Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
Chad's Hangout w/ Chad Barraford
Recorded: Dec. 11, 2025 Duration: 1:46:33Space Recording
Short Summary
ThorChain is making waves in the DeFi space with the launch of its new app layer, Rujira, which will enhance user experience by enabling seamless swaps and yield opportunities. The platform is also set to introduce innovative features like zero confirmation trades, further solidifying its position as a leader in decentralized finance.
Full Transcription
yeah
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah a pile on in got a good week you guys good week all right let's get this introduction going
for those who don't know who are listening live or to the recording of this space
thor chain is the first decentralized exchange to swap real bitcoin you can use every bitcoin
wallet in the world you don't have to connect it to a website. Same with Ethereum, XRP, BNB, Tron,
Doge, and many more. Eventually, you'll be able to swap any token from any wallet. It's going to
be awesome. ThorChain is turning into a full layer one where apps can be built on top of it.
The new app layer, Rujira, unlocks lending, perps, Bitcoin backstable coins, token launchpad,
NFTs, prediction markets, and much more. ThorChain isn't just a
decentralized exchange. It's becoming the protocol of pure, uncensorable liquidity.
Very important. Swapping on ThorChain is simple and it's also permissionless. There's no KYC.
Anyone in the world can use it. To swap on ThorChain, go to thorchain.org and click on swap.
New features and functionality are being added to the site over the next few months. If you have any issues whatsoever, we have an email there that you can
contact. ThorChain's token is called RUNE and that's spelled R-U-N-E. You don't need to buy or
hold RUNE to place a swap on ThorChain, but the fees are deducted from your swap and they are
used to buy RUNE. And this is the RUNe that goes to liquidity pools and nodes there are no block rewards on thor chain 100 of the yield is real
thor chain is also deflationary with five percent of the revenue being burned if you excuse me if
you hold rune on a centralized exchange you should withdraw into self-custody immediately because
these tokens can be used to short sell rune and drive the price down on us and once in self-custody you guys should look into bonding your rune to a node and earning
some yield a really good website to do that is runebond.com super easy all you have to do is
find a node request a whitelist and bond your rune this is going to get easier when we add
b rune and other things so keep an eye out for that you guys uh thor chain has another token called tcy this token is kind of like a preferred stock where 10
of the protocol's revenue goes to these token holders if you deposit crypto into savers or
took out a loan on thor chain make sure to claim your tcy token so you can start collecting this
yield and anyone can buy the tcy token as well there's a thor chain community discord and
telegram you can join to learn all about thor chain make lots of friends to find the links go to
at thor community that's t-h-o-r community account on x guys these spaces we aim towards anybody
whether you're a veteran or a newbie you will find something here that'll interest you got a little
laundry here before i kick it on over to Kenton.
We had a delayed churn, but we just churned recently.
And something I noticed is apparently we have a new node,
about 300,000 rune.
And for those who don't know,
I think Runetard's been working really hard on this.
I'm not sure if this is the one from him,
but shout out to Runetard for doing that.
So just wanna make a quick shout out to Runtard for doing that. So just want to make a
quick shout out to that node. Welcome. Glad to have you. Thank you for contributing to the
decentralization of the network. If you need more bond providers, please reach out to me. You can
reach out to RuneBond, Patriot Sounds. I'll try and get some people to help you out. Okay. And
then of course, if you join RuneBond, we can get you there. So welcome, welcome, welcome.
Another thing guys is Solana is officially on StageNet.
Very exciting.
I think you guys saw some Solana test swaps going through,
looking like things are looking very well.
So super excited about that.
And a little fun thing, you guys.
I don't know if you saw Familiar Cow uploading a video of him doing pull-ups.
Also, Paul from Edgewallet.
But, gosh dang, that guy is jacked.
I personally think Cow needs a new name.
Instead of Familiar Cow, I think he should be called Familiar Bull.
What do you guys think?
Familiar Bull.
He's pretty meaty, that guy.
It should be Familiar Wow.
How about that?
Wow, there you go.
That's awesome. That's awesome.
Okay, guys. Pretty cool.
So that's all I got for laundry.
Kenton, I'll kick it to you, buddy.
How you doing?
I'm good, man. Thanks.
Yeah, maybe just to reiterate about Runtard.
I think we need to start reminding people,
telling people about this every week,
that if you're looking to bond your rune reach out to at runetard on on twitter he's been acting kind of like a broker like he's
been helping new node operators get set up and um and then helping them find bond providers as well
so um um yeah reach out to him on on twitter know, if you're looking to bond your rune
and he can help place you,
try and get these new single independent node operators,
get them going and get some rune bonded with them.
The more nodes, more different node operators we have,
the better.
So, yeah, at runetard.
And, yeah, no, I got nothing much for me.
I'm just kind of working on little things here and there.
Yeah, you got anything for us you want to mention, bring up?
Nothing specifically, to be honest.
Well, maybe let's jump right into it.
So, you know, the last few spaces we've been on
it keeps coming up about door chain doing concentrated liquidity to get better quotes
and um some people have been like lamenting how you know they've been saying this for a long time
now and it's not happening and resources should be put towards it. Why isn't it happening? And I thought I'd just kind of ask you not to, and I'm not trying to put you on a few million dollars and you know or do we need
we need somebody really smart you know smarter than you chad to to do the code and we just can't
find the person to do it you know what's or or what is what is the reason for not doing concentrated
liquidity is it you know uh maybe let's stop there and see if you want to respond to all that yeah so
um let me let me explain a little bit what
concentrate liquidity is first so that we're all kind of like starting on the same page.
Effectively, without getting too much into the weeds of it all, you are taking a liquidity pool
and AMM typically, and you're applying liquidity of more like kind of narrowly scoped targets of
what the price is that it's operating on.
And in theory, what should happen is that you get, you know, lesser fees, right?
So you can have the same amount of liquidity in terms of the depth of the pool,
but you can trade as if it was, you know, two times the depth
or five times the depth or whatever,
depending upon how many traders are and what their scoped, their ranges are scoped for their liquidity,
blah, blah, blah. There's a bunch of math that goes into it. So that's generally what you're
getting. You're getting better price execution with the same amount of liquidity. That's
effectively what you're really getting out of it. Now, the reason why that doesn't make sense for us
is because we already get the price that we want, right?
Like adding cost to liquidity now wouldn't actually give you a better price execution.
It just wouldn't because you already have, we can already set what the price is or like how much you pay in fees through a configurable, you know, MAMIR setting.
So if we wanted to get, you know, better price execution, we could just change the MAMIR and get it right now
without even making a single code change.
So you can already achieve what that is
that you're trying to achieve in a matter of speaking.
So it doesn't give you a better price execution
than what we already have.
It would, in theory, make the...
Sorry, can I stop you for a sec?
What is that MAMIR setting?
What could we change?
The min basis points fee.
Oh, sorry.
Yeah.
So there's three of them, actually.
There's one for layer one trades,
there's one for secured assets,
there's one for trade assets
that could be configured separately from each other
if you wanted to use more fine-grained control.
But you wouldn't really get better price execution.
You probably would get,
you probably wouldn't get a faster trade because when you have those min basis points, you know,
fee thing, whatever, you're basically just telling the protocol, in effect, how many sub swaps to do
for a streaming swap, right? Is it, you know, 10 sub swaps or 20 sub swaps or 100 sub swaps?
The smaller that number is, or rather the bigger that number is, the, you know, 10 subswaps or 20 subswaps or 100 subswaps, the smaller that number is, or rather the bigger that number is,
the, you know, more or less, the less you pay in fees
for that trade being of the same overall size.
You know, but obviously it takes more time to do that trade, right?
Like more blocks, right?
Instead of 10 blocks, it's doing 20 blocks or 100 blocks
or whatever the number is largely. So you might be able to get a faster execution on your trade, which is like,
yeah, that's a good thing. You know, it's something we want to do in general. But we're already kind
of on the right track to do that already. So we have, by adding the kind of limit swaps, you know,
kind of feature, which is still kind of worked on. That not only achieves the same goal of being able to, you know, effectively trade faster,
because the next step after that is rapid swaps.
It also doesn't only just give you that kind of faster trade execution,
but also just gives an entire new kind of fundamental, you know, style of trading on ThorChain,
other than just like a regular swap.
Now you can do like, you know, limit orders in effect, which is obviously a really positive
thing too. So I don't think doing concentrated liquidity would actually give us a whole lot,
you know, in terms of price execution, in terms of trade speeds. The other component to that is,
is that like, you know, a large chunk of the,Ps we have on the protocol is actually the protocol on liquidity and not so much like regular retail humans in a sense.
So how many of those retail humans, so to speak, would be using this contraliquity functionality?
I don't know, you know, I don't really like the idea of requiring people to run infrastructure
and servers and manage code and uptime and all these things like an Rbot typically does.
I don't want to apply those to LPs because I want LPs to be kind of fire and forget,
apply those to LPs because I want LPs to be kind of fire and forget, you know, you can just provide
liquidity, walk away, you know, let things go as they are, you know, collect rewards over time,
blah, blah, blah, you know, without needing to like run infrastructure or like manage code or
anything like this. So I don't think I just don't think the protocol would actually gain much by
by adding it personally. I know it's kind of a hit word, concentrated liquidity.
But I would also like to challenge anybody
who is a concentrated liquidity advocate,
like what protocol has used concentrated liquidity
in a really positive manner?
You know, what DEX out there has done it correctly?
And I don't know of one and i
know uniswap is was like one of the first ones to do it um and like you know 80 or 70 of their lps
are like underwater because most people because all the all the fees get collected to a handful
of individuals rather than you know the collective community um i think osmosis also made a change in that direction.
I'm not so sure it actually was helpful in that case.
So I'm not really sure why it would be beneficial for us in our circumstance or how it was beneficial in other protocols, to be honest,
other than just being a talking point.
That's great. Thank you.
And thank you for the initial explanation too good idea um
you mentioned if you made if we made the min swaps swap fee zero then in theory we would have the
same say bitcoin price you would get on any other exchange but um sorry or in theory we would have
like the best quotes if we had yeah you know if you if you if
you put main main base points to zero then then you're charging basically zero fees and it's more
or less going to execute as a like a one-to-one for every one dollar bitcoin will give you one
dollar of you know ether or whatever but what about isn't there still slippage on the pools
uh in that case the the slippage would be so negligible
because if you were to do zero basis points,
then the number of sub-trades that would be executed,
you'd be basically doing like a swap per percent.
