Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
DEV🕶️TIME: AMMs vs CLOBs. Who’s the real king of DeFi?
Recorded: June 26, 2025 Duration: 0:49:39Space Recording
Short Summary
In a recent discussion, crypto experts explored the evolving dynamics between Automated Market Makers (AMMs) and Central Limit Order Books (CLOBs), highlighting trends, partnerships, and growth opportunities in the DeFi landscape. As new blockchain projects emerge, the conversation underscores the importance of adapting trading mechanisms to meet the demands of a rapidly changing market.
Full Transcription
Okay. Okay, can you hear me?
Hi, Dima.
Yeah, hello.
How are you doing?
I'm good.
How are you?
Yeah, I'm good too.
Nice.
Let's wait for Vadim as well.
And let's give it a few minutes before we're going to start.
And how is it going, Dima?
Where are you now?
Currently, I'm in Armenia, in Yerevan, the capital of Armenia.
We are having a meeting here with other developers and stuff.
Nice.
How is the weather there?
Yeah, it's like plus 30, something like this this it's very hot and sunny as usual as usual okay nice i wasn't sure if you are guys coming you were kind of
keeping me surprised today i was hoping you didn't forget about our day. But we never missed any of our AMA sessions.
It's always a deal, you know, if we agree that we have an AMA session, so it's a deal.
All right.
I see Vadim is here as well, so let's just wait for him to join the stage.
And we can slowly start.
It's so hot.
Keep it slowly, just in case, you know.
Yes.
It's very hot here in Czech.
It's like 30 degrees, no wind.
It's actually insane.
So, Vadim, are you going to join us or not oh hello how is it going all right so I'm just gonna set up a recording. So I also have the recording for notes and everything.
All right.
So the session is recorded for anyone who couldn't join.
I see the attendance is not the best today.
But let's hope people will still join.
And yeah.
All right.
So hello, everyone.
Welcome to another DevTime with Vara Cordes and me.
Today we're going to be tackling one of the DeFi's most fundamental debates.
I actually did research on how to pronounce these words, so
hopefully I'm gonna be okay this session. So we're gonna talk about AMS versus SLOBs.
These are automated market makers versus central limit order books. Since the infrastructure choices we make today
will shape how trading works across all of the web3, we're gonna start with some
basics then we're gonna deep dive in some technical aspects and explore how
solutions, especially Gear XE, are changing the the game at the end of the session you can ask
questions if you would have any questions during the session I suggest
we do kind of new new way and maybe if people have a question we can let them
ask you guys so you know they don't have to wait the whole time. What do you think about it?
All right. Sounds awesome.
Okay, so let's start with the first question, which we're gonna explain.
Or basically, could you guys explain at the beginning, so all the listeners understand.
Okay.
So AMM is an automated market maker. So it's a smart contract
that lets users trade tokens directly with liquidity pool.
So there is like a smart contract where users put
their liquidity for example USDT and Ethereum and the pool manages this
automatically and yeah the users can trade like within seconds with this approach.
And CLOBs is a central limit order book.
It's more like a SEX, S-E-X-E, like centralized exchange.
It's a trading system where users place buy or sell orders at specific specific prices so some some users can
ask for some price and users can bid for some price and they should match each other to actually
make a trade yeah so generally speaking it's like the types of protocols to exchange one fund to another one with different
algorithms so some pros and cons for all of them and i think we're gonna figure out what what's
what's the best deal right now on the market inside the industry all right uh so why were
amm's dominant solution in the DeFi's early days?
And what infrastructure limitation made SLOBs impossible back then?
Actually, I wouldn't say that they were for real impossible to implement.
But there was no need for them by the industry just because they work totally differently.
So it's both the first one and the second one. It's a smart contract on chain and it's somehow
operated by the users. They somehow collect liquidity and provide the API to exchange one
asset for another one. But the point is that AMMs, they work like as one call, just one function, one transaction to submit, to perform some transfer, just because there is some formula.
Like, let's say just one formula, how to exchange.
And it's all about the current state of the pools, which contain the assets.
So you're always guaranteed to proceed with your exchange, depending on the slippage.
So you're always, you're guaranteed to proceed with your exchange.
