All right, so welcome. Welcome to going parabolic. Glad to have you all here today. This is a pretty cool episode. I'm waiting for our guests to show up. And, you know, I just wanted to make kind of an announcement. You know, I really appreciate all the love that you all have shown over, you know, the host of these episodes. And, you know, let's let's keep learning. So here our guest is here. I'm gonna let him in the room. Hello. Hello. Hey, Jameson. How are you? Good. Let's see. Yeah, there we go. Okay. Awesome, man. Good to see you. You too. Before we begin, I talked to Walker this morning. I really enjoyed that conversation. So we went over kind of my perspective on renewable energy, mining, sourcing rigs, how to make a business like he's kind of conceptualizing work, which I think is really interesting. So cool guy. And I appreciate, you know, I don't know if you guys know each other real well, but I enjoy talking with him. So anytime you have someone like that, you can send him to me. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, he just emailed me through my contact form on my website. And I was like, Oh, you're you're in North Carolina. I know a guy. Yeah, very cool. Yeah. So let me start off with this. Going parabolic is this is the premise behind it. I don't like to watch people interview people and the interviewer knows more or pretends to know more than the people they're interviewing. It's not a good learning environment for me. And that's just not how my mind works. So what I'm trying to do, and it seems to be working, is share due diligence with people and share my learning process with people. So it's sometimes live rants and it's sometimes, you know, getting someone whom I think knows infinitely more about something or some subject and then begging them to come and teach me kind of just give me a download. And so I've been in this space, you know, a blink compared to you 2015. And I went all in though, I started to mine by crypto, put it in obscure exchanges, get SIM hacked eight times, SWAT attacked, lost millions of dollars and currently have a lawsuit with AT&T. All of that experience showed me that OPSEC and security super important. And I've gone through my own evolution of that. What I'm hoping to gain from you today is to take me on a journey of your kind of knowledge about security and how do you actually custody this stuff? What am I doing wrong? Because I'm hugely convicted in the process I have. But if you tell me something that I'm really doing wrong here, I'll change my mind. Does that kind of make sense? Yeah. Was your SWATing related to crypto? Did you know much about that? Was it an extortion thing? It was an extortion kidnapping thing. And I'll be honest, they threatened to kidnap my middle daughter so they had enough information about me and my family that they had identified her location. We already had the FBI involved. But local law enforcement literally told me, do you have a gun? Because we can't protect you at this point. And inform your job and Morgan Creek Capital and Morgan Creek Digital that they could call the police and send a SWAT team there. It's at that level. Yeah, yeah. That's interesting. Obviously, there aren't many people who have been SWATed. But were you public about that? Because I hadn't heard about that. No, not at all. And I'm only speaking about it with you because I feel like we're kind of brothers in arms regarding this. I think that's part of the problem is that I know of one other person who was SWATed and also did not go public about it. And my suspicion is that the vast majority of people who are SWATed don't go public about it because they don't want to draw more attention to themselves. And so after you went through that, did you go to the trouble that I did of basically buying a new house and starting over again? Or are you just hoping that nobody finds you because your information is still out there? You know what? And again, I'm here to learn. I've taken a different approach, Jameson. I was the medical examiner of Cumberland County back in 2010 to 2013. So I was handling gangster murders and testifying against people in any type of homicide, suicide. So I was gummed up, security systems up, and I already had bad guys kind of tracking me. So it wasn't an environment I felt uncomfortable about. The way I've done this is with like guard dogs, alarms, video cameras, private security, and guns. Because I don't want to live a life as a recluse. It just seems like it's too difficult. But people are wild, man. Someone identified my home because I took a picture of a sunset out of my backyard and they used Google Maps and picked up a fire pit and said this is his house. So I don't know if that's pertinent to this discussion. Maybe give the listeners a little bit of your background and then I'd love you to take me into the weeds of custody. How was your experience with the FBI? I have them on speed dial, Jameson. I have FBI agents that I can text and say someone just hacked my daughter's phone. That's my relationship right now. They showed up at my house and they've come to my work. And yeah, I mean, I am intimately involved with the FBI. I'm assuming though that they never actually tracked down your attacker. They've identified some of the hackers, but they have not identified the attacker. One of them was a kid. Oh yeah, I think a lot of them are kids. And I feel bad because I'm not going to spank him and his family, but I think that he may be in trouble. Once they start to prosecute this stuff, it's out of my hands. Yeah. I mean, I'm in limbo right now with my own case of just like I spent over a year gathering information. I put out a bounty and eventually I hired a former