Can Humanized Autonomous Organizations Scale

Speaker A00:00:00

Welcome to the debate.

Speaker A00:00:02

Imagine showing up to work tomorrow, and well, you discover you have zero bosses.

Speaker A00:00:07

None.

Speaker A00:00:08

Your department is capped at exactly 15 people.

Speaker A00:00:11

Okay.

Speaker A00:00:12

Sounds pretty good so far.

Speaker A00:00:13

Right.

Speaker A00:00:14

You control your own budget, but if your team can't agree on how to spend it, an algorithmic protocol steps in, freezes your assets, quarantines your team, and literally dissolves your project entirely.

Speaker A00:00:27

Yeah, which sounds exactly like a sci-fi dystopia.

Speaker A00:00:30

It really does, but it's actually the highly calculated blueprint for something called a humanized autonomous organization or HAO.

Speaker A00:00:39

It is uh a massive departure from what we know.

Speaker A00:00:42

I mean, we are so used to traditional organizational design, right?

Speaker A00:00:46

Where we borrow our metaphors from classical architecture.

Speaker A00:00:49

Right, exactly.

Speaker A00:00:50

We think in terms of load-bearing walls, rigid hierarchies, centralized control rooms.

Speaker A00:00:56

If a beam is cracking, you can just point to it on a blueprint and say, there, there is the structural failure.

Speaker A00:01:03

But the HAO model essentially throws that blueprint in the incinerator.

Speaker A00:01:08

It absolutely does.

Speaker A00:01:09

Specifically, we're going to be looking at the reference implementation of the HAO, which is known as the integrated cooperative network, or ICN.

Speaker A00:01:18

Right.

Speaker A00:01:18

It operates much more like a biological ecosystem, you know?

Speaker A00:01:21

It's a decentralized polycentric web where autonomy is pushed to the very edges.

Speaker A00:01:27

And the structure itself is just constantly learning, versioning, adapting.

Speaker A00:01:32

So the central question we're exploring today is whether this HAO framework, with its trickle up economics, its reliance on constant social emotional alignment, and nested governance, whether that actually presents a genuinely resilient, scalable alternative to centralized organizations.

Speaker A00:01:51

Or conversely, does this intricate labyrinth of you know localized autonomy and constant human consensus just introduce a fatal fragility and coordination paralysis?

Speaker A00:02:01

I'll be representing the perspective that the HAO model is actually a robust, anti-fragile system that successfully aligns human incentives and prevents the brittleness of traditional hierarchies.

Speaker A00:02:12

And my position is that the HAO model relies on high-friction consensus mechanisms, highly complex socio-emotional safety layers, and a distributed governance that will inevitably buckle under scale, leading to total coordination collapse.

Speaker A00:02:27

Okay, so let's lay out our foundations here.

Speaker A00:02:29

The entire reason the HAO model exists is because traditional corporations suffer from centralized failure points, right?

Speaker A00:02:36

And deeply misaligned incentives.

Speaker A00:02:38

Yeah, wealth concentrates at the top.

Speaker A00:02:40

Exactly.

Speaker A00:02:41

While the people actually creating the value are just totally disconnected from capturing it.

Speaker A00:02:47

Now on the other end of the spectrum, we've seen tech-driven attempts to decentralize through DAOs, decentralized autonomous organizations.

Speaker A00:02:55

Right, the crypto model.

Speaker A00:02:56

Yeah, but those largely fail because token-weighted voting relies on like algorithmic coldness.

Speaker A00:03:03

It entirely excludes qualitative human judgment.

Speaker A00:03:06

The HIO tries to solve this by utilizing united microenterprises or UMEs.

Speaker A00:03:12

Right, the 15-person teams you mentioned.

Speaker A00:03:14

Exactly.

Speaker A00:03:15

They are small, self-managing venture teams intentionally capped around 15 people.

Speaker A00:03:20

Which is based on Dunbar's number, right?

Speaker A00:03:22

Yes, exactly.

Speaker A00:03:24

That specific number is chosen to respect Dunbar's number and maintain actual sociological coherence.

Speaker A00:03:30

You can genuinely know and trust 15 people.

Speaker A00:03:33

Okay, fair enough.

Speaker A00:03:34

Now, instead of a boss managing these teams, power is distributed through an adaptive governance framework and versioned dynamic enterprise agreements.