It's like the difference of the price, which is ruled by this formula inside the contract.
Except the slippage you're guaranteed to proceed with your exchange.
It's a little bit different to the clubs, because clubs, they work like on demand.
They work on request responses by the
sellers and buyers and there should be some you know confirmation or agreement between
two guys the first one who is selling and the second one who is buying on the price
that will be used as a multiplier for for let's say exchange yeah uh and the point is when you use some other books
it's more likely will force you to like submit several transactions so for example you place some
uh bit to buy the bitcoin for the price 1k usdt for example let's imagine let's hope for this
for someday maybe not uh and the point is uh when you submit your
requests to buy uh it's not guaranteed that somebody gonna sell you by this price so you
may want to change your order you may want to cancel it because it's not anymore actual for
you to buy the bitcoins by the by this dedicated price uh and that's mostly all differences between them just because
amm is guaranteed to go with a reason exchange because nobody can rule the price and the only
pool and they are feeling with the assets can um can mutate the price let's say like this yeah and
in the the clubs they require some uh some great cps from the network uh which is running this uh
defy protocol it requires some uh small fees for the transactions because you may want to submit
several of them which wasn't actually like real uh let's say five or seven years ago because there
was a few before the the merge which is like yeah hello guys
I can proceed with like 10 transactions per minute what do you think about it yeah I also
cost 1.5 thousands of dollars and I require you to apply transaction fee in the in the
in amount like 20 bucks per each and it wasn't suitable for such kind of deals
when you want to exchange some small amount of currencies and uh yeah i think it's all difference
and the reasons why the collapse wasn't so popular um like back then um but actually the collapse is
the and their concept as a connect as economical unit it's is like the building and the primary concept
for any Web2 exchanges like the classic markets with the stocks.
Yeah, and so on.
I think we're going to somehow cause these words in the next questions, I guess.
Yeah, I actually wanted to say you kind of touched these topics, but the second question
is actually really great follow-up.
So what are the specific blockchain performance metrics like TPS, finality time, gas costs,
which need to be achieved to make unchained clubs actually viable?
Yeah, actually, as I say, I think it's all about the transactions per second, but not the
classic marketing transactions per second, as we see in every, maybe not everybody in the most of
the players on the market in the web free industry. I mean, like real transactions, which is exactly
the swap, for example example how many swaps
per second you may proceed with it's your like actual and real throughput as a network as a
computational unit and um it's always about the money it's always about the user experience and
so the gas prices they like they really matters just because nobody wants to exchange my 10 bucks
paying like 50 bucks or
something like this yeah and about finality time I don't think it's kind of like important in this
case just because if you're an active trader you may not want to wait for the finality time but
it's not that big in the most of the protocols except some some of optimistic roll-ups which is like one week to
go with the finality time but they work a little bit differently just because they have some internal
guarantees for the transactions order but anyway yeah i think it's all about you it's all about the
performance of your chain it's all about the prices and it's all about the ux that you have built with the apis of your
contracts with the apis of your network and how how useful and easy to use for the beginners and
advanced users to interact with your some front end or something all right so we are seeing chains like Monad, Fluent and other specifically position for club infrastructure.
So could you tell us what makes these chains different from existing L2s like Arbitrum or Optimism?
Yeah, I think more likely the answer is the question.
Yeah, I think more likely the answer is the question, just because it's some projects that have built to be as performable as it could be in this particular case of executions.
So they provide all of the APIs and specific functionality to support the collapse running on them.
them while they are bitroom as any classic evms they are more likely uh general purpose and they
support any types of computations as well as the gear for example and the wire network and the gear
xz but uh it's also differs from the ethereum just because evm is not so performable how it could be
yeah and it's i think it's all about the optimizations of your execution. How do you give some promises on the results, how you
confirm the transactions, how you perform them, and how many of
them may fit in your some block time or something.
And, all right, thank you. Just a reminder, if anyone would have any question,
feel free to raise a hand.
We will gladly let you ask the devs.
Vatim, did you want to add something?
Alright.
So, another question.
So traditional centralized exchanges, for example,
like Conbase are
already using clubs but they are just off-chain what are actual benefits of
bridging the on-chain and what are we sacrificing?
