Edited & organized: Wu Says Blockchain
In this episode of (GoodGame), AllianceDAO co-founders Imran and Qiao delve into how the tech industry's focus has swiftly shifted to AI and robotics, overshadowing the current innovation cycle in cryptocurrency. They evaluate the stagnation narrative around stablecoins and tokenization in cryptocurrency while emphasizing the competitive landscape dominated by exchanges and meme-driven token issuances.
Robinhood, as a strong competitor, is bridging fintech and tokenized assets. The discussion covers the dynamics of emerging startups, the impact of AI on coding and education, and the prospects of junior positions in law, medicine, and finance potentially becoming extinct, ultimately painting a future reshaped by AI-native, founder-led micro-startups. This article is edited by Wu Says Blockchain.
Original link: https://x.com/goodgamepodxyz/status/1907801545065820269?s=19
The AI and robotics wave is overshadowing the current state of cryptocurrency
Imran: Welcome to (GoodGame), where we provide no-nonsense insights for cryptocurrency founders. We've been through the ups and downs. I think there are a lot of exciting new releases in AI and robotics, which are overshadowing the dynamics of cryptocurrency.
Qiao: Indeed.
Imran: There will be some innovative periods that attract a lot of people's attention and minds. I think we are in a phase like AI and robotics now, while cryptocurrency is undergoing a rebuilding process. If you’re looking for the next startup idea in cryptocurrency, check out our startup request list for inspiration at align.xyz/ideas.
Qiao: Currently, in the cryptocurrency space, whether builders or investors — even on crypto Twitter — there's almost only one narrative.
Imran: Stablecoins and tokenization are the two narratives.
Qiao: But it's still the same story. It's like putting traditional assets on-chain.
Imran: This seems to have reached a consensus now. Yes.
We see many institutions launching their own stablecoins. I think Fidelity just announced its own stablecoin recently.
Who else? I mean, there are a bunch of companies trying to do exactly the same thing. From an innovation perspective.
It seems there isn’t anything truly new; they are just reinventing the wheel.
I plan to post this meme. I tried to get ChatGPT to generate a Ghibli-style meme. But essentially, I wanted to express that the competitive landscape is actually quite small.
Everyone is vying for each other's profits. If you look at Binance, they initiated two very large indirect statements. The first is, I don't know if you've seen the Hyperliquid event, but the top-level summary is that there is a token called Jelly on Hyperliquid.
Fierce competition among exchanges highlights the challenges for Hyperliquid
Imran: The trading volume and liquidity of Hyperliquid have reached a level that can be manipulated. Someone opened a short position to extract HLP's value.
OKX and Binance are publicly involved — posting about it on Twitter — many interpret this as them wanting Hyperliquid to fail because it is seen as a competitive threat to their derivatives business.
Another example: Binance is listing tokens from FourMeme, a PumpFun clone running on the BNB chain. Tokens like Mubarak and Broccoli are being listed, prompting criticism of Binance's direction. But the logic is clear — they see platforms like PumpFun as competitors.
Right now, Binance is actively competing with Hyperliquid, PumpFun, Jupiter, etc. — it’s a war of on-chain versus off-chain.
Qiao: Everyone is targeting the same verticals — trading and stablecoins. In trading: crypto-native platforms and Robinhood. In stablecoins: Circle, Tether, and traditional fintech companies.
Robinhood's Strategic Push Towards Tokenization
Imran: Robinhood recently held an Apple-like launch event, emphasizing their commitment to 'everything tokenized.' With their vast distribution network, they are in a favorable position in the market.
They also want to tokenize real estate — similar to a tradable OpenSea-style MLS — allowing users to trade risk exposure to real estate assets.
Qiao: But not physical real estate — they might offer derivatives tied to real estate, which aligns with their strengths.
Imran: That's right — they have a deep understanding of their user base.
Additionally, they launched a cash delivery service — you can request physical cash instead of going to the ATM in person. At first, I wondered who else was using cash, but many people actually do — contractors, barbers, etc. — primarily for privacy reasons.
Qiao: I understand this appeal. Banks ask some intrusive questions when you try to withdraw large amounts of cash. It's very frustrating. I just don’t understand why Robinhood wants to get into this space.
Robinhood's cash delivery and banking services
Imran: You know, this could be another angle — it might be because the ATM business is still very profitable. If you can capture that...