Speaker A00:03:45

I know those sound like dense terms.

Speaker A00:03:46

Very dense.

Speaker A00:03:44

But think of it like shared software code on GitHub.

Speaker A00:03:50

If two teams are working together and realize their revenue split just isn't fair anymore, they don't have to hire corporate lawyers or escalate to a CEO.

Speaker A00:03:59

Right.

Speaker A00:03:59

They can literally commit a new version of their contract on the distributed ledger.

Speaker A00:04:04

If both teams consent, the rules of their collaboration update instantly.

Speaker A00:04:08

It allows for localized adaptation, meaning the network can take hits, learn, and evolve, making the overall system antifragile.

Speaker A00:04:18

I see the theoretical appeal.

Speaker A00:04:23

Okay.

Speaker A00:04:24

Traditional corporate models are deeply flawed, yes.

Speaker A00:04:28

But they are undeniably efficient at allocating resources and executing decisions.

Speaker A00:04:35

The HAO framework attempts to remove single points of failure, but in doing so, it replaces them with just a labyrinth of coordination dependencies.

Speaker A00:04:45

Well, just think about the daily reality of a contributor in this system.

Speaker A00:04:50

You aren't just doing your job, say writing code or designing a product.

Speaker A00:04:54

You are maintaining local UME governance.

Speaker A00:04:57

You are managing strategic enterprise partnerships or CEPs, which are these joint projects across multiple teams.

Speaker A00:05:03

Right, cross collaboration.

Speaker A00:05:05

And on top of that, you are participating in constant value alignment monitoring to make sure everyone's ethics are in check.

Speaker A00:05:12

The cognitive and administrative overhead required just to keep the lights on is staggering.

Speaker A00:05:18

My deep concern here is that this framework risks replacing corporate hierarchy with bureaucratic paralysis, all disguised under the pleasant language of collaboration.

Speaker A00:05:28

I hear that concern about overhead.

Speaker A00:05:30

I really do.

Speaker A00:05:30

But let me give you a different perspective on how that efficiency is actually achieved, starting with the economics.

Speaker A00:05:29

Okay, let's hear it.

Speaker A00:05:37

Because the financial incentives here completely alter how that daily reality actually feels.

Speaker A00:05:41

The traditional model dictates that capital flows top down, right?

Speaker A00:05:45

The HIO utilizes a trickle up investment flow.

Speaker A00:05:48

Walk me through exactly how that works in practice.

Speaker A00:05:51

So let's say a UME forms to build a new logistics application.

Speaker A00:05:56

Capital enters the HAO coordinating layer and goes directly to the edge to that 15% team actually doing the work.

Speaker A00:06:02

Okay.

Speaker A00:06:03

Now here is the brilliance of the design.

Speaker A00:06:05

It's basically the inverse of a franchise model.

Speaker A00:06:08

In a traditional franchise, you pay royalties up to corporate forever.

Speaker A00:06:12

Right.

Speaker A00:06:13

Here, as a UME matures and repays its initial capital, the percentage of revenue it returns to the central network actually diminishes.

Speaker A00:06:21

It might start at like 30 to 40% during the risky seeding phase, but it drops down to maybe 10 to 15% once mature.

Speaker A00:06:29

So the network subsidizes the risk early on, but backs off the extraction later.

Speaker A00:06:43

Oh, interesting.

Speaker A00:06:44

Yeah, it constantly adjusts based on the actual time, resources, and risk each person is contributing month to month.

Speaker A00:06:52

This brilliantly prevents wealth concentration at the center, rewards early risk, and continuously funds what they call the microenterprise ecosystem.

Speaker A00:07:00

It is an economic engine designed for sustainability, not just permanent rent extraction.

Speaker A00:07:06

I come at it from a different way, specifically regarding macroeconomic survival.

Speaker A00:07:11

The trickle up model sounds highly equitable in a stable, predictable market.

Speaker A00:07:17

But let's look at the mechanics of that diminishing contribution protocol.

Speaker A00:07:21

Okay.

Speaker A00:07:22

Think about the math here.

Speaker A00:07:23

The more successful a team gets, the less money they send back to the center.

Speaker A00:07:28

That sounds great for the team.

Speaker A00:07:30

But for the whole network, it means the center is structurally relying on a constant, unbroken stream of the newest, riskiest UMEs to fund shared infrastructure and mutual aid pools.

