D (3:16)

So Brian, when you say existence is the highest virtue, it's like, whose existence are we talking about? The individual? Like if I embrace don't die philosophy and am I saying that my existence is the highest virtue? Are we talking about humanity as a collective or is it some combination of both?

A (3:34)

Yeah, a combination of both. And so this is, it's not an effort to create immortality, it's an effort to say that the most sobering, quite, I guess the most practical question anybody can ask on planet Earth right now in this part of the galaxy is what does an intelligent species do when you give birth to super intelligence? When you give birth to something that is of the breadth and depth and potential as AI. Now we don't know exactly what it is, we don't know how it's going to manifest, but it's meaningful and it's substantial. And as that manifests, we as a species need to say what do we do? And right now what we do is we try to make more profit, we try to achieve higher status, we try to achieve greater power. Those are the end objectives of our species and we will pursue those objectives at any cost. Our own health, like you think about, like how it manifests as an individual. If you're in web three, and I know I have a lot of web three friends, a lot of them are not on the health train, right? They're waking up every couple hours to take check trades. They're sleep deprived. Like they've just, they've just run themselves into the ground. And so that is a situation where the person is trading their life for the objective of trying to make money. Right, or something like that. And so the same thing is true with, with corporations in their pursuit that you're willing to take environmental damage in order for this thing to happen. And so this is, I'm not saying that capitalism is bad, I'm not saying that democracy is bad. I'm saying that when you point them at these specific objectives, you make trade offs. And whether we see it or not, we are making the trade off to say we value power, status wealth more than our own existence. And that's the underlying philosophy of our society. That's the moral philosophy that guides us today.

B (5:37)

Introducing FRAX USD the genius aligned digital dollar from frax. It's secure, stable and fully backed by institutional grade real world assets custodied by BlackRock, Superstate and Fidelity. It's always redeemable one to one, transparently audited and built for payments, defi and banking. The best of all worlds. At the core is fraxnet, an on chain fintech platform built to align with emerging US regulatory frameworks where you can mint, redeem and use FRAX USD with just a few clicks, deposit usdc, send a bank wire or tokenized Treasuries and receive programmable digital dollars straight to your wallet. Fraxnet users benefits from the underlying return of US Treasuries and earn just by using the system. Whether you're bridging, minting or holding, FRAX USD works for you. FRAX isn't just a protocol, it's a digital nation powered by the FRAX token and governed by its global communities. Join that community and help shape Frax Nation's future by going to frax.comr/bankless frax designed for the future of compliant digital finance. Ethereum's layer 2 universe is exploding with choices, but if you're looking for the best place to park and move your tokens, make your Next stop Unichain first. Liquidity Unichain hosts the most liquid Uniswap V4 deployment on any layer 2, giving you deeper pools for flagship pairs like ETH USDC. More liquidity means better prices, less slippage and smoother swaps. Exactly what traders crave. The numbers back it up. Uni chain leads all layer twos in total value locked for Uniswap V4 and it's not just deep, it's fast and fully transparent purpose built to be the home base for defi and cross chain liquidity. When it comes to costs, Unichain is a no brainer. Transaction fees come in about 95% cheaper than Ethereum Mainnet, slashing the price of creating or accessing liquidity. Want to stay in the loop on unichain? Visit unichain.org or follow at Unichain on X for all the updates. Bit Digital Ticker BTBT is a publicly traded ETH treasury company that combines the two biggest metas of our time, Ethereum and AI Compute. Bit Digital believes that ETH will power finance and AI Compute will power everything. Bit Digital gives you direct exposure to both Bit Digital holds more than 150,000 ETH with institutional grade staking and validator operations. On top of that, the company owns roughly 73% of White Fiber, an AI infrastructure business that runs high performance GPU data centers. That adds a meaningful exposure to the growth of AI compute with over 27 million shares. This is an ETH treasury backed by real operations designed to capture staking yield today while positioning for the future of intelligent computing tomorrow. The ticker is btbt. This ad is not financial advice. Do your own research, learn more about Bit Digital and try their M nav calculator@bit-indigital.com that's bit-digital.com Bankless is being compensated by Bit Digital for this ad. You can find out more information by clicking the link in the show Notes.

D (8:15)

I think coming into this conversation, I would say maybe a difference. David and I had it just a pregame on this conversation. And David, I think your comment to me was like, you're all in, like you're with the transhumanist sort of movement. You're with the, the don't die idea, at least conceptually. Is that right?

C (8:31)

Yeah. And my reasoning there is that if I understand Brian's position is that inevitably, with enough time, the hu human society finds its way into. I mean Brian said he doesn't like longevity, but like I'll just use longevity. It's like we'll, we'll eventually get there. It's a scientific problem to solve. And especially, especially with AI, that becomes a very solvable problem. So eventually people not dying becomes the base case. And that is the default path of where humans go. And so I'm not saying it's like better or worse. I think it is better, but I'm not saying that it's just like the default mode. And so why fight? It is kind of my position.

D (9:11)

Yeah. And I guess my position is so I, I, I think both David and myself, we're techno optimists, so we definitely believe in a brighter future with technology. I think for me this is like getting a bit further on the transhumanist kind of bandwagon. And so with the don't die concept coming to this conversation, Brian, I'm sort of like the undecided voter. Like I'm not really sure. Like something about it feels a little weird to me and I'm not sure what exactly it is. I'll talk maybe about the part that especially resonates with me. So part of crypto, part of Web three is this whole movement to bearer assets being Your own bank going bankless. Independence, it's really a movement towards freedom. Like, so why bankless? For individual sovereignty, for freedom. Something that you said in, I think one of your posts recently is right now society is trying to kill us for profit. You said our society has made us unwell, metabolically, mentally, spiritually. We're addicted. Social media, porn, nicotine, junk food, fast food, smartphones, streaming energy drinks and gambling. Each perfectly engineered to keep us in their grip. That is something that I think we all feel very deeply. And when you're living like this, you are not living with freedom. You can be as crypto wealthy as like Michael Saylor, but if you are addicted to a smartphone, like are you actually free? If you're checking prices every single minute and you're worried about what's going to happen next and you're doom scrolling on the timeline, like are you actually free? And so the vector that resonates the most with me personally is this freedom vector. But that seems kind of different than don't die because that's just basically quality of life. Me living a free life until kind of the end. And it's time to kind of like, I guess, fade, fade into the night and pass it on to the next generation. Can you talk about this? What is the difference between the freedom and the don't die type of movement? And why have you interwoven them?