Qiao: Are they trying to become a bank? They want people to deposit money. Yes, they want people to deposit so they can lend it out and earn the spread, essentially like a bank.
Imran: This could be a potential reason — essentially, 'Get your money out of banks and give it to us.' Then add this cash delivery service. But they also offer other incentives. Recently, they announced a promotional campaign — I’m actually considering it. If you transfer your brokerage account to them, they’ll give you an additional 2% bonus. So I’m really thinking about moving it over. It’s not a bad deal.
So, they are fully advancing — traditional business, banking services, traditional brokerage accounts, and now even competing with crypto exchanges. Their reach extends into three fields.
Qiao: I think Robinhood is the biggest threat to Coinbase.
Robinhood vs. Coinbase: The Battle for Platform Distribution
Imran: I think Robinhood is the biggest threat to crypto startups. Because all the services they are currently offering — whether tokenizing X or Y — are exactly what we want our founders to build. If Robinhood becomes the major distribution point, it essentially cuts out the middleman — in this case, the startups.
So if we look to the future and consider the current competitive landscape, it actually feels very small. And when you factor in Robinhood and other major players, it gets even smaller.
Qiao: When you say 'small,' do you mean only a few players are chasing the same opportunities?
Imran: Yes. Hyperliquid.
Qiao: Binance, Coinbase...
Qiao: Pump. The startup trading volume that Pump is handling is about 30%, right? That's quite significant — pretty large.
Imran: Yes, it's huge. I'm not sure of the latest figures, but the 24-hour trading volume is about $294 million. Annualized revenue is around $30 billion. In comparison, Raydium's AMM trading volume is $332 million.
However, trading volume has slightly decreased — now close to $200 million. Essentially, Pump has surpassed Raydium in trading volume. That’s the point I want to make.
Liquidity dispersion between exchanges and aggregators
Qiao: What data are you looking at? DeFi Llama?
Imran: Yes. Raydium's trading volume remains stable, mainly due to the previously issued tokens.
Qiao: The main one.
Imran: Yes, but that might change. Pump is gaining attention. Jupiter launched Meteora (an AMM), and there's also Moonshot. They're all part of the same founder network. Jupiter acts as an aggregator.
This market is getting crowded, and everyone is chasing the same marginal users.
Now the real challenge is to expand the market — how do we bring new users into cryptocurrency? That's the next frontier. Before that, it's a waiting game for the next wave of meaningful innovation.
An interesting experiment is Noise on MegaETH. They use Kaido as a trend oracle — kind of like fantasy sports but for trend trading. This is part of our 'financialized attention' theory we've been discussing for years.
Qiao: Yes, this is not new; it is just a repackaging of the same idea. There isn't anything transformative yet.
Imran: Almost.
Circle's Strategic Dilemma: Relying on Coinbase, Global Competition, and On-Chain Transformation
Qiao: Circle's IPO valuation is between $3 billion and $5 billion — slightly lower than I expected, but maybe that's just my bias.
Imran: Reasonable. What's notable in the application is that Circle pays Coinbase 50% of its reserve income — from income on treasury bonds and other earning assets.
Last year, Circle's revenue was around $1.8 billion, with $800 million paid to Coinbase. That's huge.
This shows a clear power dynamic: Coinbase has the user relationships and is the main distribution channel for USDC. It's like Pump has its end-users and uses them for AMM.
Qiao: Indeed. If treasury yields fall, that poses a survival risk for Circle. Maybe that's part of the reason they're pushing for an IPO now.
It’s also worth noting — Coinbase returns most of the USDC earnings (about 4%) to users. Thus, Circle pays Coinbase for distribution, and Coinbase uses it as a user acquisition tool, ultimately profiting through higher-margin trading and other businesses.
Imran: Circle seems to be fighting a losing battle. While they currently have a regulatory moat, traditional financial competitors are emerging.
Qiao: USDC dominates in the US, but globally, USDT still reigns supreme.
Imran: Yes, a founder from Colombia told me that USDC is basically irrelevant in Latin America. Despite offering better products, it hasn't gained traction.
Qiao: That's the network effect of money. USDT has been around for ten years, and everyone trusts the brand — especially on Tron, where USDT holds a massive share.
Imran: So what is Circle's ultimate goal? They are between regulators and Coinbase, and although USDC has been adopted in DeFi and among some founders, is that enough?
