories. Abramsky was at Imperial, Hyland was at Cambridge and Ong was at Oxford. And, and that resolved a bunch of questions about computation that were open. And it’s the this last kind of game theory that we use in our proof of stake, not the Nash equilibrium.
Darryl Neudorf 25:34
Okay, all right. Well, you jumped the gun on me because now there’s no point in me showing that video. But
Greg Meredith 25:42
I just I just want to I’ve made this point a bunch of times, but people never it doesn’t get internalized, right until they until they start to do what you do, which is to try to go and find sources that will help explain things. And, and then it’s like, oh, okay, now I see? Right?
Nora Germain 26:01
Well, that’s fine because it just leaves more time for more questions.
Greg Meredith 26:07
Absolutely so, so But I did want to I did want to sort of, you know, not not go down the the Von Neumann game theoretic thing. It’s, it’s well understood for at least for economists and, and certain kinds of mathematicians, the Abramsky, Highland Ong games are less mainstream. But that doesn’t mean they’re any less important or impactful. And in particular, it occurred to me in 2008, that I might use the game structure to provide security for a network. And essentially, the way the way it works, if you don’t mind me going down this this path.
Darryl Neudorf 26:54
No, great. This is exactly the kind of question this is exactly what I’m looking for. So yeah, please!
Greg Meredith 27:00
Okay, all right, cool. Cool. So, so the way Abramsky Hyland Ong games work is that there are essentially two player games you have player and opponent. However, player may be made of many agents and opponent may be made of many agents. So you can aggregate players together and opponents together. And in fact you can have, you can have groups that are mixes of players and opponents, you know, you know, you could have this one group that’s a mix that’s in the role of player and another group, that’s a mix that’s in the role of opponent. So it’s a subtle notion, but it’s a beautiful notion. And essentially what happens is, you get these streams of questions and answers, right, so, you know, opponent will challenge with the question and players can answer or the other way around, the player can challenge with a question and opponent can answer Like that, and and these are natural kinds of natural kinds of dialogues in human form. I want to take just as a quick aside and point out something that I often point out in this context, which is that it’s no accident. It’s no accident that games are such a profound conceptual substrate or framework for human cognition. Hmm. Right. So again, there there are at least three, four notions of game theory that have provided just this huge advances in terms of human understanding. But if you then map that against other aspects of human society, we learn through play.
Darryl Neudorf 28:59
Yes.
Greg Meredith 29:00
Yeah, yeah. Right. It’s just it’s it’s how we’re organized as a species we learn through play. Yeah. All the mammals have this play aspect, right? primates, the primates are even more organized this way and Homo sapiens is, has really taken this up a notch.
Darryl Neudorf 29:17
This is a theory of Ian cross, right? Ian Cross, the guy who basically, you know, has this theory that it was the discovery of music that accelerated our brains through creating this, what he called, like an open place space for us to to play in, which is what opened our minds.
Greg Meredith 29:40
Yes, yeah, exactly. Exactly. And, and so there’s tons and tons of evidence for this, at the sociological at the individual level, at the family level, at the sociological level, and also in terms of math and science. So that’s why I think games and play are so important. And why I think when we talk about things like programmable money, or digital currency, the essence of that should be the gamification of behavior that we want to promote or inhibit.
Darryl Neudorf 30:16
Yeah, interesting, because I’ve often heard you talk about gamification. And I’ve never, whenever you say it, I don’t really, I don’t really grasp the full context. So I kind of get a little bit of an idea when you talk about it, but it doesn’t I don’t really know how to apply it to to what you’re talking about. Exactly.
Greg Meredith 30:37
Okay. So but you know, what it’s like to set up a board game right? You know, what it’s like to you know, create a board game and set up some rules whereby, you know, the behavior of the players who are engaged in that game, is is moderated or mediated or, or You know, you promote certain kinds of behaviors, and you inhibit other kinds of behaviors. And and so the one thing that’s common amongst these different kinds of game theory is elucidating certain aspects of the promotion of behaviors. So with Nash equilibria is a great example of, of things that you can say very generally, about behaviors when the rules are set up in certain ways.