prosecutor to help me build a case and basically hand it over. And that's just where we are now. I handed it over and it's just a black hole. And as far as I know, nothing's ever going to happen with it. Yeah. Look, I'm just glad you're safe and you by luck navigated people showing up at your house. So I know a little bit about the story, but it's pretty wild. So again, I would love for you to talk a little bit about who you are. Tell me a little bit about crypto, why you're doing what you're doing. And then again, like I really want to pressure test my custody thesis. I've got coins in cold wallets. I've got some stable coins in different exchanges and I've got Bitcoin and GUSD and BlockFi. So I'm sure that a lot of these things you've thought deeply about and have strong opinions like why put your Bitcoin on an exchange or in a banking situation where they're rehypothecating and it's not your Bitcoin. I'm looking for you to say those things and literally smash me on top of the head, wake me up. Cool. So the mic is yours. Well, all right. Where to begin? Well, I mean, I used to do some of that stuff. I had funds in various places and it was nice just to play around. And then I got burned a few times and I nearly got burned a few other times, usually due to custodian failures of some sort. The whole BlockFi lending stuff is an interesting development, but it's only slightly new in the way that they're doing the lending. I mean, I'm pretty sure the last time I actually lost Bitcoin was because I was lending it out through another service that was essentially lending to margin traders on Bitfinex and then Bitfinex got hacked and everybody got like a 30% haircut. So that was kind of the end of me leaving my Bitcoin with any third parties even if they were promising to pay me back with more Bitcoin because I ended up losing money at the end of it. And I figure these things are generally probably going to suffer a failure at one point or another. I mean, they work until they don't. And that's kind of my experience going all the way back to Mt. Gox where I bought my first Bitcoins there because it was the only real option at the time. And thankfully I was aware enough that Mt. Gox was just a flaming dumpster and so I never kept my money on there. I would just buy and withdraw and be done with it. But I knew a lot of people, even sophisticated technical folks who they kept a lot of money on there and they got burned. And so I would say my general approach to the spreading your money all over the place, the sort of diversification stuff is that on one hand it reduces the likelihood of a single catastrophic failure completely wiping you out. And that is the thing that I think makes people feel safer and in a way it is safer. On the other hand, it's increasing the likelihood that you will suffer some sort of failure that will partially wipe you out. So I can't stand here and objectively or quantitatively say that one is better than the other. There's just two different risk profiles. And I am on the extreme of I would rather have a super robust single setup that I can reason about and be highly confident that there won't be any failures with it and forego the possibility of slightly increasing my, having some gains in my Bitcoin by diversifying it and having a little more risk, et cetera, et cetera. They're all valid strategies. I think another question that kind of comes into it is like, are you trying to increase the total dollar value of your investment? Are you trying to increase the total Bitcoin value of your investment? Or are you just trying to make sure that your total Bitcoin holdings doesn't go down? Those are kind of, I think, three major perspectives to look at it and then make decisions about risk. May I jump in on that? Because I think that those are super good points. And I can only speak to you about why I'm doing what I'm doing. Historically, I've made investments in things and hoped that those investments appreciated. So you buy real estate, you buy stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, what have you. I've approached Bitcoin as money and I've tried to take fiat that to me is a real liability, especially if you have a lot of it. I don't want to hold cash. So I've looked for alternatives. That's why I've been attracted to stable coins that have interest. And I have a position there and I've bought Bitcoin. And then I've looked at the Bitcoin, and this may be incorrect, as kind of a stranded asset, because it wasn't working for me. That's a common perspective. And so let me stop there and let that statement, like I felt over the last five, six years that I've held Bitcoin, I'm a holder, it wasn't working for me. Yeah. So that's one of the most common questions that I think especially early folks come to me with is like, how do I invest my Bitcoin to get returns on it? And I mean, obviously, I'm not a professional investor. I come from the technological perspective and security perspective on all of these things. And my retort to that is Bitcoin is the investment. Ultimately, I think what you have to look at, especially historically, is what things could you have invested your Bitcoin in that would have resulted in a positive ROI compared to just holding? And there's very few things, especially in the crypto space, I think one of the few things would have been investing in maybe some of the exchanges in the early days because the exchanges are the insane casino moneymakers. But other than that, I suspect the vast majority of investments in this space are net losers, unless you're talking about doing perfectly timed speculation of other low cap altcoins or whatever. And there are certainly plenty of shitcoin traders out