Yeah, everything seems good on my end. I'm all good over here. Yeah, very good. Awesome. Awesome. So all right, let's get let's get started. So today's roundtable discussion is on the future of cross chain D5. I'd like to
Welcome our speakers. We've gathered a panel of experts from some of the leading platforms in the Moon River ecosystem as well as the polka dot ecosystem to explore the latest developments and trends in the field. Each of them has a unique perspective. Each of the projects have their own unique
set of features and we'd like to just begin by giving them a chance to introduce themselves and the platforms and additionally you guys can if you guys can talk about who the target audiences for each of your platforms and what sets them apart from others in the DeFi space and let's start with brain decks.
Hey, sure. Yeah, please do me just so this is cicada on the brain dex sticks So we're a dex aggregation protocol currently where the most complete dex aggregation protocol in moon beam moon
and we're working on integrating, you know, what V3 pools into our routing algorithm at the moment. We provide optimized swaps, atomically and non-castodially importantly. And we're also building on
our the cross chain element of our protocol. At the moment, we have a beta up for moon beam to a star XCM, but we're going to be building that out with a lot more options and a lot more chains and more channels pretty soon.
Awesome. Thank you. And here we have Justin from Beamsdrop. Let's make an introduction here as well.
Hey everyone, so yeah, my name's Justin on the chief marketing officer at BeamSwap. So BeamSwap is a decentralized exchange located on the Moonbeam network. We also have the BMEX Perpetualist product which is currently in live beta. Right now operating on BSC.
but we'll have some surprises here for the MoonBean Network. Hopefully later this week we'll be able to share with everyone in regards to that. Outside of that we've beyond like what we've built as far as a DEX product is everything within our products is really much
focused on community and simplicity and having a one-stop shop type of field so that users can have a really simplified experience on ramping into the ecosystem. Thanks Justin and Tyrone, you're off.
Thanks for having me here. I'm Tarron from Bifrost and the product manager of Bifrost. Bifrost is the liquid stake in protocol in the Pogodos ecosystem as well as Moonbeam and more river. So the relationship between Bifrost and Moonbeam ecosystems is that the liquid stake
in drop to we have include we call it V-mover and V-glimmer. So it's quite a two-kennon for liquid-staking drop to of monday more river. So we are reasonably doing communicating and the testing
with mumbeam on some interesting functions about using axiom to lead it user to directly mint the liquid state in the rub to the mumbeam and more of a ecosystem. So that should be quite interesting and I can take a dip
in his talk. So let's keep going. Awesome. Thank you Tyrone. So first thing I like to chat about is governance. One of the key trends in DFI today is this move towards cross-pan
each different blockchain and different protocol has their own way of doing these things and it could also be very challenging to create these seamless user experiences. So in your expertise for each of the projects, like what does the future of
Washington governance look like. Another example of this would be like unistrop applying to Binance, Smart Chain. Would you guys like to share your thoughts and challenges on these opportunities? Will anybody who wants to start, you can just hop in and take the question.
Yeah, totally. I got some thoughts on that. So, you know, brand X we certainly envisioned this is a cross-chain thing from the ground up basically. But when it comes to
cross-chain governance and through incentivization models, because that's generally when it comes down to in cross-chain governance as you have a set of stakeholders or whatever that have.
that stand to benefit in some way from the protocols continued rollout on a different chain. They make a proposal, proposal goes through, it doesn't go through, yada, yada, yada. What's interesting with that, in my opinion, is that these protocols can sort
of single-handedly bootstrapped ecosystems in that way by bringing a lot of liquidity or a lot of users or even just a really good user experience directly to it as opposed to sort of the other way around.
that's been going on for a little bit. You see like SushiSwap has that model, right? Is anywhere SushiSwap wants to deploy anywhere they possibly can? But what's a little more interesting, I think, is when you have specifically some sort of incentivization.
like curved us, right? Curve is sort of the go-to model for incentivizing liquidity management. And they're really good at it. So that's something we're thinking about at Brandex a lot. Although we don't have any error of our own liquidity pools yet.
We want to start having something that are going to complement other protocols in the space, right? Things that we think we can step in and say, "Hey, there's an opportunity here. We can deploy something." When that happens, we're going to be looking at it from very much a cross-chain perspective in that way.
Awesome. Justin, did you have any thoughts on that as well? Yeah, so as far as this, for Beamswap's model, as it speaks right now, obviously we're standalone on Moonbeam, but it doesn't mean there's often not opportunity from the sense of umbrella outside of that.