Do you know what I mean?
And the slippage on that, while technically it does exist,
it's so infinitesimally small.
You're talking about like you know a thousandth
of a penny or something like that you know I'm making up numbers here but it's it would be so
infinitesimally small that it would be almost immeasurable you'd pay more you'd pay more in
fees on the gas on the outbound than you would on the actual trade okay so and you're referring to
streaming swaps the t-wop yeah yeah okay okay. Yeah. And then same with limit orders and rapid swaps.
That's like, again, like instantaneous.
There's no slippage on a rapid swap.
It clears through the pool, but there's no...
Well, the rapid swaps don't change the slippage, right?
Or don't change how much you pay in fees.
They just make the trade execute faster.
Okay.
So if you have the min basis points set to zero,
and you put the rapid swaps to infinity, right?
Then the entire trade, in theory on paper,
although practically it's a little bit more complicated than this,
but in theory on paper, if everything was like, you know,
goaded and everything was like, you know, perfect,
and there was no issues,
and there was infinite amount of liquidity or whatever,
then yes, you would get an instant,
in a single block, you would trade $100 worth of Bitcoin
for $100 worth of Ethereum or 99.9999 or something like this okay um hey shit do you have any any questions yeah i do um
so when you said the set the rapid swaps to infinity is this something that's going to be
toggable in the beginning is it can it knows you'll? Okay. Yes. So the reason why you want a limit is,
so say somebody,
say you get a huge trade, right?
Like, let's just say it's like $10 million, right?
And so you need,
you have a market order trade for $10 million,
and then you have a limit order trade
of approximately also $10 million,
which is like the ARB in this scenario, right?
And so these guys are just, you know,
this trade gets broken up into, you know,
whatever the number is, 10,000 subswaps,
you know, in that thing.
So there's like 10,000 trades going back and forth,
back and forth, back and forth across the pool.
ARB, then the market order, market order,
then limit order, limit order, then market order,
just back and forth, back and forth, back and forth,
back and forth, going 10,000 times or 100,000 times or whatever the hell the number is.
And that might take, you know, let's say that takes like a half hour just to execute that trade
or 45 minutes to execute that trade.
Then you're not producing a block for a half hour, right?
And if you're not producing a block for a half hour, that in itself is a bug in a matter of speaking, right?
So you have to limit it at some point because you don't want to just like lock up
the entire block for you know multi seconds or multi minutes just to execute some larger trade
so when we first so we the limit the configure is a set like what is the maximum number of like
times that we can we can swap a specific swap multiple times in this block what is the maximum
allowed right and so on day one we'll probably set it to two right just so you can do like two swap a specific swap multiple times in this block. Where does the maximum allowed, right?
And so on day one, we'll probably set it to two, right?
Just so you can do like two trades in a single block instead of...
If you can do a hundred blocks...
You cut out for me.
Did I cut out?
Yeah, just a little bit.
You said...
Just the last 10 seconds.
Yeah, last 10 seconds.
Right after two instead of one, then you cut out.
Yes.
So if you have two instead of one,
you'd do two sub-swaps in a single block
instead of one sub-swap in a single block.
So if you were going to take 100 blocks to your trade,
now it's going to be doing it in 50 blocks
instead of 100 blocks, right?
Now, if you set that number to three instead of two,
the configuration of rapid swaps
instead of doing 100 blocks you're now doing you know 34 uh blocks you know hypothetically and then
you can increase that to three to four to five to six to ten to a hundred or a thousand even
arbitrarily like you can go as high as you want to more or less but if there are limits to it in
the sense that like that like sense that how much liquidity,
in order for a rapid swap to execute entirely in a single block,
it requires that there's some sort of ARB on the other side
that's using a limit order to be the other side of the trade,
which is what we always see.
Whenever somebody trades to the protocol,
ARBs always come in to counter trade in reverse direction because
it leaves a little bit of money on the table in a sense. And so ARBs come in and do that. And so
we need limit orders to be working, functioning, got good amount of liquidity, ARBs are healthy,
all this kind of stuff. And then depending upon how the depth of the ARBs and how big are the
walls that the ARBs's putting around the pool prices,
you know, that tells you like how many sub swaps you can actually do in a particular, you know, block.
And I don't know, I have no idea what that number is.
We can look into that, you know, as, you know, later in the future. And we'll probably start with the number two to configure rapid swaps at two on day one,
just kind of like the smallest step possible.
You know, watch it, make sure it's all, you know, functioning correctly.
There's no issues or bugs or blah, blah, blah, whatever.
And then, you know, we'll walk it up to three, then four,
and then maybe jump to seven or, I don't know, I'm making up numbers,
but like it'll be the slow process of rolling off that feature.
And so as that number gets higher and higher and higher,
rapid swaps will be, you know uh improving the performance or speed of um
of of um you know each each streaming swap as for that number increases i mean just with two right
that cuts the time in half so even at the lowest yeah even at the lowest setting it's a significant
shift you know yeah that's good that's absolutely wild actually i have a question regarding that
from the community because you guys were talking about price execution uh min bits and things like that
so uh let me pull it up here so someone asked me um okay so they took a quote from sto our main
they want one bitcoin to uh usdc on ethereum and so the min bits right now for a double swap you know it's it's 10 so it equals
20 um our price execution on this screenshot it's about um about 40 basis points okay so a little
bit didn't double right in that and they want to know um any what are some more thoughts and ideas
to lower the total costs without lowering our slip fee to get basically to get it closer to the value that it is.
Is rapid swaps the answer, you think?
Or what would you say?
I don't think rapid swaps would help in this particular goal.
Rapid swap is primarily just to make things more rapid,
to execute faster.
Not so much a better trade, but just a faster trade.
The fees of outbound fees and gas fees,
those kind of come into play, you know.
I don't know why the offhand, I don't know why it's saying, you know, 40 bps.
That sounds high to me.
I don't know if there's, I think it could be because of SwapKit takes a kick, right?
So I think they charge 20 or 25 bps on trade.
So that might be what they're looking at
and why it's 40 bps and not 20 bps
because SwapKit takes a little bit for themselves.
Or if they're using STO,
then it's obviously bypassing the SwapKit thing.
I don't know offhand what the world would be causing that.
I'd have to look at it more deeply.
But the only thing I can think of is just like outbound fees and gas fees, that kind of thing.
Gotcha. Yeah, that makes sense.
And by the way, I forgot to mention in my laundry.
I'm sorry, Kenton.
STO, the main swap, it has a thousand unique addresses that have used it.
So congratulations on that to you and uh the other guys working on
it nice job yeah thanks man um pretty impressive volume for only a thousand unique wallets too
um looking forward to getting this to a million um we can do it yeah absolutely and uh uh just i apologize uh patriot that's your question about the numbers and the
quote i honestly i forget the reason i looked into it a while ago i can't remember what it was it was
something about pulling quotes from different places and um so i yeah i'm sorry i forget but i
i'm a stickler for stuff like that like it'd it'd be nice to have the U.S. dollar numbers all line up and everything makes sense.
But let's be honest with you guys, like it's kind of a, you know, lesser priority for now.
Trying to work on bigger ticket items and the little stuff.
But it is, my OCD is aware of that.
And I would like to try and figure that out.
Totally got you, man.
Everyone knows how you are.
So yeah, your OCD is probably one of the greatest things ever.
So thanks, man.
Appreciate you.
Okay, so I don't have any other questions from the community.
Oh, actually, I do.
I'm so sorry.
Let me pull it up real quick.
Okay, so someone wants to know, what is the status?
I think, you know, we touched on this.
It's pushed into an update,
but do you have any update on limit swaps, Chad,
or are we just kind of waiting for the new version to go out?
Yeah, we're waiting for the new version.
So all known issues or bugs have been already patched.
It'll be in the next release, which is 3.15.
That'll come out probably like mid-January. Okay. Mid-January. Okay. Got it. Perfect. Yeah. I, you know, I've,
I've been checking out the volume. Things have been going pretty well. You know, we occasionally
have a slow day, but I think things are going really, really well. So if anyone has any questions they want me to ask, Chad,
you can request to come up or you can tag me in the Thor chain main telegram.
I'll see them there.
But yeah, man, I think we're pretty much in a holding pattern right now,
you guys, if I'm not mistaken.
Go ahead, Kenton.
I have a question for Chad.
Yeah.
The min swaps per block, that
was the nodes recently voted
to change it to 50.
I forget what the previous number was. 5
or 10? 10, I think. Yeah, yeah.
And yeah, it was something you
asked the nodes to vote on and they agreed
and they did. Maybe just remind us
of what that is again and what
improvements we should see and will that help
with rapid swaps or anything?
It will make things execute more quickly in that sense.
So let me give some historical context
so people understand what this was.
So when we were first designing the protocol way back when
in 2019, 2020,
we thought about the kind of algo of
how do we prioritize swaps?
So we go to SwapQ.
Say we've got 100 swaps in the SwapQ.
How does the network decide upon
which one to trade first
and which one to trade next?
And we opted out early on
to have it be some sort of deterministic system
rather than something that
the nodes themselves could
opt to put this one first and that one
second and this one third or whatever it is.
And largely because
if nodes can control the
order of swaps, then
you've just inserted the ability for
MEV to happen in a very
significant way. And you can get
potentially sandwich sandwich attack,
although our CLP mathematics doesn't really,
even in that scenario,
wouldn't allow for a sandwich attack specifically.
But in general, you can allow, you know,
prioritization of swaps.
And I didn't really want to, you know, give space to that.
Instead, I kind of wanted to follow more of like,
more like Bitcoin's mentality of like,
how to prioritize transactions where, you know, in Bitcoin world,
the one that pays more in transaction fees
is the one that kind of gets prioritized,
you know, in a sense.
And we're doing something very similar
where larger trades on the protocol
will, you know, give larger rewards
to the LPs and nodes and whatnot.
And so those are obviously higher priority than some kind of little, you know, $10 trade or whatever it is.
So it just prioritizes based upon that.
And so the 10 number that we've got changed to 50,
it's a way of calculating that when it does the choosing of which ones to do,
it would always only swap like half the number of swaps in the block.