Speaker A00:07:41

Well, yeah, because the mature ones are keeping 85 to 90% of their revenue.

Speaker A00:07:46

Right.

Speaker A00:07:47

So what happens during severe market volatility?

Speaker A00:07:50

Let's say a recession hits and new teams stop forming while existing teams tighten their belts.

Speaker A00:07:56

If the center's revenue stream is systematically restricted by its own successful nodes, you risk starving the center of resources, precisely when the broader network needs systemic liquidity to survive external shocks.

Speaker A00:08:09

You've decentralized the capital to the edges, meaning the center cannot enact a coordinated financial defense.

Speaker A00:08:15

That's a fascinating stress test, I'll give you that, though I would frame the system's defense entirely differently.

Speaker A00:08:21

How so?

Speaker A00:08:22

Well, the HAO doesn't just evaporate its capital pools into people's pockets.

Speaker A00:08:27

The revenue allocation framework specifically designates strict allocation tiers.

Speaker A00:08:32

Okay.

Speaker A00:08:32

Before any profit is distributed to the individuals in that mature UME, revenue must go into an operating reserve tier for the team and a reinvestment tier that channels surplus into network-wide funds.

Speaker A00:08:46

But it's still at the edges.

Speaker A00:08:48

Yes, the center isn't starved.

Speaker A00:08:50

Rather, resilience is distributed.

Speaker A00:08:53

The central HAO doesn't need to mount a massive top-down bailout because the UMEs themselves are contractually required to hold localized liquidity buffers.

Speaker A00:08:59

It's a distributed reserve system.

Speaker A00:09:07

If you look at banking, that is fundamentally more resilient than a centralized treasury that can be completely drained by a single executive miscalculation.

Speaker A00:09:16

Okay, but if you push all that capital to the edges, you're essentially giving every 15-person team their own well-funded treasury.

Speaker A00:09:24

Historically, when localized groups have their own treasuries and autonomy, they either hoard it or they fight over who pays for shared infrastructure.

Speaker A00:09:33

If there's no CEO to step in, what physically stops two well-funded microenterprises from engaging in a brutal turf war over resources or strategy?

Speaker A00:09:42

That friction is exactly why the adaptive governance framework, the AGF, is the bedrock of the whole system.

Speaker A00:09:49

The network operates on the principle of subsidiarity, meaning decisions are made at the lowest competent level.

Speaker A00:09:55

But remember that GitHub analogy I used earlier?

Speaker A00:09:57

Yeah.

Speaker A00:09:58

These units are bound by the dynamic enterprise agreement, the DEA.

Speaker A00:10:01

The modular contracts on the distributed ledger.

Speaker A00:10:04

Right.

Speaker A00:10:04

If an economic dispute arises between two UMEs operating in a joint strategic enterprise partnership, they don't have to navigate a bespoke legal nightmare or fight a turf war.

Speaker A00:10:15

They just check the code.

Speaker A00:10:16

Yes, they rely on graduated conflict resolution protocols built directly into the code of their DAA.

Speaker A00:10:22

It provides a clear, stepwise algorithmic path from peer mediation all the way up to network level arbitration.

Speaker A00:10:29

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy that this resolves smoothly.

Speaker A00:10:32

Let me tell you why.

Speaker A00:10:33

Go ahead.

Speaker A00:10:34

The source material explicitly outlines something called enterprise collapse and containment protocols.

Speaker A00:10:40

We're talking about CPT1, CPT2, and CPT three.

Speaker A00:10:44

Yes, the safety mechanisms.

Speaker A00:10:46

But if a system explicitly requires codified protocols for enterprise degradation, asset freezes, and enterprise recovery reviews, simply because a microenterprise failed to reach a quorum or experienced a governance deadlock, that is a glaring, tacit admission that consent based nested governance is inherently fraudile.

Speaker A00:11:05

I don't think it is.

Speaker A00:11:06

If the system was robust, you wouldn't need a CPT3 hard fail protocol to trigger a crisis cell just to corning a 15-person team that can't agree on its resource allocation.

Speaker A00:11:18

I'm not convinced by that line of reasoning because you are misinterpreting the presence of a safety mechanism is proof of inherent weakness.

Speaker A00:11:26

Let me offer a biological analogy.