I think it's one part that I know we talk about what's good, but I think it's good to talk about what's missing and I think it's the participation side and really getting the community active. I'm making these decisions. I think with that, there's stronger benefit to where the moves happen, to where people are more involved and where you get to participate.
Thanks, Justin. And Tyrone, being that Bifrost is inherently like a cross-chain blockchain, how do you guys see cross-chain governance being instituted in your platform?
Yeah, this topic is quite important to us. So, but also this originally a power chain, right? So, we have originally the governance mechanism by using the Pogodol and Kusama one. So, which means we're using the St. Logic referendum democracy.
Council and technical commit to execute all the proposals and voting in the governance by following the steps of the Pogodal. So it's about time to upgrading the governance
and it will happen recently is quite important to us so we are targeting to do like a muti chain, like a stake in protocol so when that LSD includes the governance function
side of it. So let's take an example like we are providing liquid staking for mumbeam, right? So we need to ask at the governance function, the governance right for each of the V mover or V glimmer to make sure that V glimmer is
It's covered governance a boat to directly vote in moonbeam ecosystem. So that's quite important that what we are doing. So it's actually, it's very suitable for mutage-chain
and disruptive. So in many uses have their ownership and their rights for each of the token represent their voting rights and governance rights in their orange and notchains. So that's quite important to us.
Awesome and I hope you guys don't mind if I go a little bit off script, but you know something just came to mind Regarding you know as you as you as a lot of the listeners might very well know boombi is an EVM parachain and especially they the focus is on this
cross-chain connected compatible contracts. Previously, Uniswap had planned to deploy on Moonbeam through their governance. They actually passed a governance vote on Uniswap's Dow that they were deployed in Moonbeam. How do you guys
see in the future, how do you foresee something like unistrop governance being applied into the Moonbeam ecosystem and relating to these cross-chain connected contracts? Anybody who wants to hop in here can just hop in and answer this question.
I'm I've yet to see what like unisplop actually plans to implement in terms of like cross chain connected contracts because in it doesn't seem to me like that's I'm not really sure that's exactly what they're going to be doing I know that some cross chain stuff was floated at unisplop a little while back but we've been taking a look at that governance protocol
call for that governance vote for sure. But apparently I've heard you swaps planning on coming to Moonbeam for like what over a year now. Was that was that probe? Was that governance vote like super recently? It was a while ago. So this was originally they planned on using
I believe it was the Nomad architecture to support that. Luckily that didn't happen. I guess that was a good thing. But yeah, but I saw somebody bring it up recently in a discussion forum.
I'm really interested to see how that applies. And maybe Justin can speak to like the differences in the beam swaps approach compared to like the unistop approach because I know beam swap is obviously native to moon beam. But I'm sure there's some differences there.
Yeah, so our approach to governance yet it hasn't been fully implemented to sense however like our our governance structure is based through our staking with our share token and how we essentially tend to implement that is just a straightforward straightforward voting mechanism on weight
power as far as expansions and necessarily like future governance for expansion to cross-chain. That's something that obviously is still in discussion for our platform and how we tend to focus on moving forward with it in the most appropriate manner because
For us right now it's more or less the evolution of what we're really building as a core product with BM SwapShifting to be three and then the evolution with BMX where I think you'll really start to see the evolution of our governance through that because the opportunity with the perpetual product itself is going to be exceptional once we're able to go live.
Awesome. And Tyrone, oh, CK, I saw you unmute there yet something. Yeah. Yeah, I just think it's going to be really interesting to see how the specifically how the Uniswap governance stuff, either conflicts or compliments with sort of the native, you know, polka dotter moonbeam.
I think there is some, it's not like it's not conflicted interest, but it's, you know, there are going to be opposing goals between the Uniswap people and the Moonbeam people. They're not always on the same page. Like the Uniswap people are not always on the same page.
So when you have a big cross chain protocol like that that's on lots of different chains and is, you know,
a veritable jug or not. It's going to be really interesting to see how they treat these smaller ecosystems that have other hooks into other networks. I think it's almost kind of reminding of your more traditional
corporate sort of stock war structure stuff. You have people coming into the ecosystem with voting power, potentially getting into that ecosystem to benefit their own protocol. And it's just a really interesting sort of field, I think, is emerging right now.
Awesome, and Tyrone, did you have anything to add on that?