So if there's like 100 trades in the block, in the swap queue,
it'll take generally the top 50 largest trades, execute those first,
and then the next block, you know, it's got 50 remaining, so it does 25. And the next block, it's got, you know, 25 remaining, so it does, you know, 12 or 13, whatever the number
would be, and then so forth and so on. Up until it gets to the point of 10, if the number is 10 or
below, it just does all the trades, right? Just like, it's got a little bit left, just execute
them all, whatever, they're all good. It's just a small queue anyway. That was the mentality. And that worked very well before we had streaming swaps
because trades would be executed in a single block.
And so in a very short period of time, all the trades would get swapped
in a relatively short period of time because every trade gets executed
in a single block because there was no streaming swaps at this time.
But with the invention of streaming swaps,
and we have like these large trades that can stick around for, you know,
not only minutes, but like hours, even potentially days,
you can kind of have like a sustained large swap queue in theory, right?
And in that scenario, you know, large, small trades rather,
you know, could get pushed back where they don't get executed for 15 seconds or 30 seconds.
And we were seeing some cases where people, I think it was mostly like ARB if I'm not mistaken, but where they were like doing some kind of trade and it just would take, you know, 25 or 30 seconds for the trade to actually execute.
And it just kind of left, you know, not a great user experience.
So by changing that configuration number from 10 to 50,
it just says that, like, if there's less,
if there's 50, you know, swaps in the swap queue or less,
just execute them all.
And by doing that, you know,
it seems to have solved that particular issue.
And, you know, and everything seems to be, you know,
swapping fairly quickly at this point.
Nice. Awesome. issue and you know and everything seems to be you know swapping fairly quickly at this point nice awesome um let's kind of go back to rapid swaps um you're saying if you if we crank it up
too high it could slow down block times would this be this is another reason to go to two
second block times to get that done so that we have we can crank up rapid swaps a bit more?
I don't know.
I'm not sure that makes...
I don't think so because when you make the blocks shorter,
you also make them typically smaller as well.
I have to think more deeply on it.
I haven't really thought much about it,
but I don't think it would matter that much.
Because I think in practicality,
like if you were to set this configuration of rapid swaps
to like something really big, like 100,000, for example,
you're almost never going to see it actually happen in reality
because as soon as the swap queue doesn't have a market swap to swap
with a limit order in the reverse direction,
then it kind of just like, you know, I've reached the end.
There's no point in continuing to iterate another 80,000 times
because there's nothing to be swapped in this particular block anymore
because I've already swapped everything that can be swapped.
So most of the time, if you were to have a number be large,
like something very large, even something as big as 100,
you'd probably almost never see the protocol do 100 iterations
in a particular block because it'd be fairly rare
that you would have a trade large enough, you know,
and the ARB is healthy enough
to actually do that 100 times in a single block
in practicality.
So you do have these, like, diminishing returns
of, like, you set the number to two
and you, like, you know, swaps are, like, twice the speed.
You can see a very significant shift. You set it, you know, to three and now you're, like, you know swaps are like half twice the speed you can see a very significant shift you set it you know to three and now you're like you know slightly faster you know um you're
like 50 you're adding more speed but you're 50 less than the previous number you did more or less
and you each number you add you get these kind of diminishing returns you know so it's like it
doesn't really make all that much sense to put the number all that high
and because like i said like 99.8 of the time it's probably not even even hit that number to begin
with okay cool um you mentioned if it's if we go to two second block times that's just
making the block smaller to do it so it's the same amount of oh i i so my
smooth brain was thinking it's the same size block as as a current six second block but now can be
done and would be be able to be done in two seconds uh i mean kind of like it's it's it's
probably more complicated but like think about it this way.
If you're – you have to get consensus across the nodes
about what's going to be in the block, right?
Usually a block proposer that's been established by the protocol
to choose one validator to be the proposer for this particular block.
They're going to put a bunch of transactions, you know, in that thing.
But, like, like – let's play a better way to put this.
If you're doing like,
probably an easier way to explain this is
if you're putting 20,000 trades, right?
If there's a total of 20,000 trades per day, right?
Like the number of trades we're going to see per day
probably wouldn't change
if we go from six second blocks blocks to two-second blocks.
So you still have the same quantity of swaps,
and therefore the total number of megabytes or kilobytes
or whatever the correct term would be here,
added to the chain per day is going to be more or less the same.
And that just means that there's probably going to just be less swaps per block
because there's 3x the number of blocks, but the same quantity of blocks, of swaps rather.
So you're probably just going to, what's likely to happen is that your blocks are likely going to be smaller in size, but executing faster.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, but you really think the amount of swaps would be static?
This is the whole point of high-frequency trading
and why HyperLiquid wants really fast trade times, settlement times, block times,
because it's the more trades you can do.
Yeah, if we were a perpetuals protocol, that would make more sense to me.
In my mind, and maybe I'm wrong about this,
but in my mind, I don't see ThorChain as a protocol that people use as day traders.
Do you know what I mean?
I think day traders are going to use something that's not what we are.
If we go to two-second blocks, you can make the argument that people might use us more because we're faster execution,
especially when you're talking about using native assets like secured assets, for example.
But you might be right that going to two-second block times would inherently create more volume.
I'm not convinced of that personally, and maybe I'm happy to admit I'm wrong
if I'm wrong about this,
but I'm not convinced that that would be the case.
Well, isn't this kind of a point of AppLayer
is to try and to get traders?
Yep, yep.
The last time we spoke about this,
myself and the Ruji team,
we were talking about doing this like two-second block tap
because they wanted to give,
they wanted to have a perpetuals swapping interface
that had similar user experience
where you have this near instantaneous transactions.
And there was a discussion about
instead of going to two-second block times,
doing something even faster than that,
which would be kind of like an intra-block consensus mechanism so you can almost think about it like it's kind of like a layer two
although technically it's not a layer two but um their their transactions would would execute within
a kind of like a pre-commit or pre-block or mid-block kind of mentality where you can kind of get a consensus without actual finality,
but like a reasonable consensus.
And you could execute your things like nearly instantaneously
between blocks rather than waiting for the block to be committed.
I don't know if there's, you know, put that on the back burner
or it's actually being worked on or what.
But that was the last conversation that I had with them.
I think for me, I was a little bit concerned about going to 2-3 block times.
Like, it's a big, it sounds like a very simple change.
And in some ways it is.
But it creates a lot of opportunity for things to go wrong.
A lot of the code operates off of, you know,
blocks per minute or blocks per hour
or something like this.
Getting that wrong could have some downstream effects
that could be, you know, troublesome.
And then also going to faster block times
inherently creates generally like more instability
with block creation because there's less,
there's more opportunity for things to go wrong
or communication has to be even faster between these validators.
So I was concerned about the stability issues, concerns around it,
and some downstream bugs or issues or problems that it could manifest in our mainnet environment.
That was my hesitation around it personally, and they were talking about doing this kind of like
between block or intra block kind of committing system
to get like instantaneous transactions, in a matter of speaking,
using this kind of like layer two almost thing.
But I haven't heard them talk about it or reference it since then.
I think my memory is that that's been put on the back burner
that they um i think run into some trouble trying to figure it out um i don't know if patriot if you
have any if you know i don't uh no i i think i remember hearing something like that too there
were some technical issues there but i don't remember specifics either yeah i mean they've
been focused pretty much on loans lately, you know,
which is a great product and a great thing to be focused on. So getting,
you know, lending out there was obviously a big,
a lot of work and a big step and a good milestone for the, for the team.
I have some, yeah, go ahead. Oh, sorry. I have a couple a couple questions here first question is this is from
instaswap he's curious if you've had a chance to look at the new decks that came out to harbor if
you have any opinions on it or anything like that oh on harbor yeah um I looked at it like I think
it was yesterday or day before briefly um I couldn't find the source code.
It doesn't seem to be open source, or maybe it's somewhere
and I just couldn't find it or whatever.
I think it's going to be an interesting thing to see how things move forward
because I think we're going to see more players come to the space,
whether it be Harbor or something else. And I think that's going to be kind of a challenge because
if you're going to launch a new kind of cross-chain swapping platform, whatever,
especially if you're starting from zero where you have zero brand, you've got zero liquidity,
you've got zero volume, and you're starting from ground zero there. You have to like figure out a way that you're going to like stand out
or get volume or, you know, get liquidity or like one of these things. You have to have answers to
these questions. And that, and it's an uphill battle. Like I, you know, I, you know, good luck
to Harvard, you know, and all that kind of stuff. But like, it's not going to be an easy thing.
And maybe a Harvard will knock out of the park. Like I don't, I obviously have of stuff, but it's not going to be an easy thing. Maybe a harbor will knock out of the park. I obviously have no idea.
But it's a challenge, right?
And when the product that you're selling
is basically identical or very close
to being identical to everybody else
because trading Bitcoin to Ethereum,
these are fungible tokens.
So whether you're trading on ThorChain or on Harbor,
you're still getting the same asset in the end.
You're still getting Ethereum, right?
Which is no different from anybody else.
So the question then becomes like,
well, how are you going to stand out?
Because obviously the outcomes are the same.
So how are you going to stand out?
Now you could do it a handful of different ways.
You could do it about supporting specific assets or chains. You could do it about, you know, supporting specific assets or chains.
You could do it through branding, outreach, and marketing. You could achieve it through
focusing on a certain kind of clientele, right? Like, you know, institutions, for example,
like ThoughtChain has predominantly been focused on retail for most of its past. You could focus
on institutions. That's a little bit of an uphill battle because institutions aren't really quite ready for it yet.
I'm sure that'll change over the next, you know,
five-ish years or whatever.
But, you know, you could focus on a different client,
like a different service, a different community.
You can try to go after it by, like, certain features,
like what Harbor's talking about, you know,
by having, you know, this kind of limit order thing,
which is, you know, which is, you know, this kind of limit order thing, which is, you know,
which is, it's a good tool, I guess, but, you know, it's not that unique, you know, other,
we already have, you know, limit orders, like, kind of launching in a sense. So,
it's, it's, it's a tough battle, and I wish them well, and I don't know what quite differentiates them other than just like, we have this like two,
two prod liquidity providing mechanism that in the end will give,
you know,
not necessarily better trade speeds or execution or anything like this.
