Ep 178: MALWARE, serious tech news from unserious people. What a new administration could mean for crypto policy with Jake Chervinsky, Chief Legal Officer at Variant

[00:00] Malware is a non-technical look at the tech news of the week. This is a podcast where we learn together about everything from crypto to AI to whatever comes next in tech. I'm Natasha Hoskins. I'm Dina Burke. And this is Boys Club. Wait, is it just Boys Club? It's just Boys Club. [00:18] The boys club podcast. No, no. [00:20] Just boy stuff. [00:22] Welcome to Malware. [00:23] serious tech news from unserious people. I'm your host, Dina Burke. I'm flying solo today. Natasha is off on a plane to Bangkok to meet many of our listeners who are going to that crypto conference. I want to address the elephant in the room. I'm recording this on November 6th, which is the day Donald Trump was reelected president. And I'm going to be a little bit [00:52] thought a lot about. [00:53] this podcast, whether or not to do it, how to do it. But I felt like it was important to have the conversation that [01:00] we had. So in today's episode, I'm talking to Jake Chervinsky, who's the chief legal officer at Variant Fund and a key figure in crypto policy. We unpack what this election outcome means for the crypto industry, and we look at what might change or what might stay the same under a new administration. Before we dive in, I think, you know, I'm going to [01:24] want to [01:25] acknowledge the weight of today's political news for so many people for so many listeners for so many people in the boys club community for myself we generally keep politics at an arm's length here but I do feel like it's important to say that I voted for Kamala Harris and I'm sad and I'm disappointed and

[01:49] I think like so many people in the boys club community, I'm [01:53] Grappling with what this means for people that I care about, what the election result means for people that I care about, people who are listeners, especially people who are most vulnerable, potentially under this new administration. I'd say the group chat is too. So join us in the Discord if you want to talk to other people about this. [02:15] And of course, as always, my DMs are open. [02:18] and want to hear from you. That said, we're [02:23] we're going to keep it pretty clinical on crypto today and we're going to do that for three reasons. [02:30] The first reason is that just honestly, it's the lane that I know best when I think about what my role is and what my voice is, what this podcast is. [02:38] There's a lot of other podcasts. There's a lot of other voices of people who are [02:42] doing retrospectives who understand the political landscape and progressive politics and all of that that are just better at that. And you should go listen to them for that. The second reason is I work in crypto, many of our listeners work in crypto, or are very invested in crypto or interested in crypto industry for many reasons. And I think a lot of people want to understand what happens next, like really just tactically and what it means for their work or what it means for [03:12] We wanted to really just like learn. I want to learn myself about. And we wanted to have someone on who has a really informed perspective on what is possible for what's next. And then...

[03:25] The last thing I think, which is really, really important and something I've been meditating a lot on today, is that in moments like this, I really go down to the values level of what I think and what I believe. And I think that the core values of crypto... [03:42] self-sovereignty privacy decentralization are more critical than ever like those are as important as they've ever been if not more so and [03:53] I still believe that technology, when it's wielded responsibly and creatively, can be an incredible force for good and improve lives around the world. And all I know is to just go back to that. And that's what I'm leaning on today. [04:07] So yeah, today's conversation is going to be just like what happens next, best case scenarios, worst case scenarios, what we should be looking for. [04:15] Thanks for bearing with me. Let's get into it. [04:19] you [04:20] Hey, Natasha. So a question we get asked a lot is, what do you look for in a crypto platform? So let's talk about it. Well, Dina, I look for a secure, no fuss platform that I can dive into right away. That's why I love today's sponsor, Kraken. If you're waiting for the right time to get into crypto, Kraken makes it super easy and intuitive to get started. Plus, if you get stuck, they have an award-winning client support team that's available 24-7, along with a bunch of educational guides, articles, and videos to help you along the way. If you're ready to check out [04:49] go to kraken.com backslash boys club. Not investment advice. Crypto trading involves risk of loss and is offered to U.S. customers through Payward Interactive, Inc.

