you here, Chief? How's it going?
How's everyone? How are you?
I've always enjoyed hearing
ICON strategy for this year.
is going to be a big one.
other than that it's perfect.
David, I can't hear you if you were talking.
Because I could switch to that.
On the desktop. It does? Oh yeah.
Compared to my phone, now the desktop version
Right. Okay, I'll be back in 20 seconds.
I lose my train of thought, I apologize to everyone.
Just remind me what I was
referring to or talking to.
and chief, if I ramble at all,
if David doesn't tell me to shut up,
Can we send David an invite?
or interject when Fez is rambling
And they will be helping us
to understand the general
strategy of the foundation
merger between Icon Foundation
I know it's been in the talks
Can you give us a little summary
with the subset of requirements
communities of both the platform
do they think it's a good or a bad idea?
offers a win-win scenario
the balanced app can benefit
collaboration. So in terms of
it would be a one plus one
According to the proposal, and yeah, the community
either seeing that or disagreeing with that
been happening over the past week, I'd say.
collaboration for it, of course
that you think of on a Monday and you post
it to a forum on a Tuesday, like it's something
have a lot of thought and conversation about
before you put such a proposal
And that's what's happened now, so
forums for balance to an icon, that's
where you can read the thing
and discussion is happening over
there in the comments, but
I would say most of it is actually happening in
the respective Discord channels
as well, like you could scroll back and
the current state of things,
not sure if Fez wants to add
his perspective to that as well.
I think you covered it really well.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, as you said
there is a potential win-win
this merger proposal aims
I know one crucial aspect
involves the introduction of a burn
could you please provide more
enlighten the community in a better way?
the blockchain itself has
inflation, the amount of transactions,
In fact, every transaction burns ICX,
it's just at the moment inflation is much higher than
what transactions we're able to generate.
or originally it was BTP,
that the messaging component has been
abstracted, XCall is the messaging
on different chains, like for example
when you're sending from Archway to
it's taking that fee in arch tokens
when you're sending from ICON to Archway or
using that transaction, it's taking that fee in ICX.
it's retained to get burnt.
When I use the word ideally
ideally it would be cool to do like
on the other tokens you do a bit of an
to go hey am I getting a 5% discount
on ETH or am I getting a 5% discount on
Arch or am I getting a 5% discount on Injective
which they have to use ICX to
purchase it and then that ICX gets burnt.
Whatever that formula may be
at the end of the day, XCall when
and banks it that is going to
burn mechanic XCall introduces
the whole idea around this
is if we enshrine the app
then starts providing liquidity
for balance which is going to
then generate revenue and
also then starts buying ICX
is kind of where your three fundamental burns
complement each other. If there's
volume there's XCall transactions
and there's layer 1 transactions for ICON
like all three come into play.
I was going to say exactly the same thing Fez
the L1 fees. There is a burn
that is the XCall cross chain
transactions and then the proposal
the burning of trading fees
the ICON network has supplied the liquidity
burn mechanism which is the XCall
transactions would receive a boost
implemented. So the proposal
kind of touches on all of it.
loaded question. There's so many
personally it's having a flagship
story. The tech's good. I've heard this.
The tech's great. The tech hasn't
been available on mainnet. It's great
believe me but nothing's available. Finally we have
the tech available but there's
no flagship application showcasing the
actual tech and this is what
balance has worked through but the state
of things are rough for people working
on the actual protocol. This kind of
removes all of that and go
don't have these worries anymore.
flagship product to showcase our tech
and this product will help
us reach other chains because we can not
just connect to other chains. We can then
show this working example of how
and through that we're acquiring
it's a win-win on both sides. The tech finally
gets displayed and balance we can keep
growing balance aggressively.
From a technical standpoint
I'm a bit of a control freak and
across how we're building
this new feature of XCOAL. We've got balance
right there in the background,
tested out and ready to get to
mainnet when that new feature of
XCOAL is about to get released.
It goes hand in hand versus
that may not sit too well but
are waiting for a long time for
someone to come in and actually use it.
A good example there is craft.