A (11:25)

Yeah, I think what you're articulating is that freedom is part of our current moral framework. We hold freedom to be sacred in our society, individual choice. But that, that was not always a virtue of society. If you go back in time, freedom was not a foundational component of how societies understood themselves. And so if you look at our time and place, we say, what is the moral philosophy of 2025? If you really dig deep and you identified it, freedom. And so what I'm suggesting is if you, if you fast forward in time to the year 2500 and you imagine them looking back on us, like with some kind of detached perspective, then from their vantage point, I, I would say that they would look back to us and say in the early, you know, in the, in the late 2000s, early 2000s, that's when, that's when humans figured out that existence was the highest virtue. Because when you give birth to super intelligence, when you have all this potential at your disposal, the immediate question is, what do you do? And the argument I'm making is that you focus on entropy. Like the immediate, the moment you become super intelligent, your only enemy is entropy of the universe, that's your battery life. And then you're simply trying to say, now that I understand the battery life, how can I, I prevent. Prevent things from happening that would eliminate my life. Like you're trying to not die. And then once you secure that, you say, now what can I do with my existence? But the, the primitive that we all share, like, every person shares one thing in common. Nobody wants to die right now. That is the universal want. Every single human wants that. So it's not that I don't want to die in 20 years or 50 years, a hundred years. This is just, I don't want to die right now. And so what I'm trying to do with this effort is I'm trying to. To put my finger on what is the single most sober insight that humans can make in 2025. And I'm suggesting that we just acknowledge we're at this special moment of giving birth to something magnificent, and we don't want to die right now. But that's the ethos and the moral philosophy of, of the environment in which you want, as you give birth to AI. What you don't want is you don't want to be at war. You don't want to be trying to dominate with these, with these technologies. Like, I don't know if that's like the right environment for us to say, can we bring in a new species and, or trying to maximize profit, or I'm trying to say, how do I get Ryan to be so addicted to my things that he loses all his freedom in existence? So I'm trying to look at the, like, the macro of what we are as a species.

D (14:18)

But, Brian, entropy eventually does win, doesn't it? And so I guess maybe what you're saying is kind of the part of the moral virtue of don't die is humanity's purpose is to fight against entropy for as long as possible.

A (14:34)

That's right. I mean, we do that naturally. When you get a car, you repair your car, a tire is flat, or you change your oil or you replace a carburetor. We do that with our bodies. You know, like, we do that kind of maintenance and repair. It's just we, we don't have robust abilities to address it. But every time we acquire new powers to address entropy, we do so. So we are really good applicators of technology. And so I'm saying that as we, as AI gets better and better, it will drive a lot of innovation in terms of our ability to address our own entropy, as in, you know, we call it, it's aging today or in systems. And so the, the contemplation is we will just naturally apply these technologies to the things we care about the most. I mean, I don't. When death is inevitable, of course, humans have been shipping product for thousands of years to help humans cope with death. And so there's like, no.

D (15:32)

No shipping product to cope with death.

A (15:34)

Right.

D (15:34)

That's an interesting way of thinking about it.

A (15:36)

Like, you're gonna die anyway. So people are like, you know what, we're gonna reincarnate or there's heaven, or, or like you, you can achieve immortality through professional accomplishment, or you can have children, but people are selling products to help people cope with the fact that death is seemingly inevitable.

C (15:53)

Brian, have you ever read the book the Denial of Death by Ernest Becker? Yeah, the side quest, side, side bit of lore. I tried to. We emailed the foundation, Ernest Becker foundation, to get him on the podcast, not realizing he had died like 12 years ago. The whole premise of that book is that humans can't wake up and contend with their mortality without that, just the weight of that just crushing their spirit every single day. And so what do they do? They push that to the back of their brain and they start working for symbols. Christian, the symbol of Christianity, the symbol of the American flag, the symbol of the Ethereum logo, the Bitcoin logo, sports teams, fraternities, any sort of club. And this has been one of the ways that we. We've coped with, with death, and that has, like, arisen to some of the biggest, like, moral frameworks that we've ever developed, that sort of energy, right? Like democracy, Western liberal values. We have all of these moral philosophies that some of that energy goes into in establishing. I think one of the reasons why Ryan is uncomfortable here and why this is such a big deal and why this project is a project of like the highest order. The don't die project is because it starts to get pretty fundamental to physics. We're going, and we're talking about reversing entropy. And to some degree, all life is, is the controlling of entropy. Like, the atoms are organized in a particular way so this organism can persist for the next day and the next day and the next day. And so it almost seems like this moral framework, the don't die moral framework, is kind of going all the way into the basement of like life's source code and saying, hey, let's flip this bit and tinker with our moral philosophy. But we're all the way in the basement. There's. There's nothing Deeper than this. Which is why I think this project can be scary to a lot of people because it's such a big paradigm shift.

A (17:47)

You nailed it. Yeah. That's why I think it packs. Yeah. Ashley Vance made this comment to me. He wrote the Elon Musk biography. He wrote the first article that went viral on Bloomberg about this project. He said to me he's never seen so much energy behind any idea it does. It just hits at the core of our understanding of our existence, and it immediately provokes very strong reactions that people are not undecided on this topic. They want to pull out. Like, here are my five arguments on existence and why I think this is correct.

D (18:24)

Actually, I'm still undecided.

A (18:26)

Like, truthfully, I'm one of the people that's still undecided.

D (18:29)

Have there been any moral frameworks that we've had in place in the thousands of years of recorded human history that places existence as the highest virtue? Or is this all new? I get the point, Brian, that, like, practically, that's kind of what we've been doing. We've always been trying to extend our existence, Delay agent, aging. And just like you, yes, I, like, I am planning to be here next, tomorrow and a week from now, and I have things to do, and I very much want that. But I can't think of a moral framework anywhere that just places existence as the. The central thing is, is there one.

A (19:14)

Or is this the first time we've been stepping here? If you read of historical societies, there was a lot of senseless violence and killing, and we don't really tolerate that in our society. We've got universal human rights. We have laws in place about what you can and cannot do with harming someone else. The founding ideas are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the United States. So it definitely has, you know, followed a trend line where there's much more respect for the sanctity of life than there has been in previous civilizations. So, yes, it's on that trend line.

D (19:53)

Okay, it's on that trend line. But it's not ever been kind of the central thing.

