Hello everyone and welcome to the club. Today we have a exciting guest Nicholas who will be with you. Us in a few seconds suggested tight guys we will be right back with you.
But this is going to be a good one. The first text coming to Cosmos Hope. Very excited to hear from Nicholas today.
Alright, I can see Nicolas is officially with us. I just invited you to speak Nicolas. So you should be able to see the speaker
icon or the speaker invitation. I had some issues last night when I was interviewing Gelato. So just let me know if you don't see the invitation I'll try to invite you as a co-host that worked out in the end.
yesterday at least. But super excited to have you here Nicholas. I think a lot of people are very keen on hearing both about what's happening on Cosmos Up but also about what's been in the making with duality.
I don't see the speaker icon on your end, Nicolas, so I'll just try to invite you as a co-host.
So yeah, hopefully that will sort things out.
Yes, loud and clear. Great. Hello Nicholas. Welcome to the club. Hello. Thanks for having me, guys.
Definitely, definitely. As I was saying in the intro here, I think people are super keen on hearing more about, first of all, what was going on in the customer's hub. I think a lot of people are super excited about that. But in particular, what happens with duality and
Perhaps talk a little bit about yourself. Let's hear a little bit more about Nicholas, who is Nicholas and how did you end up working on or for duality? Yeah, so just for a bit of background on myself.
I stumbled on the, let's do the long, long version. I stumbled on the Bitcoin white paper and it about, we got to him in maybe around 2016ish while I was studying to become a software engineer and I had heard about it before.
for, but didn't make any significant effort to understand anything about how it worked the underlying technology. But it's pretty safe to say that I got properly hooked by mainly proof of work and its elegance, and naturally then discovered a theorem shortly after.
I spent most of my early Ethereum days studying the standards and programming language and
I found myself deeply, deeply interested. And from that moment until now, I've kind of exclusively worked on Web 3. I started off at consensus.
and have since worked on various projects from decentralized bridging to defy to centralized permissioned ledgers and
contract work here and there but yeah so it's it's been a it's been a crazy wild last few years honestly it feels like two lifetimes already but here we are today yeah that's crypto for you right
there. The talk to us about perhaps going from being quite deep into the Ethereum ecosystem and moving on to then duality and of course the Cosmos ecosystem, etc. Because this is something that really resonates with me and I think a lot of other people. I started out as well.
just like you, being very fascinated with obviously Bitcoin, Proof of Work, the first blockchain, and then subsequently the Ethereum being able to deploy smart contracts and actually do stuff on-chain. But in my personal experience at least, maybe you can talk to this as well, but I really experienced in the Ethereum
ecosystem when I was banging my head against the wall building stuff there. I really felt like there was almost like a zero-sum game happening like, you know, in this corner you got all the liquidity markets and we all fight for the same liquidity and in this corner you got all the taxes and they're all fighting for trading volume.
and see who wins. But then when I first started really paying attention to Cosmos, obviously I knew about Cosmos for many years, but only until maybe a year ago, maybe one and a half year ago, I really started paying attention because it was a completely different vibe. With IBC and
enabled and being able to move as is across different chains. It just changed the game completely. Like everybody was cheering each other on. Everybody was sort of having this sort of, yeah, what you see in tech in general, like we can build a bigger pie. We don't have to fight for the same amount of pie. I'm curious to hear if you experience sort of the
same thing and in general just how was it to go from being quite deep in Ethereum and then now to being quite deep into customers? Yeah so basically it's bittersweet. I love Ethereum I think it is
I think it's fantastic. I spend a lot of time working on Ethereum and I developed a passion for the community and the projects there and the language and how everything works. You know, synchronous composability and whatnot.