And,
you know,
like,
it's just,
I'm not sure what, what,
what the actual like thinking is,
what the actual like hypothesis is, what the actual like hypothesis is
about like what their actual,
how they're going to grow
and reach product market fit.
Like what makes us different,
you know, initially is like,
we have like the virgin birth in a sense, right?
Because we were the first,
we invented this entire
cross-chain liquidity market
where obviously like we have brand recognition.
We have lots of things that kind of,
we have like established ourselves already.
We have a long history,
like,
you know,
so we're not,
we're not starting from ground zero.
We've been around for,
you know,
five years now,
six years,
whatever it's been.
So I don't,
I don't know.
Let's see how it goes and wish them well.
And,
you know,
and,
you know,
yeah,
we'll see.
That makes sense.
I mean,
you can't know,
I mean,
it just came out,
right. So it's hard to know all the details, but you know, if you guys that makes sense i mean you can't know all of it just came out right
so it's hard to know all the details but uh you know if you guys ask me questions i will i will
ask them to chat even though i figured that would be that would be your answer because it's like
well it just happened um i do have another question for you other um i'm gonna try and
condense this one basically this is a question about the number of devs that work on ThorChain, not necessarily like the total number,
but basically the question is,
you know,
how helpful is it to have even more devs on ThorChain?
Is there a point where there's diminishing returns?
Whereas,
you know,
like Leo deck,
shout out to them.
The question's about them.
Like they have a really small team so they can execute really fastly,
quickly.
It's not fast.
That's not a word.
Sorry.
Really quickly.
And I know you mentioned that back in the early days, Chad.
Back when we were much smaller in chaos in the days, you could just ship code.
Do you think ThorChain should just try and acquire as many devs as possible right now
because there's so many different things to work on?
Or, yeah, what would you say generally would be your answer to those questions?
you say generally would be your answer to those questions?
From the beginning,
ThorChain has always been a very kind of like skeleton crew, right?
Like Coinbase has, I don't know how many employees,
it's got to be at least 500, I'm guessing,
something like this, right?
And of those, probably 300 of them are devs or security people or technical people of some kind.
We've just never been that way.
We've never had the treasury
to support something of that size.
You know, NIR has, you know,
over $500 million of investment into their token
and their, you know, into their investors
investing into their treasury.
We started off, I think it was like a one or 1.5 million.
We've got a little extra money since then,
but like nowhere close to anybody else.
We've always just stayed small and focused
and being kind of a tight-knit, smaller team.
Adding more devs, you know,
does give you the ability to move a little bit faster
in some ways,
but adding devs requires time
for them to become, you know,
proficient in the code,
which the code is like not simple
and you're not picking it up in a month.
I would say on like on average
would take somebody maybe six months
to get a decent handle around the code base.
So they're not going to be that helpful
until that at that point.
And considering we only have like, we have a handful of features and roadmap that we have,
you know, working on adding more devs, I don't think would be that helpful because you don't
want to be like having, you know, we're not as young as we used to be as a protocol. We have to,
You know, we're not as young as we used to be as a protocol.
We have to be more diligent than we needed to be in the past.
You don't want to put, like, you know, 10 new major features in a single release.
That just creates a lot of, like, instability.
And then when something blows up, you don't know which of the 10 features necessarily broke whatever the hell it is that broke.
So it's like you don't want to move too fast, especially at this kind of age that we're at.
Like if you're a harbor protocol, for example,
and you can move as fast as you want
because your brand is spanking new.
We could use more devs though.
Like I was thinking earlier today
about like, you know, maybe hiring some more
onto the core team.
That said, but I don't want,
I don't think we'll ever get to a place
where we're going to have, you know, a very large dev team. I don't think we'll ever get to a place where we're gonna have a very large dev team.
I don't think it would be a good allocation of resources.
Yeah, I think I remember you saying last space,
the new chain client team on the Nine Realm side
is coming online, right?
They're new devs, it's a new code base.
So they're probably gonna need their handheld
for a little bit before they can really start revving up
these chain clients on a rapid pace.
Well, that's like nothing but that is like they're not like general devs in a sense.
Like they're very kind of focused on a very specific thing, which is very repeatable.
So like the code around Bifrost, while it's not simple, I'm not I don don't want to like, you know, undersell in a sense.
It's on a simple code base, but it's like, it's more narrowly scoped and more targeted.
So the amount of time that it takes to get spun up in that kind of realm is a lot faster than like the entire code base, you know, like the TSS and the Thorn.
So they'll spin up a lot faster.
And they're just kind of repeating the same steps, like building the same chain client, but with a different insert other chain name here. And so it's very, it's somewhat
repetitive. And some of these, you know, chain clients are just derivatives of other chain
clients we've already added, like a UTXO or EVM based or, you know, something like this. So
they're going to, I mean, they're building their own kind of their little team to stay focused,
to start like just adding changes as much as we little team to stay focused to start, like, just adding changes
as much as we can to the protocol.
But again, like, I don't see us ever really getting to the point
where we need, like, you know, large dev teams,
like you probably see on Nier or, you know, other protocols.
All right.
Kenton, were you trying to say something earlier?
Oh, just, yeah, I didn't touch on the chains.
Like, what about, you know, if we had 10 different devs working on 10 different chains to add them?
Right.
But then come the question of, like, how do you roll them out, right?
Because, like, do you want to roll out a chain, like, every day, so to speak?
I mean, that might be a little bit too much too fast. So you don't want to be making changes to a protocol, you know,
that quickly because if you move too fast, you could break a lot of things.
Okay, gotcha.
So it almost is kind of a, the fewer people does help gate it.
It does, but also keep in mind that like every chain that we add to the protocol, at least from a fundamentals perspective, has diminishing returns in terms of trade volume.
Because once we add, Zcash is kind of big right now for whatever reason.
Solana is kind of big right now in terms of volume.
Maybe there's a couple more that have like got some decent volume but like if you were to add 10 chains like the first two or three chains would have the you know three times more volume than the next
you know seven chains added do you know i mean does that make sense yeah it does and i i understand
i agree with you but this was this was the idea with you know not prioritizing solana and and
then what what happened is chain
flip did it and that was their way to differentiate themselves and so they got in like a dirty sock
right and then um thort chain also passed on zcash which you know that's big volumes for uh
for near so you know we don't really know which chain is going to take off and do well and at the same
time if we just keep adding them what we're doing is preventing our competition right we're taking
yeah but even even with like those examples of like solana and zcash are kind of unusual examples
but let's just take them anyway like the amount amount of trade volume that Nier does for Solana or Zcash
is like really not that much.
It's like maybe like 10 million,
you know, in a day or something like that.
It's nothing.
I'm not scoffing at it or anything like that.
But it's not like a make or break kind of thing.
It's like a small kind of leg up to some degree.
And, you know, we'll rectify that.
We're adding Solana probably in January, I assume.
And Zcash probably right around a similar time, I hope.
But like all the other chains that Nier supports,
like Sui, for example, and whatnot,
like the ones we don't support,
have infinitesimally small amount of volume.
Yeah, I get it.
That's also right now, right?
I mean, we're all expecting crypto to grow and expand,
and who knows where it'll go?
And there's also the indirect benefits too.
Like with Nier and Zashi wallet, they're getting free promo.
Like Bankless wrote an article about Nier and Zashi.
And that's all
intangible benefits right right right and that's and that's what kind of like shifted my my kind
of worldview in this topic like historically i've kind of been against adding long tail kind of
chains because of because it's diminishing returns on the value that it provides the protocol and also but not diminishing the
amount of you know dev time to support the particular chain the cost that it costs for
node operators to support that particular chain for maintenance related issues or you know bugs
or issues of the chain blows up or you know instability of whatever those chains are with
us so we have more kind of outages on, on, on Thor
chain per month or whatever, because the number of chains we support is, you know, more than it was
the previous month. That gave me pause about all this, but then you're right in saying that there's
like this, there are some significant amount of value that is kind of hard to measure. That's
kind of intangible. And you just can reference an example of you know
um that podcast referencing uh near and whatnot and also like being more of like a one-stop shop
where people can come to us because they know that we'll support their chain whatever chain that is
and having confidence about that like that's more like those are kind of intangible values that are
not really kind of you know you can't really kind of mark it down on a piece of paper necessarily but they do
provide value yeah that's what my brain is stuck on the intangibles and um and i like i think about
coinbase and binance like they just keep listing tokens they face the exact same problem right
every new token is a lot of diminishing returns, but they're, you know, doing it to stay relevant,
you know, give something to the users.
And that's kind of how I view ThorChain.
Like we had to just keep doing it, keep adding it.
And it's how we just like maintain dominance,
maintain our position.
Yep. Yep. It makes sense.
I have a follow-up question on a a question earlier we had so we were i mentioned
i'm sorry i asked about the number of devs on thort chain but the someone wanted to have this
clarified they said well what about the app layer does the app layer sense where they're building
new primitives on top of thort chain this is something could you like hundreds and hundreds
of devs could work on the app layer side no problem any opinion on that chad yeah the app layer side, no problem. Any opinion on that, Chad? Yeah, the app layer and the core protocol
are separate kind of roads, right?
And they operate, you know,
almost entirely separate from each other.
So you could have hundreds and hundreds of devs
on the app layer producing whatever apps
that they're all producing.
And there's no, you know, barrier or boundary to uh to that yeah that's what's got me so
excited you guys the app layer is just that really wets my whistle i'm about y'all but i just man i
love that especially redact and all this stuff so cool they're building there um kenton did you have
any another question i have a topic to move on real quick someone want to clarify uh well actually
well we're talking about app layer maybe pick chad but chad's brain a bit more about i don't know i don't know if i've heard you talk much
about app layer chad i mean we all know jp is excited about it i'm curious are there any is
there any feature on app layer any any product that they're working on that you think is super
cool that you're looking forward to seeing finished and live and how it's used? Yeah. So, all right.
Well, I'm going to start by throwing a little bit of cold water on the app layer in general,
and then I'm going to warm it up a little bit.
There's this kind of like mentality in our industry as a whole about app layers in general.
Would that be, you know, Layer 2s or Solana or, you know, Ethereum or whatever.
There's a mentality that we've had as a culture, as a community and the industry as a whole,
that like app layer is great because you can build a smart contract that does so many things
and people are going to be really creative and think of these really great ideas.