Craft a busy building but they're not
at that stage to utilize the tech
even though that infrastructure
to Neutron has been up and running for the last
David, do you have anything to add?
questions that you want to cover
If we're talking about other benefits
technology that has so much
benefits for app builders
amazing testimonial coming from
Balanced or this flagship that you can put on
display where people actually see
Balanced pop up on these different chains
that is impressive. We're not just
chain to the other. We're talking about
chains that have their own
standards and balances just connecting
to them like it's nothing because it's
using XCOAL. When that happens,
developers or teams see that
there is something there. Come check it out
On the Balanced side, the
growth that can be achieved
I think the key is definitely
owned liquidity side of the proposal.
if you can kind of have a guarantee
that your pools are going to be
well with users who are looking to trade.
They might want to trade big without
price slippage. They might want to trade
price slippage and they can
when you have deep liquidity. So the fact that that's
merger I think is a benefit on the
You know, at the first place
merger proposal, I thought
to other developers for the ecosystem.
the opposite way when I first read
ICON is shifting more towards
infrastructure instead of
so directly. See the thing is
bring value to the ICX holder
and the way that that can be done
a straightforward method of doing so is burning
the only way that that was done is through
layer one fees. So it made
to come and build on the layer one blockchain.
so they were always aiming to add
functionality which is infrastructure
that that implies. They were always
to the value package that is ICON
I wouldn't say we're seeing
a strategy shift. If anything we're seeing
that was announced like last year in January
I'd say that you could call more
of a shift because what we
instead of just relying on
one interoperability solution
we looked around and realized
hey there is multiple solutions
out there and for apps to build with
it they need to have choice
points for apps when they want to go cross
for them? And that's when
X goal kind of got lifted from
let's plug this into not just BTP
but also IBC maybe in the
future layer zero wormhole to give
much more options and benefits
and what you're seeing now is kind of
doubling down on it. We want more
users of the X goal tech. We've
seen spectacular deployments
12 months. There's really been
of connected chains and a logical
next step is now we want apps to come and use
those chains. That doesn't mean
that we're going to stop with the tech.
working on X goal, improving it
added, new chains to be added. That still
doubling down in this proposal saying
the growth of this flagship app
so that we have an easier
other apps whether they're on the icon chain
whether they're on other chains
to come and consider X goal
use it and potentially down
the line generate transaction
I wouldn't say it's a strategy
shift into infrastructure
doubling down on bringing
I'm rambling you've got to stop me.
I can understand totally with this shift
it's like are we abandoning the layer 1
going hey applications come build
it did kind of succeed for a brief
period of time and then fizzle
and we had CPS finding a bunch of building
that eventuated to nothing
funds I would say in that way
we were behind in connections we weren't connected
we had that one connection that we get
in and out of Ethereum and Binance
chain through thanks to Icon Bridge
so this was a real roadblock
and by the time we've been able to fix
some of our delivery pain points
which I do believe we fixed
and in the year of 2023 we have been shipping
to that. Finishing off this
if we expand balance with a real
zoned approach we start getting a
ton of assets. Ethereum, BNB
we're talking like all the major
chains. Hell, I've been wanting to connect to SUI
I've been wanting to connect to many chains
but there's a limit to how much we can do
and how quickly we expand and also you
gauge our performance and make sure security
standards are up to scratch and all that jazz
assets under balance and we
acquired a new user base thanks to it
I think ThorSwap is a great
example so we won't chase the assets
ThorSwap have, we'll try to diversify
so that we have a bit of a unique
once we have all of that the layer
one very much comes into play
again on iCon because it's not a closed
chain, you could do something on it
and you could benefit from a ton of
liquidity because of it. Whatever you may
be doing, you may be doing NFT stuff
you may be doing other random stuff
moment it's a very focused approach
if we execute and pull it off
bring back the builders or bring
back some kind of innovation and building
and unique use cases and we've
we've got Lydia Labs who deployed this
there's literally moments ago I got
a Discord message that they're trying to set up
a few last components to actually start
testing the integrations they have planned for
the treasury bond into balance
to introduce the savings rate and a few other mechanisms
yeah I hope that's answered
reap rewards in the long run
yeah Chief how about that?