[05:02] Today's guest is Jake Trebinski, Chief Legal Officer at Variant Fund. Jake is the former Chief Policy Officer at Blockchain Association, the largest advocacy group for the crypto industry in Washington, D.C., and a ton of other accolades on your bio as well. Jake, welcome to the show. [05:21] Thanks so much for having me. Great to be here. [05:23] Listeners know... [05:24] We are recording this on Wednesday, November 6th. [05:28] a lot going on in the country this morning. A lot of [05:33] new information that we're all trying to make sense of with a [05:37] re-elected Donald Trump president and a new administration on the horizon. A lot of division, a lot of celebration within the crypto industry, very [05:46] a spectrum of feelings. We are going to keep today's conversation as nonpartisan [05:52] as possible, but also really just look very clearly and clinically at what happens next and what it means for the crypto industry that we both work in, that so many of our listeners work in and love. And this represents a potential reshaping of that. So really just excited to look at it with you and to have your expertise sort of weighing into that. [06:11] Just want to start off by saying as a as a crypto policy guy, [06:15] What are you thinking about waking up to this news? [06:17] Yeah, well, it's a whole new world, honestly. And before I go into it, I'll start with my usual disclaimer, which is I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer or anyone listening. So nothing I say should be interpreted as legal advice. Also, I'm just here to give my personal opinion and not speak on behalf of my employer variant. But to answer your question,

[06:36] it really does seem like for the first time ever, we are going to have an administration in Washington, D.C. that is supportive of the crypto industry. And I've been working in crypto for seven or eight years now. And, you know, when I got into crypto initially, you know, the general view on crypto in Washington was benign neglect. Right. It was crypto is not really very important. We don't have to think about this very much. We have to go after some of the bad actors. [07:06] any legislation or create any regulation to enable this industry to move forward. And then for the last handful of years in the Biden administration, the view has been even more hostile and aggressive than that. It's really been crypto is bad. It should not exist in the United States. And the government will use all of the tools at its disposal to try to drive the industry out of the United States. That's made it extremely hard for innovators in the industry who just want to build [07:36] They just want to build a better internet, right? That treats people fairly and equitably to do the work that they want to do here in the country. And now what we're looking forward to is a new administration that is not only positive on crypto, but as it seems a lot of people who are experts in this area and really understand what it is that we're trying to do. And we'll take key roles in the administration. And we can talk about what that looks like to actually get good regulation done so that

[08:06] can do what they want to do. That's very exciting for those of us who want to make sure that this industry succeeds in the United States. [08:12] Yeah. Okay. So I would say some cautious optimism is what I'm hearing from you. [08:16] Yeah, you know, I think there's still a lot that we don't know. And so what I don't want to do is, you know, have a parade and, you know, pop the champagne yet because there's a lot of hard work ahead of us. And, you know, the election was the beginning, not the end of this process. So there's a lot that we need to do in D.C. to figure out what does good policy look like for the industry. [08:35] You have some great tweets lately. I've been really enjoying your tweets. A recent one [08:41] Crypto policy will immediately and significantly shift when new leaders take over the federal agencies. Between now and then, the outgoing administration may be busy finalizing rules and filing enforcement actions. [08:51] You heard a lot about these enforcement actions. Say more about this and what you think the next couple of months are going to look like. [08:56] Right. So, you know, we have to think about this in terms of what happens when. And of course, the election won't have an effect until the new Congress is seated in early January and then the new administration, the Trump administration, takes power on January 20th. [09:11] Between now and then, we're likely to see a tactic that is very common at the end of any presidential administration that is leaving power, which is called midnight rulemaking. And it's exactly like it sounds. The outgoing administration has its last few months, last few weeks to figure out how can we make as much policy as possible before the other guys who we disagree with are at the steering wheel.