Oh this one is easier with the no, we have transparency, composability,
and no custody, so you can trust the protocol,
not the Coinbase company, for example.
And what we sacrifice, I think, it's UX, user experience.
And it can be kind of slow and can be unusual so the coinbase way is more convenient
but i think onchain is actually better
yeah actually the collapse it's just a technology it's just a concept while the some centralised
exchanges like Coinbase, which are just companies, it's some legal entities, it's some private
code, it's some guys behind of this, there is the need in some KYC's, but they do provide
the great service. Yeah, of course, any any of chain service any of chain code will be running much faster and give
you responses almost immediately. While on chain, it takes some
time to build the block to include your transaction to
finalize it, blah, blah, blah. But it's it's totally different
in the cases of DeFi, because you may not want like the exact
immediate response,
but you want it to be as permissionless as it's possible.
You don't want to be banned on the principle of territory you live,
on the principle of your citizenship.
You may not want to have some trust into the provider of the services.
So you may want to maybe manually check the code
because for any on-chain programs
it's like common sense uh to have an open source code just because anyway anybody can could check
what's your source code does um yeah so i think on chain clubs they less performable as enough
chains but they are totally trustless they're 100 transparent they do not need you to believe you don't need to
provide some documents kycs you don't need to say hey guys i paid my taxes for this crypto
but it's like a tricky question as we all know but um also a point of like them being completely
different things as a legal essence as a principle of their work. It's more about that on-chain clubs, they may have some security issues.
They may have some UX troubles just because it's a little bit harder to build some
some interface being as friendly as possible for a WebTree project.
While some centralized solutions, they may become bankrupt, they may become scummy,
they may become, I don't know, whatever you want,
what's happening in our world recently.
So I think it's all differences,
which are not actually about the concept,
it's not about the tech behind,
because the clubs gonna work the same way they only differ
in their like general manner of being what this is so i have a question like from my side which
i'm just curious what do you think about it so since clubs and amm's were here even before
and AMMs were here even before.
Why people talk about it right now?
Why do you think now it's the time to talk about these two,
compare these two, and why is it, like, you know,
lately a lot of big discussion regarding this?
Yeah, I think it's all about the fall that is coming, the autumn is coming.
Just because each fall, every year for the last maybe like four or five years, there
was something good going from the tech perspective.
And I think that it's like nowadays hype, it's another of uh some projects inside the crypto industry uh being
really really eating something becoming a new players on this market uh and some of them provide
like specific uh instruments uh and specific platforms to support this case just because
um the clubs and they might like they differ like a a lot because it requires different minimum knowledge of you, how to interact with this.
It requires you to pay more attention for your actions on chain just because for AMM it's just one button and the UX and UI of your application in a web free AMM.
It's as simple as it could be just the token number one, token number two, or there is a pool that's gonna swap something.
But while you're using the collapse, it's more about you figuring out what's the best strategy for you.
If you're your trader, if you're just a common crypto guy who's willing to just swap, you need to set some price.
You may want to not to go with the market order.
So the best deal on the market, you may want to submit some requests by some specific price, which may not be resolved in the time you are sitting still before your laptop.
be resolved in the in the time you are sitting still before your laptop so yeah actually I just
a little bit get confused and missed my path of the speaking yeah can you have another question
just to come back sorry so first of all to command people you need to sit by your crypto I feel like
people like to sit behind their crypto no matter what.
So I think that's no problem.
And you actually even answered the upcoming question,
which was about how does the change,
the economic incentives between AMMs and clubs.
Or would you have any more comments comments i think you just answered the question
though yeah i do uh just because the security uh security not not the exact tech security but
security of your funds as a customer of such protocols uh they also differ in amm and the
clubs uh just because if you are using amm and defy some some specific and suitable for you sleep if you
are totally good uh if if the swap doesn't go it doesn't go well uh it's just reverted you have all
funds on you and um when you're using amms you're only at risk if are liquidity provider so the guy who is giving to the pool his money to have
some revenue to have some additional value from this because they put their money inside inside
the pools and they receive some tokens which is the approximately equal of your share inside the
pool so for example if there is a pool for a hundred thousands of
dollars and i provide another thousand i have like one percent of the pool so i have one percent of
the total income of this pool just because all of these pools they collect some commissions on each
trade um yeah and as i said uh I am like in risk of being the
liquidity provider because by the time I provide, uh, some
tokens, they might cost like one way it's let's say $2.