Speaker A00:11:28

Okay.

Speaker A00:11:28

Think about the human body's immune system.

Speaker A00:11:30

Our cells undergo a process called apoptosis, programmed cell death.

Speaker A00:11:35

When a cell becomes damaged or dysfunctional, the body doesn't collapse.

Speaker A00:11:39

The cell gracefully self-destructs to protect the surrounding tissue.

Speaker A00:11:43

The enterprise collapse protocols are the HAO's apoptosis.

Speaker A00:11:47

Wait, hold on.

Speaker A00:11:48

I want to stick on that word you just used.

Speaker A00:11:50

Apoptosis.

Speaker A00:11:51

Yeah.

Speaker A00:11:51

So in biology, that's a cell programming itself to die for the good of the body.

Speaker A00:11:56

You're saying if a 15-person team in this company has a toxic internal dispute they can't resolve, the system is designed to just what?

Speaker A00:12:05

Kill the department?

Speaker A00:12:06

It gracefully degrades it, yes.

Speaker A00:12:08

The fact that a 15 person UME can undergo a controlled shutdown, distribute its intellectual property back to the shared commons, and undergo an enterprise recovery review without tanking the entire integrated cooperative network is absolute proof of systemic resilience.

Speaker A00:12:23

Graceful degradation.

Speaker A00:12:24

Yes.

Speaker A00:12:25

Think about a traditional corporation.

Speaker A00:12:26

What happens?

Speaker A00:12:27

A toxic department festers, politics run rampant, and it poisons the whole company because there is no protocol for localized contained dissolution.

Speaker A00:12:34

The CEO just fires a vice president and hopes for the best.

Speaker A00:12:37

In the AIO, failure is expected, contained, mathematically unwound, and metabolized into learning.

Speaker A00:12:43

That is a highly elegant biological defense mechanism in theory.

Speaker A00:12:48

But we have to remember that this immune system relies heavily on the immune cells themselves.

Speaker A00:12:55

And in this case, those cells are human beings.

Speaker A00:12:58

Exactly.

Speaker A00:12:59

Which brings us directly to the reality of the HAO's human infrastructure.

Speaker A00:13:03

Apoptosis is great for mindless cells.

Speaker A00:13:06

Humans tend to object when you try to dissolve their livelihood.

Speaker A00:13:10

But that human infrastructure is arguably the most revolutionary aspect of the design.

Speaker A00:13:15

The HAO treats human systems as core infrastructure, on par with software code or legal contracts.

Speaker A00:13:21

Through the culture cultivation stuff?

Speaker A00:13:23

Right, through enterprise culture cultivation.

Speaker A00:13:26

The network actively builds psychological safety into the daily workflow.

Speaker A00:13:30

They use codified shared language, for instance, a contributor might say, check myself in a meeting to explicitly signal self-reflection, or use the phrase, needs not met, to raise unmet expectations without casting personal blame.

Speaker A00:13:45

Okay, but it treats conflict engagement as organizational literacy.

Speaker A00:13:49

By utilizing regular tension tracking boards and strict check-in rituals, the system ensures emotional safety and prevents the formation of shadow hierarchies.

Speaker A00:13:59

You don't get the toxic unspoken power dynamics that plague traditional offices because tension is systematically surfaced and resolved on a board.

Speaker A00:14:07

I have to admit, when I first read the source material about enterprise culture cultivation, my immediate thought was exactly what the text itself warns against.

Speaker A00:14:18

Process fatigue.

Speaker A00:14:19

Process fatigue.

Speaker A00:14:21

It sounds exhausting.

Speaker A00:14:22

Think about the lived reality of this constant pulse checks, metadata analysis of your language patterns to ensure you are using the right codified phrases.

Speaker A00:14:32

Calling a meta meeting to unpack the emotional undertones of a software update.

Speaker A00:14:37

It's just communication.

Speaker A00:14:38

We are asking everyday workers, logisticians, designers, supply chain managers to function as part-time organizational therapists.

Speaker A00:14:47

Well, I wouldn't call them therapists.

Speaker A00:14:49

It's about clear communication protocols.

Speaker A00:14:51

But the emotional labor required to sustain this is immense.

Speaker A00:14:55

At some point, this risks bogging down contributors in endless tension metabolization.