[09:41] rulemaking at midnight, you know, right at the last minute, that sort of rammed through without careful consideration. And the problem for us, you know, sitting here in November is that this SEC, led by Chair Gary Gemsler, has proposed a whole bunch of really terrible rules that would do a lot of damage to the industry. And up until now, we've mostly held the SEC off from finalizing [10:11] threat of litigation, right? I mean, both through threatening litigation and also explaining why these are bad rules and why they shouldn't be adopted. The same thing is true. One thing, sorry, just to clear, threatening litigation from the crypto industry side to the SEC. Exactly. Basically saying, look, you don't have statutory authority from Congress to adopt this rule. Just to give you one example, there's one rule the SEC has proposed, which would vastly [10:41] Exchange Act of 1934 to cover basically everything in DeFi, right? So something like Uniswap all of a sudden needs to go register with the SEC and comply with traditional securities obligations, which are absolutely unworkable for a DeFi protocol. And we tell the SEC, look, this doesn't work. It's not going to help you achieve your goals. And also you don't have authority to regulate DeFi in the first place. But during this period where we expect midnight rulemaking,

[11:11] That means either the industry will have to file those lawsuits to challenge them in court, or we will have to impress upon the incoming Trump administration that they need to undo those types of rules. And that's just one example of probably a dozen across many different agencies, the CFTC, the IRS and others that might engage in this type of activity. [11:41] So generally speaking, in, I would say, the traditional political context, [11:47] you would expect that they are going to be sticky. You know, there's this saying that rules are written in ink, right? It's really hard to erase them. And once they're in effect, even if a new administration disagrees, it's sort of unlikely that they'll roll them back for a couple reasons. First, it does take some process. You know, it's not like the new chair of the SEC can just immediately say this rule is no longer on the books. They have to go through the ordinary process under the Administrative Procedures Act in order to roll the rule back. [12:15] Also, the agencies typically have staff that stay on board from administration to administration. And what they don't want to do is appear to be fickle and political as if the policy that they set will change every four years when there's a new president. Right. Businesses in the United States want to have certainty about regulation and not be subject to the whims of a new administration. So ordinarily, minute rulemaking is quite sticky. That said, given the Trump administration's approach to executive power,

[12:45] And what we might expect President Trump to think about any policy that was enacted under the Biden administration, I think it's reasonable to assume that a new administration would, or at least we should expect them to say on day one, we will not enforce any of these rules adopted at midnight by the Biden administration. We will go through the process of repealing them one by one, no matter what it takes, and do our own rulemaking at the right time. [13:11] I have like a logistics question, which might be really silly, but is the new SEC chair [13:16] Does that happen on Inauguration Day? Is that the work between now and then to decide who that is and how that sort of transition takes place? Or is there another like quarter that happens between... [13:27] inauguration and the new sort of administration team coming in. [13:31] Not a silly question at all, really important actually. So on day one, a new interim chair who is selected by the president will take over. So the president gets to decide who the chair is. [13:42] Probably that would be either Commissioner Hester Peirce or Commissioner Mark Ueda, one of the two Republican commissioners on the SEC right now. So one of them. [13:51] would likely become the interim chair. But then at the same time, over the next couple months, the Trump transition team is going to be interviewing people to decide who do they want to nominate to become the full-time chair of the SEC. And the same thing with the other agencies as well, the CFTC and elsewhere. That appointee has to go through Senate confirmation. So that takes some time. So in the early months of the new administration, we'll start to see

