The Genius Effect: Stablecoins Take the Stage | Future of Finance 2026

Briefly introduce yourselves, and then we'll jump right in with some questions. But Lauren, I'll start with you. Thank you. And I'm so pleased to be here. My name is Lauren Belive, and I'm the global co-head of policy for Ripple. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for for being here. And thanks to the Milken Institute for hosting us. I'm Robin Cook, and I lead the federal team at Coinbase and am our legislative counsel. Morning, everyone. Michael Greenwald, global head for financial innovation and couldn't think of a better venue to have this conversation today. Morning, I'm Gene Ludwig. I'm the CEO of Carry Networks, which is a new tokenized deposit solution. Looking forward to the panel. Hi, everybody. I'm Caroline Pham. I am the chief legal officer and chief administrative officer at MoonPay, which is a global value network which powers for our partners moving value throughout the world. And I am the former acting chairman of the CFTC. All right, fantastic. So, Robin, I'm going to turn to you first. So the Genius Act was just passed by Congress and signed into law only last year, yet we seem to be talking about it again. There are some debates and discussions around yield and rewards. And from my understanding, these conversations have, at least for the time being, been a barrier to broader market structure legislation moving forward. Can you help us understand that and where the fault lines are? Sure. So what the Genius Act did in what I think was a pretty monumental win for the administration early on, the first major piece of financial services legislation in more than three decades that was not directly responsive to a crisis. What it did was pave the way for the safety and soundness issues associated with stable coins. It set out the prudential framework and importantly included in there a ban on interest in yield paid by stable coin issuers. The debate that we're having now is about the commercial viability of stable coins as they enter the marketplace. And I use those words very, very specifically because of the fact that in payments, as we all know, you have to provide incentives for entrenched networks that have high network effects to be able to scale. And so that's really what we're talking about here. At the top of my wallet is a credit card from United Airlines. And that's because I really value my relationship with United Airlines and I value the points that I receive every time I make a transaction. What we have seen for decades and decades and decades is that you have to pay consumers to actually use a payments product. What Genius did is it said that there is a ban on the payment of interest in yield by stable coin issuers. But what it did not say, and that was because this was an issue that was actually litigated and decided on the Senate floor, was that third parties can pay incentives for the use of stable coins. And so that's really where we are. We've answered the prudential question. The question that we're answering now is how do these products actually be able to grow and scale? And so we're concerned about the prospect that you would just not be able to provide any incentive whatsoever, because what we're going to be left with is effectively handcuffing the growth of this product over the long term. Many, many use cases that we have in the world, ranging from treasury management to actual use cases of retailers by consumers, ultimately are going to have in order for a stable coin to actually come to being, you have to buy it in the first place and you have to provide an incentive for them to be able to do that. So I think where this is going is ultimately where do you draw that line? The banks are saying that if you just allow no restrictions on the payment of interest in yield, that ultimately this could capture what you would think of as core bank deposit products. There hasn't necessarily been a lot of evidence that has been offered that's proven that up, but that is the argument that's been made. And we hear that and we're sympathetic to it. The question now is exactly where do you draw that line? And so we're hopeful that Congress is going to be able to figure out a way so that the products themselves can continue to grow and scale and develop, but that the banks will get comfortable with a new world that's ultimately going to lead to better, faster, cheaper payments around the globe. Great. And so, Lauren, let me turn to you. And what do you make of this discussion around bank deposits and the risk of flight? And is there another contrarian view that actually this could benefit banks in the long run? Oh, I think this is an excellent question. And I'll pick up where Robin left off. I think the narrative that has come around is that it is a zero sum issue. And that's really not the case. And so I want to zoom out to the macro level here. How does the movie end? The movie ends, and I think it's specific from the Ripple perspective. Ripple is a 13 year old company. We're mature in the crypto asset space. We build digital asset infrastructure for B2B platforms. So our banks are institutions, they're financial institutions, they're big banks, they're fintechs, they're governments, they're corporations. And we have a whole suite of products for them. We do cross-border payments. We allow for custody. We have a prime brokerage that manages trading, both crypto and traditional finance, as well as doing some treasury and liquidity management. But one of the crown jewels of our stack for clients is we've launched our own RLUSD stablecoin. And it's a really great opportunity for traditional finance to take advantage of the stablecoin and the rails that they work. It's 24 hour. It's instant settlements. There's great collateral against stablecoins. And it's an immediate kind of liquidity that banks can use that's a cash equivalent. So it's not going to be a big bang theory overnight. And I think