yep yep yeah yeah I'm convinced
we were talking about the icon side
of the merger let's talk about
the balanced side of merger
I'm going to ask this one
how would this merger benefit
balanced now that interest
is picking up again in the crypto space
just keep doing its thing and
I mean we could I'm a balanced
a part of the DAO I could say
for balanced you know after
a couple of years of bear
of the platform like it's not like
that doesn't help a platform thrive
of the speed at which it can
if the merger were to occur
you know you'd no longer have
to rely on for example the
fund a development if you cannot
relying heavily on external
liquidity to come in and fill up your pools
major benefits that balanced
could take from the merger
of things like I've kind of touched off it before
they propose deep liquidity pools
for cross chain token pairs
which you know if you want people
to have a good trading experience on your
without the suggested merger
go and deploy on a new chain
but they wouldn't have that direct liquidity
which makes protocol so usable cross
chain so that's just one of the benefits
for balance that when they do set their
targets to you know a new chain
that they could actually deploy with
they could execute faster
than without the merger is
I understand that balance
would be viewed as a low cap
so the idea that it can grow
faster in value right like that would be the
counter biggest counter argument
kind of tend to put that a little bit to the
side only because it's like well it cannot
and that is the state of affairs
excuse the hacks aren't an excuse
shit gets hacked it is fat
like major platforms radiant the other
day got hacked right and these have
TVLs of like in the billions
if not close to eight hundred
nine hundred million dollars right
they recover because they have funds
and they keep pushing on and
eventually as long as you know
the protocol is doing what they
can to add security layers which
balance is doing you know now that the lock limits
there's certain things in place so
if icon the network starts putting in a bunch
of liquidity well what are the risks
of there being hacks there are risks
but now thanks to some of
pieces that have been put in place
the hacks would be limited
I come back to funding to get
the work done like ultimately
my brain is only seeing it this way
like you've got a protocol if
no work it won't survive like
the expansion of balance like
in the background is thanks to
to fund smart contract development
have a product to showcase
but it's just we haven't been able to execute
in the pace that we would
kind of gives us that like
we'll be able to ship at a much quicker
rate because we know we have dedicated
front end resources we know we have
smart contract resources we know we have
already mapped out on what we need to deliver
it's all just a bad delivery right I keep coming
back to this I just want to keep
which we have done in 2023 but
we've only done that we've only shipped
we've lost a lot of users
so now it's about okay well
how can we take what we've shipped
with the product to start acquiring
the user base again get new
people in seeing how cool
balance works from a cross-chain
balance is a doubt and there is
a governance mechanism and it will stay
impact the roles and responsibilities
I mean will their contributions
merger and one of the reasons why
balance would be owned by the
part of the ICON network so
you could imagine any voting
that would need to happen would either
be done through validator sets
of intertwined it's not so
the balance team is basically
of the people working on balance will stay focused
the protocol because it's part of the
enshrined application and obviously
it needs to keep evolving and
yeah so they will be providing
nothing has changed as I understand
I'm just checking like the question is like
happy to touch on this I know Scott's
been a very much a thought leader and a driver in the
ICON space since even right at the start
if Scott's at the helm you believe you know stuff's
getting done because that's who he is
he's not going anywhere he's still there
it's just this is just a way
this merger is kind of best
for both worlds and it removes
how are we going to pay or how does
a Dow keep funding when it's
low on funds at the moment and this is
the bear marks being rough and the hacks blah blah blah
solves all of that and then
in a unified direction we start
I guess there's a time frame
the potential dates for the proposal
setting up the infrastructure if the
it's a proposal at the moment so
at this point like a ton of
feedbacks come through and this is something
we've got a new video dropping as well
everything that has been put forward
a lot of conversations have happened in the background
to make sure the core teams
are aligned you know as you've been
what happens to the balanced team so a lot of
conversations have happened with the balanced team how do they
okay with this direction this is what it means for them
this is the implications with the token so those
conversations have been had
the proposals have been put forward and now we've gathered
a lot of feedback from the community
and we've been having a few meetings in the background
to kind of go this has aggregated all that feedback
and what are the next steps whether it be
this is being collated at the moment
in a perfect world I would love
to have the vote by the end of
option that's as generally designated
with the icon community and the balanced community
I'm not going to be able to get
everyone to go yes love this
but in general the idea of this
unify the community not divide it
end of Jan is the current
I would timeline we pinned in
but that is that can change if there's
but the goal is to be aggressive
as long as everyone's happy
asking and we are doing the space
do you know enlighten the community in a better
way so they can understand the concept
better the proposal better
so I was just curious about the timeline
the next thing you did ask me like
that was the vote and then
there's a bunch of work that needs to happen
so we do have one of the devs
on here on the call as well
a smooth transition there
is a bit of work I anticipate
we're hoping around a month worth of work
in terms of smart contracts
extra stuff you know the buyout
is inputted and how people can do
their swap so we estimate
high level around a month's