But when we switched to cosmos and a little bit of interesting history is that duality's first implementation was insolidity. But we decided to move to cosmos when thinking about what the actual
vision, long-term looks like a what a DAX can be. And that means full stack control. The fact that we can control our own gas markets, the fact that we can control consensus and we can control ordering in some ways. We have a lot of tools in our disposal to do a bunch of
really crazy things, which we just don't on Ethereum. So the move was a intentional targeted move to increase our technical scope a little bit in order to be
to actually implement what we want and we want what we set out to build. But yeah, it's been very welcoming here. I've been aware about Cosmos for a while, but didn't actually consider it as a place to actually start building until maybe about
a year ago. It's funny because it's exactly the same story as myself. I don't know what was the trigger point for you. For me, it was very much the whole IBC enabled and the adoption of IBC started
to take form. Was that the same trick point for you to move from Ethereum and onto Cosmos or was it something else? I wouldn't say it was exactly a trigger point as much as it was one of the points that we needed to parse in order to determine whether or not Cosmos was a sufficiently
feature complete ecosystem. That being said, bridging is a very, very important piece of the puzzle. And as we were doing more research and understanding a little bit better how exactly IBC works, what the limitations are, what the security and
I think I have some issues. But I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have some issues. I think I have#
about it, it's really cool. Yeah, and I think most people, when they get into Cosmos, that's at least something that they can see like, okay, what is Dinguish, for example, Ethereum from Cosmos? The first thing that comes to mind for many people at least is IPC, but obviously the stack is much
bigger than that. And it sounds like you guys have been sort of, yeah, waiting for the tech to be not just developed, but also sort of battle tested, right? Before you start to move from Ethereum to Cosmos. And I think that's something we will see more and more and more teams. Like, of course, TYDX comes to mind. There's a lot of different depths that are massively
successful on Ethereum, I think we will start seeing more and more looking towards Cosmos and Cosmos Tech as it gets more and more proven. Would you agree with that, or? Yeah, I agree with that. By the way, another point on IBC versus versus Ethereum is that I don't necessarily think of
IBC as a big differentiating factor compared to Ethereum. Well, the reason Ethereum doesn't need IBC is because it does have default synchronous composability. IBC is bridging and it
It works by making chains asynchronously composable with each other, which works in many cases. I don't personally believe IBC is the base infrastructure
is there it's ready and it's cool but I think the adoption of it and how it's being used is currently a little bit lacking and I'm just very excited to see teams actually pick IBC up and use it to its full potential in terms of all the cool very very cool cross-chain things you can do with it.
Definitely, definitely. But obviously, as we all know, cosmos has sort of been this weird beast where it was very hard for a lot of people, I think, getting into cosmos to wrap their head around what is cosmos, what is the cosmos hub, and it just seemed very fragmented. I remember
The first time I came to customers like, "Okay, so I have to buy Adam and then I move it to Cosmos Hub. What is Cosmos Hub really? What can I do here? Not much. So I have to move it to Osmoses and then I can trade. Now I can move it to Mars, for example, only recently and then there's a money market. Yumi has been around.
in sort of beta mode for quite a while. But it's very fragmented for me, which is very different from, as you say, Ethereum. Like you install Metamask, there's a mainnet, Ethereum mainnet, and boom, off you go, all tabs are deployed on mainnet. So let's talk about Cosmos Hub and your experience
working with them because the headline here with duality is obviously the first text deployed on Cosmos Hub. That's going to be exciting for a lot of people in our community. But why is that such a big deal do you think? And why did you guys focus on implementing the first text on Cosmos Hub instead of deploying on Ethereum, for example?
So two reasons, slightly separate from each other. So the reason we didn't deploy on Ethereum is because we didn't have the Ethereum just did not offer us the control we wanted.
to in the product we were envisioning and the Cosmos ecosystem did. And now since we're on Cosmos and we've made that decision, the decision is now, hey, should we deploy on the Cosmos hub and leverage this multi-billion dollar security set,
versus a custom deployment of our own. And the decision there in many ways came down to what is highest leverage for A, the community, B for duality. And the answer to that was
So the Cosmos hub is currently doesn't really have a real use case and I think strides like ICS on mesh security are a
are a good way to bring some utility into the hub and having this fairly diverse secure validator set and you know being able to leverage it is very exciting.