there were some really consequential blockers. The lack of knowledge, the lack of access to stablecoins, and frankly, the lack of regulatory certainty, which we now have with the Genius Act. And because all of those blockers have been coming down, we are starting to see traditional finance truly come to the table. And, you know, at first, it is retail payment processing, cross-border payments. But as soon as people can see that this will also be good collateral for their cash equivalents in their bottom line, you're going to have a real moment where traditional finance and how the movie ends is it's going to be integrated very seamlessly into not just what big banks are using for their business, but how the end user is affected. And so what's happening right now, I think, is in a moment in time. But if we start looking at the scale of how stablecoins is going to be integrated, it will be prudent for traditional finance to come to the table and want to give these benefits to their consumers. So really exciting opportunity. So, Caroline, let me turn to you, having recently been the acting chairman of the CFTC, of course, my favorite federal agency. You are steeply involved or deeply involved in many of the conversations around stablecoin legislation, market structure. Does the current impasse surprise you at all? And how do we get past it? I actually am surprised by the current impasse because I thought the draft that was released in January was so much improved from the one that was released last year. And, you know, just following on the conversation from my colleagues up here on the panel, these are pretty common sense things to want to be able to provide rewards. And I think both sides agree on that. So I actually feel that the debate right now is feels a little bit like theater. And how do we how do we solve this? How does the movie end? The movie ends with the agencies just doing the hard work that is necessary to actually create the specific rules and requirements necessary for the use of stablecoins as payment instruments and as other types of settlement or collateral tokens. So I used to work at a big bank. I used to work at Citi for seven years. I was regulated by the OCC for seven years. And I think what the OCC has recently done with its stablecoin rule proposal, which there has also been a lot of froth on crypto Twitter about, is also straightforward. So what did the January draft say? The January draft basically said, yes, you can go ahead and pay rewards to users of your stablecoin, right? And what does the OCC draft say? I think pretty simply it has a rebuttable presumption. And I like to call this like the you know, looks like a duck test. If it looks like a merchant rewards program, you used the example of like your United Miles card, then that's OK. If it looks if it's a lookalike deposit account, a lookalike checking account, a lookalike savings account, a lookalike money market fund, that's not OK. I like to say the rebuttable presumption is just like the looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, it walks like a duck test. So that's the pragmatic path forward. The agencies have to write rules anyway to implement this. There's a debate that's going on right now in Washington. But I'm pleased to see that, you know, the OCC, which is pro innovation under Controller Gold, is moving right ahead forward on creating those rules that are necessary. And there's a comment period. And so let's like get to work, like good policy is hard work. So let's really dig into the nitty gritty and see how this should come out. Great. Gene, let me turn to you. You've been you've seen many regulatory cycles. The Genius Act creates a viable pathway for non bank stable coin issuers. How do you think about the integration of these new types of players and tokenized products within the regulatory perimeter? Well, this is an exciting time in financial history. The Genius Act has really done a great thing for America. Digital currency was coming. And oddly enough, as I've said to a number of people this morning, I was tasked by Secretary Robert Rubin when he was treasury secretary as controller of the currency to go find out about this digital currency stuff, because he thought it was going to be the future. And this was 1996 ish. And he gave me as a team to work on it with me. And what we found was that, yes, he was right. Digital currency would be the future, but it wouldn't be true for 25 years. He said, no, no. Five years. This is this is so necessary for America. He was right about that. In the meantime, there was a funny detour. Blockchain was a tremendous invention and really sped the opportunity on and made it a much richer set of opportunities. But because it was outside anything regulated, it became synonymous with something that was unseemly and nobody wanted to touch it. Banks were excluded from a big mistake because digitalization is just the necessary financial human step in currency development. When you think about it, in Mesopotamia, they had rocks. They put little marks on rocks and that was money. And they're a little heavy to, you know, carry around. And then they went to different kinds of metals, ends up gold. And then finally, paper. Well, why should we have paper in a digital world? So digitalization is simply the representation in a digital form of currency. Now, I've developed a tokenized coin that is a tokenized digital deposit. And I think that fits the banks terrifically. I think this is the future for banks. But but for the Genius Act and legitimizing this area, we would be stuck in the mud and slow down. Because when you think about it, it's not it is not revolutionary. It's evolutionary. A digital tokenized deposit as a payments mechanism is just a kind of checking exercise, except instead of having paper checks, you have a token. And because of the way things have evolved with the blockchain, you're going to have smart contracts and flexibility and ways to solve problems