Darryl Neudorf 31:32
Well, like to me, the Nash equilibria, as I understand it is is centered around the idea that people only pursue their own self interest, right?
Greg Meredith 31:44
That’s, that’s correct. Right. And so that’s an assumption about the default behavior. But when if you put but but what you’re doing is you’re placing them in zero sum games. You’re right. It’s It’s It’s set up you can make these kinds of statements if the players are by default pursuing their own their own interests and and you’re putting them in arenas where they can only play zero sum games. You know, what, are there ways in which you can reach these equilibrium states?
Darryl Neudorf 32:15
Right so it’s always played within that finite game if you talk about it from the James P Carse perspective of “Finite and Infinite Games”, it’s always played within an arena.
Greg Meredith 32:25
Yeah, that’s that’s exactly right. And so but but it turns out that they’re wider arenas. So for example, the Abramsky Hyland Ong games by by structuring it in terms of player an opponent. That’s, that’s a very specific framework, like that’s not paper, rock, paper, scissors, right? Four people who can play rock, paper, scissors. And they all go at the same time, right? Whereas in a player opponent style game, it’s it’s an alternating play, right? player goes, opponent goes player goes opponent goes, is you see what I’m saying? You Yeah. Okay, so so so what the game with the with the mathematics of games do is to elucidate some some common things that happen when the rules are fixed like this and the default behavior of the players, is this, what’s going to happen? Or what how can we explore that? Right. So that that helps us that helps us make predictions about you know, Ensembl behaviors, essentially. And you know, so the Nash games are looking at it largely from from the AI idea of economic human agency, primarily in there are other ways you can apply it, but that was the impetus was economic human agency, the Abramsky Hyland Ong games to get back to the other thread. They’re organized to elucidate the computational aspects. Right. So So computer science has kind of was sort of the stepchild of math and science. Hey, kids, go compute this for me while I’m working on the real stuff. Right? And, but over time, we learned that the computing, you know, through through the work of Church and Turing and, and Godel and many others, we learned that the compute part was just as deep, just as rich. And in fact, what’s what’s going to happen is, over the next 200 years, the compute is going to come back to mainstream math and science and say, No, there’s the your paradigm is missing a bunch of features, and we can tell you what they are.
Darryl Neudorf 34:35
Over the next 200 years you just said? Wow!
Greg Meredith 34:40
Yeah, yeah. And you can easily make these kinds of timeframe predictions by just looking at you know, the impact of Newton’s calculus and how long it took to really sort of sort out the implications. Right and so similar Similarly, there, there are all kinds of things like the notion of bisimulation in computing. Its import and impact has not yet been understood in science. It will, it’s inevitable, but the time that it takes for it to be grokked by the scientific and mathematical community, you can pretty much predict that.
Darryl Neudorf 35:14
Wow.
Greg Meredith 35:18
So, so anyways, back to the Abramsky Hyland Ong games. The the thing that is intriguing there is with this question / answer discipline, you are on Hyland and Ong sort of, they worked out this idea of using justifications. So an answer is justified by a question. Right. And, and you can think about how even certain questions are justified by questions. So again, this is very, very natural. If you think about like ordering a coffee. So the client comes into the store and He says to the barista, can I have a coffee question? The barista in the role of player says, “what kind of coffee Would you like?” Question. Right? So that question was justified by the previous question. And then, you know, you can you can imagine all the different ways that this might go, you know, like the client may be a regular and just immediately say, “Okay, I wanna, I want an Americano.” Or they might say, “Well, what have you got?” another question. Right? And then, you know, at some point, they sort of have gone down that path of figuring out, you know, what, kind of coffee it is, and you know, any parameters, you know, whether it’s with cream or without cream, that sort of thing. And then and then there’s this whole question of size. Okay, what size of coffee would you like, if you see what I’m saying? So this is a very natural way to think about the organization of
Darryl Neudorf 36:58
one question to another?