Yeah, definitely. I think a lot of people would agree with that. But talk to us about this almost mythical creature called the Cosmos Hub. Because when you guys set out, I know obviously it's just security or replicate security, whatever we call it.
has been undergoing development for quite some time, but it is quite a big bet, right? You haven't seen it in production only until recently, really, very recently. So how has that been like building duality while actually in parallel
the Cosmos hub and regulatory security and all these different features that you want to see in Cosmos hub being developed as well. Has that sort of working in parallel been, I don't know if you call it easy, but how has that benefited you guys because obviously being the first comes with benefits.
But there's also typically some challenges to face there. Can you talk to us about some of those? So actually developing in parallel with the development of everything that's happening on the Cosmos hub was not particularly difficult.
It kind of feels like a big collab in many ways. There's individual contributors that have added a specific code to help with porting things over and to make the duality chain interchain security compatible.
And in fact, the changes required in code to actually make this happen were not too large. And by majority, this allows us to focus on the core logic of the decks and not so much the peripherals.
for you integration. Sure, there's been some headache around versioning, around versioning and importing the right stuff and then changing how things are wired internally. But aside from that, it's actually been pretty smooth.
That's great to hear and very reassuring also. I think the more teams that I talk to, founders, etc., the more convinced I become that the tech in Cosmos is not just rock solid but it's actually quite elegant. Like people just seem to
enjoy working with it. So that's very reassuring from someone that is also on the technical side of things. But yeah, so let's talk about the user journey just to dumb it down a bit in here. And for anyone who's just, you know, a casual sort of deck
trading person. Right now, if I want to trade typically what you do, as I mentioned earlier, you would buy Adam on maybe a centralized exchange or whatever, then move it to your customers wallet on customer's hub.
And then you can really do much there. You have to move it to something like osmosis, for example. And that last step is profoundly confusing to a lot of people, I think, including myself in the beginning, by the way. So what is different when duality gets deployed and the whole setup that you guys have?
So not as much as you might think, but there is a push internally to strive for a lot better UX in Cosmos in general.
I think that, you know, current with the current level of infrastructure, it can be a little bit unfriendly to new users. It can look kind of scary and haunting, you know, setting
up in understanding ports and channels and all that. But I believe that we have the ability here to make very significant strides in UI and UX to make it so it's a lot less confusing.
which is something we're actually focusing on.
make sense, make sense. But I guess the underlying question there is, do I still need to move, let's say Adam, that I just deposit to my customer's wallet, do I still need to move those funds by IBC to
to the consumer chain or another water address, how will that work in practice? If there's something here you can't say, then obviously just let us know, but we have to ask a question now that we have you on. Yeah, so the assets were
It still need to be moved over from the cosmos up to any consumer chain that it secures. The address can be shared, but there would still need to be a transaction.
Yeah, make sense. And you've done a lot of work on the LP side, the liquidity pools and the liquidity provider side. How can you talk us through the novel mechanism design that you guys have set up in the incentive system that you've built for duality?
Okay, this is where it might get a little bit interesting because the underlying mechanism design is something resembling a hybrid between an AMM and an order book. In that we are not an order book,
exactly and we're also not exactly a traditional AMM speaking. So the way Uniswapi2, Osmosis and a bunch of other decentralized exchanges currently work is that they use constant products
curves. The x times y equals k curve where you can deposit liquidity in one position and as-trades happening, there's a very simple calculation to determine given an input what the output should be. And because
because of this equation, basically the x times y equals k. You make it so the output of what you get is not equal to the input, but it is equal to the input plus some slippage. And that slippage is the, it's kind of a
function of how much liquidity is in the existing pool already, which is why to get very good prices on constant product pools you need good chunk of liquidity. Duality uses an aggregation of constants some pools to generate its positions.
what that means is an accounts in some pool. If you have a certain amount of liquidity, you can trade all of that liquidity for a predetermined price. So there's no slippage on individual
individual ticks. However, as you propagate through ticks and you exhaust liquidity on constant some ticks, you move to the next tick that has liquidity and that jump between tick 1 and tick 2
can be defined as slippage. So that is the main difference between the design. What this allows you to do is it allows you to kind of approximate any trading curve you want.