A (19:58)

Yeah, I mean. I mean, actually, you think about it, Ryan, like, really, religion does kind of say that, right? They're like, this is not the. The final frontier. Like, after we die, we go to this other new. You know, humans don't want there to be an end, and therefore we have all of these, again, products and or stories to explain how it's not the end, how there's a continuation, and how your behavior directly maps to what happens to you in those contexts. So, I mean, in many ways, don't die is the oldest idea ever articulated. I mean, it basically has been packaged and delivered to humans in so many different ways. So this is just a new. A new framing to say, like, we actually have the technology to play don't die legit for the first time without needing to extend ourselves to mythology about what happens after death.

D (20:51)

Why do you think some people don't feel comfortable with this? Why? Like, I know this is the first time we've met, Brian, so you don't know me yet. I'm very open minded on this. But there's something that makes me feel like. Gives you the heebie jeebies, something about it. And it's some strange mix of like, I guess the feeling like, well, is this a greedy thing? It's like, I get don't die for humanity. I'm very much. I'm there. I don't want humanity to die. I want humanity to continue. I want my kids and my grandkids to be successful and prosperous thousands of years into the future. Like, that's fantastic. But for me individually to, like, seek don't die, something about that feels like, selfish or copy, like, I'm not making space for the next generation. It's kind of like the geriatrics in politics. It's kind of like us saying to the baby boomer, all right, you guys have had your time. You don't have to be 85 years old and still grasping at power in Congress. Make some room for those that are new. Maybe that's part of it. There's other parts of it too, that I don't feel completely comfortable with. But this idea that don't die, at least at the individual level, is selfish. Where's that coming from, do you think?

A (22:05)

Yeah, my guess would be in the same way if, if I say, Ryan, I really like your shirt. Right. Or, Ryan, you did a great job in, you know, in your performance today. And like, I gave you a compliment. The socially appropriate thing would be for you to acknowledge my compliment and maybe offer something back to me as well. Right. Like the rest, the concept of reciprocity. Yeah.

D (22:29)

Thank you. Your shirt looks great too, Brian.

A (22:30)

Thank you, Ryan. Appreciate it.

D (22:31)

You're doing a great job today.

A (22:32)

Thank you. I appreciate that. So, like, reciprocity is part of our current social norms. You know, it's like you want to lob things back and forth. You want to create equality in the conversation. And if you, if you didn't say that, you might feel a similar deficit if you're just like, great, thanks. You might feel like that felt uncomfortable because I really wanted to volley something back and repay the kindness.

D (22:58)

That's right.

A (22:59)

And so I'm imagining that running inside of us is our entire moral and ethical stack which says, you know, if then statements, if complimented, return the compliment. You know, if presented with the situation where you could sacrifice for the help, you know, for the benefit of others, then do so. And that I'm. So I'm imagining that we all just basically are playing out these scripts that we've been taught our entire lives and they feel so natural to us that they feel true, but they're not necessarily, they're not true like in the form of physics or math. They're just ephemeral constructs that we have in our society that we are all acclimated to because that's all we've ever known. So I'm imagining that's what you feel intuitively. It's just a, it's the natural tension of an idea that kind of bends upon itself and inverts everything that you've been trained to think your entire life.

D (23:50)

Yeah, it's a good human thing. I would say it's part of being a good human is looking out for other humans around me and not just focusing on just myself. But maybe you can talk about the Don't Die movement isn't just for individuals.

A (24:05)

No. Okay.

D (24:07)

It's for everybody. Like I feel much better about it if I'm taking everyone, if I'm taking everyone else with me, if everyone is winning from Don't Die, if it's just me and I'm the guy in Silicon Valley who attaches himself to a blood boy because I'm rich. Do you know that kind of thing? That's like what I get in my, in my head when I think about this is it's sort of self serving. It's only going to be for me at the expense of others. But maybe that's not what don't die is. Is this for everybody? And if so, how could it be for everybody?

A (24:40)

Yeah, it's entirely for everybody. And what it's observing is. So the principle is don't die individually, don't kill each other, don't destroy the planet and align AI with don't die. So the contemplation is that we are not individual actors, we're part of a collective on this planet. And that when I behave a certain way, I'm influencing how you are behaving, whether you want that to be true or not. We're all influenced by each other. And how I behave affects how my children behave, how we behave in our companies affects how we treat the planet. Like these are all this, we're one integrated system. And so it's, it's trying to acknowledge we are a whole and that everything we do affects the other. And it's also the case that if, if we're thinking about how we build A.I. i mean, don't die is entirely the, the, the reason why I'm doing this is because of AI. What we do with AI is literally the only question that matters at this point on planet Earth. There's nothing else that really matters. Like, we, of course, we all want to play our games. If we're doing this or that it doesn't in context AI that we, that we need to get this thing right. And so it's trying to say what is the philosophical framework that is relevant for AI? And what I'm suggesting is it might be a good idea if we ourselves are that philosophy, if we actually practice don't die as examples to AI. Like, we acknowledge existence is the highest virtue. We don't want to be killing each other. We don't. We don't want to be killing ourselves. It's like a very practical example of this is like we've, we've said children can't smoke cigarettes because that's bad for them. But we feed them dye in the form of school lunch, you know, a piece of pizza, canned vegetables with BPA plastic line, carton of milk. And so we're feeding our kids die. That's not a good thing. So don't die is like cleaned up the food system so that our children are not consuming dye at school lunch. So it's very much like it's a holistic what do we do as a species kind of contemplation of. And it's really, it's ultimate sacrifice of you're willing to do this for the success of the species, for all of intelligence.

C (26:57)

There's that scene from Back to the future where Marty McFly is. He grabs the guitar and he plays Johnny B. Goode. He plays some rock and roll. And then at the end of the scene, everyone's watching him and he's like, maybe you guys aren't ready for that yet. I guess. I guess you guys aren't ready for that. I think what your answer, Brian, is like, society's totally ready for this. And there has been a resurgence of like health and fitness culture in the United States. People are aware of things like microplastics of like, Red 39 or whatever that dye is. There is like a growing crescendo of like, actually, I'm going to really re. Elevate the health as a. As a top priority in my life. And then I think not only that is like there's some sort of cultural readiness, but I think you're also expressing there is a technological urgency with AI because the. Just the relevancy of AI is like, this is actually not an option. This is actually how we get from where, wherever humanity is, to like, the higher phase of existence that is somehow with AI. Can you talk about like, the happy case of like, say, say we do, like, align with AI? We have the don't die philosophy. AI absorbs that philosophy because we've been practicing it. What do we get from that? What's the.

