Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Anoma Community AMA
Recorded: March 21, 2025 Duration: 1:08:02Space Recording
Short Summary
Anoma and SpiceNet are set to revolutionize the blockchain landscape with innovative applications and partnerships, focusing on user sovereignty and local consensus mechanisms. The introduction of zero-interest loans and a new middleware solution highlights a significant shift towards mainstream adoption in DeFi.
Full Transcription
["Sweet Home Alone"] I'm going to make a The end. The 2.5 cm x 2 cm 3.5 cm x 2 cm 4.5 cm x 2 cm
5 cm x 2 cm
6 cm x 2 cm
7 cm x 2 cm
8 cm x 2 cm
9 cm x 2 cm
10 cm x 2 cm
11 cm x 2 cm
12 cm x 2 cm
13 cm x 2 cm
14 cm x 2 cm 15 cm x 2 cm Music សាងាងាងាងាងាងាងាងាងាាងាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាាា� Music Thank you. Hello. Hello, Test Test.
Hello, hello.
Hello, hello.
I think I'm hearing both of you perfectly.
Wow.
Fingers crossed.
Let's not jinx it.
Yeah. Yeah.
I have technical difficulty this time.
I was about to say don't jinx it.
I'm in Bali with the team and I'm hoping my connection stays steady.
Nice.
Well, we've got like crazy tropical storms where I'm at.
So in case I lose power or internet connection, you know, you might have to end this a bit
early but fingers crossed we're good there.
We'll pray for you.
Thank you, Sarah.
I think we'll give folks a couple more minutes to file in here before we kick it off. . Yn ystod y cyfle, mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle. Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle.
Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle. Mae'r cyfle wedi'i ddod yn ystod y cyfle. All right. We've got proof of Adrian Brink.
Maybe.
Let's see, Adrian, are you there? Can we hear you? Maybe not. something with these spaces. There we go. I don't know.
There we go.
I don't know.
It didn't work the first time around.
Can't be perfect.
Well Ganoma, good spice.
Thanks for everyone for joining.
As usual, feel free to drop questions in the chat for those listening live.
We've got Anoma co-founders Christopher Gohs and Adrian Brink on.
And here just to keep things spicy, we've got Mr. Pepper from SpiceNet, which is one of the teams building on the Anoma DevNet.
So yeah, welcome everyone.
We'll dive into SpiceNet in a bit. But first, to kick things off, I know we've only
got Adrian for a few minutes here.
So we've got a ton of great questions
from the community this week.
And a few of them seem to be Adrian specific
based on some recent tweets.
So we'll start with those.
It's always a bad sign when people
bring up the old tweets.
They're recent tweets, so hopefully you can defend them.
We got a question from Vlad.
It's a two-parter.
He's asking, what are the main technical challenges that we're currently solving?
And the second part is what do you think Anoma is in the context of your recent tweet on Solana nationalism versus Ethereum communism? Yeah, main technical challenges, how do we get, like how do we have infrastructure in
place to allow many sovereign domains to be able to interoperate with each other, so I've
talked to each other and that users and applications can grow in between all of them.
But like very fundamentally, how do we get sovereignty working where I on my phone,
I'm a one on one blockchain and again easily talk to like an Ethereum or Solana or global
or Nomad instance without having to have weird abstraction boundaries in between.
This is I think honestly this is by far the biggest challenge with all of crypto currently
faces because currently like when you look at these things they're nice examples of like what
like of like usage of global consensus but they're not something that an everyday person
can actually touch.
And this will only get better once everyday people can deploy their local instance in
their local jurisdiction, do some incredibly low latency trading there or some settlement
there and then sort of settle globally.
I think this is one of the main technical challenges
that we're solving here.
Yeah, Solana, nationalism versus Ethereum, communism.
I think in that case,
I'd position it with a normal sovereignism.
I give everyone the ability to be self-sovereign.
Nice. So what's this idea and what's the sort of,
I guess, goal or benefit of this idea
of everyone being their own chain or roll-up?
Yeah, I mean, so very fundamentally,
there are a couple of reasons for it.
One, it provides a much cleaner abstraction boundary.
Rather than I'm a user and I talk to a blockchain over an RPC,
I'm just yet another blockchain.
We're all just blockchains or state controllers.
And we all interoperate or talk to each other using the same standardized
protocols. So there's not this weird abstraction jump. The other thing is it allows applications
to be not sort of like blockchain specific, i.e. I can have an application that roams.
In the real world, passports are a great example of this, actually. Where my passport can roam between many different countries
because we all follow roughly the same standardized format.
And there was a second part of this question,
which I actually blank on right now.
I think you got it.
Just this idea of everyone being their own chain at the end of the day.
But there's a related concept here from Sam
based on one of your tweets where you said,
most users don't need global consensus.
What they really want is to have shared state
with their frequent counterparties,
but not with every human or machine on the planet.
So what do you mean by that?
Can you clarify?
Yeah, very basically, right?
Right now, we, like, in, Ethereum is in another global state.
So, i.e. you and the person in China and the person in New York, you all have to try to update the same piece of databases.
So that it's all being contentious between those three different parties. When you actually look at sort of how commerce
works and it is mostly local, i.e. if I'm in Switzerland, most of my interactions are actually
local to Switzerland. And so it makes no sense for my transactions in Switzerland to be totally
ordered with all transactions in New York. This makes it expensive, it makes it slow,
it makes it hard to actually update over time.
So this is the idea that most people actually have a fairly fixed set of people that they interact with.
This could even be like the World of Warcraft community, i.e. if you play World of Warcraft a lot, which I used to,
you're much more trading with other people in that game than you are with someone that plays Minecraft.
And so in that instance, it also would make no sense to have both the Minecraft state as well as the World of Warcraft state
live in the same sort of global consensus instance.
It makes a lot more sense to have a local instance, one to World of Warcraft and one to Minecraft.