That's pretty cool. It's almost like flipping a switch between, "Go this route or go that route." Between the order book style way of trading versus the AMM style of trading. Is that how it works underneath the hood?
that decision, how's that decision being made when when it's traded being executed? Yeah, so if you want to think about it like like an order book, it works however when you're on when you're on an order book and your liquidity position is failed, then it's taken out of the order book. But in this case,
When your liquidity is bought or sold, it actually just jumps over to the other side of the market, providing liquidity on the other asset until that is bought or sold. Interesting. As you guys call it, I think,
L.P. superpower, superpower. I think you call it. Is that correct? Yeah, we're actually in the middle of kind of changing the changing some of the some branding, etc. But yeah, sure. Yeah, but it is giving
I think, yeah, forget about the cash phrase, I guess, but it is giving or empowering the LPs much more than they will otherwise be empowered in other taxes and AMMs out there. Would that be fair to say, or? Yeah, it would. So ideally, how this works is, if I want
to provide very, very narrow liquidity and I want to provide at a very specific price point, I can concentrate my liquidity very, very heavily to supply liquidity at that specific price point. Say I'm supplying liquidity for a highly correlated asset. Say I'm trying to buy Adam and Stakedadden. I want to
I want to provide liquidity for Adam and State Adam. I can provide liquidity at a very, very narrow price range. And I can provide it in, say, a bell curve fashion. Providing liquidity in a bell curve fashion actually approximates a stable swap curve. If I want to provide liquidity
across the entirety of the position that I could potentially create equal provisions of liquidity throughout the curves, and that would approximate a constant product. Interesting. Any curve that makes sense
that I want to do, that I want to approximate, I'm able to approximate with a series of cons and some pulls. It's almost like you flip the scripts, users and traders are used to obviously being able to almost select their price point, at least in an order book style.
training experience, but here you allow LPs, liquidity providers to be able to do somewhat the same, choosing a price curve, only to be used for their liquidity. That's pretty cool, man. I mean, that's a much needed feature. I'm sure that a lot of LPs have been requesting for a long time.
Yeah, I hope so. We also hope to take in as much user feedback as possible and improve it and potentially even redesign it if things are unintuitive or missing and we're going to try to make efforts in the front end to make things again more intuitive but but
Yeah, there's no real replacement for real world use and accumulating data that way. Yeah, and it's a goal. So like again, forget about the marketing jargon or catchphrases, but the ultimate goal here is for LPs to limit their impermanent loss.
I assume, but you haven't mentioned impermanent loss. So, perhaps spit bowl in here. Yeah. So, the impermanent loss is, unfortunately, a problem that is
This is kind of omnipresent in the world of Dex's. So when I'm providing the liquidity position, say I'm providing Adam USDC, when I'm providing that position, I'm opening myself up to the external market forces that say, hey,
price moved up or that price moved down. Now this person, which is me, because I provided liquidity, has a position that's open that allows me to buy or sell this token at a predetermined price. So I am putting up my money
and I'm not really getting any guarantees. The only guarantee I'm getting pretty much is that if what I'm selling is cheap, someone will buy it. But if someone buys something that I'm selling,
then probably losing money. So unfortunately with with impermanent loss, it is it's omnipresent. It's a problem that currently exists on Dex's. And one of the only ways to try to combat this
is to have whoever is profiting off of purchasing your liquidity because when you're providing liquidity you're basically providing a free straddle option to whoever wants to purchase it. So instead of providing
providing a free straddle option. The best we can do is we can say, "Hey, you need a paper this straddle option." One sec. There's a dog. Hey, you par. Mike, drop. The dog is out. Dog out. Come here, buddy. But yeah.
So the LPs can basically say that the best we can do is we can have whoever is purchasing this rattle option actually
purchase it from us. So if the straddle option would provide me an arbitrage opportunity of $200, I might as well force people to bid on it. And whoever bids the most for that free straddle option should be able to purchase it.
And then that's on EV. And then that MEV revenue can be used in creative ways to potentially try to reimburse the LP for the funds they lost via EVV by providing this option.