And when I leave the pool, it could be like $4.
And the point is I'll have like appropriate amount of my tokens
in, um, like real money equivalent, USDT equivalent,
but it's not the fair money of my income just because if I just hold it, I may have more
dollars to eat, let's say like this.
And whenever you use collapse, it's totally different just because all the risk is on
you as a buyer, just because your transfer may not go well, just because all the risk is on you as a buyer just because your transfer
may not go well uh just because it may not be resolved in time you need this money uh to be
exchanged you may uh maybe maybe somehow abused by the by the some bots which is the uh which may
let's say follow the club state and for some reason they have incentive to not let you to perform some exchange.
But it's actually, it's all totally safe in most implementers on the market.
The guys know about all of these cons and they somehow resolve them by the maybe private pools of the transactions,
private pools of the transactions, maybe by the private pool of the overall transaction
pool if you speak about layer one providers and layer one developers.
So I think all of these risks, they are minimized as possible just because there is a lot of
intelligent and the great guys in the industry developing great, great things.
But overall, they all have some cons.
They all have security, small issues and risks for you,
but they are totally minimized as I feel about it.
All right.
So I have a few questions regarding GearXC.
I have a few questions regarding Gear Xe. So first of all, Gear Xe can run 16 simultaneous
computation in single block for 0.17 dollars cents. How does this Perl execution model
specifically benefit to clubs operations versus traditional sequential processing.
Wow, this sentence was really difficult, but I hope you understood.
Yeah, it was difficult, but it's also difficult to believe about 16 simultaneous processes
of compute on Ethereum just because gear exists some kind of magic, you know? Yeah, but to be honest,
we already also touched this question
in one of the first ones.
Because gear is super performable in the terms of compute,
it's super parallelizable.
It may be more than 16, it may be like 68, for example,
68 simultaneously running programs just because we have a huge
plans of being as flexible and as growable for future as possible.
So the point is, GearyGree provides a huge instrument which is super reliable, it's super
fault tolerant and super performable to do some of your businesses.
And as we mentioned, the clubs, they require this performance just because you need to submit transactions.
You need to always do something.
If you're a trader, if you're a regular user, you also need to submit some transactions because any action is a transaction.
And the point is, it's super cheap on the gear.
XZ is super fast on a gear.
XZ you may have some even free to use API.
So for example, our chain transactions, which will, which is more likely familiar
for you as a pre confirmations.
So you submit something totally for free in RPC of the
gear Xe node it's going to spread across all validators and they're gonna include
it inside the block and mutate the state of the program not only one maybe
several ones also it's totally a parallelizable process of submitting of
chain transactions just because we are planning to have some maybe pools.
So let's say we have 10 programs in a Gear X deployment.
So it's 10 programs on Ethereum and we have, let's say, 100 validators having these 10
programs running.
And we may split these validators for half.
So for example, we have 50 and 50, and they have five programs
and five programs, and somehow, randomly at some moment of time, we shuffle these validators
to keep the security the same, but they're gonna only work on their programs. So it's
gonna be more focused on some performable programs because of the gas payouts but anyway it will be much more outcome from the block
like changes of states within a second a minute and so so the gear g from my point of view is
super suitable for such cases as ams as a collapse maybe not like the vanilla ams just because they're
as simple as it could be and it's like easy to use
directly on Ethereum uh you don't need even Arbitrum or anything like this just because
Ethereum is cheap right now but the clubs are different they require a lot from you from your
execution engine and stuff yeah all right uh so you kind of touched this again, but since I'm not really technical, I will rather ask another question again.
You can say if you answered everything.
But the ArcNoid benchmark showed DRC handling complex computation with instant finality.