B (28:11)

The end product?

C (28:12)

What are the spoils of. Of this. This success?

A (28:15)

Yeah, I like this thought experiment of imagining that we're hanging out with Homo erectus about a million years ago and they've got an ax in their hand and you pose the question to them through their rudimentary form of communication, Tell me about the future of our species. Tell me what's exciting about what's coming. They would probably say, well, you're going to forage more and you're going to go to war and you're going to. They'll express their mental models of reality, but they won't say, you're going to discover there's a microscopic world, there's atoms and particles. Or they'd say, like, in the air, you can't see it, there's waves that communicate information or that, you know, one day you're going to hold a little white thing and it's going to solve. Address your infection. And so at that moment, Homo erectus does not have any mental models to say anything intelligent about the future. So the only thing it could say is like, I don't know, I don't have the mental models. And so what I like in this case is I, of course could fill the air with a bunch of words to your question. But I think potentially the more interesting contemplation would be, are we Homo erectus relative to AI? Are our mental models of reality so primitive? Are our ideas just like, so rudimentary relative to what's coming? We literally have no idea. Which leaves us to say one thing that's intelligent is, I don't want to die in this moment. And so what I'm saying is, is really the ultimate expression of intellectual humility. We may not know what's on the horizon. We may not know what's coming. And we may not even want to express any preferences about profit, status, power, or some magical whatever we're going to create. Maybe the most prudent thing for us to say as a species is this is big. We don't know exactly what it is. We may be limited in our ability to understand it. Therefore, the most sober and practical thing would be to say, like, let's not die. So let's reframe our moral framework to say, like, what can we do in this moment? What is in our control?

C (30:11)

I know you said that because we have this technological urgency of AI, we should. We should not die. But does the argument to why we should adopt the don't die moral philosophy exist in a vacuum outside of AI, or is AI actually, like, a critical component of, like, why we need to do this?

A (30:28)

Yeah, I mean, when. When death is inevitable, you can yolo your way with any moral framework, and that's what society has done. Like, you pick your political system, you pick your economic system, you do your thing, and we're now at this moment where this is possibly the first time in history where we may not die. If that's the case, it creates this opening to say, what do we do now? And so that's why this moment is so different and it's unlike anything we've ever experienced before. And it's why, Ryan, I'm sure it causes you some consternation because it really does bump up against everything you've imagined of, like, what existence is about, what you are about as a person. You have ideals of who you are, how you want to be seen, you want to be respected, you want to be part of the tribe. You want to feel good about yourself.

D (31:16)

You know, one thing, as you guys have been talking about this, that makes me more comfortable is a slight addition or addendum to don't die, which is, like, for whatever reason, I guess with my current moral framework circa 2025, it feels okay to say, I don't want you to die, or I don't want my kids to die, or I don't want those around me to die. That feels less selfish than focusing on I don't die at maybe all costs. So I guess when I think of don't die, if it's like, you don't die or we don't die together, that feels like much better than a focus on I don't die. Is there something to that? Like, is the, you know, how do we. I guess if you shift the moral argument to it's you looking after everyone else. It somehow feels okay to me. Whereas if it's just like, focused on me alone and my needs and my need to continue life forever regardless of who around me dies, that feels somehow morally not okay, at least with the way my brain works right now.

A (32:29)

Yeah, I mean, I would. I would. Yes. And that. It's definitely not a selfish framework. It's really not meant to be selfish. This is not a pursuit of individual immortality. This is a more. I mean, really, if anything, it's more of like, we can't do this individually, and it has to be a collective endeavor. Like, no one person can pull this off. And so it's probably the biggest team sport. Capitalism is a team sport where everybody on the planet participates in this some way. And don't die is probably even a more integrated team sport than capitalism is talking about.

D (33:10)

Don't die. There's been a subject. We've had Eliezer Yakowski on the podcast. He's written a new book, his Existential Concern, and he gives us a probability of about 99.9% is basically, AI is going to be misaligned and kill all of us. So it's definitely not don't die. I mean, I think his moral framework is don't die, but he's saying AI will kill us all. Does don't die help us fuse with AI in some way that doesn't kill us all? And also related to this, in that fusion, if that's the direction, this is sort of the answer that AI accelerationists always give is just like, humanity and AI, they fuse together. How do we fuse together without losing our humanity? And the thing that I don't know is that spark of. Of light that makes life worth living. Like, I don't want to be a robot. I'm struggling with this whole transhumanist idea in general, and I'm not sure that I want that future. I'm not sure that I shouldn't actually resist that future.

A (34:19)

First on Eliezer. He's a friend of mine. I really appreciate him. He's earnest. He is genuinely trying to be useful to the world, you know, whether he's right or wrong. Tbd, like, you know, I don't think anyone knows, but I really do appreciate his earnest attempt at trying to keep the flicker of intelligence on this Earth, you know, through humans alive. So it's just. It's. It's a very hard. I mean, it's very hard to get your head around this idea. So I appreciate his Earnestness number two is, you know, if you go back to the example of, of Homo erectus and they're saying, look, if I can't do what I'm doing now, if I can't be Homo erectus, if you're telling me I'm going to evolve to be a Homo sapien and Homo sapien is this, I don't know if I want to go forward. And so we, you know, it's, we're an evolutionary species, we are today something that is unimaginable to previous versions of our ancestors. And so there's a possibility that the move here is to suspend all of our beliefs on who we think we are, on what we think we want, on what we aspire to be. I'm personally there like I'm wide open on absolutely anything. And so like the way to really, if you want to give yourself a real workout on this question, here's a thought experiment for you. Imagine that your existence is nowhere to go, nothing to do, no one to become. That's your existence.

D (35:57)

I mean, that's not really, that's not existence, is it? I mean, that doesn't feel like existence.

A (36:02)

Exactly.

C (36:03)

Feels like jail.

A (36:05)

Exactly. This is why the thought experiment is so good, is because those three things offend in the most potent way possible all of our sensibilities about existence. You can't find anything more offensive to our consciousness than those three ideas. And so the question is, are you open minded enough to say, I'll give it a shot, like, give me a month and let me see how I feel about it? But it's, we're really like, we have to understand. Our knee jerk reactions are when things don't square with how we understand the world. We want to immediately bat it away because it's so uncomfortable. So these topics are very uncomfortable. Like when you talk about the future, everybody's got an answer. It's like, this is gonna happen. This is gonna, this is gonna happen. Everyone but like, nobody knows. Everyone's just spinning up words because they're trying to fill the dead air because they don't know.