Qiao: From the outside, Circle seems like a tough business. I'm not sure what their next steps are.
Imran: They seem to be leaning more towards on-chain infrastructure.
Qiao: The best thing they built is CCTP — the cross-chain USDC bridge. It’s fast, settles in under a minute, and is essentially free. Because it's centralized, they just need to move database entries internally.
Honestly, I trust CCTP more than some decentralized bridges.
Imran: I'm also using Debridge and Wormhole — they're both pretty good. But Circle's solution might be the best in terms of speed and reliability.
There are also two significant mergers and acquisitions — Kraken acquired NinjaTrader, a major traditional derivatives platform, and there are rumors that Coinbase made an offer for Deribit.
To me, this reflects a broader trend: existing companies are expanding beyond pure crypto trading, which is no longer sufficient to meet growth expectations.
Innovation seems to be stagnating, so exchanges are doubling down on adjacent fields. Interestingly, some are turning to traditional finance while others — like Robinhood — are returning to crypto with a refocused attitude.
Qiao: Yes, I feel the same. This line is clearly starting to blur.
Market Sentiment Check: Saylor, GameStop, and the Liquidity Cycle
Imran: Quick market sentiment check — Michael Saylor just raised another $2 billion, and GameStop followed up with a $1.6 billion issuance.
Qiao: Saylor's moves are almost no longer newsworthy. But yes, I checked his risk — his liquidation risk is very small unless Bitcoin drops below $20,000 in a few months.
Imran: Yes, he controls about 3% of the total BTC supply. He’s aggressive but also safe.
Qiao: So which stage are we in the cycle right now? A lot might depend on what Trump says today — policies could change rapidly.
As for stocks, I think only a few American stocks are reasonably valued. Google is one of them — it is reviving in AI and remains fairly valued. I'm also optimistic about Tesla.
I bought my Cybertruck last year, and within a few months, FSD has almost achieved hands-free driving. This made me double down. Musk also plans to launch the Optimus humanoid robot in 2026 to 2027.
For me, Tesla is the most liquid venture investment in AI, autonomous driving, and robotics.
Imran: Agreed. If you want broader exposure to fintech and tokenization, Robinhood is also interesting. I might currently lean towards it rather than Coinbase, although that could change based on acquisitions.
AI competition intensifies: Google, Tesla, and China's involvement
Imran: I’ve seen videos of humanoid robots in public places in China — while they aren't general-purpose, they're still impressive.
Qiao: Yes, possibly task-specific robots. But I agree — China is clearly involved.
Imran: If investors want to tap into Chinese innovation, there are now more options.
Qiao: And Chinese tech stocks are priced much lower than American stocks. I hold some — Tencent and Pinduoduo (PDD) are my favorites. Tencent is doing serious AI work in terms of data scale. PDD is founder-led, rapidly growing, and still feels like a startup.
Imran: Makes sense. So, the tech competition between China and the US is unfolding in real time.
Qiao: In the realm of AI models — have you tried Mistral? We use it internally at Alliance. For deep research tasks, it clearly outperforms ChatGPT.
Perplexity is also quite good for research — it has quickly become one of my go-to tools.
AI Assistant Showdown: Gemini, Mistral vs. Perplexity
Imran: A few days ago, someone compared Mistral with Google's Gemini on Twitter. They said if it takes five minutes to do deep work with Mistral, it only takes two and a half minutes with Gemini. So I started using Gemini more.
Qiao: Gemini is indeed good. Its performance is surprisingly robust.
Imran: Yes, I've started switching. Every few weeks, I feel the need to change workflows based on the latest tools.
Qiao: Me too.
Imran: There’s currently no moat. So I've been using Gemini more often lately. Last night, I tried their new feature — real-time chat. It's part of the latest updates.
You can actually brainstorm with AI in real time. For example, I want to throw a birthday party — it helps me brainstorm, find a place, estimate costs, and I even have it help me make calls.
Qiao: Did it work?
Imran: Not yet. But it got me to a point where all I needed to do was make that call myself. It automated everything to that point. Super useful.
Qiao: Can ChatGPT do that too? Or is it not quite there?
Imran: As far as I understand, Gemini feels faster and more interactive. Have you tried Sesame AI? It's the most advanced voice model I've seen — it feels like you're talking to a real person.
