Welcome back to another Crypto Daily 3 at 3. What's going on, guys? So today we're going to do a narrative watch where I dive a little deeper on a full topic kind of end to end. And this came out of seeing a bunch of different pieces of news around tokenization, which is I feel like something that we maybe haven't talked about

as much recently.

It was pretty clear that it's out of vogue, right?

This is a time for maximalism and for, excuse me, a return to fundamentals in some ways.

And so it's interesting to see a number of pieces of news from Shapeshift, the exchange, from Block TV, the media company based out of Israel, and from Satoshi's treasure that somehow relate to tokenization in some way.

So what I wanted to talk about is kind of do almost like a linear history of the once and potential promise of

tokenization, the problems of tokenization, and then I'll spend a little bit of time on these

set of news stories that are kind of the latest in tokenization. So let's start with the promise,

right? So this is something that I think we forget often because of everything

that transpired and because of the ICO boom and because of how crazy it was. But there was an

idea behind tokenization that was more than just kind of this rampant fundraising mechanism, right?

And so loosely put and or simply put, I guess, and this is cribbing a little bit from this piece,

Why Decentralization Matters by Chris Dixon, which I think is probably the most thorough topic

or writing on the matter, aside from maybe this piece by Sheridan Erickson, the Future of Network

Effects, tokenization, and the end of extraction. But basically, what these posts are arguing and what the

larger idea was arguing was that effectively tokenization represented a transformation of power

in networks. And networks being that the businesses, the companies, the organizations, the political

structures all around us, right? It wasn't one type of network. It was all networks. And the issue was, specifically, if you look at

the Fang companies, right, the Web 2.0 companies, which were supposed to be these liberating

forces that allowed people to create, not just consume, what happened, in fact,

is that they created network effects that created incredible user locket, right? It became

enormously expensive, either literally or in terms of just switching costs for people to actually

...