And, you know, we're going to have all these great apps, you know, Web3 is going to come in and we're going to have
socials and we're going to do this kind of mentality that this kind of Pandora's box
will open as soon as we have like, you know, basically smart contracting on a blockchain,
which obviously we've had for quite a while now. But like the reality is that crypto as a whole,
But the reality is that crypto as a whole has a hard time finding product market fit.
If you look at all of the app chains out there, whether it be Sui or Solana or Ethereum or
whatever, whatever, whatever, layer twos, base, whatever, there's a mentality that these
things will just open up Pandora's box and there'll be tons of apps and huge transaction fees collected.
But like, if you look over the last like 10 years, like what is it? Oh, it's an A&M, Dex,
it's a Perpetuals, it's a lending, Aave style lending concept, maybe CDPs, like collateral
depositions, collateralized depositions, stablecoins in that sense.
There's like a handful of applications that really get some actual usage and product market fit.
And there's really not much after that point, right?
We just saw, recently we just saw a Farcaster who's been kind of pushing this kind of like social media on a blockchain mentality for years now.
And I remember even like my very short podcast I had for a very brief moment called Mad Blocks,
where we kind of ripped into Farcaster and why it makes no sense to even put socials on a blockchain.
And they have now shifted.
They're now moving away from the whole socials idea.
And they're moving to more towards just like building a wallet,
I guess, or something like this.
Like, I don't think that EVMs or smart contracting in general
on a blockchain really is that valuable as a whole.
Not in the same way as like Web2 is,
or just apps that you can build in the Web2 space.
There's a handful of reasons for that,
but like I just don't think it's really that valuable, you know?
And I think that like what we'll see on our app layer
is we'll see Rooji build these kind of major things I mentioned
that are successful that do get decent volume.
That's perpetuals and that's, you know, maybe a Bitcoin back stable coin, you know, Bitcoin
loans and Ethereum loans and, you know, Litecoin loans or whatever.
And like these kinds of apps that we've seen happen time and time again throughout the
decades of the years or rather of DeFi.
What they'll be like past that, I don't know.
I get a little bit more pessimistic after that point, to be honest.
There's going to be maybe three, maybe four at most,
five if we're lucky, that are actually, like, good apps
that produce real value and real transactions
and real fees generated and get some kind of reasonable amount of adoption.
But beyond that, I don't expect much because I don't think any other protocol,
any other kind of smart contracting-based kind of concept
really achieves much beyond these basic DeFi fundamentals.
Yeah, and the thing that – good, good soundbite there.
I like what you said. I really, the one thing I really like is I love the privacy element to it,
the redacted. So I don't know if any other protocol with an app player that can take any
DeFi primitive, which, you know, there's a lot of them out there. The market is split between all
these different ones, but you can come to ThorChain slash Rujira. You can conduct your business, do whatever you want to do,
but you also have this toggle ability that gives Zcash zero knowledge proof-esque
cryptography of privacy. I think that's a huge leg up for us. I'm curious to see where that goes.
us. I'm curious to see where that goes. Well, so that can be really great and it can be kind
of pointless. It depends upon the volume, right? So like a Zcash style or even Monero style,
like Monero is like the most privacy focused or the most privacy preserving protocol out there,
in my opinion. And it's how how much how well it preserves your privacy
uh depends upon the volume that's being passed through it right because if there's like a
if there's like a tornado cash kind of like clone and you know i put in a thousand dollars into it
and then five minutes later i take out a thousand dollars it would not be hard to figure out where
the money went in and where the money came out, right?
So you need, in order for mixers to work in the way they do, they need volume and they need
transactions. So if you build something, you know, that has a privacy like functionality
and there's no volume, then the privacy doesn't really work that well. Like it's fairly easy to
unwind. Then the question becomes like,
how much privacy is enough privacy, right?
Because if I want privacy
so that the government can't see my transactions,
well, then I need really good privacy
because there's a lot of money
and a lot of capability
and very highly technical people
within the government
that can unwind a lot of these.
I mean, I'm pretty convinced
that a lot of the privacy-preserving protocols out there, even ones that are popular or well-utilized, are probably cracked by the government.
I would be surprised if that was not the case, to be honest.
But if you're looking to have privacy because you want to, you know, this is not a perfect example, but if you want to buy a TV on Amazon using Amazon coin,
and you don't want Amazon to know how many Amazon coin you have
or associate an address,
because they're going to ship you that TV to your address,
and a wallet address which has so much Amazon coin or Bitcoin or whatever,
you don't want to put both of those pieces of information into a database
that Amazon stores until they get hacked. of information into a database, you know,
at the Amazon stores until they get hacked. And all of a sudden they can look, oh, look,
this guy bought a TV and he's got a thousand Bitcoin in his wallet and it got shipped to,
you know, 124, you know, Rodecaster, Rode, whatever thing. I'm going to go there and,
you know, with a wrench and a hammer and beat him over the head until he gives me a thousand Bitcoin.
That makes, that becomes like a lot more reasonable way of preserving your privacy. Like if you don't
need government level, NSA level privacy in that scenario, you just need enough privacy that it
becomes, you know, it's difficult enough for any regular person or regular criminal, so to speak,
or any regular person or regular criminal, so to speak,
to not be able to decrypt my, you know,
my original wallet address and how many, how much funds I have.
Right, right.
And real quick, we got a comment from InstaSwap.
They said, thank you for answering the questions.
Doing a great job.
Can't wait to see where ThorCh chain is in five to ten years from now
um thank you for that insta swap really appreciate that um kenton did you have anything you want to
add to that or i was going to move to coke um no well you didn't mention something you said the
volume on like you know if you're doing your secrecy your privacy is only as as strong as
as the volume going through it um i brought this
up before in the past people were telling me i was wrong so this is my understanding if we had
a monero pool on door chain like if it starts out really small it's actually going to be hard to
have any real privacy from it because the volume is going to be small and probably be kind of easy to point transactions. But I was told I was wrong.
Correct. I don't think that's an accurate way of looking at it. When you put Monero on
Thorechain and you're transferring your Bitcoin into Monero, the depth of the pool has no
relevance to the privacy aspect of it, right? The depth only dictates basically how fast the trade will execute.
It doesn't make it less or more private.
The privacy is preserved on the Monero side.
So you don't even get your privacy really until the trade is done.
Now the trade is done and you have your Monero and if you're 1,000 Monero in your wallet,
and now you have your privacy.
And by the way, if you take that 1,000 Monero
and trade it back through ThorChain,
back to a new Bitcoin wallet,
because you're just trying to break up the history or whatever,
if that's what you're trying to do,
that's probably not going to work very well.
Because if you swap to 1,000 Monero,
and then the next block, so to speak,
you swap, you know, a thousand Monero back to Bitcoin, it might,
that the two are connected, right? There's actually a reason why in Monero,
you're not allowed to move funds from your wallet if you've transacted within, I think it's like 15
blocks or something like that. I think there's like a limitation that like if you do a transaction,
you have to wait 15 blocks before you do another transaction.
And that in part is to help preserve the privacy of it.
Well, that's what I thought.
If someone did a huge trade in Monero, Bitcoin in Monero,
then Monero back to Bitcoin, you'd be able to track it.
Like, well, you connect the dots and you can infer.
Yes, but the depth of the pool has no relationship.
The pool could be 100K deep or $2 million deep.
The privacy preservation has no relationship to the depth of the pool.
But you have to be smart.
If you really wanted to do this and preserve your privacy, you're swept you know you swap some bitcoin to like a thousand monero um you should
wait you know i don't know a few days at the minimum right maybe even like if you want to be
really you know paranoid about it you could wait like a a couple months and then when you trade
back don't do the entire value of a thousand Monero. Actually get a random number generator
and because you don't want to use generate your numbers yourself because there's numbers that
humans tend to pick over other numbers and it makes it easier. That's the IRS does. Like the
IRS can figure out some degree, let's mathematically speaking, that taxes are done incorrectly because
the numbers are aligned with numbers that we make up as people, as humans. We have biases in this sense, and then the biases show up in your tax numbers.
And that's how one of the ways the IRS can determine, like,
some fraudulent activity on somebody else's taxes.
It's conceptually similar to that.
So, like, you want to take that thousand Monero, you know,
roll a random number like a dice in your home,
and, okay, I want to do 234.6767, whatever.
And that way it becomes more difficult to connect A with B.
And so if, using your example, say 1,000 Monero,
if there's thousands of people trading 1,000 Monero,
then you're like, you get, you're lost in the crowd, basically.
Yes.
So you mean the volume on, on the Monero?
That's what I mean about volume.
Because if there's a thousand people, if there's 10,000 people,
if there's a million people, the more transactions there are,
the more volume there is, the more, you know, interactions there are,
the more kind of shaken up,
the more mixing more or less happens, sort of,
in a matter of speaking.
And it becomes more difficult for, you know,
chain analysis companies to try to unwind.
Gotcha. Thanks for that. Thank you.
Good. Patriot, did you have a...
No, I thought that was great conversation.
Great job, guys.
I'll go ahead and kick it to With the Coke.
You got your hand up. What you got, buddy?
Yeah. The show goes so fast i kind of i forgot the ignition the beginning of my question but it's okay uh about that player no no i will try to you make this question appear again you
were speaking about that player and like like finding the product market fit and
like maybe, yeah, you see like it's Bitcoin stablecoin, etc, etc. But you kind of were
like skeptical about this AppLayer features taking off and that stuff?
Well, I'm not skeptical about like the AppLayer features taking off. Like if they
launch a really good perpetuals, it might take off.
If they launch a really good lending protocol,
it can really take off.
If it does a really good CDP, it can probably take off.
But I have doubts that them or any other team,
I'm not even picking on Rougie here specifically,
but just any dev team,
to build something in the smart contracting space
that isn't one of the already well-established
and well-utilized things like perps
and, you know, AMM decks
and, you know, these kind of basic kind of fundamentals
that has reached some kind of PMF. And there hasn know, these kind of basic kind of fundamentals that has reached
some kind of PMF.
And there hasn't been a lot of apps outside of that that actually has real usage and adoption.
I see.
Perfect.
You derailed me into my question.
But don't you think that ThorChain and AppLayer is doing something different?
We have this like a omni-chain approach.