[14:21] Trump hearings in the Senate, votes on confirmation, and then we'll find out who the new chair of the SEC and other agencies will be. OK, got it. So it's not just you're blessed and you're in it. There's a process that that needs to happen. [14:35] There's a process, and this also gets to the importance of the vote for the Senate this year. So if the Democrats had held the Senate, but you had had a President Trump, well, maybe the Democratic senators would be able to block his nominations. Right. But where we sit right now, it looks like there will be at least 53 Republican senators, more likely 54, maybe even 55, but somewhere in that range. I think what that means is any nominee that President Trump decides to select could cruise through the Senate confirmation process. [15:05] Hmm. You tweeted about a litmus test for the new administration coming in, dropping the SEC's unjustified enforcement actions and the DOJ's tornado cash prosecution. Talk a little bit more about that. What are the indicators that you're looking for in order to understand what type of president and what type of administration we're going to be getting? [15:24] So the worst thing, in my opinion, that the Biden administration did as a matter of policy was not in rulemaking or in the legislation that they supported. It was trying to establish law by bringing enforcement actions against companies that were trying in good faith to comply with the law. And the SEC would just take them to court and say in a federal complaint, here's our view of the law. This is the first time we've ever expressed this. And we are suing you in an attempt to drive you out of the United States.

[15:54] That is not the way that the United States should be establishing policy. We should do regulation by regulation or by legislation, not by enforcement. So to me, the very first thing that the new administration must do is stop these lawsuits against good actors in the crypto industry. And so as the Trump transition team is considering who should we bring in as the new SEC chair, or as that person is considering who should be my new enforcement director who's really [16:24] decisions, to me, the most important policy priority in order to normalize relations between the federal government and the crypto industry is to stop all of this enforcement. And it's not just an SEC issue. So as you mentioned, I tweeted, this extends also to the Department of Justice. So the Department of Justice, you may know, has also been engaged in regulation by enforcement [16:46] And here, not just by civil enforcement, where the penalty is a fine or a registration requirement for some company. Rather, they've been engaged in regulation by criminal enforcement, trying to put software developers in prison just because they wrote software that allowed third parties to engage in private transactions. This is the prosecution of Roman Storm in the Southern District of New York. [17:16] of criminal law to the crypto industry. It's not something anyone expected the Department of Justice to do. It flies in the face of guidance that we've gotten from the Treasury Department about what it means to engage in regulated money transmission. And so the Department of Justice also needs to drop that prosecution. Now, there are some issues with this because the Department of Justice is intended to be independent from the president. And so it's not like President Trump should be able to just call up the Department of Justice and say, you have to drop this

[17:46] But what he can do is he's thinking about who is the attorney general or what kind of message does he want to send regarding policy at the Department of Justice. This is something that he should be focused on, in my opinion. [17:58] Has the Trump campaign signaled anything about the tornado cash case? I can't remember any notes about it. [18:28] But the thing that we don't know is how he will approach issues of national security and, you know, geopolitics related to sanctions and also criminal enforcement through the Department of Justice. You know, there's there's sort of a strain of thought among national security hawks in the Republican Party that they also aren't really a huge fan of private transactions. And that's really what the tornado cash case gets to. [18:58] hasn't said anything yet about that issue to make sure he understands that privacy is normal. And if he wants to protect the rights of software developers and make sure the crypto industry flourishes in the United States, this is also a case that should be very important to him and his staff. OK, that's going to be a really important early indicator, I think, to be looking at. I think part of how I woke up this morning and what's been really weighing heavily on my mind is the

[19:23] the euphoria in certain parts of the crypto industry that feel like there is an administration and a president that is supportive of this industry. And looking at a man that is known and very well documented to not keep his promises and to say a lot of stuff on the campaign trail and not deliver. And so... [19:44] I am thinking about how [19:47] to game out best and worst case scenarios and like what those early signals are going to be that [19:52] Okay, maybe he is going to stay true to his word. [19:54] that he is in support of the crypto industry, or maybe that was just sort of empty campaign talk. I will say I was at Bitcoin [20:01] Nashville here. I'm based in Nashville and the Bitcoin conference was here and he had his big speech and came and was saying a lot of things that the crypto industry wanted to hear. And I got to say, I didn't feel like he really like had it in his bones in terms of him really feeling it and believing it himself. It was kind of like someone gave him some great notes that he was reading off the page. [20:24] And so, yeah, just like some concerns about like, is he really going to do it? And I guess just to you, what what are some things that you will be looking for in the first couple of months to be like, OK, maybe it is moving in the right direction or what are some things that would be a red flag? [20:38] Yeah. So first of all, I totally share your concern. I think that's very valid and not even specific to President Trump. But generally speaking, campaign promises are worth the paper that they're written on. Right. So I think always we have to wonder, you know, candidates say one thing during a campaign and then you have to see what really happens.