Speaker A00:15:01

An organization ultimately has to actually create value for the outside world, not just continuously process its own feelings about creating value.

Speaker A00:15:10

It's a fair concern, but let's look at the alternative.

Speaker A00:15:12

In a traditional firm, that emotional labor doesn't magically disappear, it just goes underground.

Speaker A00:15:17

That's true.

Speaker A00:15:18

It turns into passive aggression, massive burnout, high turnover, and siloed departments that refuse to share information with each other to protect their fiefdoms.

Speaker A00:15:28

That is a massive, unquantified financial drain on actual value creation.

Speaker A00:15:33

Right, the shadow hierarchies.

Speaker A00:15:35

Exactly.

Speaker A00:15:36

The HOA simply makes that labor explicit and distributes it equitably.

Speaker A00:15:41

Yes, it takes an hour on a Tuesday to metabolize tension on a tracking board, but doing so prevents the catastrophic cultural failures that sink traditional companies.

Speaker A00:15:51

The codified language isn't about enforcing a therapy culture, it's about establishing a highly efficient communication protocol so that a dispute over a joint project doesn't devolve into a personal feud.

Speaker A00:16:03

It's a feature of operational efficiency.

Speaker A00:16:05

But if maintaining internal alignment requires such a delicate, highly calibrated and honestly time consuming balance of socio-emotional forces, the critical question becomes how this carefully manicured ecosystem survives contact with the ruthless profit-driven external market.

Speaker A00:16:24

Oh, the external market.

Speaker A00:16:25

Yeah.

Speaker A00:16:26

An ecosystem this internally focused, this deeply empathetic is highly vulnerable to external extraction.

Speaker A00:16:32

And the architects of the HAO anticipated exactly that.

Speaker A00:16:35

That's why they don't just plug these microenterprises directly into Wall Street.

Speaker A00:16:40

They designed public market interfaces or PMIs.

Speaker A00:16:43

Let's look at the contribular reference model from the material.

Speaker A00:16:46

Okay.

Speaker A00:16:47

PMIs act as a literal buffer company between the internal microenterprise ecosystem and outside investors.

Speaker A00:16:53

Wait, a buffer how?

Speaker A00:16:54

They translate cooperative value into market terms without compromising the internal governance.

Speaker A00:17:00

In the contribulo example, the network maintains a 77% supermajority ownership, while only 23% is open to public investors.

Speaker A00:17:09

I see.

Speaker A00:17:10

And they utilize capped ROIs and revenue share notes rather than traditional voting equity.

Speaker A00:17:16

This is a brilliant structural firewall.

Speaker A00:17:19

It allows the HOW to absorb aligned capital and interface with traditional markets while completely shielding the UMEs from extractive short-term investor demands.

Speaker A00:17:29

The investors get a fair, legally capped return, and the internal network retains its autonomy and culture.

Speaker A00:17:35

I understand the mechanics of the firewall, I do, but capital is not polite.

Speaker A00:17:40

You can put up a legal firewall, but external capital is like water pressure on a submarine.

Speaker A00:17:46

That's a dramatic way to put it.

Speaker A00:17:44

But it's true.

Speaker A00:17:48

The deeper you go, the more external money you take to scale, the more pressure hits every single joint and seam of that 7723 split.

Speaker A00:17:58

Even with the 23% capped stake and mission lock articles, external investors exert gravity.

Speaker A00:18:06

But they don't have the voting rights to crack the hall.

Speaker A00:18:08

They have the leverage of liquidity.

Speaker A00:18:10

I'm sorry, but PMIs are porous firewall.

Speaker A00:18:14

The HAO uses what they call a multi-capital evaluation framework.

Speaker A00:18:19

Inside the submarine, they aren't just measuring financial capital, they are measuring non-financial metrics like ecological impact and social capital.

Speaker A00:18:28

Which is a good thing.

Speaker A00:18:29

Sure.

Speaker A00:18:30

But the external market, the water pressure, does not care about your cultural capital index.

Speaker A00:18:36

The demand for financial returns will inevitably conflict with those non-financial metrics.

Speaker A00:18:42

If contribular has a bad quarter financially, but a great quarter ecologically, those external investors will apply pressure.

Speaker A00:18:50

Well they will threaten to pull future funding.

Speaker A00:18:53

Over time, that relentless water pressure will force the PMI to compromise a network's ethical protocols to sustain financial viability.