for the consumers and businesses that weren't dreamed of before. So the Genius Act is a big step forward. The current regulatory environment is very positive. And I think what the controller is doing is terrific. I think bringing the whole era into or this whole ecosystem, I should say, into a regulated format is a really big step forward. So we're in an exciting time. And it's fun to be part of it. So you all. So I'm going to jump in and just kind of add to how this is just modernization, right? Like, let's talk about a specific example. You're talking about the United Miles card. MoonPay just last week announced a partnership with PayPal where we have created a developer platform. It's a white label platform where you can come in and create your own branded stable coin for your app in a number of days. What is that? That's just an evolution of a rewards program like your credit card. So these things are iterative. And I think when people realize that it's just a continuation of what we know and are familiar with, but in a new format, that's why the rewards question is so important. Well, I think that's very well said. I think it's important to note that there are going to be a variety of different digital solutions. And that's one of the wonderful things how this thing's evolved. I think tokenized deposits has an important place in the banking infrastructure. I think stable coin is an important advance. But we're going to see a blooming, buzzing confusion of, you know, evolution here, which is typically American, and it's an area in which we can yet again lead because of our market-based society. Well, I was going to say, I think we heard Gene say he's been involved with digital currencies since 1996. So maybe some Satoshi rumors will come out of this conversation here. But Michael, let me turn to you. We've been talking a lot about some of the regulatory underpinnings of this space. But obviously, there's the technology component. Talk to us about the role of cloud and other types of tech infrastructure in supporting some of this innovation. Sure. I wish I was back at Treasury with you in 96. I missed you by a few years. But I think what we're seeing is that the financial landscape, it's in a constant state of evolution from what you just heard. And I think, you know, customers and consumers globally are looking for options. They're looking for optionality. And I think what's exciting about this moment is you're seeing those options play out in real time, and for us at AWS, you know, we really believe that a resilient, transparent, secure cloud infrastructure, you know, that's the bedrock and the foundation for everything we're discussing today for digital assets and for the future of digital assets. And the competitiveness, you know, U.S. economic competitiveness, it depends upon that foundation and that intersection. And that reinforces the message of if you're using a U.S. cloud provider, that's reinforcing competitiveness in the space. And so I would say developing this infrastructure for the different optionality of digital assets, that's going to be key. And it's going to be interesting to see the optionality play out between the customer here at home and globally. So before I move on to some exciting use cases and applications, I want to ask one more kind of policy question of the entire panel. And feel free to jump in. You know, recently we were starting to have more debate and discussion about various types of non-bank entities seeking banking-like charters and potential access to Fedmaster accounts or the Fed payment system. Share some thoughts on that. How important is that to the ecosystem? Is that a logical next step, or do you see that as a distinct conversation? Lauren, I'm happy to start with you. Absolutely. I think when we talk about what's going to be a needle mover here, right, you know, you look at the stable coin industry right now, it's about $314 billion in market cap. I think the first $0 to $314 billion really was driven by retail investments, by crypto investments. But that next 10X going forward, I believe, is really going to be driven by institutional engagement and institutional investments. That's the shift, and that's the opportunity for stable coin going forward. Now, as I mentioned, Ripple, our clients are big banks, and for us, we are a regulatory, regulation-heavy first company. When we went to start our stable coin, we went through New York DFS, which is the largest, the third largest regulator in the country under the Fed and the OCC. And now we've also sought a OCC charter, which we were approved for. And a lot of that is, if you're going to be engaging with banking partners, most of them haven't had much exposure to stable coin counterparties because they weren't regulated yet before. And so those entities now, through the Genius Act, through going through, I would say, very tough regulatory scrutiny of New York DFS, and we enjoy our relationship with them, that's the baseline to really establishing trust through a lot of these banking work partnerships. And that is what, now, and the Genius Act itself, you know, you need to have a one-to-one dollar backed. You need to have a proof of reserves. There's a lot of heavy AML scrutiny that goes in through the Genius Act. And there's bankruptcy protections. So that eliminates a lot of that risk that the banks are feeling. And so now it makes sense that there's access points that the OCC can properly regulate these entities that are really above board. Further thoughts? Yeah, Robin, please. Yeah, I mean, I just want to completely underline everything that Oren just said. I mean, we also have sought a trust charter at the OCC, have a trust charter at New York DFS, have been regulated as a BitLicensee at DFS for about a decade now, and have been asking for more and more regulation around the world. And that's because of a couple of different things. One, that's how you drive adoption, ultimately, giving consumers, giving