Not much, but for several cents. I think maybe that's important to, sorry, I'm not very familiar with what was the news about the Unisworld governance, how it looks like, but I'm a user.
that of curve or the balance. So I mean if if if you need to, I want to push their governance for the users to attend for the governance. So I mean, it must be something relationship with their token all makes into the governance. So if
If let's say from the question side, so how they can come into the Mumbim and start the governance in the Unisor V3, so that might be difficult, I think, because seems it's a logic in the ISRM midnight is that it's like curve or
We're balancer so they have convex aura as like a boosting boosting off their new governance. But what they're doing is all focusing on the midnight but not not L2 so they want to make read all the governance
Mojo and the users to attend for the governance and now to. So I think they were still focusing on maybe focusing on the main night, but maybe little change to separate the governance rights to another ecosystem.
That's what I saw. Awesome. And this actually kind of leads into the next topic regarding the different architectures of DeFi protocols, specifically the hub and spoke model versus this point to point model. Some of the platforms
there are adopting hub and spoke while others are pursuing a point-to-point approach. And so I'd like to hear your guys thoughts on the pros and cons of each approach and what they see as the future of this cross-chain DeFi architecture and just to touch on like, again,
to go back to the unistwap thing that we were talking about. I think, and I could be wrong here, but it looks like that potentially they're looking to do this kind of point to point approach being that, you know, their governance may rely, may stay on this like, I mean, sorry, regarding the governance and this approach.
But their original governance model is just using a snapshot on ETH mainnet. I think that's the point to point approach. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. Tyrone, do you want to go first? We'll switch up the order a little bit.
I'm sorry, I may not get the question. Okay, I will so think about thinking about like polka dot as like a kind of like a hub and spoke model where your relay chain is your
And then each of the parachains are kind of a spoke that attaches that is connected to that hub. And so like each of the projects and the ecosystem kind of are looking at this in a different way. You know, you have some projects which are
Solochains and they have a specific point where their DeFi hub where their applications run, maybe they only run from one chain directly to another chain and then you can compare it to something like
you know, moon beam ecosystem where moon beam ecosystem is kind of like a central hub in the ecosystem and then each of the projects kind of are attached to the through the moon beam ecosystem. I'm making sense here.
Alright, so Moonby and Manoly stars kind of a special power chain in the popular ecosystem because they are quite like a platform to include my transfer projects in set office. So, like
Yeah, definitely moon beam or a stars quite like a hub to using moon is using glomer as a native token to jump into the governance for all the different protocols. I mean that's possible, but maybe for different power chains like by forals
So it's kind of a way our users especially for the native tail kind of buy for us to do governance for the you know all the parameters and product details Now buy for us, but definitely moving is another thing I mean if it is a
very good idea, I think, to start the governance by using Glamour into a defy contract on Moonby more or other contract in Moonby. So they have their different utilities, but they are using a common hub
of governance module in each of them. I think that's a good stop, but I don't have a clear mind on any yet. I can pass it to the brain or just.
Yeah, totally. So I have some thoughts on that specifically on the hub and spoke narrative, right? Is that one thing that both Moon and even A start do really well is they're really good at making sure that you can connect your applications to other
change, but it's just that in practice, I don't think we've seen a whole lot of hub and spoke DAPs, really, that have sort of fulfilled that promise yet. In practice, we're still most DAPs are siloed to
One chain and in practice, if there is hub and spoke stuff, what ends up happening most of the time is that Ethereum remains the hub for most of these things and then govern as protocols. Like they do a snapshot there and then like Uniswap and then govern as protocols.
in there and then something maybe executed on another layer one or layer two. So it's really question about how to shift that narrative to being, hey, use Moonbeam or use A-Star as your governance hub basically.
like that's as cheaper here, you can do a lot more with a lot less on here and it's just as secure and then you can outsource your actions to your other chains. In practice that hasn't really, I haven't really seen that happen yet. And other ways that people are talking about doing hub and spoke and connected contracts is
Transmitting stuff over, you know, over XEM, we're using something like Moonbeen as a hub. That's also still working out because there's there's XEM, it's it's great. There's issues with it still and namely that
Whenever you want to have an XEM channel open and actually turn the data you have to have all the parachains on board and that's like all the parachains you want to connect to on board. There's no Easy way to do that yet and that's still being worked on so that's something that I think that Polkad in particular
really has to come together and start working on these standards that many common parachains implement in order to have good non-custodial, good secure non-custodial messaging to and from a variety of places.
Awesome. So it looks like Beam Swap is having a little technical difficulty. He's restarting his phone, so we'll hopefully have him response this question when we can get them back.
on. In any case, we can move on to the next topic for now. Oh, wait, just there we go. Justin is here. I'll invite him. See if we can get him up.
to Justin try and request to speak.