You kind of touched this topic now, right now as well.
specific computational tasks benefit most from this architecture yeah I think
we touched almost the bigger part of this question but it's more about the
gear X rather than just defy we are talking about just because it's more uh general purpose
so uh for gear g uh suitable any case that requires some at least some like medium computations
so for example amm the amm doesn't so they do not need any of like huge mathematical formulas they don't need all of this uh while the clubs do
uh they do need this they do need do need to perform some transitions from one way to another
uh there is also uh you know there's a couple of project running amms uh with this like some some
mathematical specific and the concept shift uh for example the one of the latest
releases of uniswap they uh if i'm not mistaken uniswap do the same um they have like you know
like centralized pools uh for just swapping uh which is more flexible and risk-free for liquidity providers so they are like a combination of amm and all of you
know like let's say bug fixes for them but it's not a bug it's like just just just how it works
so a lot of guys a lot of guys like fixed and improved the concept of AMMs. So like solutions like this, they do also need gear XE, uh, just because it's going to
help you as a business, uh, like pay less for the transaction fees from your site.
It, it allows your users to pay less.
They, it allows, allows everybody to have the same results directly on the field without
any, uh, bridges and stuff but do it it's
maybe maybe faster time do it with the with less money just because it's in it for everybody for
the business owners for the business users and stuff so it's I think it's benefit for all of
us including the gear because we need users they need some businesses they need technology that we provide and it's super suitable for anything that requires
some compute so for example clubs some improved AMMs we also had the
demonstration as well as our conard for 16 computations in the same time we had
a demonstration of running an AI inside Ethereum.
So it's super great, I think, to submit, for example, in Ethereum,
submit some image of the cat and have an answer, is it a cat or not?
Just because, yeah, it's meaningless in the world,
but it's like a great showcase for how we could do this inside Ethereum.
a great showcase for how we could do this inside the Ethereum.
Vadim, would you like to add some comments to Dima's notes or answers?
No, okay, you are good. I'm just like listening today.
my name is one of the listeners today as well you know all right so i have a like you know
Vadim is one of the listeners today as well, you know.
hypothetical question could we see protocols combining amen liquidity pools with club
order books and what it would that look like and what would be the trade-offs?
Yeah actually there is a lot of projects which are more about the clubs plus AMM just because it's in their customer
interests and it works differently from one project to another but
generally it's some kind of combination of one and another. So for example, some of the
guys, actually, I'm trying to memorize any any name of the
company and I'm totally forgotten about any of them.
Yeah, I do. I do remember Uniswap because they have some
kind of like virtual orders, but it's still like a mm yeah actually I do
remember the the YDX yeah also a great project yeah which which is like the
primary it's order book but inside you may interact the exchange as an AMA just
because if you need to exchange something, it's maybe much more productive and like
cheaper for you. If it's not the market request inside the order
book, but but some some some kind of pool by your order book
somewhere nearby. So if you need to the best deal on the market
market market purchase, you may want to go inside
uh of course automatically you may go want inside these pools to have like the best deal that is
possible just because if you submit some request by uh let's say ethereum by one dollar uh there
could be no that much sellers for one dollar but there there is a pool that allows you to
fill the nest the rest of your like purchase request let's say something
like this
all right but you you wanted to add something did you want to just
remember what weeks they they operate something like AMM plus club, so it's some kind of combined experience.
Nice!
Alright, so how does maximal extractable value manifest differently in AMMs versus clubs,
and which model is more vulnerable to sandwich attacks?
I think AMMs are easier to sandwich attack because they have predictable pricing and it's just a curve and while clubs are less prone to me mev attacks because it's more
more i don't know it's not that easy to predict something on the club
easy to predict something on the club.
Yeah, but there is the main point of
that.