[21:08] his speech at Bitcoin Nashville, it seemed like he was sort of learning as he was getting feedback from the crowd about, you know, what these issues were and why they were important. And, you know, a lot of his support, I think, comes from the industry being very supportive of him and engaging with him, you know, very consistently. Well, we're not the only ones who can do that. And you could imagine another lobby, like the bank lobby deciding, well, now we're going to show up and we're going to influence President Trump to still be pro-crypto, but maybe in a way that supports [21:38] liberal or libertarian ideas that we have about what crypto should do in the world. So just to say, I think that it's valid for us to watch this and take it seriously, whether he falls through or not. So to your question, what should we be watching for? I think the first thing is in the transition process, we should be very focused on who the leaders of the agencies are that the Trump administration is going to select. [22:00] And, you know, there's the saying, personnel is policy, right? The president doesn't make every decision about every policy issue. He selects people who will work for him to do that job. And so the question is going to be, is he selecting people who we know are aligned with industry priorities for key positions? So that includes the chair of the SEC or the CFTC. It also includes other members of the cabinet. So one really important position is the secretary of the treasury.

[22:30] been floated is Senator Bill Haggerty. He's a champion for crypto. He really deeply understands these issues. And I think for our purposes, he would be a phenomenal treasury secretary. He's not the only one who's being considered, but we should be looking at who are the people who are going to staff the Trump administration. That's the most important thing. I think the next thing that we should look for, you know, on January 20th and going forward, are whether President Trump does [23:00] pardon Ross Ulbricht. I think he said he was going to do that on day one of his administration. Now, it's a promise that he made at, I think at Bitcoin Nashville, if I recall correctly. And so the question is, if he's going to follow through on his campaign promises, that's a really easy one for him to follow through on. I think it would signal that he understands the importance of the sort of rights of developers that we care about in the industry. And so I would want to see him do that to get a sense of what's going to happen next. [23:26] Yeah. Let's talk about the what did you say? People are policy. I like personnel is policy. Personnel is policy. I really like that. To that point, we spent a lot of time talking about the federal level. Let's talk about the impact of the House and Senate election results. Is there any interesting like state level regulation that's come out of last night's results or any international crypto policy developments that you feel are worth highlighting or or potential developments rather? [23:50] Yeah, so it's a great question. On the state level, I don't think there's much that we learned from the election. There were some important state races that happened, but nothing so much in the states that are engaging on cryptos. You know, there's some that are very pro-crypto, like Texas or Wyoming, some that are a little more hostile to crypto, like New York, California, Illinois. I don't think anything is going to change much in those states based on what happened in the election.