Where is he on Musk when you need him? Yeah, this thinks totally whack. I wish he would stop firing as developers. Yeah, he should focus less on blowing up spaceships and
more on getting Twitter spaces working, right? Okay, so let's talk on the next topic. So this is cross-chain liquidations. And again, one of the key
and DFI's ensuring stability of the system and especially in DFI projects where you know where you can work, there's lending and borrowing involved. You need these systems to kind of facilitate
the stability of the system. And so I'd like to hear the speaker's thoughts on this, how you see this panning out in the future and how maybe if these are going to be implemented into your platforms as well.
Let's have Justin speak since we finally got him back on board.
Hey, sorry, I hopped in when the question finished.
I don't know what it is. Okay, no problem. I'll go over it over time. So we're talking about cross-chain liquidations and how these affect the stability of different DeFi systems.
to hear just your thoughts on how maybe you see this being implemented in the future with different D5 protocols and potentially how this might be implemented in your platform.
Yeah, no, for sure. So as of right now, BeamSwap does not have a landing protocol. However, moving into the BMX perpetual side, obviously, that's a simplified form of landing. As far as the cross chain aspect yet, obviously that hasn't been popped or played out.
on our side is what we're first going to focus on launching the product itself. But in the sense of the future of cross-chain liquidations, it's obviously a necessity and needed in sense for the ecosystem to work properly. Right now, I think one of the biggest
challenges in sense of building the product on the perpetual side is going to be able to fill and have the ability to support larger leverage trades. So I think it's going to be something that's going to be needed to develop, especially on the Polkadot
outside so that at least we can expand and really take full advantage of our product on our end. I don't know if any of the other speakers might be able to speak on this a little bit more in depth. I know they might be able to add a little bit more value here. Yeah, I have a question actually. Where does like where I can
I'm trying to figure out what exactly a cross chain liquidation means. And so it would be the notion of what you make a call on one chain and a position in another chain is liquidated typically. Would that be the general consensus? Is there a particular protocol that's looking to implement this? This is part of their marketing or something?
that I am looking at this is like kind of from the sense of having a protocol that's live on two different chains and using something like a cross-chain message, whether that be XEM or whether that be axler or wormhole, cross-chain messages to kind of implement a liquidation.
And I imagine this being borrowing on one platform, maybe using your cladderal on one platform to maybe take out a loan on another platform, say having
ETH as collateral on mainnet, but using that ETH to mint a stable on say, on say, um, moonbeam and how, um, and how you would actually go about, uh, liquidating these, uh, positions in case the, uh, the collateral falls under the value of, uh, of, of like these tables.
Okay, yeah, I see what you mean. So I've I've I've some thoughts about this like in practice, I don't think a cross chain liquidation would ever happen unless the barrow we know that the barrow position itself is you know, inextricably.
cross-chain as in you're not holding any native assets on your borrow your borrower chain really. You're just holding some sort of wrapped equivalent that's you know a derivative basically. Under that circumstance you know a cross-chain liquidation
might be an option, but in general for lending markets. Crossing liquidations just don't really make any sense, in my opinion. And that's because the way that these protocols are kept healthy in general is that liquidation is an arbitrary
And whenever there's an arbitrage activity, it's always optimized to help. There's always 30, 40, 50, 60, 100, 200, whatever people monitoring the mempool like a hawk waiting for that next tick to come in where they can actually turn a profit.
And in those circumstances, almost all liquidations all happen within the scope of the same chain within the same block that they become possible. Right? So it's not like you're waiting for a block to be finalized and then it's like, oh, hey, here's the liquidation event.
you can do it. No, people are saying, okay, next block, or rather at the end of this block, a liquidation is going to be possible. So I'm going to fill it right now. You just can't do that stuff with a cross chain infrastructure at all. It's not really possible because you have to wait for finality. There's more, there's what I'm, to boil it all down.
When you're liquidating a position, when you're an arbitrage or liquidating a position, the amount of time it would take to send any kind of message cross chain in any kind of, in any secure way is much longer than your typical, than the, in the amount of time
you need between seeing an opportunity acting on it, right? Probably in the order of like 50 to 100 times longer, honestly. So under that circumstance, only in my opinion, only if the borrowing protocol itself is inherently
cross-chain using synthetic assets, and the only way to liquidate it is cross-chain. That's when cross-chain liquidations are important, in fact, sort of a necessary to the critical's operation. I don't know of any protocols like that right now, although I do hope they will come up, because that'll be really interesting to see.