Yeah, I think this is a pretty new concept for a lot of folks in the blockchain space
where everything is sort of global by default, right?
We had another question from Trish App who asked,
can you give us deeper insight on the strengths and faults
of local consensus versus global consensus?
So like, are there trade-offs to consider
with local versus global?
Yeah, so I mean, having global consensus is quite nice, especially if you want to do large global trading.
Or like you want to have some sort of always global market. So I think there will always be
a space for global consensus.
One of the downsides though is that
with local consensus, you actually get more decentralization, right?
Because decentralization is something that's sort of fundamentally subjective to the observer,
i.e. my parents will never trust global Ethereum, but they may very well want something that's
locally secured.
And to them, that's sort of the most decentralized fashion.
To them, this is a higher security guarantee than the globally decentralized Ethereum
version. And I think this is just something we have to accept. So having local consensus
just allows us to build systems that are actually adaptive to the needs of people,
rather than prescriptive as in, I think everyone must be on the global consensus.
Because I think to me, this is the best thing.
But this doesn't take into account
that other people may have very different trust preferences
than me.
Right, and then you get speed and cost benefits
with locals as well, right?
Yes, a couple of other obvious things.
You get way lower latency
because rather than having to hop around the world,
you can do things locally.
IE, normal will always be faster than Solana
because with Serovia on the same room,
you should do the local settlement in that room.
It will always be faster.
There's no global consensus that can ever
be faster than this local consensus.
You also get cost benefits because, again, you don't have to
all update the same global database. You can rather go, well, this state is only local to us,
and so it's only contended by us three locally.
And then the other big aspect is you also get huge information privacy benefits,
because rather than having to send you a data over the public internet and then
have to use some cryptography to figure out
how to make it private, you can rather say, well,
let's just run on a local server in my room.
And none of the data ever leaves this local server, right?
So you get a bunch of improved privacy guarantees
by default here due to how the topology works.
Right, I guess this is sort of a unique way to solve the privacy question too, right,
compared to a lot of the other privacy projects out there.
Yeah, and this is, I mean, this is less of a, I mean, it's like, it's not a cryptography approach,
it's more like, you know, if you, for example, want to trade A for B, you have to reveal
something about that intent.
You have to reveal that you have A and you want B. You don't necessarily have to reveal
who you are, but you definitely have to reveal your trade intention.
And there's no cryptography that can sidestep that problem.
So in the end, as soon as you have an intent that's only partial and that you would like
someone else to take the other side off, you need to decide who do you send this intent to.
And if you do global broadcast, you leak that data globally. But you can be much smarter and just do local broadcasts or only broadcast to two or three trusted people. And thereby you leak a lot less data.
Yeah, this seems seems huge.
Last one that I think is Adrian specific here, you dropped some
alpha on Twitter today on this concept of a Noma foreign
reserve and a potential meta stability mechanism. Yeah,
what's that all about?
Yes, it's, to me, blockchains are it's like, what's that all about? Yes, to me, blockchains are digital nation states, right?
And so a global L1 is the community or the country creating its own sovereign land.
And when you actually look at how large scale economic systems, i.e. countries at the moment,
interact with each other.
One way they do this is by building, like successful countries end up building lots of foreign currency reserves. So they can regulate economic flows between themselves and other trade parties
in sort of the wider world. And this is something that I think chains have and communities have
tremendously underutilized so far. And so this concept of
foreign exchange reserves is just something at the end that we can start bringing into the
Anomal community here. And then you have this meta stability mechanism that allows you to put
a price floor under the native asset, similarly to how currency reserves and sort of owned by
traditional central banks put a price floor to some extent under the national currency.
But Chris can also speak a bunch more about this.
For sure.
I also want to make sure we get to SpiceNet.
I don't know where we are here on time, Zach.
Adrian's tweet did link a thread,
which I would encourage people to read if they have questions on the mechanisms specifics. I do have to drop off, Zach. Everyone,
thank you very much. I will see you on the next AMA on Twitter. And if you have cool questions
or cool ideas for what we should do in the normal community, in the normal ecosystem,
just hit me up on Twitter. Nice. Thanks, Adrian. Yeah, I think we've got time for you
to flesh that out a bit Chris,
and then we'll jump into SpiceNet.
Yeah, okay.
So the idea of the,
Adrian described the foreign reserve
and the foreign reserve pretty well.
I would, the only thing I would add to that is that,
so what nation states do very roughly
is that they manage foreign reserves
in the context of some broader strategy, right?
Like what kinds of trade they want to have
with different countries,
what kinds of diplomatic relationships they want to have,
you know, maybe other agreements, you know, it's a tool.
Just like when you're a company,
you choose how much to pay employees
based on your negotiations
with them, right?
Like there's some broader purpose, you're trying to actually produce something, I don't
know, cars.
And so you need to pay the mechanics and you need to pay the people who are putting the
frame together and you need to pay the designers, et cetera, et cetera.
And the thing you're trying to do ultimately, it doesn't really like the payment is just
a means to get there. Right. So a foreign reserve is starting to give blockchains and the network in this case, potentially these kinds of tools, which I think so far we've kind of in hard for it to be neutral or something like this.
And in a certain way, that's true. But in another way, it's also, you know, you give up this very essential capability.
Like you just can't regulate an economy at all unless you have these tools of control, I think.
Like imagine you had a company, but you couldn't pay anybody, had a company but you couldn't pay anybody,
you know, like you couldn't pay anybody to do anything specific. I mean, it just wouldn't work
very well. So that's part of the broader idea there. The metastability mechanism specifically
is a way in part to convert short-term volatility into long-term stability, the idea being that the
network, the ANOMA network in this case,
but I mean, I hope that people copy this idea.
I think it would be more broadly,
could hold some liquidity positions
in the native token XAN and other tokens
and the kind of trading fees over time from those positions
gets converted into a foreign reserve.