there. I would say the real pro shitcoin traders, the one common theme that I come across on them is that they're just doing it to stack more Bitcoin. So to them, it's just a game. And the whole, if they end up with more dollars but less Bitcoin, then they've been wasting their time. So that's how I would approach any investment. And actually, it's kind of tricky for those of us that are building companies in the Bitcoin space, because that means that if we want to pitch investors on our company, in many cases, we find ourselves having to convince them that it will be more profitable to invest in our company than to just keep holding on to Bitcoin. Now, there are some other arguments around that of sort of more meta grand scale of, if we don't build these certain pieces of infrastructure, that will, at a whole, inhibit the growth of the system. But as a direct investment ROI, it definitely creates more of a challenge. Got it. I had a tremendous epiphany in my own understanding and approach to money. I had a conversation with Bitcoin Tina. I don't know if you've ever come across Tina, but this was one of those times where Tina made a statement that, Jason, money should be enough. You've traded your life and time to get money. Why then do you have to take the money and risk it in some type of investment? That's the problem. Money should be good enough, with money. Fiat, US dollars, aren't working like that because of inflation and all kinds of other things. Bitcoin, because it's deflationary and has all kinds of other really interesting things, is probably good enough. So you're saying to me, and I'm just feeding it back, that Jason, you don't have to leverage your Bitcoin to put it to work for you. Bitcoin's good enough. You just have to hold it. Yeah. I mean, this can ultimately devolve into some more Keynesian versus Austrian economic theory of like, is it a good thing that we're not incentivizing investment in various companies, et cetera, et cetera, and all of the second order effects from that. But my perspective in general, at least for the past three or four years, has been, I'm going to hold on to my Bitcoin, and then I'm going to invest my time and my skills into making pieces of the ecosystem more user friendly, more mainstream. So instead of me investing my Bitcoin in things to try to get a return, I try to invest my time and skills into things that will appreciate the value of my investment in Bitcoin. So smart. And you're saying to me that you're getting equity. That's the game, right? That's one way to think of it is that the Bitcoin ecosystem and network is kind of like a decentralized startup. We're all playing our parts, but there is no leader that is telling us what our parts are. You kind of have to find your own place in the system. Yep. So true. So true. So can we talk a little bit about just custody and different solutions that are out there and how you approach custody? That's what I've been doing for over five years now. So yeah. Love it. Love it. Yep. So tell me, where are you right now in the custody world? What are you working on? So the first three years of my career in Bitcoin, I was mainly helping enterprises secure their hot wallets because exchanges and other large institutional level providers are really juicy targets because they generally keep a lot of private keys online and hackers want to get at them. Large reward potential there. And that's why we even to this day see more and more exchanges get hacked every year. So that's what I was focused on at BitGo building multi-signature wallets. And then a little over two years ago, I made a very slight pivot where I took sort of the same general idea of multi-sig, but also trying to take a lot of the best practices that we've learned over the years through a lot of hard lessons and basically write software that encodes as many of these best practices into the software itself so that we can try to lower the learning curve for people to do self custody, what I consider to be the right way, or at least a far superior way compared to what most people do. And there are different levels of ownership in Bitcoin. Really level zero is you don't actually own any Bitcoin. Level one is you think you own Bitcoin, but you don't own Bitcoin because it's actually all on the exchange where you bought it or, you know, with some third party who controls the actual keys. The next level is, you know, you actually withdraw the Bitcoin to a software wallet that you have maybe on your phone, your desktop or laptop or whatever. Next level after that is getting those keys off of an internet connected device, putting them on a hardware device, you know, Trezor, Ledger, Coldcard, or one of the many other ones that are coming out. And then I would say like, you know, each one of these levels is probably an order of magnitude fewer people who actually attain that level. And I would say that, you know, the vast majority of people who make it to the hardware wallet level, which we know at least two to three million hardware devices have been sold possibly a bit more as of today, they generally stop there. And, you know, they figure, okay, I'm safe from hackers. Call it a day. But the problem is that big hacks and thefts make the news. And so that's what people think about. But what they don't really think about is the other side of security, which is security against yourself, security against loss and disaster scenarios. And so while multisig is great because it helps you against all kinds of attack vectors, that's why I think it's great really for the redundancy aspect. So that's why I consider like the final level, like after going to a single hardware wallet is actually then multiplying that