Sorry, that was kind of a kind of a brain dump. There's a lot of information. So I've heard the term crossing liquidation going around a little bit. I've never really been able to get my head around it. It's like I know how the liquidation market works and the gas price auction, it's crazy.
Okay, didn't you have a, in your past experience, didn't you deal a lot with like these liquidations? Isn't that something that you worked on before, before brain decks and then working in the ecosystem?
bit of it. I never really got super heavy into like I had a proof of concept liquidation bot that I whipped up a little while back. It was never actually profitable and you could never actually run super well. There's just too much work that you could go into it with too little payoff.
Yeah, I have worked with that code base a little bit specifically, you know, out a style lending. So I have some experience with it. Awesome. Did any of the other speakers have any thoughts on this as well?
Actually, the bot force is trying to do a lexium liquidation palette. So we name in axiomaction, so which include the functions like remotely outstiming to redeem and the liquidation. But I mean, there's an axiompermanso stage.
So we are trying to do that with A-star for testing. So the logic behind is quite like there's the liquidation requirements on A-star and that we have a contract on SDK deployed at A-star and once we receive our requirements we also
send it back to Bifrost and the liquidation will be executed in the in a swap pool of Bifrost. So I mean, mainly liquidity is in Bifrost for V2. That's why we want to do cross-channel liquidation right?
from destination chain. So once the liquidation done and by frozen and we need to send it back to A-style and back to uses. So that's how the progress to make that cross-chain liquidation done. But definitely we are seeing that's definitely there's a question inside of the desk.
that's, you know, that's the time. So it might take a list, rip blocks to execute the only XEM transactions and swap transaction. So a list three and four blocks to execute it. So which means it will take a list for the 50
seconds for executing. So for liquidation, there's a quite long time for weighting, which includes a race car bar charge between two chains. So, same for that. Although it's an
testing stage but I think that is the only solution for that is how we can make more of the transaction into one block so make that things happen in the short term. That's my thought.
So yeah, just to run back off of that, yeah, that's part of what I'm saying is that in practice, depending on where the liquidation actually happens, whether or not it's on A* or Bifrost, if you're able to call that chain directly,
In any way to action the liquidation in an optimized market and you know optimized is definitely not I would not consider most substrate chains optimized in the same way that you the m chains are. I mean optimize in terms of how the market treats them not in
terms of how efficient they are. But for optimal markets, you have like 10 milliseconds to actually action the liquidation before somebody else jumps in in front of you and takes. So if that really
So, in my way I'm looking at it, if you can call the liquidation directly on Vifrost and turn a profit, people are going to do that. Or if the liquidation is actually actioned on A-star, like that's where the actual liquidity lives.
Then people are going to do that instead. But in practice, once like when you first roll out when an XEM channel for liquidations first rolls out, it may get some use. But once people start to optimize, it's going to be optimized out in my game. It'll still be very useful for opening and closing positions though.
Yeah, it's a little like worry. Sorry, got very technical very quickly.
Justin, you have anything you want to add to that?
Just like your thoughts on the matter.
No, I think these guys hit it on the head. Like I said, for me, for Mark perspective, there's nothing really on the side that's available yet to really structure benefit us on our nature. So I think these guys hit it well. Awesome. So next topic I'd like to talk about is is rap that sets and we did touch on this.
and the previous question, there are popular way to bring assets from one network to another, but they do have their own set of challenges. I'd love to hear your guys thoughts on the different, obviously, the different sets of issues and challenges and the benefits that these sort of assets can bring to DeFi in general.
and maybe Justin you want to go first?
Yeah, sure. So obviously like with wrapped assets, this really sets at home with us at beam swap. Obviously with the moon beam ecosystem, there's been a few different shifts in sense of the wrapped assets that are primarily used. With beam swap, we essentially started out with multi
USDC products and multi-wrap assets. We did have a good experience with that, but that's things shifted obviously with different protocols utilizing different bridges. Obviously, there was the incident with Nomad in the middle. It caused a little bit of instances that
had a little bit of turbulence and sense of user experience. So recently, BMSwap actually decided to make the shift to wormhole assets from our own handin sense of multiple rid of reasons, security being one of the primary and just having the ease of use across ecosystem because right now as we were operating with multi
and then there was other protocols using Wormhole. It wasn't really a good seamless user experience across. Moonbeam and that was one of the issues we saw. It made it harder for users to utilize different protocols or just do different swaps for different assets.