institutions the familiarity with rules that they know that for consumers probably many of them already assume apply, so that there is a level of protection that is uniform. And I think with that level of protection comes the next iteration. And so these federal charters do provide the ability to have more and better and smarter regulation. I think the important thing here that we should be debating as part of market structure legislation is not the question of how you draw the line on something like rewards or how you draw the line on competitive issues. It is fundamentally how are we protecting consumers and what exactly are the rules to ensure that there is that measure of protection. And so I think to the extent that there are concerns that are out there about these charters, let's have that conversation. There may be real concerns. Congress is well-suited right now to be addressing some of those questions. I think the larger point, though, is that we need to have this conversation. We can't have a reflexive response that just because there is a business model that is new and different from things that we've seen in the past, that that inherently makes it bad. Yeah, I was just going to add, I mean, the geoeconomic landscape, it's shifting so quickly. And so having a strong AML CFT regime of today is different than five years ago. And you have to stay five steps ahead of the illicit actor constantly. And so having that stringent regime is critical. And that's something that you have to, it takes time, and you have to evolve with the myriad of information you're dealing with at this moment. Yeah, I want to sort of, you know, second or third or fourth all the comments that have been made, but it's important. We would not have, will not have the kind of really exciting digital future that we all want to have without a regulatory framework. In 1863, Lincoln understood that and created the first American national currency, and at the same time created a regulatory body to oversee that whole system, the payment system, which was the OCC. What's been done today has been a real step forward in being able to take this whole digital ecosystem and make it real, explosive, the ecosystem of the future. Now, the secret for these regulatory bodies, and it's really important that the OCC stood out, began to issue licenses, et cetera, is that the regulatory framework is a fair one, level playing field for everybody. Because at the end of the day, any regulator understands that you've got the public's trust that you've got to satisfy, and that point was very well made. And the more the public can trust in these, you know, new digital currencies, the more they're going to use them, and yet keep it fair and balanced. And I'm very hopeful that the current controller and that the regulatory bodies we have today, or regulatory leadership, I should say, will be able to handle this important task. And Caroline, to you, as well as, you know, any comments on payment systems and access? Of course. So, again, I feel like to know where we're going to go, we need to know from where we came from. And so, since probably about 2019 or 2020, I have been saying that stable coin regulation in the United States is going to end up looking a whole lot like our dual banking system. Right? That is our history, and that is our heritage, because we are a country of federalism. What does that mean? That means we have state chartered institutions, bank and non-bank. It means that we have federal bank chartered institutions. And the thing about how this is all shaping up is that it's also a repeat of conversations that we've had before. I used to advocate on narrow banking for about five years or so, and it really is that question of a level playing field, and what do we mean by a level playing field? It just means that there are prudential requirements for capital standards and for risk management, which is exactly what the Genius Act provides, and also what the OCC's rule proposal provides. Right? So, it is that parity, and, again, it reminds me that this is very similar to the debate that we have and still, you know, may have around industrial loan companies. Right? So, again, just about narrow banks or special purpose banks, it's just a continuous iteration of a conversation that's been going on for a very long time. You know, I also presented on this in Basel to the BIS on the regulation of big techs, because I do think that the undercurrent of the debate around, you know, national trust banks and sort of non-traditional entrants into the space is really more of a almost cultural reaction to technology and the role that technology has in our lives. All right. Well, let's move to some, you know, forward-looking use cases and applications. Michael, maybe I'll start with you. You know, people are talking about a convergence of AI, digital assets. Can you connect those dots for us? Sure. I think that's the convergence of AI and digital assets. It creates really a new financial paradigm, and when you have the ability to extract key information, increase automation, you know, that really opens up the aperture to so many opportunities. And I think that convergence is going to be a building block off each other. And, you know, you hear a lot about, you know, what does AI leadership look like? And I think that's the opportunity for AI leadership to be powered between the development of digital assets for consumers and to give them those options. And that's the building block of why you have a resilient U.S. cloud infrastructure to build on that block and then to create that paradigm between AI and digital assets. But with that also becomes responsibility, increased cyber controls, increased potential vulnerabilities that you need AI to go after illicit actors and extract that key information. So I think, Daniel, really there's an opportunity, and there's an opportunity for each institution to define what AI leadership actually means for them when talking