C (36:59)

Brian when we as a species, as humanity gain control over aging, that's like something that we, we've like unlocked that piece of technology on the tech tree. We just control aging and we, we achieve what's known as, like the, what is it called? The longevity escape velocity where science puts more time on our lifespan than the time is passing it takes to put it there. And so theory, theoretically we, we have longevity. I would imagine that that comes with a Bunch of other unlocks too. Like, it doesn't really stop at longevity at that point. Like, AI will be much more powerful. You know, gene editing, as I understand you aren't really into the world of gene editing quite yet, but you're. I think you're curious, and it potentially contains possibilities for what we can do here. It seems like there's a little bit of a Pandora's box there. It's like we. We open up the longevity, and then out comes a bunch of consequences, for better or for worse, that we then therefore have to contend contend with. And like, big. The big broad strokes of it all is like, humans kind of get the ability to upgrade ourselves. Like, once. Once we achieve longevity, we can kind of figure out the science to kind of upgrade ourselves in any particular way. Does this. I'm sure this is scary to Ryan.

B (38:18)

Does this excite you? Like, how do you feel about this?

C (38:21)

What about this part of this story arc excites you? What do you want to do with those powers?

A (38:26)

Yeah, if you think in parallels, you know, humans figured out how to arrange atoms in the physical world, and we built homes and skyscrapers and bridges and boats and airplanes. We've built all sorts of objects with these atoms. We had a new programmable playbox of software where now you have zeros and ones. And what can you build with that? We've had that sandbox for a couple decades now. And you look at the world of software of what we've done with that sandbox, our biological systems is a new sandbox. You've got this genetic code, you've got this amazing ability to alter it, and humans will do. What we've always done is you've. Once you acquire those tools to start playing with that sandbox, we're going to have all kinds of creative flourishing. We just don't even know where we can go with it. So, yes, I mean, it's happening now. We see it happening in gene editing, we see it happening right in all sorts of applications. So it's the next sandbox. And that's what I'm saying, that we've done this with the physical world, we've done this with the digital world. Next is the biological world. And that's what's squarely interesting right now, is then once that is on the table, we have the ability to not just do physical form in the body, but also how we like our conscious existence. You know, like, you start playing with, like, the things that give us rise. So, yeah, I mean, it's the next frontier, and this is why I'm saying that it's health. Even though it's uncomfortable, it's healthy just to suspend belief and just say like I'm gonna, I can pipe off and imagine a few things. But also I, it's really healthy for me to say like, this is probably past my ability to imagine. It probably exceeds my capacity to imagine as a human, which is a nice healthy balance where like not see, seeing the unknown is really good.

C (40:15)

I think one of the concerns that people have that, that I have is that, you know, previously with all of the progression of the Homo Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens, they all happened in consequential order and you know, one ended and then the next started in some like fuzzy way. We are in the world, the era of technological accelerationism where things are happening really fast. Like five years ago is 2020. And now we have AI and robots and self driving cars and we have this guy, Brian Johnson who's trying to achieve immortality. Shit's getting weird, shit's getting weird in 2025 and it only seems to be getting faster. And we kind of now, I kind of now see, I know you are.

B (41:01)

Trying to be very humble about, you.

C (41:02)

Know, we can't predict the future.

B (41:04)

I can kind of see this future.

C (41:05)

Of we have a collection of people who achieve longevity, escape velocity. They get chips in their brain via brainlink interfaces that multiple people are building. These are real startups and we start to edit our DNA and because we have that, that power and that access and all of a sudden we have these hyper thinking, AI interwoven, immortal, immortal humans walking around next to normal humans and it seems to be we split into Homo sapiens, which is where, what everyone is today, everyone's a Homo sapien into what Yuval know, Harari calls like something like Homo deus. And that's happening at the same time. And we have the Homo deus humans and we have the Homo sapien sapiens crypto. Twitter might call this the permanent underclass, but we have two tiers of humans and one starts to look a little bit like deities on top of Mount Olympus and the rest are us. And that is a little bit concerning to me in, in a way. Have you thought about this?

A (42:09)

Yeah, I mean that what you're articulating is basically you took the foundational principles of today's society, which says power, wealth, status individually as the ultimate pursuit, and you applied that to these tools. So it's a very natural. Right, pattern matching. And so I agree with you that you can pattern match and you can make those observations totally legit. And what I'm saying is I don't know if it's wise if we take our power, status, wealth, principles and carry them forward. Not to say that they're by themselves, that they're bad. It's that when they're the ultimate prize and we're willing to pay any price, including my life or your life, it may not be the right environment to do that. And that's why I'm saying that as we have all of these advanced technologies to create this magical world, but also to destroy ourselves and also create dystopian outcomes, that it might be a really fresh opportunity to say what is a conducive moral framework where intelligence thrives together. And so I'm really trying to get at the core of this problem of how to avoid those kinds of situations. But also, we still want the powers of progress. We want to push things forward, we want to better ourselves, we want to cure disease. And so that's the dance I'm trying to create is not say this with certainty, but just to say, like, if I can say anything intelligent at all, I go back to this basic instinct, which is no human wants to die. If you look at planet Earth and you look at all the biology on planet Earth, even though if you look at humans, that's the basic instinct of biology, it doesn't want to die. Not right now.

C (43:54)

So are you saying that I did the hunter gatherer thing of like, yo, when we improve and get better, we're just going to be able to forge so much more, and I'm actually just not really able to contend with the future. And so what you're saying is like, and I can't even do that. And so what am I doing?

B (44:09)

I'm just not doing it.

C (44:10)

But I'm doing the one thing that will buy me some time, which is not dying, exactly.

A (44:14)

Right? Yeah. I mean, it's very sensible and practical. For what you're saying is you take the current technologies, you mix it up in a stew of current philosophical and ethical frameworks, and you have the output totally understandable. Like, and that's what I'm saying. I don't know if that's the recipe we want to cook.

B (44:30)

Imagine a world where traditional finance meets.

C (44:33)

The power of blockchain seamlessly.