[24:20] will take cues from what's happening overseas, it seems like it's going to be a much bigger priority for the administration and also for the House and the Senate to make sure that this industry doesn't go overseas because they're not allowed to do business here in the U.S. So I think what's happening in Europe, for example, with the MECA regulation is going to be more impactful on how we think about next steps here in the U.S. I think the most important thing, you know, talking about the House and Senate, which you mentioned, is what legislation is going [24:50] of the new House and the new Senate in the next Congress. [24:54] And it seems, again, from where we sit right now, that the Republicans have swept Congress. So they're going to maintain control in the House. It looks like they're going to expand their lead a little bit. They might have the House by about 10 seats or so. And again, they're going to have something like 54 senators, plus or minus one. And I think what that means is Republicans are going to have a mandate to do crypto legislation for the first time. And not to get too deep in the weeds, but there's two kinds of legislation that we've [25:24] for the last couple of years, stablecoin legislation. So what are the regulations around US dollar stablecoins and market structure legislation? So how do we regulate the primary issuance and distribution of tokens? And then how do we regulate secondary markets like exchanges or custodians? And I would expect the new Congress to be really focused on getting those types of legislation done in the next two years. Okay. That sounds... [25:48] Promising. [25:49] I think it is. I mean, look, often we in the industry get attacked for wanting to just be totally unregulated and a wild west. I don't think that's true at all, right? We want there to be regulation. We just want it to be reasonable regulation that works with the technology and works for founders of companies trying to build products and services in the United States. And we need Congress to do its job in order to get there, right?

[26:19] something done in the next two years that is bipartisan, right? Even though Republicans are going to control the White House, the House and the Senate, what we want to do is create durable regulation for crypto that doesn't just get wiped out the next time power changes in Congress or in the White House. And I do really think there's a lot of pro-crypto Democrats who were elected, right? This wasn't just, you know, like a red wave. A lot of pro-crypto Democrats are also [26:49] We have to get everyone together to work on this legislation so that the industry can thrive and flourish in the U.S. [26:55] you [26:57] It's time for a more open, inclusive, and transparent financial system. A system that serves nearly everyone, everywhere, all the time. That's why we love today's sponsor, Kraken. Kraken is a crypto platform that provides a super simple on-ramp to the world of crypto with a 24-7 support team. Crypto transcends physical and imaginary borders. No matter where you are, you can send funds easily and quickly to almost any part of the world. Plus, forget about waiting times and waiting lines. You can send, receive, and trade crypto anywhere near instantly. [27:26] cracking.com backslash boys club, not investment advice. Crypto trading involves risk of loss and is offered to us customers through payward interactive Inc. No third party transfers available. I want to talk about the Democrats for a moment. We'll actually talk about fundraising. So you had tweeted something that I actually repeated to my husband over breakfast that it's such a fascinating fact. Crypto industry raised more money for candidates this election cycle

[27:56] is [27:57] That's crazy amount of money. [28:01] Totally. [28:02] power and leverage that I didn't know we were in that league. That was so surprising to me. It's totally crazy. And it's very new, right? This is the first election where the industry, and not just the industry, but the community, right? You know, ordinary people who care about crypto and decided to make donations or get active in the campaign, the first time we've really had a national stage. And I think we really took advantage of that opportunity. So, you know, [28:32] which was the single largest super PAC in America for this political cycle. And Thirshay gave tens of millions of dollars to candidates on both sides of the aisles, really importantly. I think they gave something like 60 or 65 million dollars to congressional Democratic candidates and a similar amount, maybe a little bit more to Republican candidates. [29:02] this technology and why this industry are important and are going to carry that message in that position to their new jobs in Congress. [29:08] I know you don't have a crystal ball and might not be willing to share perspective on this, but if Democrats had embraced... [29:15] crypto more. And I know there's a bunch of folks who were elected who are pro crypto. And I know that it is bipartisan super PAC. But I guess just even optically, the Harris campaign in particular, wasn't

[29:28] I would say outwardly pro-crypto. There was a couple of notes here and there that we picked up and sort of reading between the lines. And I wonder... [29:37] One wonders if [29:39] She had been more pro crypto if things I don't know would have [29:43] changed or it just went so much deeper than [29:48] what was happening with crypto. [29:49] So I don't have a crystal ball, but I am in Washington, DC and the favorite parlor game in DC after an election is to try to come up with explanations why this happened and how it could have been different. So I'll give you my, I'll give you my best shot at it. [30:00] I don't think that if she had been pro-crypto, it would have changed the outcome of the election, right? I mean, if you just look at... [30:06] Donald Trump winning the popular vote, which no one expected. This really was a statement by the American people that they, I think, wanted to reject not Kamala Harris, but the Biden administration and its governance of the country over the last three and a half years. And I think when you have Americans saying only about 20 percent, you know, America's on the right track, which was something like the number, you're just going to assume that the incumbent party is going to suffer and is going to lose. [30:36] I'm not. [30:36] I do think, though, that that Kamala's general approach to crypto was was emblematic of her approach to many different issues, which is that she wanted to win the election without taking strong positions on a lot of different issues. And crypto was just one of many where, at least in my personal opinion, she sort of tried to have her cake and eat it, too.