We can go on with Dolana USDC, we can go on with ETH USDC.
It really makes it easy.
And let's be honest, I was a victim of the Celsius network.
And the reason why a lot of people were using Celsius network,
besides Manchinski being really charismatic and stuff, was the ease
of use.
You come in, whatever assets, you put it there, it starts auto compounding right away.
Now the Ruggira is approaching themselves or how they are doing their stuff.
They're doing this like mid-chain approach.
It doesn't matter what you have.
All the USDC is the same.
I think it's like really streamlining all those like friction points.
And I think they have a really good way to cater to a lot of users.
No, I think there are some structural differences between
what you can build natively
on ThorChain, on the
app layer, than what you can build natively
on Ethereum or
other competitors out there.
There is structurally a difference between
our app layer and
Sui's app layer, for example.
We automatically already have a built-in kind of DEX
and we have access to layer one assets, for example,
that's not so present on other kind of app layers or chains or whatever,
layer ones or layer twos or whatever.
So there's structurally a difference.
But even like the layer one stuff,
when you swap into a secure asset on ThorChain, the secure asset is, in effect, a wrapped asset.
The protocol is taking in one real Bitcoin and then inventing this new token called a secured asset Bitcoin.
And then it gives you a one-to-one ratio between the two assets.
That, in effect, is a wrapped asset, right?
Which is nothing wrong with that.
Like, wrapped assets have their place, have their purposes.
You shouldn't have to use one if you want to just trade
from point A to point B, for example.
But that makes sense for what the RUG or the app layer
is trying to achieve.
So there are changes, and there are differences,
and there are benefits to using DoorChain over some other kind of app layer is trying to achieve. So there are changes and there are differences and there are benefits to using
Storechain over like some other kind of app layer out there.
And having native support for Bitcoin and Litecoin and Doge
and all the other chains that we'll be adding
over the next X amount of time is helpful, right?
Like even if you go on AVAX
and AVAX have their own, like,
Bitcoin solution that you can get a, like, an AVAX Bitcoin on the AVAX network, you know,
can you get Doge? I don't think you can, right? Can you get, you know, other Solana tokens?
Don't think you can. And so, like, ThorChain, like, it allows us, we're not, like,
And so like ThorChain, like it allows us, we're not like dug into a specific ecosystem.
We're like a Unitarian in a matter of speaking.
And we add support and want to support the larger ecosystem as a whole,
rather than like specifically our own particular assets or whatever.
I don't think it's already like a significant value proposal for a user just abstracting away the swapping thing.
They don't have to have WPTC or the WRAP PTC and stuff like that.
It's same as Celsius, like you just deposit your Bitcoin.
Although in Celsius, of course, they did their own bogus this and that, but we will do it in an honest way.
But it just abstracts the complexity away from users.
They come in with Bitcoin, they come in with ETH, they come in with AVAX.
Whatever they come within, they can get their loan back in whatever asset they want.
So whatever is going to happen in the background, you just take it away from users.
Isn't it already like a specific, like a huge value proposal?
That is one of the differences, right?
Because when you want to use Bitcoin on Ethereum, for example,
and obviously Bitcoin is not on Ethereum,
but you have to go through a wrapped asset like WBDC,
which, if I remember correctly, is managed by BitGo.
You are exposed to your,
you've exposed yourself to the risks
of the Ethereum blockchain to start with.
You've exposed yourself to BitGo
and, you know, however they're managing
and storing all this Bitcoin
and to maintain the kind of the peg
between WBDC and real BDC.
And then you have the smart contract risk
of the whatever the app is that you're using on top of that. So you're concatenating all this risk, you know, together to calculate
what your full total risk of the whole thing is. Like, what's the chance of Ethereum having
some major problem? What's the chances of BitGo, you know, having some major issue? What's the
chance of the smart contract that I'm using to have some sort of major issue? These things
concatenate and add together. Unfortunately, it's a little bit different.
Like everything's structurally built in from the ground up.
So you have risk from ThorChain risk, of course,
and you have threshold signature risk,
like our GG20 implementation.
And then you have the RooGee app or whatever the app is
that's doing whatever the thing is you're trying to do.
You have that kind of risk.
And then you can kind of like look at those things and say to yourself, how comfortable or how
much risk is there on this stack versus risk on the other stack in Ethereum land.
And you can make it whatever calculations, somewhat subjective calculations about what
the risks are for A versus B. But you have to think in those terms, I think,
if you're going to use either of these systems.
Yeah, I understand this, but I think it makes,
at least for me, in my mind, it makes it easier for users.
They come with Bitcoin, we have our own system,
we have our own custodiality, we don't go with BitGo and stuff.
I think it makes it easier. Yeah, it's less steps.
Right, because it's all like,
it's very Apple-esque in a sense, right?
Like Apple is kind of like a walled garden,
in a matter of speaking.
They do everything and everything is well integrated
and kind of works very well
because when you're building or designing your thing for Apple,
you know the environment you're working in. And that kind of more narrow view of knowing what you're building or designing your thing for Apple, you know the environment you're working in.
And that just kind of more narrow view
of knowing what you're working in
makes it easier to build better UX and experience,
which is what I think what makes Apple so,
one of the things that makes Apple so successful
as a company is that kind of,
that beautiful UX they give
and the full complete UX
and your laptop and your phone and your iPad
and your iCloud and your contacts that they will sync to this and it all just it's all seamless and kind
of elegantly put together and you have conception the same thing happening you know in Thor Chainland
where you don't have to go run off and put your bitcoin and then go to the WBC people and give
them your Bitcoin.
Chad, you can't get it out there.
He's back.
Sorry, guys.
No worries.
There's a difference between using the unified experience of ThorChain where you can just deposit your Bitcoin
and then you're already in the smart contract
and you're getting your Bitcoin loan
or whatever it is in a single transaction versus if you were to go to Ethereum land, you have to go getting your Bitcoin loan or whatever it is in a single transaction.
Versus if you were to go to Ethereum land, you have to go get your Bitcoin, you have
to go to BitGo, you have to give them your Bitcoin, they'll give you the WBDC and then
from there you can take that WBDC and put it over there to that thing you're trying to
do, whatever that is.
And it's like a multi-step, kind of multi-interface potentially, depending on how it's made.
You know, that can be more complicated.
Yeah, that's exactly why I think
you kind of, I don't know,
maybe downplayed the Ruggira,
but I think that's the perfect example
why Ruggira makes sense.
It's like this streamlined approach.
There is a value proposal.
It's easy.
You come with your native L1 asset.
You leave with your native L asset.
There is, of course, contract risks.
But at least there is not got the risks
like with WPTC and stuff like that.
So, yeah, I just want to tap in that conversation.
Thank you for your answer thank you yeah no worries
yeah um okay um kenton did you have something i have oh i don't let me just encourage the
audience if you guys want to come up ask a question or if you have a comment um by all
means please request i do have one topic um so we haven't talked about in a while um the thor chain
account on x shout out to the uh intern uh he posted about the router v6 coming forward um chad
would you just like to break that down maybe um the importance of the the version 6 router for the audience?
Oh my God, it's been a while since I've thought about this.
So the version six router, if I were quickly,
it's a little bit more efficient.
It supports Memolus for ERC-20s,
which is a really nice thing.
And I think it extends it so that, I think Oleg was talking about how the new router gives them okay ability to interact with,
what's the name of that protocol?
Gosh, I'm blanking on the name.
The one that does stable coins across multiple EVM chains.
Tron?
Sorry, was it? Say it again?
Tron?
Not Tron? Sorry, was it? Say it again? Tron? Not Tron.
God, they did cross-chain swaps like...
Noble?
Not Noble, but good guess.
Anyways, it allowed them to integrate
with other
DeFi or smart contract apps
that would be helpful.
No, good guess though.
Good guess. I can't remember the name you gotta
find it now it's annoying me um i remember i did i actually did a debate with one of their guys
like two years ago we got into like arguing about their designs so it was like it was they came out
and everybody was like you know asking questions about it we did did the space together. Stargate? Stargate. Oh, I remember that.
Go ahead.
Yeah, that's the one.
That's the one.
Good.
That's it.
Stargate.
And then Stargate is built on something else.
Stargate Finance is built on top of some other protocol.
I'm not blanking on the name of that, too.
Oh, Layer Zero.
That's what it is, Layer Zero.
It took me forever to get to that name.
Now I forget the hell I was even talking about.
Where was I going with this?
Oh, Rider V6.
There you go.
Yes.
Yes.
So it gets some capabilities in that.
What's interesting is that, like,
I sincerely doubt,
and maybe I'll be eating my words,
but, like, that this will probably be, like,
the last change to the router, to be honest with you.
Like, we don't really have much of a need to change it
after this point because it supports everything
we could want to support.
In fact, like, hypothetically,
you could even get rid of the router.
Like, that's totally possible.
Like, the primary reason why we even created the router to begin with
is that ERC-20s don't actually have memos in their transactions.
And so you couldn't swap the Thorchain with an ERC-20, you know, initially
in the early, early, early days,
because there was just no way of embedding a memo with the transaction.
And so we kind of wrapped ERC-20 transactions in our own little router
to create a memo in addition to the transfer itself.
That was the original reason why we even created the router to begin with,
just on day one.
But with memo-less, in theory, I'm not saying we should do this
or this is going to happen.
I would even argue we shouldn't do this, to be honest with you.
But in theory, you could get rid of the router now that we have Memolus.
That way, all the swaps and transactions and everything you could possibly want to do on
a thought chain is done through a Memolus transaction, like a Memolus way of interfacing,
rather than embedding your intent in the transaction itself.
So you could actually even remove the router in a theoretical future.
Whether we actually do that or not, I doubt it, to be honest.
But it is kind of interesting.
I believe that debate you had with that guy, I think that was like more three years ago.
Yeah, it could be.
Three and a half.
It could be.
That was a blast from the past man oh yeah that
was fun i think i think i won that debate yeah i think i ripped that guy a new one you did i do
remember that my my favorite moment of that like little debate because i i had i had you know i
wasn't shy about my my concerns around the on the design or why it's not nearly as decentralized as they were, you know, stating that it was.
But I remember, like, I was pointing out something
that's, like, not very decentralized.
Like, this whole part, like, how are you going to
decentralize this part?
He goes, I don't know.