Greg Meredith 37:01
Yeah. Well, it’s not just how one question leads to another but it’s, it’s, it’s this flow of questions and answers. Okay, right. So certain you may answer a question with a question. That’s a, that’s one way to think about it. Right? That’s a natural thing to do. I want to Can I have a coffee? What kind of coffee? Right? Right. So that answer that question of what kind of coffee is really a justified response. And so with these, with this thread of justifications, this thing was justified by this previous engagement. Right? This this utterance was justified by this previous utterance, Hyland and Ong were essentially able to figure out threads of conversations and what constituted a single thread. Right. And once you have an understanding of what constitutes a single thread, you can get at issues that might have to do with conversations stepping on each other. So in the case of The blockchain. The issue is, if one validator is saying to one side of the network: “Hey, you know, Alice is asking to get 10 tokens out of this account.” Right. And that’s it. That’s all that’s going on. And if it says to the other side of the network, “Allison’s asking to get 100 tokens out of this account.” to the other side of the network, and if you require that those things have justifications, then you can see through the justification structure the double spend. You can see that someone will start reporting on the basis of a justification structure that goes back to Alice’s asking to get 100 out, and another is that Alice is asking to get 10 out, you know, sort of within the same context or within the same bounding box of behavior. Right. And so this this single threaded-ness allows you to track resources, you can track when, when resources are being double spent. And I was originally looking at it in 2008, and then I wrote the code in 2009. And you can see this history on GitHub. I wrote the code as preparatory work for the messaging layer for a decentralized Facebook. And so, so essentially, what I did was I took some theory, I saw that it had wider application, so some some well formulated game theory that had clear results and a very valuable, how do I say? worldview? All right, so it right so it says like mathematics is really good if it helps you ask even better questions. And that was certainly true of the Abramsky Highland Ong games. So I took that and I applied it to network security. And then when Vlad and I were talking, I explained to him this idea of justifications and Abramsky Highland Ong games, and Vlad said, “Oh, we can use this for for catching these double spends!” And so that’s when we you know, that’s when we sort of came up with this idea of Justification Based Casper.
Darryl Neudorf 40:52
Justification Based Casper.
Greg Meredith 40:54
Yeah, so so so the CBC Casper, the one that Vlad and I were contemplating was built on this idea of using these justifications, you can think about the justifications as like little snippets of the chain. Right? Okay. And eventually you piece, you have enough confirmation of these snippets, in terms of how everyone is communicating with each other that you get to. You’re able to piece together with certainty. This must be the flow of conversation,
Nora Germain 41:24
like this series of questions.
Greg Meredith 41:27
Yeah, exactly. So yeah, you get enough reports from everyone. Well, I saw this series of questions. I saw this series of questions. Right. And once once you piece them together with enough stake behind it, then you go, okay, everybody’s seen this flow. So we can commit to that flow.
Nora Germain 41:48
Yeah…..That’s fascinating.
Greg Meredith 41:50
It’s a lot. It’s a lot of fun. Yeah, it’s a really beautiful application of what is already a beautiful theory.
Nora Germain 42:07
Wow, awesome.
Darryl Neudorf 42:09
That was amazing.
Nora Germain 42:11
Unfortunately….
Greg Meredith 42:12
Thank you for the question….. Are we are we out of time? Sorry, I rambled. No, no,
Darryl Neudorf 42:16
No, that’s great! It’s not 9:29 right now. So
Greg Meredith 42:18
yeah, perfect, perfect.
Nora Germain 42:21
We seem to be kind of at the end, but obviously, this is something we could continue talking about, or possibly could be a topic for another one of your RCasts, Greg.
Greg Meredith 42:31
Sure. Sure. Yeah. Well, just
Darryl Neudorf 42:33
the answer to my questions gave me more questions. So
Nora Germain 42:39
I feel like that often happens with Greg. Well, okay, so thank you so much for joining us for this week’s climbing coordination RCast. Please subscribe to RChain on YouTube to become a member of RChain at RChain.coop and you can email climate@rchain.coop , if you’d like to be here. Thank you both so much.
Darryl Neudorf 43:02
And Happy birthday, Nora.
Greg Meredith 43:04
Happy birthday Nora!
Nora Germain 43:05
Very nice of you. Thank you