So it's just like reserves of the other tokens that provide both a price floor and the ability to give sort of zero interest loans
in the other tokens, the ability for XAN holders to meet liabilities they might have, and also just
long-term stability, right, since that sort of long-term, you know, if XAN network owns like
1% of another token, then you know then at the very least you could get that
1% of the other token out if you wanted to. There's some sense of meta-stability.
So it's not a stable coin to be clear. The term meta-stability is chosen very intentionally here.
The goal is not to track any kind of other asset as a reference, the goal is just to sort of stabilize gradually over time and to convert short-term volatility, which, you know, if there's one thing that's certain in crypto is that there will be short-term volatility into this kind of long-term stability that I think is very helpful for building an actual kind of long-term economy, investing in things, etc.
economy, investing in things, et cetera.
Yeah, super interesting.
So does that actually unlock any kind of specific use
cases or applications for users?
Or is that more of a benefit fit for the network as a whole?
It does.
I mean, I would caveat this with this is a new mechanism.
I was inspired by some people I talked to, notably Sam Hart.
Shout out to Sam, and also some other prior work in the Ethereum ecosystem.
I don't remember the names of all the protocols,
but it's not just our idea, of course,
but some of the parameters are different.
One of the things that is in this specific proposal
is the ability for XAN holders to take zero interest loans against the foreign
reserves. As in if XAN, you know, if the Noma network, let's say that there are like a thousand
XAN tokens, just hypothetically, there won't be, but hypothetically, let's say that there
are a thousand XAN tokens and the Noma network itself holds one Bitcoin, Then each person who has, you have to have a bond,
you can't just have a token,
but each person who has an XAN bond,
so sort of using staking,
could take a zero interest loan of one 1,000th of a Bitcoin
against the foreign reserves.
And what this provides is an interesting mechanism
to basically just enable more economic flows with very low transaction costs,
because you can imagine that maybe sometimes I need to pay people in Bitcoin.
And one thing I could do is like if I have some XAN or some other tokens, I could take them and sell them for Bitcoin.
But this is kind of annoying. It means that I'm changing my economic position, which maybe I didn't want to do.
It means that I'm taking some transaction costs for swapping.
It means that I might have tax consequences for swapping, et cetera, et cetera.
All I really wanted to do was meet some liability.
I wanted to buy a sandwich and the sandwich guy accepted Bitcoin.
Rare, but it does happen.
The zero interest loan mechanism would allow me instead, I have an XAN bond to take a loan of a small amount of Bitcoin,
which I could use to buy the sandwich and I could pay it back later, or if I just have this bond because
the network has this foreign reserve, I can actually let that loan last forever. I never need to close it.
I only need to close it if I want to withdraw the bond. And it doesn't, there's no interest, right?
So it means that stakeholders of XAN
would have this ability to meet liabilities
in other currencies without changing
their essential financial position
or incurring any transaction costs,
which I think is pretty interesting.
Yeah, super cool.
Definitely looking to see developments there
if that ends up taking
place here. But yeah, let's get Mr. Pepper on. You still with us?
Yes, sir.
Yeah, let's introduce folks to what you guys are working on. But yeah, first, start off
on the topic here. Do you have a favorite hot sauce?
uh favorite hot sauce i mean there's there's the most used one and then there's the favorite
all right um the most used the most used one i would say is sriracha uh i eat that on pretty
much every meal and i and i know the uh catchphrase for france is supposed to be i put that shit on
everything but sriracha is the one that I actually put on everything
but there is a local hot sauce near my cottage they make like this smoky hot
sauce with habanero peppers it's unbelievable
ooh that sounds good yeah I put Sriracha on pizza it's like the most delicious
combination ever I love it. Yeah, absolute gas.
What about a favorite chili pepper variety?
I mean, I like chili flakes.
There's not a lot of hot peppers that I eat straight up
unless I have to do it for the memes.
Right, right, of course, always for the memes.
Cool, well, yeah.
Let's hear about SpiceNet.
What are you guys working on? Yeah, what's the lowdown there?
Yeah, so we call it the Omni Composable Middleware for the Global Financial Internet.
So essentially, we're introducing a new type of application to the world called an Omni
Composable Application. It's essentially an application that allows you to compose with any asset,
any liquidity pool, any state from
any blockchain and multiple blockchain networks at the same time.
Basically, just gives you a high level of expressivity as an application,
so you don't see a bunch of applications building the Uniswap on a new chain.
You see applications that are building new use cases that we haven't seen before.
And then the second problem that it solves for these applications
is actually bringing them to users. So we believe that basically those are the two
things that hold back applications
from getting users in this day and age is the fact that they can't do anything to
differentiate themselves
and that even if they could, they don't have access to any users because you're not gonna convince your mom
to make a Metamask wallet.
And even if you convince people to make a Metamask wallet
or whatever wallet,
they're segregated and split up
over hundreds of thousands of blockchains.
And it keeps on increasing the amount of blockchains
that exist in this space.
Right, yeah, that makes sense.
So you guys have sort of a specific view
on composability, right?
Like this, can you explain this like, tri-loop between developers, assets, and chains?
Yeah, yeah, sure. So, so composability essentially is being able to solve one problem with multiple
different solutions that work together. So you guys already talked about that a little bit, like
you're gonna have applications have their own blockchains, but what if you
want to solve a problem that involves a bunch of those different applications,
right? That's basically where we're able to facilitate use cases that involve a
bunch of different parties at the same time. And so basically the offering is
best to three different parties, to chains
as a whole. So you launch an omnicomposable chain, every application on your chain is
available to be accessed from any chain or anywhere. You launch an application that is
basically the same thing, but just at an application level, or you launch an asset that is available to be accessed and available to be traded, composed within any market.
Right.