Qiao: Who is behind Sesame?
Imran: Not quite sure — no major company has claimed that. But I've tried both of their models, and they left a deep impression. I had my wife try it, and she really felt creeped out. She said it felt like talking to a real person. It even simulated breathing — it was amazing.
Qiao: Turing test passed. That’s crazy.
Imran: Yes, very compelling.
Qiao: The thing you mentioned about Google is actually the only American stock I currently hold — Google. Its forward PE is about 17 — not cheap, but still reasonable compared to the other 'Seven Giants.'
For the first time in over a decade, Google is back on the cutting edge. They lost to Facebook in social media and couldn't catch up with Apple in mobile. But in AI? This is Google's stronghold. This is deep software technology, where Google excels. I wouldn't be surprised if Google has the best AI model by the end of this year.
Imran: It is said that Google's co-founder Sergey Brin has returned to Google and is working overtime to ensure they win in AI — at least that's what I saw on Twitter.
The reason I like Google is that when I do deep research, it pulls information from sources like YouTube and podcasts — real-time content. This gives it a unique advantage. Sometimes I think, 'This research would actually be better on Google than on ChatGPT or Mistral.'
Qiao: That's a good point. I still use a combination of all the top AIs — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, etc. I just switch based on context.
And while I can't always articulate why clearly, I instinctively know which tool to use in each case. It’s like I’ve built my own neural network for choosing the right AI assistant.
By the way, OpenAI just raised another round of funding — $300 million, at a valuation of $30 billion.
Imran: That's right, the scale is massive. It's obviously high-profile.
Qiao: AI competition is very fierce — whether at the foundational model level or the application level. All the big players — the 'Seven Giants' — are deeply investing in AI, except for Apple.
Apple may also be investing heavily, but they haven't released any products yet. Meanwhile, Amazon just launched its own AI assistant product for their browser.
Imran: That's right. They are officially entering this space, competing with ChatGPT, Anthropic, etc.
Qiao: I also saw a recent interview with Jeff Bezos — he is clearly all in on AI.
Imran: Yes, he didn't explicitly say he has returned to Amazon, but when asked about Amazon's biggest focus, he immediately answered, 'AI.'
Qiao: That says it all.
Imran: I switch tools every few weeks based on the best options. Recently, I tried Gemini's new real-time chat feature — it helped me plan a birthday party, from location to pricing. It was very interactive.
Qiao: Can ChatGPT do the same thing?
Imran: It might be possible, but Gemini feels faster and more agile. Have you tried Sesame? It's a voice model that feels very human-like — it even simulates breathing.
Qiao: That's crazy.
Imran: This is impressive. In terms of AI, Google has returned to the game. Their forward PE is reasonable, and they are finally becoming competitive at the forefront.
Qiao: Agreed. They failed in social and mobile but AI is their stronghold — deep software. I wouldn't be surprised if Google leads in AI by the end of the year.
Imran: Sergey Brin is reportedly back at Google, pushing full steam ahead. Additionally, Google's advantage in extracting real-time data (like YouTube, podcasts, etc.) gives them an edge in research applications.
Qiao: Yes, I rotate tools for tasks — ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, DeepSeek, etc. This has become instinctual.
Moreover, OpenAI just raised $300 million at a valuation of $30 billion. All the major players, except Apple, are deeply entering AI. Amazon recently launched a browser-based assistant product, and even Bezos is clearly re-engaged.
Imran: With the returns of Sergey and Bezos, it feels like a tech race that we haven't seen in years — the most competitive and exciting one.
Will AI make coding obsolete? The clash of productivity and expertise
Qiao: The CEO of Replit recently said, 'I no longer think you should learn to code.' This sparked a lot of controversy. But I think what he meant is that you no longer need to learn to code — it's no longer a barrier.
Within Alliance, I asked tech founders to understand how AI tools like ChatGPT, Cursor, and Windsurf affect productivity. Most reported a 2 to 4 times increase — massive gains.
Moreover, an increasing number of non-technical founders are now using Cursor to quickly develop their front ends. Before this, they had to explain their vision to technical partners, and much was lost in translation. Now, they can prototype their ideas directly and hand them off to tech people for refinement. This is a massive shift — it enables visionaries to go directly from idea to product.