B (44:34)

That's what Mantle is pioneering with Blockchain for Banking, a revolutionary new category at the intersection of TradFi and Web3. At the heart is UR, the world's first money app. Built fully on chain, it gives you a Swiss IBAN account blending fiat currencies like the Euro, the Swiss Franc, the United States Dollar or the Renminbi with crypto all in one place. Enjoy real world usability and blockchain's trust and programmability transactions post directly to the blockchain compatible with Tradfi Rails and packed with integrated DEFI futures. UR transforms Mantle Network into the ultimate platform for on chain financial services, unifying payments, trading and assets like the MI4, the Meath Protocol and functions FBTC backed by developer grants, ecosystem incentives and top distribution through the UR app. Remember reward stations and BYBIT launch pool for MNT holders. Every economic activity in UR drives value back to you, embodying the entire stack and future growth of this super app ecosystem. Follow Mantle on X at Mantel Underscore Official for the latest updates on Blockchain for banking, that's X.com mantel underscore official crypto is risky.

C (45:34)

Your sleep shouldn't be 8 sleep's mission is simple.

B (45:37)

Better sleep through cutting edge technology. Their new Pod 5 is a smart mattress cover that fits on the top of your bed. It automatically adjusts the temperature on each side so you and your partner can both sleep the way that you like. It's clinically proven to give you up to one extra hour of quality sleep per night. Eight Sleep's Pod 5 uses AI to learn your sleep patterns, regulate temperature, reduce snoring and track key health metrics like HRV and breathing. With a new full body temperature regulating blanket and built in speaker is the most complete sleep upgrade yet. Upgrade your sleep and recovery with asleep Use code bankless@eightsleep.com bankless to get up to $700 off the Pod 5 Ultra during their holiday sale. That's eightsleep.com bankless. You also get 30 days to try it risk free. Link in the show notes for more information.

D (46:19)

So guys, if we're not going to it's like you were talking about, you know, nature and how it's sort of in biology that, you know, all of the natural world, including us, don't want to die. Okay? But it also seems like biological, almost like a natural principle that the old does die and make way for the new. Maybe this is a kind of a question for this don't die world. Let's say we achieve don't die. Okay, well this goes back to baby boomers in Congress grasping at power. This goes back to the idea of like science precedes one funeral at a time. This goes back to like the old has to make way for the new. Or you have a stagnant society. Imagine if we were locked in to the people in the 1600s and their moral framework and their idea set and they just kept living and they didn't innovate, they didn't make way for something new. There was no fresh ideas, there was no creative destruction. Yeah. And so like could this be a path towards stagnation for us? Like we are the don't die generation. And then that was it. And then we, things were frozen in time. We never improved. We just like figured it out and that's it. Is there a worry that you have about that? Or like how do you address that? How do you address the idea that what if Vladimir Putin didn't die, for instance, gave no way for Russian society to evolve?

A (47:47)

Yeah, I mean first. So this is just an, it's a societal engineering problem. So if this is why we have term limits, you want to cap someone's power in a certain duration of time. And so if you just simply apply this to this technology, the same situation, you can solve it. And so it's really, it's one of the more easier problems to solve as a species if you take a given ruler who doesn't want to be voted out of office. Societies have a way of revolting and overthrowing rulers. Like that's always been the case. And so you, if someone's old and stuck in their ways, maybe a rejuvenation technology will. You know, like there's a, there's actually technology today where you can take an adult cell and turn it into a pluripotent stem cell. Like you could, we can do this today. Now we don't have it as a therapy because it has off target effects and it can lead to cancer. But that technology will be improved over time. So maybe the solution, if you take an old person and rejuvenate themselves, you make them a young person and they're fresh again. Like they're back at the same open mindedness now you can still doesn't mean they still in office. It could be like they still have term limits. But these kinds of ideas, it's just a societal engineering problem. And on the scale of problems, very easy really.

D (49:01)

So on the scale of problems, that seems like the hardest one actually because the societal engineering problems are like those are the deep seated coordination problems that we struggle with.

C (49:10)

Those are the ones that cause wars.

D (49:13)

Right. And so power, status, wealth, the things if you've been around for a couple hundred years, I'd imagine you'd be able to accrue a lot of those things in your hundreds of year lifespan versus somebody who's new. And wouldn't you power, status, wealth, your way towards consolidation of those things. And then how is the new entrant supposed to disrupt you when you've accrued all of these things? Imagine Warren Buffett across thousands of years, compounding his interest. He's already one of the richest guys in the world. I mean, that seems like that would consolidate into a setup that would be very hard to coordinate against and actually disrupt. That's sort of the stasis argument, I think.

A (49:59)

Yeah. For example, one thing that's happened in the US is there's a death tax. You know, when you pass a meaningful portion of your estate is taxed by the government. And that's some attempt at trying to level the playing field of, of stopping this generational wealth from being out of control. Now you can argue whether it's been effective or non effective, or it's too much or too little. But still, like society has tried to acknowledge that as a problem. And we're currently in, in our current system, there's a pretty substantial gap in wealth. And I think everyone acknowledges that that's probably not a good idea that you have this kind of disparity. And so I'm guessing there's going to be a correction on this. And so you could imagine where in this situation maybe someone's wealth has a tax, you know, every some block of time to present that, to prevent that kind of accumulation. But I think that society generally, even though it's been rocky and it's been sometimes it's resulted in wars, society does correct itself when it does go to extremes, naturally. Now this also is assuming that in, in this situation we're contemplating that humans are still the primary power actors, that humans are still the ones doing these systems. Now if AI steps in, and maybe society is run much more with autonomous systems and maybe humans have less power to control these things and maybe it's more indirect. So I guess all these things for me are on the table of I'm not totally confident that what exists today in terms of power will be the same things that exist in power in five years from now. And so they may. But I guess what I'm saying is the first problem is how do we not die as a species? If you're not dead, then you have the luxury of solving these other problems, which is how do you prevent runaway power, runaway wealth accumulation, et cetera. So I think I'd rather take on that problem than I would Be dead.

D (51:50)

Brian, I'm curious if you could just for me, map out what it would look like for you to live, say, 500 years. You're on the Bankless podcast. We very much are tech accelerationists, so we think that a singularity is approaching, is near, but practically, and I know some of the tech might be sci fi, but if you were to think, you know, based on what you know right now, about a 500 year lifespan for yourself.

A (52:21)

Yeah.

D (52:22)

What would that trajectory actually look like across the decades and across the centuries?