So this is, how is this different from sort of the current landscape of bridging and interrupt
protocols that are more, I guess, asset specific, right?
Yeah.
So bridging, I mean, solves the problem of I have assets over here, I want to get them
over there, but it doesn't allow me to compose with assets from a different place or use
the tech from a different place.
For example, the BTC-Fi economy is being built on very heavily, but there's not a lot of users over there
and it's because if you make users bridge over,
that's where you lose most people.
They have to be able to access it without knowing it
that it's on a different blockchain.
And that's basically where we come in.
It's not like we give you the choice to move over there.
It's like we give you the choice to use it
and you don't even have to know that it's over there.
Right, so how should we think about SpiceNet from an architectural perspective? we give you the choice to use it and you don't even even you don't even have to know that it's over there. Right.
So how should we think about SpiceNet like from an architectural perspective?
Is it like a development stack or a network or yeah, like how do you describe it?
Yeah, so it is its own L1 but I would think about it as if it sits on top of every other
blockchain that exists as if it's the spice, right?
So you have all these meals,
but they're not a very good meal
unless you're able to put the spice on top of it.
We put the spice on top of it
and make it a user experience that's valuable.
Nice, that's a good analogy.
I like it.
So where does Anoma fit in here?
Like how does intent centric architecture
like help with what you guys are doing?
Yeah, so essentially everything that goes
through this composability layer is an intent, right?
It's one party with an intention to do something
and you're able to build applications
that tie all of the mechanisms in the space to fulfill
that intention. And I forget what the other part of your question was there.
Yeah, just basically like the...
Oh, what is it? What is Anoma exactly?
Yeah, yeah.
Okay, yeah. So Anoma are network that that it's actually executing it.
So basically within the network of solvers, you have three parties,
you have orchestrators, you have executors, and you have rebalancers.
So orchestrators are the ones figuring out what the paths are to the liquidity,
the market, or whatever the thing that's needed is.
And OMA are the ones that actually execute those,
they're the executors.
And then you have rebalancers that are a service
to these solvers that help them rebalance their portfolios
after they've executed.
Nice, interesting.
So what's like the end game vision for SpiceNet?
I noticed you guys recently published a blog on this, right?
Yeah, yeah, please do check that out if you guys have time.
It sums it up quite well.
But yeah, when we say the global financial internet,
we essentially picture a financial internet that's completely borderless.
And I think that DeFi has done a great job of removing borders between countries.
So DeFi doesn't care what country you're from.
You're able to access its tooling from anywhere,
but the borders still remain
between the blockchains themselves.
And we picture a future
where those borders don't exist at all.
So somebody could actually be using DeFi
without knowing that they're using DeFi.
Like we picture it kind of being like the backend
for finance.
So you'll have a bunch of assets
from the real world move on chain. So nation states will move their economies on chain in order to
get funding from other nations. Let's say you're a third world country, you're underfunded,
you let people invest in your stock market from anywhere, it would be very beneficial to you.
But that's not really possible if you don't have a mechanism
to bring the actual product to the user. Because like I said, the user is not going to come to you
on the blockchain. So I see a world where people are using their traditional bank accounts,
or whatever the third party services for wealth management, and for actually moving their funds around. But on the backend, the activity is on the blockchain.
Very cool.
Yeah, that's exciting stuff.
We got some questions from the community as well.
We got one from Agung who asks,
SpiceNet is described as a composability middleware.
Can you explain what this means in simple terms and how it benefits
users and developers?
Yeah, sure thing.
So middleware, um, when I picture middleware, I picture something that
you don't even have to know is there for it to be useful to you.
And that's kind of what the offering is to a client.
It's like, if you're an application builder
and you use us as this middleware,
like we're not telling you at all
how you have to build your application.
We're actually only even taking a fee
if we bring users to you
that you wouldn't have had otherwise.
And the users don't have to figure out SpiceNet
as a user experience, right?
So it's this middleware that exists
without the parties necessarily feeling So it's this middleware that exists without the parties
necessarily feeling that it's there. But what it does provide is the composability for these
applications to exist as if it's not on a specific blockchain. Yeah, definitely seems like a lot of
the big unlocks these days are removing the complexity from the user, the need for
users to understand what's going on in the background.
So it seems like very much in that line.
Yeah, absolutely.
How can you expect any of the TradFi bros or any of the regular retail users to use
something that it takes weeks of learning to figure out how to use.
Most of the people here have probably been scammed in the process of figuring out how
to use their wallet.
I mean, that's not okay, right?
You're not going to attract many users if they know that their friends are all getting
scammed trying to get onto the blockchain.
Yeah, exactly.
We got one from Tiago who's asking, what are the main technical challenges with integrating multiple blockchains?
And is there a benefit here with Anoma's architecture in terms of sort of scalability interoperability benefits?
Oh, absolutely. Yeah. So without Anoma, you can build a multi-chain application. So you can build an application that
can help you settle coins.
But then you have the trouble of
balancing the confirmation of states on each blockchain.
You have to actually deploy smart contracts to each of those blockchains.
So it's not very scalable because
blockchains come out of nowhere basically.
There's new ones being built
every day so deploying smart contracts to each one to scale with the times and
it presents a huge security risk if you are having to settle on all of these
blockchains simultaneously so what Anoma does is basically removes the need for
you to do that you can still access these blockchains, whatever products
are there to fulfill intents, but you don't actually have to have your smart contracts
on there.
Right.
Yeah, there's a there's sort of a related question here.
Like, are there also benefits in terms of like execution efficiency and liquidity optimization
compared to traditional order matching systems? Yeah, I mean, I think a lot of it is just that,
you know, it would be impossible for people
to access these things in the first place.
So it's like, there isn't much of a less efficient option.