about that new financial paradigm. And, Caroline, I'm going to come back to you. Moonpay just had some recent exciting announcements related to agentic AI and agentic payments. Fill us in. What does it mean? The Jetsons is happening now. This is really exciting. So last week, Moonpay also announced Moonpay Agents, which is creating, again, a developer portal where you can come in and connect your cloud bot and create your own agent that can access and spend from your Moonpay noncustodial wallet. So you set limits. It's verified. But once you set it up, you can go and do that. This is great because it's going to really, I think, open up how much of the development in AI is very much led by individual users. I mean, AI has really democratized technology and coding and development to, you know, each one of us. And people talk about, you know, agentic commerce. And people talk about what does this mean. And, you know, some people think that this is scary. But, again, if we analogize it to what's come before, I mean, how many of us here in this room use recurring bill pay? You know, an agent kind of is like a fancier version of your recurring bill pay. You set some limits for it. You tell it what to do. It goes and it does it. It automates it, right? So I think this is kind of the future. There's some statistics that, you know, people wonder, you know, what does this really mean? Who's really going to adopt this? I mean, McKinsey estimates that it could be $1 trillion in agentic payments by 2030. Other consultants think that it's going to be 15 to 25% of e-commerce is going to be agentic in nature. And so, again, we just see this as a natural evolution. We're really excited to provide this tool. Great. So, Jean, we're talking a lot about stable coins. But you've mentioned the creation of tokenized deposit products. Tell us a little bit more about the use cases and applications you see with tokenized deposits. And what's the interplay? Or is it complementary to or competitive with stable coins? Yeah. I think tokenized deposits sort of are a must-do, by the way, very much enlivened by AI. And it is really not that different from stable coin. But there's a really symbiotic relationship. As I said earlier, there's room for a whole variety of digital solutions. For banks and for those people who seek absolute safety and certainty, which is why banks really exist, being able to tokenize a deposit, that is, make payment on the basis of a deposit, just the way, as I analogized earlier, you do with a checking account, is not revolutionary. It's evolutionary. But really important because people want deposits, they want FDIC insurance, they want a way to utilize their banking relationships. And tokenized deposits allow people to use that basis but to make transfers of their fiat through digital means that is safe, instantaneous, 24-7, can involve smart contracts, modernizes that whole infrastructure in a way that gives those consumers who want to transact that way a huge opportunity to be completely modern, completely part of and necessary part of the world that we're living in, as I said, a 24-7 world, but at the same time have the kind of security and anti-money laundering and other safety controls that the banking system brings with it. Great. So, Lauren, let me turn to you. And picking up on Gene's comments, your Ripple's very focused on financial institutions and the institutionalization of digital assets. Tell us about the interplay. Like, do you see the tokenized deposits as a good base layer? And then where do stable coins play? How are your customers or clients using the technology? No, absolutely. And I think it's really important to note that, so, I think it is a very good base layer. I think people think about different tokens for different use cases. So, a lot of people are holding and investing into Bitcoin. Bitcoin is really a savings token. Ripple utilizes a token called the XRP token. That is a utility token. It was made to do cross-border payments. It was used to be able to utilize the RLUSD, which is also its own stable coin. That's also a utility spending tool. And that is, it is a very strong base layer to be able to then look at why people are using it. And then what does it generate for the end user? And I think that's something that we haven't really talked about yet on this panel. As you do, you have banks and institutions. But who's at the end of all of that? There are 55 million Americans right now, one in five Americans, that are holding and using crypto. They're equally divided by political party. They are equally divided across the country regionally. And they're going to start going to their banks or they're going to start going to their Coinbase apps and wallets. And it's not just a holding or a savings technique anymore, but it is. It's about how are they using that utility at the end. And that's where I think the banks are going to be coming around and looking to be really, really innovative in terms of how they're serving their customers. This is very well said. I'm sorry, I'll just be quick. One of the advantages of these different mechanisms is they serve different financial goals for the consumer, for the business, etc. The advantage of tokenization, a tokenized deposit, is it brings money into the bank as opposed to the money being used for other purposes outside the bank. And bringing it into the bank as a deposit is important because those deposits, at the end of the day, support lending in the United States. And that's critically important for the well-being of commerce. So different strokes for different folks. I think we can all live together and really serve the American public in the best possible way. Yeah, I absolutely agree with that. The one other thing that I wanted to just build on what Lauren said is just the Title IV of the Genius Act that came out from the Senate Banking Committee in January. It is focused on getting the banks into the game so that they are able to