And we'll talk more about the MAB, I'm sure, in a few seconds. But before we do, I just want to ask, and this is, by the way, a question from the community. I'll start to plan in questions from the community early, because I can see a lot of people. I'm interested in all this, and there's a lot of questions.
basically go through and we can't get through them all. So I'll share a pick. But one of them many people ask actually how you compare to a unit swap V3 because obviously the whole sort of having different pricing curves that you can sort of provide liquidity to
It's sort of resembles what we all know and love. I'm sure with the unit swap V3. So perhaps you can talk to how how to add these differing from unit swap V3. Yeah, so the underlying tenant here is that it's simplicity in many ways.
And also, we have more control over the stack we built on and we're able to capture any of the revenue on the app level, which is a little bit difficult to do on the Uniswap because I guess you need like agreements with miners or
something that really can't be automated to the same degree. Unispop is, it might be an in a fantastic product. I think it is, I think it's a marvel of engineering. It is another concentrated liquidity protocol.
it works brilliantly. And in many ways duality is quite similar with the difference that we don't have, there are some minor differences and some big kind of design differences for one with duality.
So if you want to provide liquidity in a bulk curve position on Uniswap, we need to provide
some wide range liquidity, some less wide range liquidity, and at the end I need to provide a very narrow point of liquidity in the middle of all of it. So that will be three transactions. Now I need to manage all the positions and it just becomes
comes a little bit a little more complicated to do things like that. I can't have granular control of each individual take of my liquidity. Say I want to move the, say I want to move like two ticks of my liquidity to the left. It will be
I need to, you know, I need to withdraw my entire position and then read a positive, but on duality I can choose if I have 10 ticks in a position that can choose to move one, like a little left or a little bit right, remove it entirely. It's just a little more granular control. I can not be expressive as a liquidity provider.
Nice, nice. And yeah, beyond the technical difficulties or challenges that you guys have solved, I think simplicity, I mean, Uniswap is being cherished by a lot of people for their simplicity. So if we can create a similar or even better experience for users, that will be a huge step.
And a big challenge also, but kudos to your team to you and your team if you manage to find a way. Yeah, well, we'll keep trying. Yes, indeed. And you mentioned about Mu already. So let's talk about Mu.
A lot of people in Cosmos obviously in our community, they know about Skip Protocol. We also had them on Magnus from Skip Protocol, but to Loroigo, who we sort of focused on having validators adopt their technology and then become making chains become mu-resistant.
But you guys introduce a new concept that you refer to as multiplicity. Perhaps not a new concept, but it's something that a lot of people don't know about at least. Talk to us about what multiplicity is and how you guys are addressing the whole new problem in not just customers but all of crypto.
Yeah, so big fan of the of the skip guys Magnus and Magnus and barrier are great and in fact for so multiplicity kind of came up as an idea to
create central surface distance in these decentralized protocols, which is really hard to do. And the argument here is that once you solve censorship resistance, you solve the problem of inclusion of certain sets of transactions
a block and once you can enforce inclusion or once you can verify that inclusion is no longer an issue and nobody can censor specific bids then it doesn't nothing else really matters because you can order transactions however you like internally. So what that means is
If I have a bidding system for transactions, I just need to enforce that all transactions that have a bid are in a block. And once that's happened, it's very easy through the internal application logic to order these transactions based on bid. And have those go first.
So multiplicity was kind of a
It was kind of a way to solve censorship resistance. And on top of that, you know, on-chain options could potentially be built. We're working closely with the SCIF team on an implementation of this.
The skip team also announced, um, um, proposal or builder separation, which, uh, aims to do similar things. So now we've kind of joined forces there and we're moving together in different ways.
nice sorry I was coughing that's awesome and how is the revenue or the fees being saved from mu how's that being distributed I think a lot of people are at the end of the day money talks right so people immediately ask is that being
redistributed to LPs, to Stakers, to... there's a lot of ways to do this, right? Yeah, there's a lot of ways to do it. And there is... it feels like the best way to do it might not be sufficient
for our MI1, sorry, not sufficient, it might not be doable for our MI1 given that it can get fairly complicated to perfectly pro-radar distribute MEB to individual LP positions that created it. So as an intermediary point, I think what makes a lot of sense
to do here is have MEV captured in its entirety on one address, protocol controlled by governance, and then have those MEV profits distributed as rewards to specific pools.