The DAO will figure it out.
I'm like, the DAO?
You're generally not going gonna look to any dows for like technical innovation this was one of the funniest moments I can remember from that
from that little debate yeah that was a long time ago I forget which I don't
think you were at eat Denver but you had that little dweeb on on you're on stage
and he was talking smack on yeah that was the Bitcoin Bitcoin conference yeah yeah yeah yeah
I was yeah that was that was funny you know what's funny like nobody nobody knows about that was that
um uh for whatever reasons there's four of us on the stage on this panel of the Bitcoin conference
that I was invited to.
And for whatever reasons, I could only hear in my earpiece, whatever,
two of the voices on the stage.
And he was one of the two that I couldn't hear.
So it was really hard to hear what he was saying
when he was kind of like trash talking 4chain or me or whatever.
But yeah, he was just kind of like a Bitcoin maxi who was, you know,
knew his crowd and leaned into us being a non-Bitcoin token
and then used that as a methodology to like, you know, hit us on the chin or whatever.
Right, right.
Which was funny because his whole project was like nearly pointless that he was building had like almost like we had more bitcoin on thor chain
than he had on his entire protocol like times three or something like this when he was a young
kid too this is a thing that you know that always it's just man i don't know what society's gonna
look like because you know we're all the age you know back you know 90s 80s we grew up right
where if you talk smack
to another guy, you're going to
fight. You're going to come to blows.
You know what I mean?
These kids growing up on
X, Twitter, on social media, they're just
throwing haymakers
at each other all day
and no one gets bitch slapped.
There's no consequence
for just talking to magic like if i did not know
chad or kenton and i'm sitting next to you like i'm i'm paying attention to the words that are
coming out of my mouth because there is just this level of respect as a man that i have to respect
these kids don't have that filter so i was like oh shoot you know you know it's i mean you're on
stage you can't bitch slap them but you might you know what i mean i actually i i threatened him actually with a bit because you did at the time it was like will smith
had just slapped chris rock on stage you know it happened like a month a month earlier or something
like this and i remember asking the audience like should i should i bitch slap this guy will
smith style what do you think i was there chad i was in the audience you you handled it very well he
you did a great great job you didn't get get uh uh what's heard um triggered and he looked he
looked like a real a real douche um yeah he was he was definitely a real douche for sure yeah
someone says it was jack jack moeller or something i don't know no
no no it wasn't no okay sorry i don't know i would love to debate jack moeller but i cannot stand
that guy what uh i mean every time i see him talk i mean he just knows the hell out of me
well it's a bit it's a little bit hippo yeah because he he's so high and mighty about the you know
bitcoin and the ideals and everything but he's got a platform that requires kyc and your email
address and everything and like which is fine it's good but like don't be so critical of you
know of other projects other people what they're doing when you know you're bending he's bending
the rules for his his company right? Yeah.
Yeah, go ahead.
I just can't stand him.
Whenever I see him talking,
it was just like,
he's such,
I don't know,
it feels like,
he feels like he just has so much confidence or cockiness
for doing very little.
Like, oh, I connected to Bitcoin
so you can buy something on
shopify i'm like that's good and everything but like dude what the do all these bitcoin maxis
are confusing uh bull market for brains so they just they're young so they got in early and you
know and it worked right well yes it's not like anything it's not like they're intrinsically
intelligent the same thing would have happened there'd been another group of people in the 90s
or the 80s or the 1600s that would have done the exact same thing as them right they're just yeah
lucky with their timing and their age and when you make that much money that you when you're that
young it really goes to your head because you think you're smart you think you're right and um so
yeah it's unfortunate but yeah that's what it is yeah i feel like because it's so hard
to build on top of bitcoin um there's not really a whole lot you can do on top of it and so anything
you do do is like whoop to do like it doesn't really get that much of a product fit.
Even like something like Lightning Network, which I'm a fan of,
really hasn't had that much of an adoption,
even though it's an interesting design and a good project
and all those kind of things.
So like when anybody builds anything on top of Bitcoin,
there's like frothing at the mouth because something's being built.
Yay!
Like nothing being built on top of Bitcoin really matters for the most part.
The only exceptions are Light Network and TradFi Rails,
like ETFs and Bitcoin loans through JP Morgan or something like that.
But building tech on top of Bitcoin,
I have not seen anything built that really makes a lot of sense, to be honest.
I have, Chad.
And it actually wraps it up, brings it all back to the Bitcoin conference.
ThorChain.
ThorChain is building something huge on Bitcoin.
And that's why they invited you to come speak.
ThorChain didn't reach out to them.
Bitcoin conference reached out to you.
And they're like, you guys are a bitcoin you know we want to have you
and yes chain is like what one of the only or the only like you know altcoins that's been invited to
to the bitcoin conference because torch does something real for bitcoin right right we we
allow people to trade you know the biggest trading pair in crypto is Bitcoin and stables, Bitcoin USDC typically, or UCT. And we allow that trade without KYC and a reasonable amount of privacy and availability and being permissionless and all those things like that's probably the most one like not to toot my own horn here but that's
probably one of the most significant like additions to the bitcoin community is sort of
because it allows you to get in and out of bitcoin without going through a centralized third party
which upholds you know satoshi's entire vision do you know what i mean like it was funny that that
guy was giving me a hard time about rune or thor, but ThorChain is so much more decentralized
than his little protocol that he was working on.
It was apples and oranges.
We were much more aligned to Bitcoin's,
to Satoshi's worldview than he was on his own project.
If that kid decides to use Rogera AppLayer,
that'd be a great redemption arc for you, buddy.
That would be hilarious, wouldn't it? That would be a great redemption arc for you, buddy. That would be a great redemption arc.
You can make amends that way.
You know what he's doing?
He's,
he's purposely using Coinbase to avoid Thor chain.
That's how small brain deals.
Yeah.
Just go ahead and KYC away.
Yeah.
It's like so disaligned to Satoshi's entire worldview.
But it's okay.
Or whatever.
100%.
That's what got me so excited.
Our first principles are rock solid.
It might take time for the market to figure out, but hey, we're going to be doing marketing soon, guys.
That's true.
That's true.
Shout out to With the Coke.
We talked earlier.
There's a lot of good things
happening in the background guys I am so pumped were you gonna say something Kendon I was gonna
say I'm glad you brought that up and marketing same sentence because this is door chain's
competitive advantage it's it isn't cross chain swaps it's freedom right it isn't what you're
doing it's why you're doing it you know we, we're all doing this for freedom, right? The freedom to transact without an intermediary.
And, you know, that's what got Bitcoin going.
That's what got the whole,
that's what started this whole movement in crypto.
And, you know, and you see this on Twitter,
like everyone's crying,
like what happened to the good old days
when we were changing the world?
Right now it's all just, you know,
airdrops and and
you know meme coins and stuff and you know adapt and you know trying to get you know get the
government to to buy bitcoin you know what happened to the original mission and that's what thor chain
is right that's what keeps all of us here that's what keeps us all going that's what we're doing
that's our competitive advantage right that's what we really
do different and bring to the table and um you know that's why thought chain persists and then we'll continue to persist and ultimately win yes sir i love it we got no quitting us i mean
literally the the fight is existential you know um it's do or die right right? And so we're not dyers, we're doers.
So that's what we're going to do. We're not going to stop. And I think we got all our ducks in a
row. We just, we just got to send it, baby. And that's what we're going to do. I'm really excited
for 2026, you guys. Very, very excited. You know, we had a rough year, the beginning start,
but we recovered. And I think we have rallied like no other community probably has ever rallied before.
And it's really exciting. Very, very happy to be on this trip with all of you guys on stage and on the audience.
I know it's been tough, but if you're seeing what I'm seeing, you're feeling like how I feel.
You know, we got this thing. At least think though so i'm excited you guys i'm pumped
um okay oh do we have any other questions for the audience um we're going about an hour 30 minutes
here um and just so you know guys um we're gonna be there's gonna be a slight break from
from spaces uh so we're gonna have another thursday um we're gonna do saturday and then
the following saturday of course we'll have one and then i think we're gonna take two weeks
off that'll be christmas new year's spend time with the family and then you know january we're
gonna hit it hard um just so everyone is aware um and we'll be fresh invigorated and ready to go and that's when i think you know chad the
new update will be coming um and it's off to the races you guys so i'm i'm excited well while we're
waiting for people to come up and ask questions or whatever um i did just open up a merge request
today i think was i think it's kind of fun uh which i mentioned in the past, but I'll mention it again here. But it's this idea that the protocol can start executing your trade before your inbound asset hits the block.
So if you're trading like Bitcoin to USDC, for example, the trade will start to execute as soon as we notice the Bitcoin in the mempool.
And then it'll hold the outbound asset, the USDC in this case.
It'll hold it until we get the confirmation, you know, that it gets into the actual block.
And the reason why this is a benefit to the protocol is that it just basically cuts 10
minutes off of the trade, in a matter of speaking.
So it makes our trades execute a lot faster.
But it also really nice because when you're setting your order to trade Bitcoin to USDC,
within that 10 minute period, historically, the price can change in one direction or the
other, which means that your trade might not execute because the price limit that you put
on it has been exceeded or whatever, or not enough rather.
And, you know, your trade even just fails and gets returned back to Bitcoin.
So you just more or less wasted 20 minutes for this trade that didn't even execute because of the price shift and change.
So this would allow that to execute, you know, immediately, so to speak.
Like we probably will start trading within, you know, I don't know how, maybe seconds, 10, 15 seconds. And it will start to execute the trade
like immediately. So you get better kind of user experience in that sense. And then you get,
you know, up to a 10 minutes of a trade executing faster. And by having, by cutting off 10 minutes of your trade time, it makes us
more competitive in the swap kit kind of UI. So we'll probably beat out Near or whatever
in some cases and kind of snipe some of their volume.
That's really exciting. Does that apply only to is this only for Bitcoin or is this all
Is this only for Bitcoin or is this all layer one exogenous assets?
layer one exogenous assets?
It will work for any layer one, but not all layer ones do we monitor the mempool.
So like we do for like UTXOs like Bitcoin and Doge.
What is Doge?
I think Doge is like a minute, maybe three minutes.
I can't remember the block time.
Doge would cut off three minutes in that scenario.