participate in this marketplace in a material way. For the first time since 1999, for the first time since the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act, we're giving new bank powers in this legislation, 13 of them. And I think if you look at what those powers are, it's not just tokenized deposit. It's the ability for them to participate in every aspect of this business, whether it is custody of digital assets, broker-dealer activity, all sorts of different things. And in fact, I think that it will enable the banks that want to participate in this space. And granted, that's not all of them, but the ones that do are going to be able to compete in a really serious way precisely because of the point, Jean, that you just raised. Only banks can issue deposits. And so they are going to uniquely have the ability to pull together deposits, stable coins, Bitcoin, and all sorts of different things that haven't even been invented yet that will continue to be the way that this ecosystem evolves. And I just want to add on to that because that's totally true. And it's also that banks have been doing this. So, I worked on blockchain and digital assets since 2018. I've been examined by the OCC, the Fed, and the FDIC for the use of blockchain technology in banking products and services, and also the PRA, come to think of it as well. So, all the regulators around the world, the banks have been doing this. JP Morgan has processed trillions of dollars in tokenized repo and payments. And so I think now what you're just seeing is that the quiet part that has been going on, the upgrading of infrastructure, which is something that all banks have to do, now we're seeing it become a public debate. But it's always been there all along. Okay, we're getting a little short on time, but I have a few more questions I want to pose to anyone on the panel who would like to answer it. So, let's talk about the potential of international dollarization as a result of stable coins. There are many people around the world who would very much want to get their hands on dollars in a tokenized format. What do we think in terms of pros and cons? I mean, pros is to support the US dollar and its reserve status. Cons, could it be very destabilizing to foreign currencies? How do we think about that and strike the right balance? Well, I mean, I think there's been a lot of discussion on this topic over the last 10 years. And I think what's very clear is that the future and everything we're discussing today, it's going to be based on new technologies. Most of them are dollar-based that are going to enable fast and inexpensive, you know, customer-friendly payments. And so, I think when we're talking about dollar-based digital assets, that's only going to reinforce US economic competitiveness. And I think, you know, where we are right now today, given the events of this past week, you're seeing how important the dollar is and the role the dollar plays. And so, I think that's a bedrock for all of these technologies that are laying the foundation. And I think a lot of the companies have been successful because of the dollar. Yeah, I think that's very well said. Very, very well said. I'm directionally correct, if not exactly correct. But most of the US paper currency is not inside the United States. It's outside the United States in most countries around the world that use dollar paper currency for their really own safety and for transactions. To deny them the opportunity to do this in a digital format, I think is, you know, a very bad thing for global commerce and it's a very bad thing for the United States. So, the Genius Act, I think, does a very good thing in that regard of giving the opportunity to just digitalize what's basically been going on in paper, which is well overdue. Stablecoins, I think, ultimately are a foreign policy tool and that we're going to just need to look at the way that they're used in the real world to understand why. If you are, you know, sending money home, there are a couple ways that you can do that. You can pay 9% at, you know, a place that's going to make you wait three days to get it and then have potentially foreign exchange charge on the other side to be able to get it out. Or you can hold it in a way that can never be taken away from you if you can remember a 13-word seed phrase and it exists on chain and sets up a scenario where your assets are your assets no matter what happens. Robin, I know we're at time and I'm going to ask for one minute of indulgence here because I promised, I threatened you all that I'm going to do a lightning round at the end here and this will take us about 60 seconds. I'm going to wrap this up by posing a statement and I'm going to ask each of you to either note your agreement or disagreement with that statement based on a movie or song title I'm going to give you. All right, so let's go. By 2027, the U.S. will amend the Genius Act to allow all stable coin issuers to pass interest directly to users to compete with the digital yuan. If you agree, the times they are a-changing. Disagree, frozen. Lauren? The times they are a-changing. Robin? The times they are a-changing. Michael? I mean... No Washington answers here. We got 20 seconds. I think frozen. All right. I think they will change in more conservative ways than many on the panel would like to see them change, but we're living in a very volatile world, so we'll wait and see what happens. Caroline? Frozen. All right, last one. Within five years, more than 50% of stable coin transactions will be initiated by AI agents rather than humans. iRobot or Simpleman? Simpleman. I'm so simple, I can't answer in one sentence. I think AI will power lots of things, but having said that, I think it's going to be more a tool for mankind than basically the great matrix. So iRobot controlled by a Simpleman. Right. What year? Oh, what did I say? Within five years. iRobot controlled by a Simpleman. Excellent. Well, please join me in thanking our panelists.