Hello everybody, how's it going? Thanks for joining this multi-chain design space.
All right, so we have a ton of speakers here. I keep bringing folks up. Give us a minute here.
Cool, let's kick this off then. I see we have most people here. We'll let people trickle in over time here.
Awesome. Again, thanks so much for joining this multi-chain design space. We're joined by an awesome panel here, folks.
From Helena of Noble, we've got Magnus of Skip Protocol, we've got John of Calypso, Zaki joining us.
We could be talking a bit about Somme, potentially some inner protocol.
And we've also got Anil of the BiteBitch team that's building the Crabble Loaning app.
So, awesome to have everyone here. I'm just going to kick this off maybe with, you know, stating that, you know, everyone on this call has in some way contributed to the state of the industry's interoperability.
You know, so a big applause for all those folks here working diligently to make that possible.
You know, if we look at the global market cap of this industry, it's, I think, teetering around $2.7 trillion, maybe more. It's in constant flux, obviously, but it's great.
You know, we put this space together because, you know, what we're seeing in the industry is a much larger conversation and interest around how we actually build these multi-chain applications.
And what does it actually mean to be multi-chain?
You know, both from, you know, how do we design applications and what's the infrastructure required to actually make multi-chain applications a reality, and what's the benefit of being multi-chain?
Why not just have apps on a single chain?
And so, you know, just a nod here that we posted an article called Five Multi-chain App Designs on the Agort blog.
We'll link that on this call later.
But, you know, we kind of explore some of those options, and we'll be talking kind of loosely through those as kind of, you know, content buckets here to keep the conversation focused.
And, you know, for each of these general themes, we'll bring up a few speakers here who are kind enough to spare us their time.
You know, we'll maybe focus around 15 minutes.
But of course, you know, if anyone who hasn't been specifically invited up to talk about this, you know, one of these kind of categories, you know, you're totally free to jump up, raise your hand, come speak.
So we'll keep the things flowing.
You know, and so, again, I'd like to kind of maybe kick this off.
Let's bring, I see we have John of Calypso here.
And I'd love to bring up Magnus from from Skip Protocol.
Do we have you here, Magnus?
How's it going, guys? How's everything?
Yeah, so I'd like to maybe start with, you know, covering this idea of staking and swapping.
You know, I think at its core, it's fundamentally maybe the most common action users across the industry are going to be doing.
But, you know, you know, I'd love to hear maybe, you know, starting with you, John, kind of, you know, if you want to give an explanation of staking and swapping in general, that's great.
But I'd love to kind of pick your brain around how you see, you know, the concepts of staking and swapping expanding into the multi-chain design space and how we should maybe start thinking about staking and swapping differently when we start to introduce, you know, this kind of complexity to the system.
Yeah, so I think it's a conceptual change, right?
So a lot of people, how they first learned about staking was, oh, I just lock my asset up and I gain more yield on my asset.
Then the conversation changed to what staking actually does in providing security to a network and making sure that, you know, people don't actually do a hostile takeover of network.
And then now it's transitioning back to, oh, wait, I can get yield back on my asset.
You know, it's kind of like that whole bell curve thing where it's the smart brain, dumb brain, guy in the middle type of deal.
It's still providing security to the entire network.
But I think it's going to go back to, oh, I can lock my assets up and get some more money for just letting someone hold on to it for me.
And that's essentially the basis of staking.
So giving that passive investing principle, giving a lot more people the access to it, I think that's the general trend of staking.
And that's what more people are going to trend towards.
And then the swapping aspect, I mean, just swapping from one crypto asset to another and enabling easier swaps, you know, with skip and similar just to, you know, enable an easier stake.
Cool. So you have to swap to an asset to stake to it because you're probably not buying.
The first asset you buy is probably not the one you're staking.
That's just the general flow.
But, you know, those things tend to change over time.
So that was just a quick little thing on it.
Yeah. So maybe can you give a really high level of what you're doing in the space with Calypso and maybe how how you from the Calypso perspective are looking at kind of cross chain,
cross chain, multi chain staking and swapping.
Yeah, sure. So Calypso, you can look at Calypso as enabling any cross chain action to be completed with any token.
So in the example of staking, and this is an example that we've given, you know, in person and online a lot.
If you only owned an asset like Matic, but you wanted to stake into osmosis, Calypso will automatically take your Matic for you, swap it to USDC, bridge that USDC over, swap to osmosis and stake your osmosis for you.
So Calypso is essentially automating the multi step processes to complete a cross chain action.
And in this case, a cross chain stake.
And there's obviously ways to, you know, improve it further and make it, you know, faster, including like Noble CCTP and, you know, in decreasing costs and just making it a more efficient process.
But the general process is just taking your one token that you own already and completing an action with another token.
That's what Calypso is enabling.
One way to think about that, or at least the way I think about it is for chains themselves that want to increase the rate of people staking on them, you know, what they find is, say, you know, say you're contributing to the osmosis chain and you want more osmo token staked.
The actual onboarding flow there is just really difficult.
You know, user has to find multiple bridge front ends, figure out which one and give some of the best price, do a swap.
And if you're if you're not osmo, if you're the cosmos hub, then you've got another IBC transaction.
And so, you know, we know from web two that every time the user has to click additional times, you know, you lose some huge percentage of users just in drop off.
And I think what we've done in crypto really is not just adding additional clicks, but adding a research project before each click.
And so, you know, you really it becomes really hard to onboard new people and get them, you know, working within your ecosystem or, you know, using those tokens to, you know, again, if you're osmosis, maybe there's a perp text that's launching that you want people working with.
And so really the idea of using that onboarding flow, I think that's where Calypso and Skip, in my mind, sort of really, really help folks and the staking and swapping is just a huge part of that.