into a set of hardware devices that you keep geographically distributed and those devices act in concert to protect one single logical wallet. This kind of throws a lot of people for a loop if they're not familiar with the terminology or whatever. But the easy way to think of it is, you know, it's like the nuclear missile activation process, right, where you have to have, you know, two different people and they turn the keys at the same time. Otherwise, the missile doesn't go off. We can recreate that same type of requirement and potentially even, you know, make it more complex, two out of three keys or three out of five keys, et cetera, which it just means that there are more things, more keys, more devices that would need to be lost or compromised in order for those funds to be lost or stolen. And so essentially that's how we came to this idea with CASA of a three of five wallet. It's multisig, but it's also using multiple different geographically distributed devices that are built by different companies. They run their own software, their own firmware, their own hardware. And by creating this diverse setup, it actually adds to your security because it means, you know, for an attacker to be able to get enough of those keys, they have to bust through a variety of different security architectures. And so the simplest way I can describe this is that Bitcoin has always allowed you to be your own bank and self custody. But I think that what a lot of people have been missing out on, even the ones who have been self custodying, is that we have the technology, we have the ability to actually create a setup that is far better than a traditional bank. You can actually create a setup that is geographically dispersed across international lines in such a way that you have nation state resistance, if you're putting these devices in different countries that are not diplomatically in good relations with each other. So that's the type, the level of adversarial thinking that I'm trying to go for to be able to make something like that accessible to a non-technical person. And the way that we do that is we create really user friendly mobile app experience. And then we still back it up with a high level of service, which is another thing that I think has really been missing from the Bitcoin space. It's like the vast majority, at least of the large companies out there, if you try to call them up or get them to respond to you in a support request, especially if it's during a hectic bull phase, you could be waiting for weeks. Yep. Yep. So true. So true. And I know you've probably thought about this, how I've tried to approach custody and I'm using traditional or legacy systems that I'm comfortable with. It's been through wills and trusts and things like that. How do you take multi SIG and connect it to that level of a plan? Like in the event of catastrophic situations, not a catastrophic hack, but a cat is like my death. How do we protect that asset for families? Yeah. And that's something that even fewer people I think have gotten to the level of thinking through. I think a lot of the folks in the Bitcoin space are younger than they haven't really been faced with their own mortality. I put my will together when I was 30. I put my will together a number of years ago. And the reason for it was not because I had errors that I was worried about, but rather that I had this complex Bitcoin offline storage setup and I just wanted it all in writing and I wanted to have trusted friends that I knew would be able to actually execute the instructions. But this is something that we spent a year working on actually at CASA. We had one of the guys who created the Glacier Protocol work on our own inheritance protocol. And the question that we posed to him was you know, we have our wealth security protocol, which we have used to create a threat model that we then architected our multisig solution around. How do we take that wealth security protocol and build a new inheritance protocol that melds that with what we are familiar with the legal system and the estate process and probate and all of that. And so essentially what that resulted in is we took our three of five multisig model and we tweaked it to a three of six multisig model and we did that so that we can ensure that a threshold of signing keys, three of those keys, were always in places that were accessible through the legal system. And so the way that you would normally go about your day if you had that set up is you have one key on your phone to just initiate a transaction. You would then have two other hardware devices that were geographically distributed for security and robustness purposes. And then CASA always has one key that we keep in cold storage for emergency recovery purposes. That would be accessible if we were presented with proof of death. You would then have another hardware device. The fifth key would be in a safety deposit box that would have the beneficiaries listed on it so that bank or other entity would allow your beneficiary to access it also with proof of death. And then finally the sixth new key that we added would be held by your estate attorney who of course would be the one facilitating the entire estate process. That is pretty cool. So three of six have to show up for a transaction to occur? Yeah. And so normally you would have three keys that were easily accessible to you. I mean, you would also of course be able to access the safety deposit box key and if needed you can always request to go through the CASA recovery authentication process for us to co-assign a transaction. But then also you would just know that if you got hit by a truck, then even if the three keys that you are normally using