I see. And yeah, I think a lot of discussion is happening around you in general. And it should be also. It's a big industry at this point. And if we don't solve this, we, you know, the problem won't go up bigger, but once you start implementing
new resistance, tech, the question right after that magnet, I know, so in Skip protocol is getting, okay, so how all these fees being distributed? I don't think we have a bulletproof, perfect answer to that yet. Let's see how
all things play out and as long as we're flexible I think you can adopt to whatever solution comes out on top I presume. But let's talk about what's on the horizon with duality and perhaps also any any alpha
on launch date and when we can anticipate this, obviously neutron is getting a lot of attention these days for being the first quote unquote to launch on Cosmos Hub. But yeah, talk to us about the roadmap and the short term, how does it look like at duality?
Yeah, so there's some bit there been some delays in general due to internal and external factors as as you know, I think we're all very well aware in general. So the initial plan was a Q1 launch of 2023, but it seems like
things are getting pushed a little bit. So we actually took it as an opportunity to increase the functionality internally, add some new order types for traders.
really want to power security with the second audit and move forward that way. So the audit is coming up. It's going to be about a month and then after that I'm assuming sometime in
April, May, we should have a proposal up, but this is all kind of up in the air. There's a lot of things that can happen from now to then, but we're really trying to stick to the schedule here. - Stick to plan.
And is there any testnet or something that we can already start asking the community to play around with? I mean, for anyone who's listening now, real listening afterwards, we always upload these kind of spaces to Spotify and all the other podcast platforms. So anyone out there who's listening to this now,
later is there any test net that they should try out and start playing around? There's not a public test net right now. The only test nets we have for private and internal that can be spun up but that's not to say that we won't set up a public test net. We might have like maybe a two-week test
or something while we're finishing up audits or while everything is wrapping up but for the moment there's no public testnet. The only public testnet was the game of chains that was more for ICS functionality, specifically users. Right. Yeah, so anyone
who was interested, they should go follow duality xyz and then maybe in the future there will be a public testnet to play around. So let that be a recommendation from the club here to everyone, anyone listening. But okay, so let's do a little bit of a thought experiment here. Let's say
The customers are, the customers in general, is massively successful. People love using customers, more and more people, piling, not just from crypto, but also just going mainstream. More and more consumer chains are being deployed, so customers have really become the hub that
we all sort of aspire to for it to become. Now that we have replicated security and consumers change being able to launch on the hub. And that's a duality also succeeds in executing on all the different things that you guys are working on, multiplicity, giving LP superpower, even though you want to change that
But at least giving LPs more options than they are used to on other dexas. So say everything falls into place. How do you think duality looks like, let's say, five years from now? What kind of vision are you aspiring to when you look sort of in a more long-term future?
So the goal is always to create open and center the line markets. So there's always little things that need to be improved and fixed in terms of how do we actually start to be here. Maybe some internals of the chain or maybe, you know, maybe
we were regas optimizing certain things. But aside from that, the core value and the core proposition here is, well, it's kind of hard to say. Obviously, five years is like 15 lifetimes in crypto.
But, but that being said, I think that there's a lot to explore. We have a lot on the roadmap that's not really solidly on the roadmap. But ideally, it's a liquidity layer that users can programmably interact with.
Hopefully by that point, IBC would have significant strides in its development and applications are basically one click away from each other. Everything is by default, natively multi-hop compatible, arbitrary,
Passage Passing, Bridging, UI, UX, all that has been fixed. And yeah, we are a liquidity layer that can be accessed from any chain, any ecosystem at any point in time and can be programmatically
and drafted with as well. Do you think we will get to a point and that's also it's a cheeky question obviously asking five years from now is an eternity for in crypto right and cosmos in particular I think but do you think we will get to a point where sort of all the 10
you know, IPC, all this interesting connectivity and customer's hub, all that will fall in the background and people won't even think about it or have any issues with it or any barriers. Do you think we'll get to that point? Obviously, it's a little bit of an unfair question because how does that look like?