one obviously central source that has its benefits but then it also has its negatives as well and sense of a failed point being on one end. So it would be nice to see obviously the development of XEM assets and make things a lot more seamless across Polkadot in the future. Right now like from our end,
I guess XEUSDT was the first one really to come back quite a few months ago and just the user experience for that in sense of getting the asset and being able to make the trades just wasn't there yet. So in sense of where things go, I think it's just more or less all the teams within the ecosystem and our NBA
on just working together to make it as seamless for the users until the seamless experiences there because like just having a user to go to one protocol to have to go and bridge over an asset and then to have to bridge it back to Ethereum and then do it again. Just really isn't a great user experience.
And you know, once we have wormhole assets obviously implemented on BIM swap, we hope the experience will be better for everybody. You know, across moon beam and we'll be able to work together closer with other protocols as well. So we're excited for that on our end at least there, but I'll leave it there for some of the other guys to speak.
Awesome. So who wants to hop in next to Tyrone or cicada? Tyrone it is. Yeah, can come in. We are expecting for snow breach. So this is a breach from snowfolk.
It seems that's the most ideal way for us to bridge the ease from the EZRM2 portal. So we are expecting for it. And you know, we are selecting the bridges between like
old mad as the previous and warm hope and midi and midi change. So I think after evaluation the final decision is about
the snow bridge is the one that we want to select to. So they are actually using the
They are using the consensus of a for a for a polka dot to transport to teleported to to East Israel and rely off of snow folks. I think they might be most of transparent or decentralized way for achieving a breach between
which will be in poker. So that's the real map on workflows. So we shall see when the snow bridge can be done. But by now I haven't seen the bridge that we can 100% to trust.
So, normally I think old of the bridge solutions have been attacked in a single or several events.
some some rough bad news happen. So that's definitely a fact. Um, and we shall see. I mean, yeah, that's always a problem with bridges is that virtually every single one of them has had
exploit in some way shape or form. On that note, I'm actually way more liable to trust a bridge. It's been hacked once and has not been hacked again in a very long time actually. And I am the trust in new bridge for a particular reason. I mean, the security motor robot was found.
You're always being weird. Sorry. You're very distant. Very distant. It's like you're underwater.
No, just started maybe is your hand over the microphone or something?
No, don't believe so. Um, maybe I'll cut.
Yeah, still, uh, still underwater.
Yeah, I mean, just regarding like these bridges being hacked, you know, had
I'm specifically thinking of actually wormhole right now and how previously they were hacked and this leads to like one of the other questions that, oh, and I guess we'll go into.
once, uh, cicada, uh, answers the question, but yeah, go ahead cicada has, uh, has your voice sounding.
How's it sounding? Awesome. Back above water. Wonduba. So yeah, you know, I'm, what was I saying? Oh, yeah, rap assets are, you know, you're not going to get around them. The only alternative really is, you know, you either have quote unquote, native assets that are
actually just managed by some sort of central entity, right? Or you have an asset that is sort of minted everywhere, like, like, damn, which is great, by the way. But the
Yeah, there's really just no way around it. And I'm all for rap assets because I think they actually make everybody's life more efficient generally, obviously, like we've seen in the Zico. You don't want too many rap assets floating around because then you have liquidity fragmentation issues. Nobody can agree on a standard. But yeah,
I just like just from saying it's trade off is you have one bridge get exploited all of the liquidity that Tokens that have been bridged that way is vulnerable essentially Whereas if you have multiple at least you have some sort of failsafe so I guess it's
In my opinion, it's really just a question of what sort of fail safes do we have. Are there enough fail safes to make sure that in a catastrophic event, the entire network doesn't just go under. That's what's most important in my head. Really, with the thing with all these different bridges, is that
I think that most people are just trying to figure out which one is going to be the most robust long term. That's why these assets have value really is that everybody is looking for which bridge is going to be the most stable over the longest period of time. That's really just sort of what we all have to look for.
So, next topic I want to talk about is centralization and control in the E5. There's a delicate balance here between being centralized and being able to kind of control what is happening and being decentralized and happy.
having the community kind of make these decisions. And a specific example that I want to bring up and something that I think is like really, really interesting and on my end is wormhole, right? So wormhole was hacked for, I don't even know the number, huge amount of money.
But they were able to recover those funds using a proxy contract for those people who aren't aware. A proxy contract is just a smart contract that controls other smart contracts. But essentially they were able to
take control of a pool using a proxy contract and using their governance and able to force transfer these funds back into their treasury. So that in mind, what are your guys thoughts on the delicate balance between the centralization and control in DeFi?