Imran: Me too. I'm not a tech person, but I recently built a Telegram bot using Mistral and deployed it on AWS. It opened my eyes. If I can do that, imagine what today's builders can do.
Qiao: Indeed. At this rate, you won't need large teams or huge funding. A few people and AI tools might be enough to build a unicorn.
Imran: I talked to a founder from Proof — they are building rapid development tools for crypto projects. Their target users are founders building MVPs, which makes sense. These tools drastically shorten feedback cycles, making it easier to test ideas and iterate quickly. This could significantly accelerate the pace of innovation.
Qiao: Another big opportunity is consumer-facing micro-apps. Using tools like Cursor, anyone can build a highly personalized app. One of our founders spent two hours building a language learning app for himself — and it performs better than Duolingo because it was built entirely based on his needs.
Imran: That's a great example. Independent developers like @levelsio are doing this — he posted about rebuilding Skype features and is now making $10,000 a month.
This indicates that you can solve a niche problem and immediately become profitable — especially when you have a global user base.
Qiao: That's true. These small opportunities often went unnoticed in the past. But as AI tools lower the barrier, even non-technical people can build applications that can genuinely profit — $10,000 or $50,000 a month — without needing large teams or funding. This is the next wave.
Tokenizing liquidity for micro-startups
Imran: I think we are entering the 'micro-unicorn' season — we will see hundreds or even thousands of small-scale startups emerge. These companies will solve significant problems for small user bases. But they may remain small in scale. They may never become billion-dollar companies. Ultimately, there might be some consolidation, but for now, this is the shape of the future.
Qiao: And the problem is, these small startups will never go public. So if they — or their investors — want liquidity, what do they do?
Imran: That's exactly why they should be tokenizing. It's a perfect use case. Tokenization could become the liquidity engine for micro-startups.
In fact, I see another trend. I want to hear your thoughts. There's a guy — I forget his name — but he launched an app called Cal AI. I downloaded it. Basically, you take a picture of your food, and it automatically calculates calories, fat content, etc. Then it gives you a weekly health plan based on your calorie intake.
He is only 18. Rejected by all universities. He shared his story online — posted his Oura Ring data, etc.
Qiao: Yes, I saw that.
The next generation of builders chooses to skip school
Imran: A teenager recently launched a product and reportedly reached $10 million in annual recurring revenue — despite being rejected by all universities. And now, more and more young people are choosing to skip college and dive straight into building.
Qiao: For this generation, traditional education is starting to feel optional.
Imran: Indeed. It's not that education isn't important — but building what people want might be more crucial.
I saw a perfect summary of this that Nik mentioned on Twitter:
"Working at Google or going to Harvard doesn't equate to status — because those decisions come from small, biased committees."
"True status comes from something that can't be faked: building products used by millions, taking a company public, or saving lives."
"You don't need that job at Google — true status is when Google has to acquire your company."
Qiao: I completely agree. We’re seeing younger and younger founders. In our next batch, there are kids who dropped out in their sophomore year at Princeton — they're very smart.
Imran: They might not even know what they are building yet, but the vitality is undeniable. I think this trend will continue.
Qiao: And education itself is evolving. We are working with a team to build AI tools that help children learn to read earlier. There's also a new startup school called Alpha School. Have you heard of it?
Disrupting Traditional Education with AI Tutors
Qiao: Have you heard of Alpha School in Texas? Children there learn through AI tutors and only spend two hours a day on studies — yet they outperform students in traditional schools.
Imran: I saw that. Their students rank in the top 2% on national tests.
Qiao: This doesn't surprise me. AI is very effective as a tutor. I believe that within 5 to 10 years, AI will completely disrupt K-12 education.
Children no longer need to endure eight-hour lectures; they can learn the same content in a shorter time — AI tutors will personalize teaching according to their pace and interests. This will be much more efficient than regular classroom teachers.
Imran: I can’t stand the current school model — eight hours of inefficient learning. Students are passive and unproductive most of the time.
Qiao: That's right. And Alpha School goes even further: 8-year-olds start startups, 10-year-olds give TED-style talks, and 12-year-olds study Harvard Business School cases. This is real applied learning — not just busywork.
Imran: This is the most exciting case of educational innovation I’ve seen. The whole system needs to change, and this feels like the future.