became lost and inaccessible, there would be three more available for your estate to be able to access. This is really cool. I did not know, now you've written so much about this and I've tried to digest your writings on security, etc. So I really appreciate that. I didn't know the level to which you all had thought about embedding trusts, dealing with probate, which is really complicated in itself, how to avoid probate, which is important for most people for a number of reasons. That's really, really interesting to me. I would definitely recommend, if you haven't already, to read Pamela Morgan's inheritance planning book. I actually learned a number of things from that myself since I was not familiar with the ins and outs of what can go wrong during the estate process. Right, right. You know, I had purchased when you launched a CASA node. Are you no longer using that product or supporting that product? We stopped working on that because we just found that the return on developer investment towards that product was not anywhere near as high as it is for the self-custody product. The easy way to describe it is that, well, first of all, CASA started with self-custody. That has always been our bread and butter. It was actually kind of odd for us because the node became way more popular than we expected, and that in many cases resulted in people seeing us as that node company, while that had always been our secondary product. Essentially the way to describe it is that the Bitcoin Enlightening node was a fun little project that was using very experimental software, so it was always tough to stay on the cutting edge of all the changes coming down with the Lightning network. It was inherently less secure. It was essentially a hot wallet. Your keys were constantly being used to sign transactions on the device. We told everybody up front, don't put more money on it than you can afford to lose because there are a million different things that can go wrong, not just protocol level errors, network errors, hardware failure, et cetera, et cetera. It was really only meant to be a device that you would use for spending money, a few hundred dollars maybe. We were hoping that it would be more of like a complementary product with the self-custody, but what it ended up being is attracting a very different type of user, sort of tinkerer enthusiast. We ended up almost splitting our market between two very different types of segments, and the company kind of became bipolar as a result of that because we had two very different market segments yelling at us to demand different things. Mainly due to the fact that our self custody product is being used to secure, in some cases, people's almost entire net worth, millions of dollars potentially, compared to a product where someone's putting a lot of time playing around with it, but it's only really a few hundred dollars. It's just like the level of importance is so different that obviously we need to make self custody a bulletproof user-friendly thing. We can always come back to cool payment processing technology at a later point. We scaled back on that at the beginning of this year. The code's still there. We can always start working on it again if the time seems right, but we really just found so much more traction with the self-custody product because of how much more important it is to people. Jameson, is running a Bitcoin node part of a comprehensive self-custody strategy? Because I thought that's where you were going with the development of the CASA node. Yeah. That was definitely a long-term plan, and I hope that we will be able to get there again at some point. In fact, we've made some changes to our internal infrastructure just in the past month that would eventually make it easier for the CASA wallet application itself to talk to your own nodes rather than relying on our nodes. When I was talking about the different levels before, it's important to hold your own keys. That's one of the major steps towards self-sovereignty, and then the final step is, are you validating the rules of the network and the transactions on the network to get that fully permissionless, trustless model where you're not relying upon anybody being honest to you? As much as we like to talk about that and venerate the ideology around that, unfortunately, it has not resonated with much of our customer base. Really, that was when I was talking about the disjointedness in the markets that we created before. It went both ways, where we did have some of our self-custody high net worth people that were interested in the node, but in general, most of them were like, I don't even want to bother with this, even though we made it fairly user-friendly. They were just like, I just want to make sure my keys are safe, and I don't want to mess around with any other software or hardware. We always knew it was going to be a challenge to actually have physical hardware that was being shipped out and deployed into unknown networks, and we certainly ran into quite a few unexpected issues around that. It's really just a question of, how do you make IT server administration stuff user-friendly? That has been a much more challenging problem when you no longer have control of much of the hardware and network stack that everything is running on. Hopefully, we'll get there someday. There are other teams that are working on similar type of in-home, I almost call them sovereignty-in-a-box products, but if you actually look around the market, I think two of the other Bitcoin node producers, what is it? I think Shift Crypto had a Bitcoin node in a box, and then Bitseed, I think, was one of the earlier ones. Just in the past few months, both of them have also stopped shipping