That's a toughy ideally. Like in my mind, you'd never be able to do that. You know, it worked out this time, but if that same control mechanism had been co-opted by a bad actor, you'd have an even worse problem, right? Yeah, I don't know. It's it's it's it's it's
It's a security tradeoff. What can you do? Part of the thing about decentralization is great from a security standpoint, but in the event that an element of that decentralization is not super robust or an element of the algorithm is not super robust. There's nothing you can do to really recover stuff. On the other hand,
You know, FTX. So I know it seems like a seems to almost like a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario to me. There's also the problem that you know decentralized protocols are often very slow. So there is a delicate balance, especially when you're a new, when you're a young
like brain decks is super young. We have like all of our smart contracts are on chain and static so you can just interact with them. I think that's an important aspect of decentralization is that your protocol will be static and it's permissionless. But in terms of how we've
make decisions right now we are totally centralized because we need that to move quickly. You look at protocols like curve protocols like Uniswab, governance takes time. And time, you know, time moves way faster and crypto than anywhere else. So it's just a lot of trade-offs.
No, and I'll agree with you there because especially like you're saying when you're going to start up and you know decisions need to be made fast and move quickly. Those are the types of things that just need to move forward for the success of the project. So that's where you get your complications on things, but then on the larger scale just like you
mentioned, there's always the trade-offs of the centralization point can help in a good way, but it's all based on the human and charge in the back end because you can have your good people and then your bad actors in the background that don't necessarily have good intentions.
you don't know at one point which way it's going to flow and sense of those allire. So it's one of those touchy subjects I guess right now like me on my perspective always flow to the decentralization aspect of things in real focus on like taking control
and ownership of what you're trying to do, but at the same time, with everything that's gone on, especially within the last year, it's obviously something to kept in mind that there are instances where it does save quite a few people, and you can't look past that.
Yep, totally agree. That's definitely a treat of. Yeah, not much to add. So I think that's it. No, that's very clear from Brandon. Interesting. Another interesting
I guess example that comes to my mind and something a little bit more recent and even having mostly decentralized protocol with the decentralized governance, there's still centralized aspects of these projects.
you know, recently, Akala, Thai USD, there was an incident that some bad actors were able to erroneously mint Thai USD and sorry, Thai
dot and we're able to change that for regular dot. And the point being is that even though the protocol is pretty much decentralized, there's still these centralized areas that can be exploited.
Yeah, how do we fix that? I don't know. But yeah, it's just an interesting topic that I thought I'd bring up being that is such new news that's happening here. I don't know if you guys had any thoughts on that as well.
Not on that one specifically necessarily. But it's for some reason it reminded me of somebody I think Tyrone you mentioned a convex earlier. Is that even in systems that have all of the infrastructure available for decentralization?
Sometimes they're just not in practice and that's the case with you know curve in convex in some situations they have the curve Incent you have the curve governance bribe economy right the curve wars and that even if you can do your you can do
your best to make sure that you have a robust decentralized protocol. But even then, you're still a human problem. You're still at the whims of people vying for control and trying to accumulate power at the invader. In fact, you have to create systems
that actively work against that. But to do so, you have to lock a lot of stuff down. And that's-- so back on the acolyside, I noticed that they didn't pause the chain for that, right? And I'm thinking that maybe if they couldn't pause the chain for that,
That might be one tick up for good decentralized practices is that you're not allowing people to seize power in that sort of way. But on the other hand, it's like, can they, they don't pause the chain, can they recover? Probably it seems like it wasn't that bad of a hack. So I'm sure it's fine.
So for color case is quite like a contract bug so you cannot go back. So there are two rows already, two times on the colors. First one is the USD and the other one right now is a Tai KSN
right or a T-DOT. So I'm in the main problems that the logic behind the code. So to answer this question, there's no way to go back. So you lose the trust from the communities
So the contract is the top thing that we need to secure that way. So it's building in a systematic, so on the upper level there's a community in governance and I'm bright.
So it is so building on a contract and building on the logic code. So I mean, what's the best way to make that not happen is or we need to make sure that all things going to protect
before the things go into the production make that make sure things happen in testing and I mean that's the only way that we can avoid kind of issue like that but I mean the reputation saying is very hard to go with
back to be honest. I would even go as far as to say you can't devoid things like that. Like you can do your best to make sure that things have been audited and things are secure. But you know we've seen time and time again the biggest protocols out there have exploits.