worth of work that needs to get done
before everything's able to execute
from a technical standpoint
month, month and a half worst case scenario
I know there are a bunch of
the current proposed buyout is
is this aspect open to discussion
could there be any potential
have there been more compelling alternative
suggestions for the buyout
of bomb holders? I've seen some
it's an interesting thing isn't it
market of balanced tokens is
you'd expect, it's a mixed bag
holders feel about this, we're seeing
it in mostly the balanced
holder myself, I've got ICX and
seems reasonable but then I can
balance holders who feel that the premium
is not high enough and that's something
that's being talked about
Discord channels and then there's
the proposed vesting schedule
manage it immediately, you're
going to have to wait a certain amount
of time before you get access
to it and that's another aspect
opinions about, some people may
not care, others want to be able
their funds immediately after the buyout
occurs, so these are two elements
that have been heavily debated
categorise myself as an average
holder of balanced and ICX
but I can see how if you're
the opinions differ and these are things
that are being taken into consideration
after all it is a proposal
you have to find something that works
because as Fez put it earlier
the community moving forward
to give even more perspective
to bring more value to ICX
not to split up into camps
I'm curious about yourself Chief
what you think of the balanced buyout deal
do you hold balanced token?
I don't hold balanced token
I hope that was shock Fez
there might be people who
it's a complicating that that's why
but for now it seems fine
bond holders receiving ICX
and the BILN style becoming
there is a potential win-win situation
personally I would approve
I didn't mean to switch it up
you can ask the questions chief
thing to you know decide on
you know if you remove the vesting period
there might be a pressure on ICX price
or you know make angry of the
this question is going to
fast you know about the vesting
would the removal of a vesting
a vesting period still be a beneficial
so chief I'm not going to comment on
that this is probably the
community that they don't agree with
the locking and the vesting over three months
that feedback has been taken
it will just be dealing with that
part of that process could be
well the standard balance holders
the vesting could just be for
the core contributors who have
you know a large stake in balance
answer your ICX self-pressure
for the selling pressure on ICX
I can't sit here and give you any
sure-fire answers it's just
the fact is this is how the community feedback has been
taken on board and these are some of the conversations
now happening in the background to see if it's viable
to do it without the vesting and as I suggested
what the final outcome will be
is post conversations with teams
which Scott is obviously having in the background
but I'm giving you some insights into
No I think he wrapped it up well didn't he Faz?
do you guys think it is a
fair assessment to say that
by buying into this balance holders
share not only in balance
all future strategic partnerships
open themselves up to more possibilities
would have as bond holders
future of ICON's strategic partnerships
because they always have the opportunity to
swap their balance for ICX
so if you haven't done that
you're making a conscious decision
growth and potential that is going to be larger
probably because of the cross chain
aspect and the opportunity that
if you're buying into this and you say
okay I'm going to vote yes
and by default you're buying into
partnerships of the ICON network
you could say you're not buying
maybe I'm taking the question wrong
it's a hard one for us to answer
we're on both sides of the fence
they're holders and at the same time
execute on a direction that
for both parties not saving
I would flip it back and go
if there's no one to do the work and no
liquidity on the platform what good
and that's all that's how I always
that's the only way I can see it at the moment
protocols go up in flames all the time
like on other chains and you're
left with this dead token
people who know me in the community know
I'm famous for the amount of rugs I've been in
I can't even put a number
this is where it comes down to for me
it is they're telling you, the team's telling you
like we're hitting a bit of a stalemate here
due to everything that's happened
we need an injection in funding
yep we also need a flagship that we know
what if we unified it and shined it
which many chains are doing
this is not just something random
we've come up with Kojiras or been
doing this Canto and there's
several other examples so
it's kind of a happy medium here
so for balance holders it's like
stopped or it can't expand
or we do this merger you're still getting
paired with the tech to expand it
across other ecosystems and you know
if we can get this passed and then
don't throw them enough credit
how much work they've been doing
just hanging on like through
it through you know the front end pieces
what they do like I cannot throw
them enough credit so like
to be able to then go to these teams and go okay actually
you don't have let's get you funded
let's get working we have
injective we have what have we got now we've got
heck we're Neutron, injective
we have so many chains they're literally
just now waiting there I can feel one of
the devs on the call already
sweating as I say this but
the funding so to me it's just a win-win
it's a low cap coin but if it can't
keep building it's a low cap coin
this is kind of a win-win you're getting
a buyout yes it's at all time
lows you're still getting a premium on it
and what we're going to see
building and expansion of it
since we are talking about ADEX
yes balance is a doubt but it's simply
ADEX and liquidity is the
perhaps the most important
at the centralized exchange so
it's definitely a win-win situation
sub both sides of the merger
definitely there is a shift of the strategy
promoting this strategy is another
thing so we have discussed the topic
of the day but I'm curious is the
foundation has any plans to promote
the strategy in the blockchain space
do you mean the strategy of
collaborating with an app or this specific
and training with the iCon network
the question in that way?