I guess you could say that there's some applications
that basically, they allow you to execute these intents
but they're just doing it for you kind of like a broker so it's it's more like
if my friend who doesn't know how to bridge from Ethereum over to Solana and
create a wallet there's applications out there that basically say like it's the
equivalent of me saying to my friend give me your laptop I'll show you how to
do it but that's not a very sustainable and efficient solution
for most people, right?
Right. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, Chris, did you have anything you wanted to bring up with
the SpiceNet?
Yeah, I guess I'm curious. I mean, I'm sure that there are lots of details that I'm not familiar with here.
But as I understand, part of the product proposition of SpiceNet is to unify various applications on different
chains or domains, particularly financial applications. I think you use BDCFI as an example,
such that users don't really need to know
the details of what's called at the backend
they're interacting with.
They just need to have some keys that I guess SpiceNet
supports and interact with a higher level interface.
And my question is, how were you thinking about kind of
a building somewhat higher level interfaces or abstractions or ontologies
around many of these specific financial privatives such that users wouldn't need to know the
details.
Like that feels to me like a sort of interesting and important design question for this kind
of product.
So sorry, Chris.
I think my network cut out
for about 15 seconds there.
Do you mind repeating the last 15 seconds of your question?
Yeah, just how are you thinking about abstracting,
some of the details of the other applications
like different BTC-FI applications
while retaining whatever essential,
I don't know, financial properties or interfaces, you know, makes them one thing as opposed to another thing.
Like, do you have like a general swap and a general margin and general loans or things like this? Or how are you thinking about that?
Okay, yeah, so we do have general primitives and
that we build in-house that exists on the blockchain.
And this is actually how you build an application directly to SpiceNet is through these primitives,
which actually removes the need for us to run a VM.
So we can move to run a VM in the future if we choose to do so, but at launch you'll be
using an SDK to deploy applications to primitives such as fault markets, derivatives markets,
lending and borrowing markets.
But it's very customizable in the sense of like choosing what
collateral you want to use, how those markets operate with each other,
and all those things are up to the user.
So it allows developers to basically build applications within a month.
That would normally take a team of developers a year or more to build.
And it removes the need for us to keep building the same infrastructure again and again.
But that doesn't mean that the applications elsewhere
are obsolete, right?
Cause you do need that liquidity.
You do need the functionality
for those intents to actually be executed.
So yeah, I mean, there's applications that exist on Bitcoin
and the user doesn't really need to know that they exist.
But at the end of the day,
the volume is still going to that application. you know the holders of that application is token or
or the stakeholders of that application are still happy because there's volume coming through them
at the end of the day. Yeah, makes sense. So with the example of BTC-Fi, were I to be a user,
my understanding is that I would interact with some kind of more abstract,
SpiceNet financial application.
I don't use BTC-Fi, I apologize.
I'm gonna guess some of the things it does,
but then I could use that application
to do different things like swapping or lending
or borrowing, let's say.
And when I'm doing those using Bitcoin, like SpiceNet might select BTC-Fi as the backend
to provide some of that liquidity or some of those actual kind of counterparties, right?
Whereas if I'm doing it with another asset like ETH, maybe SpiceNet uses some Ethereum D5.
Is that an accurate understanding?
Yeah, that's exactly correct. I would just say to tie it together, that it's not just
abstracting the experience away from the user so that they don't need to know if it's an Ethereum
or Bitcoin application. It's also in a sense allowing those applications to work together.
allowing those applications to work together.
Right, right. As in through SpiceNet, they could, I don't
know, match some orders with each other or source from each
other or something like this.
So for a random example, I could be holding US dollars, USTC
on Solana, I could use it to bot. I could straight up just tell an AI agent even. I
want to take these US dollars. I want them to be in Bitcoin, but I want to earn yield
on that Bitcoin. And it'll figure out in a mix of states and a mix of chains how it's
going to fulfill that intent. So it'll say like, okay, well, there's a lending and borrowing platform on a chain on like a L2 side chain of
Bitcoin. We'll go get the native Bitcoin from the Bitcoin blockchain itself,
and we'll go to that lending borrowing market and you'll start earning yield
over there. But to the end user, you're just basically saying what you want the
outcome to be.
And it's giving you a list of options for how it can fulfill that outcome.
Nice. Well, where are you guys on the roadmap? Like, what should we look forward to? And how
can people get involved? Yeah, so we're currently in private test nets. We have about 15 validators onboarded so far, a bunch more that are waiting for the next
test net phase.
So we're pretty close to being done the code itself.
Then we'll go into the auditing phase.
So we expect that to start very shortly.
So the next phase that you guys will want to get involved with will be the public test
net phase,
where we actually roll out some of the trading stack features and you'll be able to see the first proof of concept
of what a SpiceNet application can do.
I would say right now the best way to get involved is just join the community, come on into the Discord,
it's just slash SpiceNet after Discord for the invite. And follow us on Twitter at SpiceNetIO.
Very cool.
Well, thank you again for joining us.
Definitely folks don't sleep on SpiceNet.
We'll go ahead and jump into some more
enoma related questions.
But yeah, thanks for joining us, Pepper.
Thanks for having me, guys.
Yeah, thanks for having me guys.
Lots of fun.
Lovely to talk.
Lovely to talk.
All right.
Well, diving into some community questions on Anoma,
we've got a couple similar ones, but some new ones too.
Some interesting questions here.
El Toro is asking, how do you envision
Anoma's intent-centric architecture reshaping
the way decentralized applications are built and used in the next five years?
Yeah, there are a lot of ways, but I'll just pick one. is just to expand the scope of what we can really build as and operate as decentralized applications in a few ways.
One of them is that at the moment,
applications are built for kind of one chain
or at least one VM environment,
typically often one trust domain,
then sort of awkwardly connected via bridges
or other ways to applications elsewhere.
With Anoma, that won't be necessary.
You could build your application
and it sort of runs on this overall virtual state space,
you know, move or roam across different sovereign domains
as Adrian described a bit earlier.