AI health assistants and the end of primary care doctors
Qiao: I see Apple is exploring an AI doctor product — that makes sense. The Apple Watch collects heart, sleep, and other health data, and they are well-positioned.
Besides Apple, there are huge opportunities for startups to build AI health assistants. One of our team members has been regularly using ChatGPT for health advice — about the heart, diet, sleep, etc.
Imagine an AI extracting data from your wearables, medications, and test results, providing tailored health advice. That’s incredibly powerful.
A recent personal example: I took my son to see an allergist. The doctor was in a rush and didn't answer all my questions. So I asked ChatGPT at home — it gave the same diagnosis and better advice. It felt like having a second, more patient doctor.
Imran: Indeed. This is already happening. My uncle in India got sick, and no one at home could understand the medical documents. I uploaded them to ChatGPT, got a clear summary and action plan, and relayed that to them. This clarity is something real doctors have never provided.
Qiao: That's why I think that some types of doctors — especially primary care doctors — may ultimately be replaced by AI.
Imran: Telemedicine is the same. It’s a step in that direction, but AI will go further — offering scalable personalized care. At the very least, AI can provide second opinions and reduce misdiagnoses.
Qiao: I wonder which startups are leading this space right now. There might be many, but no standout leaders yet. Perhaps Apple will be the first to achieve it.
Legal, analyst, and junior roles face threats
Imran: I mean, lawyers in general — especially junior lawyers — much of their work can already be handled by AI.
Qiao: That's right, it’s the junior roles that are most vulnerable.
Imran: Yes, I can definitely see this industry taking a significant hit. Even among us — junior analysts or researchers — we no longer really need them. Therefore, I think entering these types of industries will become more challenging for those wanting to build a career.
Qiao: They must find new ways to build reputation.
Imran: One way might be to showcase your thinking on Twitter. I've seen people find jobs that way — just keep tweeting, sharing sharp insights.
I read a discussion and thought, 'This person absolutely should work somewhere,' and sure enough, a few weeks later they announced they got hired.
Qiao: It will be interesting to see how this evolves. The broader trend I see is that AI is replacing many junior positions across multiple industries — not just in medicine and law, but in our field as well.
Remember when we talked about hiring venture capital analysts? We no longer need them. A lot of the work they would do — market research, startup analysis — can now be done just by talking to AI.
The Generalist vs. Specialist in the Age of AI
Qiao: Interestingly, I think Kyle posted something similar on Twitter about 'AI enhancing generalists more than specialists.' I understand his point, but conversely: in any specific industry, the most experienced people — true domain experts — still cannot be replaced by AI. They have unique insights, edge cases, and experience-based intuition that AI lacks. And those people are the experts.
Imran: Yes, it's a diverse shift. Generalists can deeply focus on one area, while specialists can expand across fields. So I think AI empowers both sides. It's not one side against the other.
For me, it ultimately comes down to agency. If you're willing to learn, adapt, and dive deep or broadly based on circumstances, you'll succeed. If you lack that drive, you'll fall behind — especially as others leverage AI more actively.
Qiao: Right. Naval recommended a book on parenting that touched on this point — I can't remember the title off the top of my head.
Imran: Yes, I remember. He shared two major points. I actually have that book now — it’s really interesting.
Teaching children agency through AI and books
Qiao: The core idea from the book Naval recommended is to teach kids agency early on. Let them make decisions themselves — even if it's not ideal in the short term — so they can learn from experience and understand the reasons behind choices. This is much more effective than just saying, 'Do this, not that.'
Imran: Naval shared an example: he lets his kids eat whatever they want — as long as they read and do math for an hour every day. Eventually, one of his daughters stopped eating ice cream on her own, realizing it wasn't healthy. That impressed me.
I adopted part of this model. I bought my kids Kindles and told them, 'If you read, you can watch a bit of TV.' We usually don't allow them too much screen time, but now they read almost two hours a day without being prompted. They love it.
Qiao: That's good. My approach is similar — two hours of math and language daily, then they can freely explore things they are interested in.
Imran: Me too. My daughter loves reading and uses Khan Academy independently. My son is a builder — we recently got a robot kit powered by Nvidia's new GPU, and we’re assembling it together. It’s an opportunity for teaching and learning side by side.
Qiao: That is exactly the way of learning I want to encourage.
Imran: That's right, this is my thinking about the future — practical, curiosity-driven learning.
