Thank you, Mr. Amiouny.
That allows me to segue beautifully into my next question.
Before I do so, if you have any insights—and I'm thinking of Mr. Rasul—in terms of how we could make it so that due diligence is better and tokens that are listed are legitimate projects going forward, please feel free to communicate that. That goes for the other witnesses as well.
My last question is more open-ended and more philosophical in a certain way.
When you look at the white paper by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008, clearly it was a reaction to the 2008 financial crisis, the greed and excesses in the traditional financial sector and then the governments bailing out large institutions. Looking at where it originated, for instance, the cyberpunks' threads and chats on this, at how Bitcoin was used to fund WikiLeaks, how Anonymous used it, how Occupy Wall Street to some extent used it in other ways, 10 years ago I would have thought that the left would be all over this. It turned out to be quite different.
Mr. Amiouny, you mentioned the case of Lebanon. I think it's a fascinating example. They have a currency that has lost, I believe, up to 95% of its value, and banks have prevented withdrawals in many instances. A lot of young Lebanese have turned to digital assets, Bitcoin and others.
I'd like to understand it from your perspective. As a progressive 10 years ago, I would have told you that the left would be completely on this technology and would have embraced it. Now we see this big divide, where it's become really partisan and more associated with the libertarian right.
My question is—and I'd like anyone who wants to chime in to go ahead—what would be your message to progressives when it comes to this technology? How do you see it as being potentially useful, for instance, to bank the unbanked? We know that there are two billion people in the world who don't have access to financial services. How can this be used?