be targeting to bring more
like the other blockchains
the purchase of network owned liquidity
the other side of a token
and then provide the liquidity
on the DEX such that users
can come in and do a lot of swaps
swaps without the price slippage
can then be used or at least
after a month, after a year
whatever governance decides
trades and the generation of trading
so that's kind of like the proposed
part of the proposed merger
the strategy what we do is we
reach out to the foundations
on the other side of the pond and we
for the liquidity and we kind of
ask them like hey we would both
provide liquidity as well
this happened with archway where
liquidity for the arch B and
but because we collaborated with the archway
foundation we have good liquidity
Astrovolt which is a DEX on archway
and this enables even more trading because
now as prices between these
pairs fluctuate between these exchanges
come in and benefit from price
difference and kind of keep that
and at the end of the day again that generates
more trading so in terms of promoting
talk with other foundations
or other parties and see if
we can get them on board with what we're
all see that it's a win-win for
more interesting strategy to actually
Balance is employing with their
and the reason for that is because
ICON cross-chain messaging
is at the center of it so
the core logic remains on the
ICON blockchain and whenever
occurs a subset of contracts
gets passed between these
Because if Balance decides that they want to go
and use IBC or if Balance
goes and decides they want to use
before they'd have to rewrite
all this cross-chain logic because they're using
different bridging protocols. They might want to use
Layer 0 in the future. They'd have to rewrite
all the cross-chain logic
bridging protocol but with Exco
and whenever Exco integrates
with a new bridging protocol, Balance is
that to go cross-chain. So the
Hubspoke strategy there in combination
and that's something worth promoting
it kind of puts Exco into that
pushes it forward and increases
Exco adoption. So I think
in terms of promotion and
strategies, that's the one that we want to be
pushing forward especially once
Balance. Now the deployment
so right now this is the moment
where Balance should benefit
with subsequent expansions
and I may have glossed over
all too accurate in my explanation
so maybe Fez, if you've picked up
on anything, please correct me
and otherwise I'm going to pass it to you anyway.
did reveal that I don't believe
everyone knew, so as part
processor with Archway, yes, we've worked with
the Foundation, we've actually gone in
and the goal was to provision
goals we have as part of this, anyone
we're partnering with, we want to try and provide
liquid staked asset being
injective, it'll be whatever the liquid
chain we picked is paired with BNUSD
another DEX on that chain
AstraVault, it is AstraVault that is
their first DEX to launch
and all these arrangements have been made
unfortunately you haven't
seen the pool there yet because
their DEX has a dependency
on a couple of APIs provided by CoinMarketCap
and these have been causing us
a bit of a nightmare. We are working
with CoinGecko to get this result
but unfortunately it's a very
time just keeps getting lost
you can communicate only a certain amount
before you have to wait a certain amount of time
so this process has been ongoing but yes
that should have happened
on launch day, it's got delayed but eventually
it is, the liquidity is sitting there
unfortunately that price feed doesn't exist
which we're trying to fix so
that's one of the ways we want to expand
partnerships, the other part
proposal stage, that's why we're not going
off promoting to other networks, hey
before we promote we need to make sure
it passes so that we don't have this
whole, I don't know, in the Cosmos space
it's very, you can see when it's divided
it becomes very vocal on Twitter
at the moment we need to be
very focused and execute, we can't have
a lot of division, my personal view
this particular plan, no, it hasn't
been actively promoted but
in terms of the IBC, like
when we built IBC, we're the second
out of the IBC implementation, the second
team and we worked on it for nine months
and shipped a mainnet product
published on various platforms
Hackenoon, everywhere else
that's cool, go to use it
how can I use it, there's no
you can't point to an application but
there's nothing there, so this is kind of where again
balance kind of fix it's like, yeah we've done this
we've done this, we've got this
and this is how it uses xcol and this
is how xcol intertwines with the other
and this is how you can use dual verification
product using it, then it
becomes a very different story to promote
that question around promotion
finally close this off around
asking, there was one final point
I lost my train of thought now
execution of the promotion
if it is approved, if the proposal
plans to promote this strategy
so I was just asking about this
a question from the community since
talking about the strategy
the increase of emissions
think the community should
Yeah, it's a good question
I'd say, you know, a lot of people