So you don't have to, you know,
you don't have to think about it
as building an application for a specific blockchain
or something like that.
Another one is that right now, basically blockchains,
especially this like global consensus blockchains
provide one thing,
which is totally ordered high security state changes.
So if you have an application
that needs totally ordered high security state changes, that is a good fit.
But totally ordered high security state changes are very expensive.
So for an application that doesn't need totally ordered high security state changes, it's not a good fit.
And the main application that needs totally ordered high security state changes is finance.
So it's a good fit for finance.
And this is, you know, mostly the activity that we see on blockchain networks is finance, right?
But Innova provides a lot of other things beyond totally ordered high security state changes.
It provides the ability to describe partially ordered state changes, to work with other kinds of data types like CRDTs or MRDTs.
It provides this kind of intent gossip network and sort of distributed data,
distributed state synchronization system,
which you can use to send a bunch of state around
and cache it almost like Cloudflare or something like this,
where most of the state isn't actually ordered.
And maybe you have some references
that are ordered periodically,
but an example of an application that really needs
this kind of flexibility is a multi chat or decentralized discord.
If you think about a chat application, you have, you know, you have channels, you have some permissions, maybe a little bit of that state needs total order.
But most of it does not end paying for a total order for chat messages is just way too expensive.
Like imagine that you had to pay, you know pay 10 cents every time you sent a message.
I mean, it's kind of ridiculous, right?
No one would use that.
So you can build multi-chat on Anoma
because there are all these other,
you could have local,
sovereign domains for sending around the chat messages.
Maybe you can even do some ordering there, right?
But you can also just accept that chat messages
will be in an eventually consistent order as opposed to
an immediate total order, and that's totally fine
because they're chat messages, right?
You know, if two chat messages go out of order,
it's just not a huge deal, as opposed to if I can
double spend my account balance, it's a pretty bad thing.
So mostly I'm excited about kind of expanding the scope
of what we can conceive of and build
as decentralized applications and giving developers the ability to write an application that is
not tied to a specific blockchain or security domain and letting users make the choices
about their security preferences.
Right, yeah.
Definitely excited for more non-financial use cases of blockchains. I think we've seen a few, but there's a lot more that Anoma can unlock.
But yeah.
And even, I would also add, I'm also excited.
I mean, right now, what blockchains, the service blockchain provides,
these global blockchains provide, these totally ordered high security state changes
is not only like it's narrower than just finance writ large it's like large large scale finance or
something like paying for coffee too expensive right you know paying a dollar to settle a coffee
payment is crazy you don't want to do this you know it doesn't cost that much even on the existing
system so another thing that i know butoma could enable is something much more like,
let's call it microfinance, like lots of little payments for different things,
little payments for bandwidth, little payments for storage,
just for network services management, little payments for, I don't know,
I don't know if micro payments for reading publications, good idea or not,
but at least it's more feasible to experiment with that sort of thing on Anoma. Or even things like, you know, you're just walking around,
you know, maybe you have an application on your phone that's like you're walking around in parks
and you configure it to, you know, donate 10 euro or dollar or whatever per day to the places that
you find valuable just to help support maintenance.
And so you're automatically sending micro payments to support this park all the time
and you don't need to consciously think about it.
It's just the spatial aspect of being there.
So primarily you make the choice of how you want to spend your time and then in the background
this kind of microfinance system is helping align some of your payments with those values. So I think that's really like you can't really do micro payments, micro finance on these
expensive blockchains either.
But I think that's also an interesting class.
Location based subscriptions and public goods funding.
Crazy stuff. Well, on the DeFi example, we got a question from Crypto King who's asking how this is
going to transform DeFi beyond the sort of traditional order book models.
Yeah, I mean, it depends a little bit on what is an order book.
What is the essence of an order book?
Is it like a set of orders? What is an order book, what is the essence of an order book, is it like a set of orders, what is an order.
In some sense, you can think of the whole Intent Gossip
Network as this giant, charted, very generalized order book.
So in that sense, it's a natural extension of the concept.
I see also, I mean, one thing I think
we hope to do with Anoma is, and maybe, I mean, SpiceNet was just talking about this a lot, like, unify some of these DeFi primitives a little bit.
I feel like there's an unnecessary amount of premature specialization of certain things. Let me give an example. So automated market makers and order book decks
are considered to be two different things,
but I think that they aren't really,
as in the thing which you have in a liquidity position
and an automated market maker is really an order, right?
It's just an order with some dynamic parameters
that you've elected to store on the blockchain.
And until you withdraw it later
by sending another transaction,
that order can be matched by anyone.
So it's not, you can imagine
and then some kind of generalized
in a generalized intent system like Anoma,
you could write an intent that expresses
an order with the same financial parameters
as an AMM position, right?
And whether you post that order to the blockchain
or just send it around the intent gossip network
is a separate decision.
So I don't really buy that these are two
different applications.
I think that the same application
with some different parameters, different user choices
but we spend a lot of time like, I think that the same application with some different parameters, different user choices,
but we spend a lot of time like, you know, people appear to spend a lot of time optimizing
these very specific parameters of these different applications.
And that may be interesting from a sort of microstructure perspective or just engineering
optimization perspective.
But I think it is uninteresting from a macrofinance perspective. From a a macro finance perspective, we want to unify things so that we're not paying
so much fragmentation cost and that you as a user can have these high level
financial preferences, the kinds of positions you want to take, and the system
could help translate those into the appropriate actual discrete actions that
you don't need to hopefully reason as much about somewhat irrelevant details.
Interesting. So this is like somewhat approaching the complexity or usability of like traditional finance, right?
Like we haven't been able to do this.
Yeah.
I mean, let's maybe I don't, you know, maybe I don't do a lot of trading in
TradFi. Maybe someone else can chime in here who has more experience.