But Ethereum and other EDMs, I don't think we even look at the
mempool so it would it wouldn't be have maybe no change there but you know ethereum and those kind
of em chains are pretty quick anyway so i don't think it would really even if you did do it it
would be like oh we saved you 12 seconds you know which is like oh not that big of a deal. Right. Isn't Zcash an old fork of Bitcoin?
Would this apply to Zcash's too?
Yes, I believe so.
I think Zcash is a fork of a fork of a fork of Bitcoin.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Nice, man.
That's really exciting.
That's a huge win right there.
I mean, cutting off 10 minutes, that's phenomenal.
Yeah.
Not much to say other than, hell yeah, let's let LFG, right?
That's awesome.
I'm curious, why didn't you have it set up like that to begin with?
Well, to be honest, I hadn't thought of the notion of just holding on to the outbound until the conf finishes.
And in the beginning, we didn't have streaming swaps
so it wouldn't have been that helpful right because like if you're doing a if you're not
doing a stream swap you're doing a single swap then this wouldn't actually really help you much
because you still have to wait 10 minutes for to get in the block to receive the funds and
and the difference actually would be like six seconds or something like this like it would
be so insignificant it wouldn't be that helpful um so historically it wouldn't it wouldn't have worked or been that
helpful like in the older 4chain world but streaming swaps kind of changes the the calculus
because streaming swaps can take you know anywhere from five minutes you know or one one block to
five minutes to you know uh 12 hours or whatever. And it would, you know, benefit in that scenario.
And it also helps with the delayed outbound, right?
So the delayed outbound is already kind of done before the Bitcoin even hits the block.
So if there is a delayed outbound, like it kind of, in some sense,
removes the delayed outbound in that sense.
Yeah, that's really cool
that could be huge man yeah i think it's i think it's interesting i've been thinking about zero
comp trading for like a while on and off and not really having an idea or design that you know
is good enough where i feel that it wouldn't be a security burden to the to the protocol
i think this is very clear like that's very obvious that it should be fine.
I missed, maybe I didn't make sure I understand.
So what you pushed, is that like a feature complete
or is that the beginning of designing
a zero confirmation feature
or is it ready to go like right now?
No, it's ready to go.
If it gets merged, I think it's reviewed
and merged into this release,
we'll have it in the next release.
Whether that happens or not, I'm not sure.
It depends upon how many rounds of responses or comments from the other devs into pointing out something
that maybe should be changed or a bug or whatever.
And then there's testing and that kind of stuff as well.
But I would... And then also there's like the holidays too.
You got Christmas and, you know, New Year's
and that kind of stuff that can, you know,
limit auditing the code change itself.
So, but I think hopefully we'll be able to get into 315
and when 315 launches, we'll be able to turn this feature on
and cut down our trade times.
Mostly from coming from Bitcoin.
It'll help other ones as well, but obviously Bitcoin is the obvious benefit.
Yeah, so one thing that gets me so excited is the first principles always lead to greater things.
Like when you made streaming swaps, right?
Yeah, it's better.
I remember you first talking made streaming swaps, right? Yeah, it's better. I remember you first talking
about streaming swaps, like you're talking about price execution and the power of the depth of the
pools is no longer that important of a consideration. It is such a level up that now you, when you look
back at it, you can think of zero confirmation. And I kind of think of the same way when it comes
to the app layer, right? Like, and it's just more first principles on first principle you have you have this uncensorable layer one liquidity that people can build on
top of and then you can then make applications on top of that i mean it's just like second third
fourth fifth tier effects very powerful stuff so bullish chad this is so exciting
oh yeah absolutely yeah it's funny to see like see how much the protocol has evolved over the years
and how much it continues to innovate and find new ways of being more capital efficient
or a better UI or UX or more efficient on gas utilization,
improving performance of X, Y, or Z.
It's kind of funny to look back and see
all the changes that have been made over the last you know five years that have improved the protocol
in one form or another you know 100 how did that work by the way just just to pick your brain a
little bit like was that like a eureka moment or was this like a real gradual like realization
like oh zero comp is now is now possible because of streaming swaps. How'd that work, if you remember
your train of thought?
This is actually a recent idea
that came to me
not even a month ago, I guess.
Maybe like two, three weeks ago
about this particular design.
The zero comp design in the past
was about somebody providing
bond, which I would
imagine to be the like the wallets or swap kit or something like this. And then they wear the risk
if there's like a reorg attack of some kind, which is kind of nice and kind of not nice at the same
time. It's, you know, it's kind of, it's like a swap kit could use like, oh, well, if you want
instantaneous trading, then, you know, instead of 25 bps, we'll give you 50 bps,
and then we'll wear the risk of a reorg or something like that.
But I'm like, eh.
I kind of like it, but I mostly don't like it.
Like, there's just too much risk there.
But even if the protocol is not wearing it,
it's still, you know, less than perfect.
But this was just more of like, I was thinking more about
when we were having some near, kind of sniping some of our volume.
And I remember that SwapKit doesn't recommend a how much weight does it put on one versus the other.
And so I actually studied the algo that they use to figure out like how much time needs to be, how fast would you be faster in order to get what kind of, you know, benefits from the swap kit, like kind of
algo. So that really got me on down the stream of like, how do we make trading faster? How do
we execute our trades as quickly as possible? And I noticed that swap kit always has very slow
swap times when going from Bitcoin, because they do two big, they do two comps, two Bitcoin comps for their trade. So
you're already 20 minutes into it. And then you have to do the whole like, you know, near and
near intense thing, which takes another like five, six, seven minutes of them like this.
So that's like 26 minutes in total, which is like, you know, kind of a long time if you think about
it in a sense. And I was like, well, if we can get 15 minutes faster than that,
then we can get like a 20% improvement on our recommendations
to the swap kits, like kind of like algo or whatever.
So then they kind of put me down like a rabbit hole,
like trying to think of ways of, you know, improving our performance,
especially coming from Bitcoin,
because that's where most of the comp counting is for Nier.
So then I kind of came up with this notion.
I'm like, oh, we can shave 10 minutes, which would be pretty good
because then we could do a trade in 10 minutes
and they're doing a trade in 26 minutes,
which is more than 15 minutes,
which should give us a more or less 20% improvement on recommendations.
Even if we're not the best price,
the time will counteract not being the best price um and and
give us and force us to be the most recommended trade in some scenarios which was which just
made sense to me yeah freaking cool man love it all right guys you got a you got a little insight
how that thinking process went really cool we have We have another question from Instaswap. They are back. I'm just going to read it to you here, Chad. And I should know this,
but I'm sorry, I don't. Is there a list of assets supported via Memolist? If I recall correctly,
not every asset supported via Memolist, will that change? There's not a list. The list is basically any gas asset should work just fine.
I don't think ERC-20s currently work with Memolist.
I think we need to get RouterV6 deployed.
And once that is, I think it should work with every asset.
Okay, there you go.
And what about Rune?
Are you still working on Rune and native assets?
I actually just opened the merge request for that.
Did I actually get it off the draft status?
Let me look real quick.
I was looking at that today.
But yes, I have a merge request open.
I'm not sure if I have...
I can't remember if I actually put it into non-draft status
ready for a review.
Give me one second.
I'll look it up.
Where did it go? I know I had it here somewhere. Oh, this one second. I'll look it up. Where did it go?
I know I had it here somewhere.
Oh, this is merch.
I don't want that.
Yes.
Yes.
It's all the gas class that's accepted.
Sorry.
I removed the draft status today, actually.
So now it's ready for code review.
And I actually got one approval already, actually,
from one of the devs already.
So yeah, that will probably be in,
I hope it'll be in 3.15 as well.
If not 3.15, it'll be in 3.16.
LFG, boys.
Let's go.
I love it.
I don't have any more questions.
Kenton, did you have anything else?
I'm wondering if we're getting to the point
where we might wrap up the space
if no one else wants to come up or ask any more questions i think so we can wrap it
up unless there's something else chad wants to to discuss um no man i think we're i think we're
pretty good yeah okay and chad are you down for next thursday as well just to make sure uh i think
so but i'm still kind of planning out
my week so that might don't hold it to me but in this current moment yes okay okay sounds good but
if you need to cancel obviously no big deal yeah it's the holiday season of course um this Saturday
you guys um we are going to have the unstoppable guys right Kenton? So that'll be fun. We'll get to talk with them.
And then the last space of the year,
that following Saturday, of course,
we're going to have Ruggiero.
We're going to have one big Ruggiero space,
credit accounts going live. They're doing all kinds of amazing stuff.
So that will be great.
And then one last plug here, you guys.
We're going to have the blog of ThorChain that is going live.
Give me a second here.
I'm going to put that in the thingy-majigger here.
No, we're going to have – okay, so can you maybe speak about that, Kenton?
I think he's just –
Yeah, the intern is asking us us to pitch tell you guys about
the blog we got the the blog on the Thorchain website we're going to start using that going
forward instead of medium and there's an email sign up list there so if you guys want to join
the email list sign up get updates so you know anytime there's new features news the quarterly
reports you know anything you're seeing on Medium,
we're going to have on the blog and the website.
And so I'm working on trying to migrate all the Medium articles over to the blog.
So it's all in one place.
And yeah, it's another way we're trying to build our audience
is build an email list.
So email is still considered
the the hands down best uh social media if you will a way for con you know connecting with people
um so we want we want to build that out very cool and uh apologies for the clumsy delivery on that
on the tc intern i will do better next time thank you kenton for the backup there and guys we're going to be having all kinds of new content coming out uh as i said earlier lots
of great conversations are happening right now lots of cool people are stepping up to do amazing
things with thor chain if you want to do something if you want to help you know please reach out
and again i'm going to pitch it one more time um if there are anybody out there who who thinks they
have the technical skill to become a node operator um please reach out um we'll hook you up with rune tard let's increase the
let's increase the decentralization of this network um it's prime time thor chain's ready to go
we got a lot of things going um please reach out i'll do whatever i can to help you it's go time
you guys it is go time all right guys with that being said thank you all so much
for turning in this episode this has been a great episode thank you again chad uh you're always so
generous with your time and kenton is always a blast um doing these with you as well i hope
everyone has a great remainder of the work week and we will see you saturday take care guys bye
bye guys bye We will see you Saturday. Take care, guys. Bye-bye. Bye, guys. Bye. Thank you.