[31:06] But then on the other hand, she would say, while protecting consumers and investors. And this was her trying to signal to us, she's going to support us while also signaling to the crypto skeptics. Don't worry, I'm not going to let these guys, you know, get away with all their crooked behavior. And then she didn't really engage on a deeper level as to what policy does she actually want to see. And I think when you add up the way in which she approached many different issues that way, I think it did hurt her with a lot of people who felt like, you know, they didn't really know what they were going to get if they voted for her. [31:36] That super pack and the power that it wields, I just can't stop thinking about it. It's a lot. And I wonder if you ever... [31:45] get worried about regulatory capture, like the companies that are putting the big dollars into that super PAC, [31:53] just the natural expression is to try and find some leverage for their business. And I don't know, does that does that keep you up at night at all? Or do you feel like the the process works the way the process should work in that case? [32:04] I wouldn't say it keeps me up at night, but I do think it's really important and it is a risk. And, you know, look, there are sort of two sides to overgeneralize and oversimplify, two sides of crypto, right? There are the centralized players, which frankly look a lot like traditional financial institutions. They just happen to be working on crypto rails instead of traditional financial rails. And then you have the sort of decentralized folks, right? These are the, you know, on the furthest end of the spectrum, the crypto anarchists. [32:34] Like the purpose of this technology is to not accrue power to a small number of people, but to bring power back to the people and to make things like the internet more equitable and more fair. And there is a tension in regulatory policy between those two things, right? You could imagine there being legislation, for example, that enshrines centralized exchanges at the expense of decentralized exchange protocols, right?

[33:04] because decentralized exchanges have lighter regulation, or even something that says, you know, DeFi protocols are not allowed because they're too risky. We can't have these systems without intermediaries. So these intermediated centralized systems are totally fine with us, but not the decentralized ones. [33:20] And I think it's really to the credit of most of the centralized players in the crypto industry that they understand they will not succeed unless the decentralized, permissionless world in crypto also succeeds. And so you see them coming out and advocating, sometimes even against their own interests, to try to make sure that everyone succeeds, right? And it's one of those high tide raises all ships kind of situations. But that's not guaranteed, right? That's a policy position that those companies have taken. [33:50] I think it's really important that all of us, right, not just the crypto lobby or those of us working on these issues in D.C., but the people, the community, the customers of those companies make sure to tell them you need to keep protecting those rights. We will not state customers of your company if you decide to try to screw everyone else over for your own bottom line. And I think if we do that, then we'll end up having a good result in legislation and regulatory policy going forward. [34:20] Yeah, I think that's a really bit on regulatory capture. I it honestly like changed the course of my life in many ways. I became not radicalized, but it really sort of opened my eyes to sort of the underworld around lobbying and legislation and and sort of incumbents coming in and finding favorable paths for themselves at the expense of their competitors. And yeah, I.