Yeah, it may not be reasonable to predict
anything in the club because you may
not do anything related to
other orders just because
inside the AMM, if you
buy, it means you buy
despite the current price
you just buy because you submitted
your request. And it's different in the
collapse because you submit requests to buy by some specific price and there is no um any deal
for you so you are not buying so as i said like also in the very beginning it's may be like
meaningless for anybody to try to sandwich attack you uh not exactly sandwich attack because the sandwich
is totally impossible for the clubs as i think because uh do we need to explain what is this
how do you think yes please explain it yeah we can start from the like from the beginning of
the question so uh the me v maximum extractable value which were like previously minor extractable value uh it's
the thing then um somebody have some profits maybe only you maybe not exactly on you but
somebody have some profits because he was inserted uh in the block uh you. So for example, you submit your request first, somebody, maybe a bot, just saw it,
like did some computations, figured out how to extract some value from you, submitted the same like or like different
requests on chain inside the transaction pool as well as you uh applied the bigger tip the bigger transaction
fee the bigger glass price doesn't matter and uh the point uh of emv is to perform some compute
before you just because it helps this guy to extract some money um yeah uh And the sandwich attack, it's one of the cases of EMV attacks.
It's when you use AMM, for example, you submit some requests for exchanging some assets.
And there is a price and let's say like X, let's say X.
And somebody see that you're willing to perform some maybe huge maybe not actually huge but but a
big exchange and they submit the same request for buying before you so uh when he buys uh the the
price increases and i'm going the second one because I just got attacked. I just got kicked by some guy, by some bot.
So the point is when I submit my request with not like good slippage, for example.
So it's always about the slippage and slippage was invented and implemented just because of such kind of sandwich attacks.
Let's imagine there is no slippage.
The price ups by the time I came to the contract and I buy it as well.
And the price also increases.
And this first guy who just bought it like cheap, pumped the price for me.
I also pumped the price and he sells and having an interest
of these differences before buying and selling.
So yeah, I think that's it about sandwich attacks, which is not applicable to the clubs
because of the model, because there is only orders, there are specific prices, there could be maybe some price manipulations, but not like the ones
that cost you and your funds directly. So I have last two questions with this, what I just said,
I would like to advise or encourage listeners, guys, if you have any questions you would like to get answered
please raise your hand and we will gladly add you to the stage i have a question for you both guys
uh so let's look ahead like 2.2 to 3 years something like that do you think it's possible
that project projects would like completely shift from AMMs to clubs?
Or will they just continue to coexist and serve different use cases?
I would say that nobody knows.
As it was two years ago, nobody had the exact idea that the clubs will be almost everywhere and will be super
trendy right now on the twitter on the x sorry um so um i think just from top of my mind uh it will
be almost the same as it as it is now just because we are we had already the big shift in the industry
is now just because we are we had already the big shift in the industry recent years so we need to
have some stabilization time so it will not different a lot differ a lot and um i think we're
gonna proceed with some kind of hybrid models and by the time some new player on the market implements
some totally new and unbelievable solution I think it remain
the same the same models the same concepts just because the clubs are not new as I said it's just
a classic classic economic unit from web 2 and the classic markets so we also we always inside
the web 3 inside web 2 to inherit some some best uh experiences the best approaches
from the past so I think it will be some hybrid models optimized for some maybe general purpose
platforms as a gear X or maybe ethereum but ethereum is less performable as a gear xe and has its cons uh obviously but it's super uh like liquidity full fulfilled with
the liquidity yeah i think uh clubs will remain in use for high volume uh pairs something like btc like BTC, Ethereum and else. And AMMs will stay for meme coins
for low volume, low liquidity pairs.
And yeah, I think that's the main use case
for both of these protocols.
It's just the AMMs is so convenient and easy to use.
And it's just exactly what's
need for meme coins for low liquidity or volume pair. We just trade and that's it.
All right, thanks guys. I have a last question for you for today's session. If you could, you know, give some advice to future developers who would like to build
some next generation of DeFi protocols, when should they choose a main model versus
club infrastructure?
And if you can even mention how GearXe
could change this decision for them
or help them with this.
Yeah, first of all, I think if you are willing
to have some business to become a great developer,
I think you do not want to work on some legacy stack.
You don't want to right now have some backend on PHP or something like this.
So you're going to choose something new, something practical,
something battle-tested but still performable and great with a huge community and stuff.
And it's all the same about businesses and developing inside the Web3.