see it through a lens of supply
dropping the value of the token
the proposal makes a very good case
investment similar to how
with their monetary policy
and they invest in their economy
that's what the inflation is meant to do
is we see the percentages
and I guess what I want to stress
initial surprise as well until I
into that network-owned liquidity
that we talked about before
it doesn't go into circulation
in a sense, when we're done with it
in the meanwhile it helps to generate
trading fees, so that's kind of a great
example how the inflation
helps kind of lube the engine
that is balanced, make it like
and when we're done with it
that's 85% of the proposed
when you're doing your calculations
but not all the inflation needs
to be offset by the growth
because it's being strategically allocated
in the current situation, all
staking and validating rewards
and then there is a percentage that goes to CPS
yeah, two out of the four
circulating supply, and that's
like everyone can make up their own mind
if they think that that is
smart or if that's worth it, and that's
again why the proposal is online
with all the numbers written out so that everyone
can see them and form their opinion
hopefully people see them
not sure if I've answered the question
but that was just my view on the inflation
part of the proposal on the
iCon network side of things
and not sure if you want to
dig into that deeper or if you want to ask Fez
when first these conversations
kicked off and there was talk
I actually didn't entertain
the conversation, however
something I'm a subject matter expert on
at any given time we're taking
a value of one asset at its
not giving it away, exchanging it
asset at the time that we then
of everything as user acquisition
this is constantly in my head
we're talking all these current plans all about
unifying and being in the same direction but we
still have this big bucket of user acquisition
we need to execute that properly
as well otherwise it won't be successful
to onboard users on a platform
Karma Finance style where now you
ICX to go okay hey we want to acquire
this much Ethereum for the
you have this way of people
coming in and doing a small arc
and I'm not saying this is some
of the stuff that's just been tinkered and
worked through to see how we can do
this efficiently but this is one
of the conceptual ideas that
through this process we can expand
we expand on chains creating a way
for users to actually provide us
with the network-owned liquidity
then ICON owns and is generating
revenue and as David said
at any given point in this scenario
remove that network vote and buy
been released to the market and burn it
I have been open to that and after
yeah just working through the plan
a good move especially if we acquire
of the chains we're going to launch on
the second part of this is
the other aspect so there's a few
other buckets and they're very fractional
it's just like we see DYDX
they have an emergency fund
injective various chains they actually
have some kind of insurance or
an emergency fund in place and
normally these funds are viewed as
locked supply they're not circulating
like DYDX had one with their
wire and hack and that's where then
the emergency fund kicked in
are worried of using the protocol
if they go hey when using this
protocol don't worry they have an
insurance fund of 50 million
a user is going to feel more
confident of using that protocol
and with their assets versus
it having no kind of insurance
and anything in that insurance
fund at the moment in the emergency
just there as a backstop if
yeah again though reading the proposal
is keen some of these obviously I've shared
a little bit of my personal takes as well
inflation in general scares me in
it is via another asset it's still
owned by the network and cannot be
the only thing that can happen with it is
I like the fact that the validator set
for that matter like CPS gets
worth at ICX price at the moment
those numbers haven't changed and this is where
that layer one like if we can strategically
use those funds to actually get projects
delivered that benefit the iPhone network
so be it and god damn we're succeeding
what's been transpiring so
cool cool cool cool cool cool
any questions from the community
connected now it's connected
Sulemanza let me add him through
Arush do you have any other
balance what would you rate
for all the reasons listed
in the proposal but the next
big goal is to actually see
the usage of the platform increase
left and right and center you want them
to use it and you want them to come back
and continue to use it and that's something
it's beautiful on the blockchain you can literally
see it right so you're going to be able to see
adoption is happening and I think
after the merger is complete because that's
essentially what's going to lead to
bringing the value to the
ICX holders it's going to lead to
the burn fees of the layer 1
and the trading fees so I guess
is to increase the usage of
hand in hand more integrations right
pocket and any potential IBC chain
theory a very quick process
IBC connecting to other IBC
quick now that we've finished the work on that