[34:40] think it's very possible in crypto, given sort of the dynamic and relationship like you're pointing out between centralized and decentralized and sort of the nature of those different types of organizations and [34:49] Yeah, it's something I think a lot about and I'm really going to be looking at over the next couple of years to see what shape, fair shake and all of that comes out. Yeah, I'm so glad you mentioned that. Literally, when you asked me that question, the first thing I thought was, should I mention Bill Gurley's speech from the All In Summit? Oh, yeah. Anyone who's listening to this, if you haven't heard it, just go on YouTube, search Bill Gurley All In or Bill Gurley Regulatory Capture, you'll see it. [35:19] this. Like everything he says there is so spot on. It's haunting in many ways. But yeah, I just learned so much. I'll link it in the show notes. But man, what a guy. Yeah, for sure. Okay. So part of what I think a lot about at Boys Club is sentiment. Yeah. [35:35] public sentiment and thinking about building brands and companies and and consumer brands and companies in and around crypto and how [35:44] Yeah, sort of the appetite for that waxes and wanes, depending on who's on trial and what the latest scandal has been. And I'm wondering if a political shift signals that. [35:55] a possible public sentiment change around crypto or are we really just needing to wait for some breakout standout application that changes people's minds i'm curious what your thoughts are on this [36:06] I think about this a lot, too. And I think I think it could go either way. You know, one issue I think is so much crypto has been associated with the political right as a result of President Trump embracing the industry. And I actually think that that's driven a lot of people on the political left away from crypto. Right. Totally. It's sort of given them the sense that they don't want to be involved because this is just another right wing type thing that doesn't appeal to them.

[36:36] really sad because crypto is for everyone and everyone should be using it if it's beneficial to them. And it shouldn't be politicized in that way. [36:43] And so my hope is that going forward, everyone in the industry will work really hard to make sure that it doesn't have that reputation. Because I think that'll drive away a lot of people who should be able to feel comfortable getting involved, not just using the technology, but also working in the industry. And then I think... [37:00] I think you nailed it. I think we've got to build something that's so great that my parents want to use it. And maybe they don't even know it's crypto, but they definitely aren't thinking about whether, you know, Elon Musk supports it and they don't like Elon Musk or something like that. But just something that's so great that there's no way around using it. And I think the technology is powerful enough that we will achieve that. And honestly, I think lifting some of the regulatory [37:30] will help people to build those types of more mainstream and accessible products and services. So I think, you know, we've sort of got a window now to get that done and hopefully we'll capitalize on that. [37:40] Great. I love let's end it on an optimistic note. So we are in one way or another, we're going to be entering into a new regulatory climate. What pockets of crypto innovation or products do you think are particularly suited to thrive? Or what are you what are you watching? What are you excited about in terms of what comes next?

[38:10] regulatory strategy. And they're often building really amazing products and services, but can't do the work they want to do because of some regulatory issue where there's a lack of clarity. And so they're sort of changing their product or their service in a way that makes it meaningfully worse and also makes it much harder for them to actually do the work that they want to do just because they need to satisfy some totally unreasonable expectation of the SEC or some other [38:40] lifting that pressure on those founders. I think, you know, most importantly, that will relate to concepts that empower users to have more ownership over the [38:50] products and services that they're using. And then one really big issue that we've been dealing with is time you have a digital asset that gives, let's call it, you know, voting rights or governance rights or something of that nature, but also some share in the economic incentive, right? The economic success of a protocol in the form of a fee switch or a revenue generation. And that's been really hard to do under current law. I think any asset that would benefit from that type of [39:20] I also think the Deepin sector in general is really exciting, right? I think those are our products that are genuinely better than Web2 versions, right? They're more accessible. They actually benefit from a network effect. They incentivize people to come in. They can make people's lives better for, you know, less cost. And yet there's also been regulatory pressure on how do we characterize those types of tokens.

[39:50] effort under is going to be a real benefit to deepen projects. So that's a couple of the things I'm thinking about. Awesome. Jake, it's such a pleasure to have you on. I honestly have not been having a great day so far, but this conversation has made me feel optimistic and hopeful and just, yeah, grateful for your very balanced and informed perspective. And thank you for sharing. We're going to have an opportunity now that we haven't had as an industry to really see what this technology can do. And I think we should all be excited about that. So [40:20] and I did too. And thanks for having me on. Thanks.