Right that auditors don't catch that nobody cat that they've been live for like a year before they become a problem. I mean, heck, sushi spot had an exploit recently on one of their routers one of the biggest probably the second biggest D5 protocol out there.
Yeah, I don't think these problems are avoidable. You do have to do your due diligence to make sure they happen as little as possible. But you just need to account for their possibility. It's just an inevitability, really.
Awesome. Great. Some some great points here. And so I do want to be aware of time where we are on the hour, but I did have one more topic I wanted to go over. Specifically, you know, this one's specifically more so for for by frost.
Topics Staking Derivatives. You know, these Staking Derivatives allow users to earn rewards for holding staked assets. Can you tell us a little bit more about the approach to Staking Derivatives? Oh, we lost Tyrone.
Maybe with either cicada you guys can touch on this or Justin.
I don't know a whole lot about staking derivatives. Exactly. I mean, I think that they're a necessary part of the economy. Like I think that just from looking at some brain deck truths.
I see that, you know, I think it's being deprecated, but the dot ST dot pools were a major sort of silo liquidity for a long time. And there was lots of arbitrage that happened between them. And that those are arbitragellars.
like that are important for the volume and just the general well-being of a network. So having them available, having them available for speculation, I think, is an important sort of primitive, really. And they need to be supported.
No, I agree. It's just a hit it just like for a further aspect on like the user side of things just having you know the ability I think to have that further utility and just have the you know it is a higher risk but at the same time higher rewards so just more things for users to do in the ecosystem which I think is really
important right now holding assets and Farming assets is one thing but when you had in that extra tangible aspect of things I think it gets more for you know more users and I'll ask people to do a bit more in the space. I think right now there's not necessarily a crazy amount of action going on some more.
And Tyrone, did you get to hear the question or were you, did you drop out? So, so the topic is the topic is sticking
So this is right up your alley. You know, just I was asking to discuss I guess like the benefits in the future of sticking derivatives and what that means for the DFI ecosystem.
Alright, so if we take a look on the OSDFI in Easter at midnight, so we might see more of interesting use cases having started. So it's all depends on the liquid stake interruptives. So basically the native of the of the liquid
they're after this are quite good quality asset. So which has the principle plus the interest instead of it. So it's quite quite like a very good quality asset can be like an underlying asset to build something interesting.
So you can see there are security, you know, futures indexes, protocols are being up in the LSD. So we might see more of like the migration of a traditional
of finance, the common to the space and start building by using the out SD and finally from the institution side, from the institution side some of the Castilian are willing to
hold at LSD in their phone and I think that's a good news for the DEFA to do something up in the LSD asset. So we might see much of the interesting cases up on it.
Awesome. So yeah, we're a little bit five past hour and I do want to be again aware of every once time. So at this point, I think we're going to conclude this. Is there before we do?
I just like to give all the speakers an opportunity to add anything additional. Did you guys want to add anything, maybe some new announcements or just anything you'd like to add before we close out?
Thanks for having us. We'll be adding Unisplop V3 and algebra pools to the algorithm soon. Thank you. Awesome. Yeah, I'll just like to give a shout out. Thanks Nick and downtime movie and for putting us on
We really appreciate you guys and everything you do for the ecosystem outside of that. The Beamswap team is going to be at consensus this week in Texas. So if anyone's going to be around, be sure to reach out to us or come by. We have some merch to give out throughout the week. We'll also be at the moon
the movie booth there this week to help obviously educate and promote the ecosystem and we'll have a pretty big announcement coming as well. So just keep your eyes out for that. Yes, thanks for having me. Thanks, thanks.
If you go to buy for a stock finance or if you visit buy for a stock app so you can see all the interesting things around buy for us. In the Moonbeam ecosystem we are currently working on to provide a SDK for the Moonbeam to start like a remotely main
and Barbara's LSD is on Moonbeam, so it's quite interesting that we will announce it in months or two months, so it's very good news for Moonbeam native users. And stay tuned, guys.
love in the alpha here. Well, everybody, I hope you enjoyed today's discussion. Our experts have definitely provided some valuable insights into DeFi industry. If you're interested in learning more, make sure you follow all the guests, follow them on social media, follow them on Twitter.
just to keep updated and make sure to visit their websites to view the latest developments. So thank you everybody for joining. If you missed anything, this will be recorded, so feel free to just scroll back and listen if there's anything you missed. Thanks everybody for joining.
Thank you. Have a good day.