But if you, you know, I don't know, in TradFi, like you have a broker, right?
And you call the broker and you ask for something like you want to take a
position basically. And you want to take a position at the level of sort of
symbols and exposure or something like this. Like you want to take a position at the level of sort of symbols and exposure or something like this,
like you want to go long something or short something else, or you want a certain kind of option, right?
And you're not super, you know, there's a bunch of actual execution plumbing that makes that happen, right?
And the execution plumbing may be, it might be different for different assets, you know,
your broker might actually like instantiate your position using several
different sort of more primitive positions, which composed to form the gestalt thing
that you want to be, you know, the gestalt position that you want to take with
respect to the market.
And I would see Anoma kind of helping with that, at least from a product
perspective. Of course, there's no, you know, there doesn't need to be a broker in
the sense of a trusted intermediary with Anoma, but there could be this kind of more
unified interface through which you could sort of interact in a financial way with the network.
Curious if you have thoughts on this, Mike.
Oh, it's like a decentralized prime broker kind of thing.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, I think also just that the fact that all of this is super mathematically clean
and you can analyze the full stack enables you to generalize financial primitives cleanly,
which can be difficult to do in Trap5 because there's just so much legacy stuff that you
have to maintain compatibility with.
But you know, there's a great blog post by Dan Robinson from Paradigm where he talks about
how automated market makers and options protocols are like some parameterization with different
exponents of the same underlying application. Like they're all perpetuals or something.
I forget what it is exactly, but it's
I would recommend it. So I think we should be able to accomplish these kinds of generalization.
Very interesting. We got a question from Fix who's asking, how does Anoma's infrastructure
abstracted design impact the performance and efficiency of dApps? Are there any trade-offs?
And what specific features make it suitable for
applications that need high performance and low latency? Right, so I think here it is important
to distinguish between two things because sometimes, at least in the crypto discourse,
they get conflated. One thing is abstracting different sort of specific implementation details
with different protocols, like abstracting different virtual machines or abstracting different sort of specific implementation details of different protocols, like abstracting different virtual machines or abstracting different, you know, ways of solvers
solving intents or something like this. And the other thing would be abstracting trust assumptions,
like not showing user, you know, which parties are involved in the course of settling their
transaction. Anoma does the first thing, but not the second thing. And this distinction is important because, you know,
what Anoma tries to do is make,
create this high level interface that allows users
to describe what they want, you know,
at the appropriate level of abstraction, such as in Intents.
And then the system, you know,
figures out how to enact that, or at least tries,
in a way that is compatible with the constraints
and preferences that the user has expressed, right? So in that sense, it's abstract, like the user is operating at a higher level
representation, rather than saying, you know, run instruction one and two and three and add the
results and I get that much money. The user says declaratively, you know, I want at least five ETH,
I'll swap it, you know, up to 10 USDC. I want more ETH if possible, go execute that, right? So you have
this higher level preference.
What Anoma purposely does not do
is sort of hide trust assumptions from the user.
So, you know, who in fact, Anoma goes out of its way
to make them very explicit.
In your intent, you can say, you know,
I'm willing to send my,
I'm willing to disclose my data to such and such solvers,
and I'm willing to receive assets on such and such chains,
but not any other ones. And the protocols are defined in a way that the network will only, you know,
can only execute in a way that is consistent with that intent as you have expressed it.
So it's much more like imagine if you're a user and you can choose which validators you trust,
which solvers you trust, and for what things. Maybe you're not choosing this all of the time,
like it's more like a configuration, you change it occasionally,
but you have full control over that.
What Anoma does from a sort of trust
or sovereignty perspective is unify the interfaces
in a way that you can specify like just identities
of parties that you trust to perform various functions
and the network will ensure that execution
is consistent with that.
Got it.
Well, it looks like we might have Mike.
Did you have any thoughts to add on that Treadfy topic, Mike?
You'll have to repeat it because I was,
I couldn't hear a thing, actually.
Oh, no.
Welcome to Twitter space is classic.
I was trying to accept the speaking invite
and it seemed to cut off all the audio for me.
Yeah, the question was, I guess, the relationship between what Anoma is going to enable for
DeFi versus like the sort of complexity and I guess optionality that you get with like
a prime brokerage kind of a thing.
Yeah that's an interesting question.
I mean like a prime broker specifically is like, I would say like a high finance term
for someone who gives a lot of white glove service to professional investors. So if you're a hedge
fund, if you're an asset manager, you have a prime broker, he will, he or she will help you,
as in like an institution will help you source financial products, which tend to be relatively
complex, like something like a structured product.
And I think Chris alluded to this, but you may want to be short rates, well, long US
equities, and all edge against some currency.
And this is to balance like a book exposure or just have a view on markets one way or the other.
And I think using a system like Anomo with an intent-based system, you get a lot more expressivity
in the way you can deal with counterparties. So right now, if I was to do that on chain,
it would be very complex. You'd have to go to a number of different protocols
if they exist.
I think using an intent-based system,
you can wrap these like much more
into a traditional finance experience
where you can send that out into a network
and either a counterparty or a number of counterparties
can satisfy a request like a more complex request,
which really simplifies the user flow,
not only for institutions,
but also for more sophisticated users
that are trying to layer or source,
more than just vanilla financial products.
So I think that's kind of what I'm excited about
with like intents and the way Anoma as a network
may help us move towards more complex financial world, not necessarily
replicating TradFi, but also enabling regular people to access the same products that a
hedge fund trader may access on a day-to-day basis on chain.
Yeah, it definitely seems like a pretty big unlock like the typical DeFi products that we're
seeing today.
We've got a couple minutes left.
Let's see if we can get through maybe two more questions here.
Chris, we had a couple questions on around how wallets will work on Anoma.
Like how are you actually doing wallets, transfers, how do they protect data in the Anoma context, et cetera?
Right, right.
That's a pretty broad question.