nodes out. It's a very low-margin, high-maintenance type of product. We still need to make a lot more progress, I think, in that area of consumer networked hardware. Jameson, do you fundamentally believe that the owner or the person who's interested in Bitcoin has to move through all six? There's a seventh layer we've talked about in terms of an evolution through Bitcoin. Do they have to go through each step to truly understand and actualize what they're participating in? Is that how it goes, or can they literally say, I want Bitcoin, I'm going to CASA, and I'm going to skip all these steps and get a multi-sig wallet and pay you guys to custody? That's what I think this is. This is a service you pay for to have this level of protection, and then you're going to be thoughtful, your group's going to be thoughtful, and bring people through an evolution of, do you have a trust? Are you thinking about a will? You've got a lot of assets here. Is that what's happening? It's not feasible for the vast majority of people to go that deep into understanding a system. You make comparisons to the internet and other internet-based services. It's probably 1% of people who use Facebook or Google or name any other popular internet service who actually understand what's happening when they're clicking on the page or tapping on their phone. It's not necessary because you've abstracted away all of the complexities of what actually happens when you are interfacing with that software. If we want Bitcoin to go mainstream, then it has to be the same way. The only way to scale to mainstream level is to abstract away all the complexities so that a toddler can use it, essentially. Otherwise, people, they have limited resources. Most importantly, they have limited time, and since most people are not so technically inclined to try to figure out how a highly complex network system actually operates, they just want to use it. They want it to work. If we want people to have confidence in Bitcoin, most of them are not going to have confidence in Bitcoin because they understand it. They're going to have confidence in it because the products that are built on top of it work as they expect and because the system as a whole has worked for X number of years, decades, whatever. This is the type of thing where every day that Bitcoin continues producing blocks is a good day because it just continues to show the strength and resilience of the protocol and the network. Yeah, I mean, I'm trying to help people, I guess you could say, fast forward through a lot of the required learning, and one of the reasons that we can get a lot of push back on what we're doing, especially with some of the more hardcore technical folks who think that you should go through that whole process yourself, it's because we're not preventing anyone from doing that. This is the freedom of the protocol and the network and all of the free open source software that's out there is that anyone who wants to can invest their time into learning and doing this all themselves. There's nothing that we have built at CASA that you couldn't build yourself if you had the time and the resources, the value- Or even architect your plan. I mean, you're saying using air gapped or cold wallets, putting keys in safety deposit boxes, trust attorneys, like I've kind of hacked away at that myself, like an idiot. It's not anywhere near as packaged as what you've put together. I love it. Sovereignty in a box. And I'm sorry to interrupt you. The hardcore kind of technical Bitcoin maximalist says you have to go through every step. Yeah. So the value in what we've built is that instead it takes you an hour to set this all up. Well, at least the key management stuff, the inheritance stuff, of course, is more complicated because we have to get attorneys involved. But it's the time savings. It's then, we believe, our user interface is going to be a lot more streamlined towards simplicity and not allowing people to shoot themselves in the foot. And then finally, that you have a support line that you can actually talk to a human on. So there's pros and cons. If you do everything yourself, that's how you can achieve the ultimate level of privacy because you haven't told anybody that you even are using Bitcoin, et cetera, et cetera. The downside is that if you're only using free open source software that is like a project rather than a company, then no one owes you anything when it comes to customer support. You're basically reliant on community support, which can be hit or miss. You may not get an answer to whatever your question is. Or if you do, it may take weeks or months before somebody decides to chime in and answer it. So there's a variety of different trade-offs between the different ways that you can custody your Bitcoin and custody your Bitcoin in this space. Jameson, in regards to where we are in this user interface, user experience kind of continuum, zero being highly technical, lots of barriers to entry, 10 being TikTok. Where are we? It depends on what level of security. The best you've ever seen. The best you've seen. Where are we? Yeah. Well, I mean, I would say that as a vague generalization, the best user experience tends to be with the custodial providers because they don't have to expose anything about the protocol to you. They're just updating records in a database. And so they have a lot more flexibility in the way that they can build interfaces for you. I think that we've made a lot of good compromises and trade-offs, but still with our setup, the user has to have multiple of these other hardware devices that have their own sort of eccentricities and things that can be confusing because we can't fully, this is another trade-off