Speaker A00:19:15

Charters can be amended.

Speaker A00:19:17

But the external investors enter knowing exactly what the constraints are.

Speaker A00:19:21

It is explicitly legally a bounded return.

Speaker A00:19:24

Legal locks are only as strong as the human will to enforce them when millions of dollars are on the line.

Speaker A00:19:29

But the mechanism accounts for human frailty.

Speaker A00:19:31

If the investors attempt to exert undue influence that violates the framework, the HAO core retains the contractual right to terminate the PMI licensing agreements entirely, or initiate a structural fork, basically leaving the investors with a hollow shell.

Speaker A00:19:47

Wow.

Speaker A00:19:48

Yeah.

Speaker A00:19:48

The firewall isn't just a cultural norm that people have to bravely uphold.

Speaker A00:19:52

It is hard-coded into the legal and structural substrate of the entity.

Speaker A00:19:56

It fundamentally alters the terms of engagement with external capital.

Speaker A00:20:00

You aren't asking the water not to crush you.

Speaker A00:20:03

You've built a hull out of titanium.

Speaker A00:20:05

Until a strategic enterprise partnership is struggling to make payroll.

Speaker A00:20:09

When a team of 15 people realize they can't pay their mortgages, the temptation to lift that ROI cap or grant a little more voting power to a wealthy external backer will be immense.

Speaker A00:20:21

I mean, that's human nature, sure.

Speaker A00:20:23

Exactly.

Speaker A00:20:23

The structural empathy that makes the internal network so appealing, the desire to make sure everyone's needs are met is exactly what makes it vulnerable to the cold, hard leverage of public markets when times get tough.

Speaker A00:20:36

Let me pull back and just summarize my perspective on everything we've explored today.

Speaker A00:20:40

The HAO and ICN frameworks offer a comprehensively architected scalable alternative to the deep brittleness of traditional organizations.

Speaker A00:20:48

Okay.

Speaker A00:20:49

We aren't just talking about a utopian philosophy here.

Speaker A00:20:52

We are looking at specific interlocking mechanisms.

Speaker A00:20:56

By encoding trickle-up economics to prevent wealth concentration, utilizing a version-controlled adaptive governance framework where contracts update like software, and treating human socio-emotional safety as core infrastructure, the system creates a deeply resilient network.

Speaker A00:21:13

It is capable of programmed cellular death when a single unit fails, and capable of genuine systemic learning.

Speaker A00:21:19

It aligns human incentives with economic reality in a way the industrial era just never could.

Speaker A00:21:24

And to summarize my stance, while the ethical ambitions of the HAO are profoundly appealing, the operational reality of this framework creates a highly fragile structure.

Speaker A00:21:36

Managing overlapping joint projects, maintaining polycentric consent across dozens of autonomous units, and constantly guarding a porous legal firewall against the relentless pressure of external markets.

Speaker A00:21:50

It requires an unsustainable level of cognitive and administrative overhead.

Speaker A00:21:55

Yeah.

Speaker A00:21:56

The severe risk here is not that the model is ill-intentioned, but that it will become an organization paralyzed by its own structural empathy, drowning in process fatigue and coordination collapse.

Speaker A00:22:08

I think where we absolutely converge is on the reality that the traditional corporate models of the industrial era are reaching their breaking point.

Speaker A00:22:17

They are just too brittle, too extractive, and too centralized for the complexity of the modern world.

Speaker A00:22:23

The search for viable, distributed alternatives is no longer just an academic exercise, it's essential.

Speaker A00:22:29

I agree completely.

Speaker A00:22:30

For all its staggering complexity and the friction we've debated, the HAL model presents a fascinating intricate blueprint full of specific mechanisms, from those GitHub style dynamic enterprise agreements to the multi capital evaluation metrics that are entirely worthy of further exploration and real-world testing.

Speaker A00:22:49

It really brings us back to that opening thought.

Speaker A00:22:52

Are we destined to keep building rigid engineering blueprints that inevitably crack under pressure?

Speaker A00:22:57

Or are we capable of cultivating a messy, complex, but ultimately resilient biological ecosystem for human work?

Speaker A00:23:04

We'll leave it to you to decide whether this framework represents the future of coordination or just an overly complex ideal.

Speaker A00:23:12

Thank you for joining us.