I mean, Anoma will certainly have wallets
in the sense that like you have your keys stored somewhere,
you have an interface for interacting with the system.
Wallets in Anoma or the thing somewhere you have an interface or interacting with the system. Wallets, you know, Enanoma or the thing which,
you know, you might understand as a wallet,
the thing which you interface with,
are actually much more capable
or kind of have to be much more capable
than wallets for, you know, for Ethereum
or something like this.
There are a few reasons for that
or a few things that they have to do.
One thing that wallets do in Anoma,
or we don't really call them wallets,
partially for this reason,
but is that they actually connect
to the peer-to-peer network.
So in Ethereum, when you use MetaMask,
or basically all Ethereum wallets,
they talk to something called Web3,
RPC API, which is a different API
than what Ethereum nodes use to talk to one another.
And it's much more limited.
Like you can simulate transactions, you can query some state, but there's a lot of stuff
you just can't do.
You're kind of a second class citizen of the actual distributed network when you're a wallet
on Ethereum.
And you're very, very reliant on these sort of indexing services and other extra protocol
infrastructure that's not very standardized and has arisen to service
a bunch of needs that users actually have
that are just not provided by the Web3 RPC API, right?
So instead of this, Anoma makes users wallets,
the kind of node that's running on your computer,
first-class citizens.
You actually connect to the peer-to-peer network,
you connect to multiple nodes,
you can still use this in a web browser,
maybe there's some tunneling, some NAT hole punching,
if people are familiar with this stuff, various techniques,
but you can just send requests to other nodes
over the peer-to-peer network,
you can query the kind of distributed state,
you can cache some of that state locally, et cetera.
Another thing Anoma wallets have to do
is they have to do much more cryptography
because Anoma has some support for shielded states,
support for different kinds of information disclosure,
and this requires that the client-side code is aware of some of what it needs to synchronize
in order to show the user the right thing, so your wallet will be doing that.
And then the other main thing or the other kind of big thing that wallets in Anoma are going to do is
really help the user take an even higher level intent than the intent that we have in the
Anoma protocol and translate that to different, you know, one or many different intents in Anoma,
which then get broadcast to the network. So you might imagine you as a user have an intent like I want to, you know,
take some of my assets from some of these chains and swap them for some other assets
and some other domains or something like this. And the first step that happens there is actually
that you describe that intent to a wallet to some software running locally, and then
it gets converted into, you know, you might even describe it in natural language using
it. It could work differently for different applications,
but that gets converted into a Noma intent
that get broadcasted around the network.
And this translation can definitely,
I mean, maybe sophisticated,
front-end, do this a little bit with transactions already,
but with intents, it can be much more general.
You can describe things that have never been described before,
or so to speak.
You could describe some kind of structured financial product, for example,
you know, in a way much more like natural language or using a very kind of,
you know, drag and drop blocks,
kind of like a UI that really allows you to put something custom together in
accordance with exactly what your preferences are.
And then the wallet, the interface will translate this to an intent and the enoma sense, which
gets broadcast around the network solvers help find counterparties and execute it right.
So this translation, because enoma can support general intent, rather than just a few buttons
translating to specific transactions, which is what most DAP interfaces are doing today.
The interface layer needs to handle a much more general kind
of translation for some user-facing ontology
of what actions you should be able to take to intend
to head back.
Interesting.
Yeah, kind of a bit tricky to wrap my head around that,
but it seems like we're definitely
broadening the concept of what a wallet is, right?
Not just sending tokens around.
Cool, well, in the interest of time,
let's close it out with this question from ZAA,
who's asking, what are the key innovations
Anoma is focusing on in the next year?
And how do you see this attracting a wider community
to join the ecosystem?
I guess this could be for both Chris and Mike.
I'll just mention one specific thing.
We're working on something we call a protocol adapter.
A protocol adapter is a sort of contract or sometimes it could be
just a code module like a Cosmos SDK module, that you can deploy to existing networks
to make them compatible with Enoma applications.
I think this is pretty cool.
So we've already finished a first draft
of the Ethereum protocol adapter.
It's actually open source.
Now we just open sourced it.
I think it's under, it should be under the Enoma GitHub.
Let me see if I can find the exact
URL. Maybe it's ethereum-protocol-adapter.
EVM-protocol-adapter. If you go to github.com.enoma.evm-protocol-adapter, you can see the first version of this. And there's also a presentation that describes
what it does, which is given by Michael. I highly recommend.
So the Ethereum protocol adapter
specifically can be deployed to Ethereum or to other EVM chains, and once it's deployed to
Ethereum, then Ethereum becomes compatible with Enoma applications, as in developers can write
Enoma applications, and those Enoma applications can have some of their state on Ethereum, can
settle transactions when they need to on Ethereum or on the other EVM chains
to which the protocol adapter is deployed
without any extra effort from developers, right?
And I think that's pretty cool,
both in the sense of it gives developers of Enoma
applications access to Ethereum consensus,
Ethereum data storage, Ethereum liquidity
that could be interfaced with synchronously, et cetera,
and that it gives Ethereum and these other EVM chains a whole new class of applications
that they can now support.
This is kind of the power of the distributed operating system concept is that we can interface
with all of these existing systems in a way that seems very economical for all parties
involved.
I'm pretty excited about that.
Very cool. Mike, did you have something to add?
He says connecting to me now.
Oh, I guess we lost him. All right, well, I guess we'll wrap it up there. Thanks everyone for joining.
Yeah, anyone who's interested in playing around with building on Anoma, you can visit the docs, which Maurice put together.
They're great docs.anoma.net.
We also have the intense initiates program, which is a builder builders program designed to support people building with Intense.
I can find info about that on the Anoma blog.
Yeah, thanks everyone for joining.
And until next time, we'll do this again next month.
Thanks for joining.
All right, take care.
Take care. Bye.