A (52:27)

Yeah, I mean it, I. The only thing I can map this to that has familiarity to me is Homo erectus, like saying, hey, Homo erectus, like, let me explain to you what your life is going to be like as you go through your various stages. Like, first you're going to live like four times longer. Then you're maybe expected 20 to 30 years of life, and then you're going to go to the following stages of life, and every stage you articulate would be entirely foreign to them. There may be some things like mating, like you're going to, you know, choose a mate, you're going to have offspring. That would be a commonality. But otherwise I think it'd be pretty novel for them to contemplate. Like, imagine trying to explain Web3, like, you know, what is, like, what is Web3? And you have to like walk down like 25 layers to get to the concept of. So they understand what web3 is.

D (53:14)

But I guess, Brian, broad strokes, are you talking about like these lifespans being purely biological. Are you talking about like taking your consciousness and putting this in silicon somewhere and fusing with the machines, like, yeah, what's on the table?

A (53:30)

Yeah, I guess all I'm saying is I, I take, I answer this question because the majority of people that hang out in this space of trying to speak about the future, they are overflowing with ideas on what existence will become. And what I find absent is anybody saying, I have no idea, you know, like literally no clue. And anything I say is probably stupid, like to that kind of extreme. I'm trying to provide a relative contrast. That not knowing is equally as intelligent as speculation or of pattern matching. You know, it reminds me of that, you know, humorous comic where there's a gentleman, there's a person under a street lamp. Someone walks by and they're like, hey, what's going on? And they say, I'm looking for my keys. Why? You know, where'd you last see them? Like, over there. And he's like, why are you looking here? He Said, because the light's here. You know, we have this. We have this proclivity to look in the light, and we don't look in the dark. So it's just a natural bias we have. And so I. I try to play the role of reminding ourselves. Most times throughout history, we've had no idea. And a lot of the times, we've been stunningly surprised with what's come up. And I'm trying to balance out the contemplations with that.

C (54:54)

There was a reply to my tweet saying, hey, we were interviewing Brian Johnson podcast today. And the reply was like, I find his ideas compelling, but I wouldn't really want to. To do it unless my loved ones also did it with me. And my reply to that was like, yeah, I kind of think that's right. Like, this is. This is kind of like a society's saying to itself, I'll do it if you do it. Like, I'll go.

B (55:19)

I'll go.

C (55:19)

Attempt to live forever. If you also go, attempt to live forever.

B (55:22)

And so the way that I think.

C (55:23)

That this works is, like, most people say no, most people say no, most people say no. But then all of a sudden, it's in people's heads, the meme has been incepted enough, and all of a sudden, just a few people say yes, and all of a sudden, all of society says, says yes. And then we're like, okay, we're all doing it. How far along on that arc do you think we are?

A (55:42)

I. I think. Here's my. I'll only say one thing about the future.

B (55:49)

You are very hard to get to say anything about the future.

A (55:54)

Okay, so here's what I think could potentially happen. AI Progresses, and we have some kind of moment with AI Maybe it's a Chernobyl moment, maybe it's something more benign, but it's a moment, and it's a moment where the world is like, oh, my God, this is real. I had imagined AI of help me writing emails and code faster and looking at my medical images better. And I had all these imaginations, but this is a really significant situation. And maybe there's one of these occurrences, maybe there's multiple of these occurrences, but it will happen, and it will create this sobriety where we say, this is literally the only thing that matters. Nothing else matters because it's such a big deal. And humans. So human society typically can only have two ideas in their mind, right or wrong. And so if you. If you think recently to, like, Covid as. As nuanced and of a Complicated a situation as that was. The world bifurcated into two opinions. Masks. No masks. Vaccine. No vaccine. Shutdown. No shutdown. Like it just forks and that we, we think good or bad, and those two forks. And in that moment it will create this bifurcation with AI of die, don't die, where there will be people who will say it's not worth doing blank for the pursuit of power, wealth, status. Like, I see the situation here for what it is. I don't want to die. And that's my guess is that don't die. Right now it really hurts to think about because it challenges everything you understand about existence. But if you remember in the early, like the first month of, of COVID do you remember the entire world shut down on a dime. Everybody's plans stopped in a week or a month. It was unbelievable. That's how bad humanity doesn't want to die. Now, of course, like after we were like, okay, like we understand it's like not the plague or something, then we started like going about human things. We started fighting about shutdowns and vaccines, all that kind of stuff. But like, never underestimate, never short the idea of how badly someone doesn't want to die. And so that's what I think is going to happen. And I think people are going to come around very, very hard to don't die. Even though right now it's kind of a trickle where it's like people are starting to like, try to get acclimated to it. Like, what is this thing? How should I feel about it? Is it selfish? Is it not? Is it good? Is it bad? It's just a natural dance humans do to try to try to digest a new idea.

D (58:24)

I think for me personally, after understanding more of the philosophy behind it, I feel better about it, right? So there has been a move in that direction for me. And maybe we can talk about the practical implementation of Don't Die. So we've been talking a lot about the future and the philosophy and the like. Is it good or bad? And why you've got a whole practical program around this called Blueprint. And I think, Brian, you announced that you raised 60 million to kind of bring Blueprint to the masses. So for myself, who's kind of totally with you, that society has made us unwell and we have all of these addictions and all of these problems, and they're trying to kill us for profit. How could Blueprint help someone like me? Because I don't want to dedicate my life in the way that you have. Like, I'VE got other thing. You know, you're doing the whole all in Brian Johnson don't die thing and that's definitely not me, but I share some of the goals that you have. Would blueprint be for me or like what's the program designed for?

A (59:33)

What does it do? Yeah, exactly. For you. So the origin of this is I basically like a script played out early 2000s entrepreneurship culture where I started as entrepreneur. I didn't sleep much, I didn't exercise, I didn't eat well, I was ragged. And you know, in those environments, like you brag that you only got three or four hours of sleep because you want to be seen with high status among your group, that you work very hard, you don't really need like, you don't really need sleep. Like you're, you're beyond that totally. So I got depressed, I got hopelessly depressed. Now fortunately, I sold my company, made a bunch of money, and I realized that I was trapped in, in that cultural system that says kill yourself because the money's worth it.

D (60:22)

Right?