I think it's in ICON's best
we need more integrations
interoperable protocols like
we've got wormhole, axle, we've got all these
it should be it is our focus
how we can get these integrations into
ICON as well because we've
already built if you've been keeping up
with the milestone stuff you know we've built
to be working with wormhole
and layer zero at the moment
currently work on not connected
back to ICON but the next step is then to
actually get these interoperable
protocols connected to ICON
the primary focus for the network
he's going to defend his back
I have two questions that I want
the first question is that
some features of your project
the second question is that
question is that I need to know the security protocols of your project as we are now for now
there are so many projects before they launch their project there are scammers that they
used to copy their project and scamming people so I need to know what ways did you follow to ensure
that your project is more secure and not from that scammers people thank you very very much
right I guess the the initial answer to that is that you know balance is being built from the ground
up it's not forked from any other project out there plus it has a track record of
um community engagement and functionality right so balance got launched like three years ago
um and it's been very reputable ever since uh quite frankly it couldn't be forked because it's built
in java which is we've got a java virtual machine on the icon uh blockchain so you know that you
don't see that anywhere else it couldn't couldn't be forked in the first place uh if you asked
about the features of the project well to just rewind a bit balanced is essentially an AMM so it
offers like swapping as a DEX but and it also issues a stable coin so you can actually pop in
your collateral in the form of ICX or um other stable coins and and um yeah balance will issue
BNUSD which is then the icon native stable coin and if you look at the proposal you will also see
that in the inflation part there is a BNUSD savings rate mentioned which would then
you know eventually give rewards to people who lock up their BNUSD after it's issued so those
are a couple of the features and then in terms of security I might want to bounce it to Fez he's
maybe a bit closer to that uh yeah sorry I was on me uh yeah look I mean
in terms of security like even our IBC we've we've we've gotten internally now we've got a bit of a
review audit internal audit process um for um everything we're building so I can give you an
example with IBC even balance all the new balance features actually have gone through this process
where essentially when work is complete it's kind of hands down and no other works in progress
dedicated team members who haven't worked on the code then go through official auditing mapped out
process um testing the code and and you know trying to break it um and then in terms of our
IBC we've done that process and that process ran for five weeks so five weeks off the development
time although we used three weeks by the end of it three weeks all the resources on the project
were were um dedicated to no work just strictly auditing um the code and the build and and running
you know kind of all the vulnerabilities that are out there that we could gauge that could impact the
project uh and of course after that we've gone through official audits and this is something I
touched on in the morning session like one of the like I think people know in the community like
we've got an audit and even after audits things have happened um literally right after audit so
in this case with the IBC implementation we actually went to audit firms that that specialize
in like informal systems their primary audit they own the audit in the IBC ecosystem and all they
zone in on is actually the IBC implementation of it and part of that audit process is actually
assessing how the team have implemented or built the IBC integration so fast because we built the IBC
implementation in Java ground up they're actually using BTP blocks or connected blocks or just this
this side chain stuff that we built an icon to make fees more efficient when it comes to running
like clients um they're actually dug into how we've implemented that and re-architected the IBC
bill to ensure that we're sticking to IBC standards and and you know not losing the security that IBC
provides in this instance so I don't know if that's answered your questions but that's kind of some of
the um things practices we have put in place to to do everything we can to make our systems more secure
cool cool cool are there any other questions
I guess yeah yeah I don't see any more from
any of the forums then quickly check the discord if there is any
nope it doesn't seem to be there was another question regarding inflation earlier today
but I think that was answered
yep yep I think that's it um I think it went well um we six blubbles and three penguins
tried to enlighten the community and it was a great one thank you for attending
and see you in the next one thanks for tuning in guys yeah thanks thanks everyone thanks