So I think if you are
willing to build some great project, you need to choose the great technology. And from my point of
view, GiverXe is one of the great technologies existing right now, also actually developing,
especially by us and so on. But why do I say this uh as i said uh about the about some solutions inheritance from
the past so it's all the same about the george z just because i had a look on some project we had
like our opinion on some technologies and how does it go and how it performs like in terms of market
as a business as a technology itself and um we did a great research on the other guys
who is developing something right now and we you know somehow concatenated and inherited it inside
the gear xd also implemented some some new things which is great for our opinion and super suitable
for the business needs that is existing right now on Ethereum, on Solana and stuff.
Yeah, so I think it's more likely like this, just because if you want to build something
great, you need to be great and you need to do good things on a good stack.
Yeah.
All right.
So I see we have someone joining us on the stage.
Hi, CS.
Are you here?
Do you have some questions for the desk?
Am I audible?
Hello.
Yep.
Hello.
We hear you.
So actually, I wanted your opinion on this.
So do you prefer, like I've seen a project doing this.
So they have made a particular L2 for just for Clob.
And they like ZK proof that transaction
and put it on the L1.
So what is your take on this?
Because when, if we are like particularly
making up L2 for just Clobs, like the validators of L1
are not getting any profit of that.
But like they are getting the, they are achieving the high TPS that is needed for CLOBS.
So what is your point of view on this trade-off?
Yeah, I'm alright that you're asking about.
First question is, first part of the question is somehow related to the liquidity fragmentation between Salus ZK rollups and the primary layer one which is hosting
all this and the second one is about which is more secure and profitable to use like ZK approaches
yeah yeah so i think any ZK stuff is great from the mathematical from the technology perspective
it's super super like interesting to watch how they develop
something, how they produce some results. For example, Ridgeview is awesome technology,
it's super great to use, but it's super limited right now. And I hope we're going to know
to ZK almost totally in a future, maybe in 10 years, maybe in 15 years, if we're going
to develop the same things, we're going to put ZKA as soon as
possible once it will follow all of our needs, just because we need to maintain the balance
between the technology and performance and the user experiences, because nobody wants to have
their lab request, like some order to be processed, for example, let's say for 10 minutes just because you need to provide
Viki proof you need to submit the results and stuff of course there is a
lot of guys developing something especially right now it's super happy to
build layer 2 which is totally about the collapse they cover all their needs they
may use Viki proofs for let's say some kind of internal finality maybe for this but i think it's not gonna
live long enough to have some results on the industry like uh in the like future perspective
just because uh it's something that cover needs right now but it's not um totally wide accepted
and uh cannot perform as as it does in the club terms in some other cases.
So, for example, if you want to buy a hammer, you want to buy a hammer that builds everything.
You may want to build a house, you may want to build a table,
and you don't want to buy a hammer to invest some money in the hammer that is only built to
build tables. Yes, something like this. Got it. All right, thank you. For your question, we also have
Naib to be asking to join the stage, so let's get him on the stage
Yes, I can see you just
Just a moment
This plastic XZX, you know
Hi, yep, hi Hi there, can you hear me? Yes.
Hello.
My question is how can you find solution to the different problem?
What is the secret to this success and share your optimal location?
That's it thank you
so we mean how to build the success business in a luxury actually we don't have an answer for this
but if you want to build something successful i think you need to first of all know everybody
else in the industry you need to get best practices you need to inherit the best best options possible for you and find something that people
around you need so I think we're all about it
yeah maybe I missed the question just because I just came out of my apartment. It's a lot of noise around me, so sorry about it.
Yeah.
Oh, your optimal location?
Yeah, optimal location for what?
all right guys so i think it was enough of the questions for today as well as the session
it was almost one hour so thanks a lot everyone who joined who listened to us. And thanks to you both.
Thanks, Dima, for you taking us on the street with you.
It was really a pleasure to hear all the noises in the background.
Yeah, actually, if you have some unresolved questions,
you may proceed in our official Telegram group.
I am always there, so we just had some conversation maybe yesterday about the bridge to base or some other solutions.
So all the answers and questions could be found there.
So if you want to ask something, let's come and chat.
Yes, so thanks everyone for joining.
Thanks Vadim, thanks Dima for coming and answering all the questions.
And see you at the next one.
Thank you. See you next time.
Bye.
Host
Vara Network
from
Vara Network