A (60:23)

It's a kind of a weird trade. And then I got, I was owned by all the addictions of society, fast food, junk food, et cetera. And so I had to dig myself out of that. So I hired a team of quite a few doctors, I started spending a lot of money and I basically tried to build the, the world's most formidable evidence based protocol. Like if you just look at the scientific evidence and you take you to the process where I try to measure the biological age of every organ in my body. So like I was 42 at the time, but my brain is a certain age. My left ear is age 64, my heart is 37. You know, my cardiovascular ability. It's like you have different ages across your entire body. And you look at the scientific evidence and say, how do you then slow down the aging or reverse it? I did that for several years trying to achieve, you know, exceptional biomarkers. And so in short, what I was trying to build is my autonomous self, which means instead of me going out and trying to like forage food every day and figure out how to do this thing, I want to say I'm going to measure my body extensively. I'm going to give it to AI, you know, run it through computational processes, compare with the evidence and then bring it back with protocols. And I'm just going to follow the protocol. And so what blueprint is trying to do is it's trying to say if the person says, I want to be healthy, but I don't want to spend my time researching if seed oils are good for me or bad for me. I don't wanna spend my time seeing how much protein I have to consume. I don't spend my time doing blank. We're just gonna say do this and it's gonna be based upon your biomarkers, on your genetics, on your situation. I'm gonna try to just basically automate the entire process. Now we're not there yet, but the idea is people don't wanna spend the time and they, they don't wanna be confused and have to chase this thing down because it's an endless endeavor, as you know, we all know. So yes, like you would be our perfect customer of what we're trying to solve is how do we basically, how do we give you exceptional well being with the least amount of effort possible.

D (62:15)

Are the limits of that well being? Health, nutrition, exercise, those sorts of things. I mean there's so many well being and even I believe, longevity studies that actually link lifespan to things like the quality of relationships in your life. Exactly. I mean, would you go there as well? I mean and yeah, talk, talk about.

C (62:33)

Can I buy a friend, buy a girlfriend?

A (62:38)

So we, yes, we are working on that. Yeah. Like we, we're trying to outperform every health system in the world, every concierge system in the world because their model is typically to sell you stuff like sell you therapies. But the highest value therapies are having a good relationship and having friends and going to bed on time and not eating fast food. So it's really about a lot of behavioral things. And so there's a lot of ways we're working on helping you with those hooks so that you start incorporating good habits. And this is why don't die is not a, not a selfish endeavor. You are your friends, you are your family, you are your coworkers. Like you all, you naturally adopt those practices. So it's basically saying this is a team sport. And so that's why we're going to take this on is, I mean I learned this principle when I was raising my son. I was teaching him how to swim. I was doing some research as a young father, like how do I teach my child how to swim? I saw there were three ways. One, you could push him in the pool and say good luck. Two, you jump in the pool and say come to me. Or three, you show him a video of his friend swimming. The third one is the one that works best. When your friends do something, you want to do that as well. And so yes, this is entirely like, how do we actually adopt positive lifestyles and then therapies where appropriate.

D (63:53)

Brian, this was great. I really appreciate it, you know, because we're normally a crypto podcast. I do have to ask this, though. If you're building Venmo today, sir, would you use cryptocurrency?

A (64:03)

Yeah. So I built Braintree. I started Braintree in 2007. I sold it in 2013. I think we were the first company to integrate Coinbase.

D (64:15)

Wow.

A (64:15)

So, yeah, so I, I was bullish on crypto and, you know, like, had I not sold Braintree, I'm guessing I would have been all in on Web3 over the past 12 years, that all the things that have developed. So I do, I, I've, I've looked at the, how the industry has matured, and I have to say, what an amazing space to build in. There's so many cool things being built. And I really admire companies like, you know, Brian Armstrong then at the time, like, he was in and, you know, he's just plugged away. And so, yeah, I, I'm very bullish on web 3. In fact, I, I've been poking at crypto for the past year, trying to figure out how to find the marriage between don't die and web 3. I don't want to do a token, you know, I don't want to do something where it's like, people are like, this is not a money grab. This is like, how do you build sophisticated infrastructure for don't die? So I've been poking at it and I haven't found it yet, but it's definitely on my radar. I really love what the industry's doing and I'm excited about the, like, the ways it can work together.

C (65:22)

Well, we appreciate you being patient with finding the right solution in crypto. We know bad things can happen when people are rushed into crypto. Brian, this has been fantastic. I've learned a lot. I'm very inspired. Before I got into crypto, I was on my own career pursuit, trying to figure out how to integrate physical therapy, mental health and nutrition into one private practice. And I kind of think if you add a bunch of science and research, you actually end up with what you're doing. And so it's very refreshing to kind of come back around full circle and touch base with who's really pushing the frontier in that world. And so thank you for doing what you're doing and wish you the best of luck.

A (66:00)

Thank you. David, I have to ask, where are you both at after this conversation?

C (66:06)

Ryan, you want to go first.

D (66:07)

I'm warmer on it. I'm definitely warmer. I'm still skeptical of the details of transhumanism and how we might merge and what longevity would actually look like. I also very much think that quality of life is kind of important, which is why I like the idea of you kind of expanding into other areas. But I think the thing I'm most at peace with after this is it's not just don't die for me, it's don't die for us. And I think that flips the whole. Isn't this whole thing selfish on its head and fits better with my moral framework of things. So I'm leaving this conversation warmer for sure.

A (66:49)

Yeah.

C (66:49)

Cool.

A (66:49)

David, what about you?

C (66:50)

Yeah, so I, once upon a time was kind of pursuing longevity in a very loose sense, way back in the day, before I found crypto, like reading David Sinclair and some of those more old school books and kind of also doing like, a little bit of just like self experimentation, like carnivore diet, keto, like all that kind of stuff, fasting.

B (67:13)

And I found it was actually very solitary.

C (67:15)

So you can't really hang out with friends or go on dates if you're a carnivore. Like, it does, doesn't. It's not totally compatible. And that was actually the thing that I found to be the most. Having the most friction. And so the notion that there is a system out there which makes it easy for me, and not just me, but my friends and my local family, and this has become a social norm is what excites me about this. And so I was always warm on it, on it to begin with. Getting into crypto, I was like, oh, well, I've just abandoned all of my healthy habits and now I sit in front of the computer for 16 hours a day. And so now I'm trying to get those back. But I find it highly enjoyable that this is now being pushed to be like a social norm so we can all kind of, like, revel in it and so much, much more warm. Yeah.

A (68:03)

Yeah. Cool.

C (68:04)

Brian, thanks for coming on today.

A (68:05)

Yep.