I don't think it's an unfair point. And in fact, when I was, so I don't usually visualize things like 5, 10 years out, I would if it was like something, something a little different, but on, it's a little bit difficult to visualize.
I was visualizing this, I will say that the technological complexity behind everything that had all been abstracted away. So if I'm on chain A and I want to LP on a duality position and call a
I could just use the front end and everything just happens in the background. You don't need to port IBC assets over manually, run a transaction, port LP tokens back. It's kind of all one click.
And I don't think it's an unfair question and I actually don't think it's too far off as long as it development on these open standards continues. While the development continues, IBC development continues and projects continue to innovate on technology right now.
It is definitely the play here that we all work towards, but it's easier said than done. But Cosmos Hub, if you ask me at least personally, I think Cosmos Hub has the potential
the potential to become that place, to become a place where you don't really think about wallet, so IBC and all the stuff that's going on with Cosmos and blockchain, crypto in general, it could really be this one-stop shop for everything decentralized.
And I think that's pretty cool. I mean that basically delivering on the promises that a lot of other chains, a lot of other ecosystems have made, I think comes up really can execute on it. So it'll be exciting to see how how it plays out in the end. But the
to LLD is certainly a very, very important piece to the whole puzzle, being able to trade. I mean, you're not going to go on customer's hub or any other hub if you're not able to swap and trade, provide liquidity. So a very important piece that you guys are building for the hub and beyond.
Yeah, that makes sense. I had a thought, but it's kind of escaped my mind. Oh yeah, it was around the hub. Yeah, the fact that the validator set is shared could be a very big weapon in fixing
some, or creating some special IBC type things. However, I'm not entirely sure that that's actually going to stay that way. I'm not sure if down the line maybe two years from now there's more specific opt-in opt-out mechanics on the validator
that to secure through merchants. But for now, there's a lot to do. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we keep building, even though it's a bear market or especially in the bear market, we just keep building. So it's just awesome to see.
that all these things are actually being executed on. So there's a question from the community that I forgot to ask actually in the beginning but I want to just scoop it in there here at the end and that's the name duality. I think personally I think is a great name. I really
I really like it, it has a nice ring to it. But I'm curious to hear from you Nicholas. Why did you guys settle on that name? Is there a sort of wordplay going on here? Because there's a duality between the trader and the LP or what does the name come from basically?
Yeah, unfortunately the more you think about it, the more the more things it fits to. We just thought it sounded cool. So there's no deeper, deeper meaning behind it, at least not initially. Yeah, we can sit here.
pretend that it's missing that but no it's it's just the name. It's actually a term I think it's from convex optimization. I need to ask I need to ask my already to Google it actually. I don't remember it's
been a while but yeah it's the duality. I know I've just hit myself if I didn't ask you before closing this off but yeah Nicholas you have been a true pleasure to have on it's really exciting to see what you
you guys are building and can't wait to try this out in public net. But is there anything that we forgot to ask? Is there anything that you want to leave us with today? Something that you don't want to miss, now that we have a chance to talk to each other here in the space?
I think you've been fairly thorough, so I don't really have much to say. My goal was just to answer as many community questions as I could. Awesome, and you did a great job Nicholas. So yeah, thank you so much for coming on.
It's a true pleasure to see the Cosmos ecosystem continue to grow. So exciting to see Cosmos up coming to life. I almost want to say with consumer change is like, well, they're coming on. So Nicholas, thank you so much for joining today and yeah, keep building.
And we will keep doing what you're doing. Thanks. Thanks a lot for having me. And yeah, we won't keep building. We will keep doing what we're doing. And there's a lot to improve here. And this can this can really be something. Yeah, we'll make sure to keep an eye out. We have a thread also that we wrote.
about dualities of anyone who wants to dive into that. You can see it in the comments for this space. Yeah, and we'll make sure to keep an eye out for duality and all the announcements that you're making along the way. Cool. Thank you so much. All right, Nicholas. Take care, man.
Take care. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for joining. Ciao.