that we make is like in order for us to fully own the user experience, we would have to build everything. But if we built our own hardware signing devices and the software on them, that would actually create a single point of failure. We want there to be other companies, other projects, other hardware that are going into our security product. So the trade-off that we make is sometimes they do things that we don't like or they aren't great for our particular workflows. But other than that, there are certainly good user interfaces in just some of the mobile hot wallets where you're just keeping the key on the phone. And I think that those are a good compromise if people are only storing maybe a few hundred dollars, if it's not your life savings, then you can go for a setup that is more user-friendly and doesn't have as much complexity. I just think that the largest amount of value that I can provide is on the extreme edge where people are dealing with bank level money of value, like the real question of how do you be your own bank without having to implement all of the same physical security protocols and procedures that a bank does. I get it. I'm still in this place in my mind where you've got Gemini, BlockFi, Coinbase. They're providing me with custody and access to exchanges, but there's a security issue, you're saying to me, Jason. You're saying there's another level or multiple levels beyond that. And you're trading a high level of customer satisfaction. Hopefully, this thing's not breaking every time there's a 30% move. You can call people and that's not the same thing as being your own bank. And that's where people who are listening to this have to arrive at. If you want complete sovereignty, if you want complete custody, you have to take it to level six, five, six, and seven even at some point. Seven, the market's not even really interested in. And we've explored that a bit, but that's part of the plan in your mind. Yeah, there's also some interesting trade-offs on the convenience side though. If we're actually talking about custody providers where you're keeping a large amount of value with them, then in many cases, these providers are going to have their own restrictions around if you request a withdrawal of a substantial sum, there's probably going to be a decent waiting period and you're probably going to have to jump through some hoops so that they make sure that the person requesting that is not someone who has sim-swapped you and is pretending to be you. And so we've actually had a number of people in small funds come to us and say, hey, we're using this institutional custody provider, but we actually found that for our own purposes, when the market moves and we need to move money, it's faster when we control all of the keys in a distributed setup than when we have to phone in to some third party to authenticate. And then if it's on a weekend, if it's on a weekend, they might not even be open. So what have we done? We just recreated the banking system. Yeah. Yeah. And I found that in my own hack away at security, I've tried to de-tech it. So I don't want biometrics. I don't want two-factor authentication. I want some type of hardware access, video conferencing, showing IDs, human interaction. It slows down everything. I'm not a trader though. The things I'd be doing with these assets and the money is real intentional things. So I'm not, I love the way you've created this kind of dichotomy where you're saying, put hundreds of dollars here. That's probably okay. This isn't a place for your life savings. But if you're really dealing with large sums of money, your life savings, material amounts of money, you've got to think about this stuff. And you certainly have done that. All right. I want to be a good steward of your time. I'm going to call it. You've been awesome. Check out Jameson. Tell us where people can find some information on this stuff. Yeah. I actually have a whole website with six or 700 different resource links on there at lop.net. It's l-o-p-p dot net. Everything you ever wanted to know about Bitcoin, lightning, custody, everything from the like, explain it to me like I'm a five high level stuff to the really, really low level technical stuff. It's all there. And I'm very easy to find on Twitter. My handle is just lop. I love it, man. I can't tell you how much I appreciate you doing this for me today. I've learned a lot. And again, I'm not here shilling projects. I don't have any sponsors. I'm just here to learn. And the whole CASA system, it sounds super intriguing and something I'm going to definitely follow up with you guys on because I've kind of tried to do this myself. I've been here a while. I was 30. I had my own will. I've got a trust set up. And let me tell you, Gemini, BlockFi, Coinbase, all of these exchanges deal with my trust documents. So they are thinking this way. But I've really traded some security, a lot of security for convenience. And I don't know if that's a smart trade. Yeah. Well, anybody who wants to check it out, it's just keys.casa for our website, keys.casa. And we have a number of different options. What I've mostly been referring to are higher premium tiers that are more of like a concierge class service. But we also have a sort of bring your own hardware device self-service setup that's only $10 a month. And that can get people from that single hot wallet into a multi-sig setup quite easily. Yeah, you guys are crushing it. Really, I've been watching. I don't know how I'm not an investor. I don't even know how that happened. But maybe I can catch the next round. I don't know if you guys are raising money, but I really appreciate your time today. Thanks for having me. Thanks, man. Take care.