It's the first step to bringing people into the ecosystem.
Thank you, Roland. That's a good.
Yeah, I mean, what I get from that is it's better UX, fundamentally, right?
It's the UX people are familiar with that they're comfortable with and they should probably come to expect.
Magnus, we have you on this call.
I'd love to, you know, can you give a high level explanation of what Skip Protocol is, what it does, and kind of your take on this topic?
So Skip is just mostly focused on building interoperability and, you know, native tooling to really help L1s thrive.
Cosmos is the only ecosystem where we actually support the development of L1s and we encourage it, right?
All other ecosystems are built on sort of this sort of like hierarchical structure of rollups on top of rollups, on top of data layers, etc.
And we want to make rollups like, oh, sorry, we want to make L1s extremely powerful.
So part of that is lowering the barrier to entry for new chains, but then also users of those chains.
And so the biggest thing there, I think, is just like the UX of the interchain.
And a big part of that is sort of accommodating what you call the major use cases, so like the sending, the swapping, the staking,
at a level where users don't really have to essentially suffer through the isolated UXs of all these individual chains
and can sort of have a unified platform for doing these things.
And also doing that in a way where it doesn't take away the uniqueness or the exciting individuality of these individual chains
and sort of like aggregating the parts that people want to be aggregated while leaving the parts that are specific to that chain, right?
And so for us, what we built is sort of this interface IBC fund, which is essentially an all-in-one cross Cosmos, cross EBM,
and now soon cross Solana swapping and sending interface, where basically you can leverage this API to send tokens from any chain
to any other chain or swap tokens from any chain to any other chain.
And the API that powers that is what's available for all other folks, and IBC fund is just an example,
but we've seen people use it for all kinds of things like Stargaze that allows you to use any token on any chain to pay for a bad kid.
It's obviously used in the MetaMask Snap to get to power swapping as well.
And in the future, we envision this world where it really doesn't matter where your assets are.
It's always going to be the case that people are going to want to hold different assets,
like people will always want ETH or Osmo or ATOM or the Agorik token.
But how they interface with that at a high level in terms of how they transfer those tokens around
and where those tokens are doesn't really matter to them.
It doesn't really matter if that token that they have exposure to exists on one chain or another.
That should all be abstracted away from the user.
And then the chains can focus on the stuff that actually is specific to their application that's impossible to replicate,
like the individual use cases, if it's an app chain, the actual application itself,
like, for example, the Perpetuals Exchange and DYDX.
But for just getting money around and having a portfolio view of where your money resides,
in our opinion, that should really be abstracted and feel like a very seamless user experience.
And I think so far we've had success with that.
I think a lot of folks have realized this and been building towards that,
and the folks who have made major progress there, including Metamask Snaps and Kepler, has also done this.
They've seen a lot of success.
People do like this vision of a unified interchain,
but then going more deep into the individual applications once they want to do so.
And so what kind of functionality, when you mentioned individual applications,
what functionality are they adding on top of this simplified asset UX, so to speak,
like using IBC fun as an example, or maybe something else,
but what value are they getting from those individual applications?
Yeah, so if you're a chain and your only purpose is to print a token and have it be staked,
and the only thing users are doing are swapping in and out of your token,
you probably shouldn't have a chain.
I think long-term, unless you're the Cosmos Hub where it works,
but long-term, that's probably not sustainable.
So I think what I envision as the future of Cosmos
and where I think things are going is,
chains will get very good at doing specific things, right?
So like, you know, Agorik is hopefully, I think,
going to develop into being one of the better development platforms
for people who want to build smart contracts in a really cool way with JavaScript
and have asynchronous callbacks and all that kind of stuff.
You know, Osmosis is obviously specializing as a DEX and DeFi hub.
Stride is obviously specializing as a liquid staking protocol.
And these are applications on a web, right?
They don't exist in isolation.
They are essentially all...
They can work together very closely, right?
And a user, I think, of the web,
just like a user will use many different websites,
will want to be able to go and interoperate with these
to use what they're best at doing, right?
And to do that seamlessly and move their assets around.
And so I think what I'm most excited about is, like,
supporting really this idea of, like,
you can sort of add a unique value proposition
And then from the user perspective,
it's very easy to get around this web, right?
And to transfer tokens from one chain to another
to, like, use these new applications,
to discover new applications,
and sort of have, like, their set of things they like to use.
Just like you would, you know, you would use on Google Chrome
Yeah, that's sort of, like, how I see things developing,
like, longer term is this sort of, like,
web of interconnected applications
that all sort of fill different needs.
Yeah, I totally agree there.
And I think, you know, speaking in part
from the interprotocol perspective,
but just any application,
they all will need to integrate these kinds of front-end tools,
like the skip API, to be able to do asset routing.
So, you know, for example,
Interprotocol did that through Leap Elements
because what we were seeing was
folks didn't necessarily know how to get the assets
to the Interprotocol, you know,
to the Agork chain for use in the Interprotocol application.
And, you know, IBC.fun is, like,
it's a really great example of how these things work,
but, you know, every single application
needs to fix this UX problem
and the API that you can just integrate
And, you know, I think everyone's going to independently
come to this conclusion, you know,
sometime in the next year or so, if they haven't already.
Awesome. So, thank you both.
Yeah, so I want to do a slight transition
a little bit into, arguably,
one of the biggest use cases in crypto being stablecoins.
We've got Helena of Noble here
and Zaki with Samile and Roland,
you obviously teed up Interprotocol a bit here.
Do we have you both here, Zaki and Helena?
I think we do. Yeah, I'm here. Hi, guys.
I'm here. Cool, cool. Thank you both for joining.
So, you know, a question,
so maybe Helena, let's start with you.
I would love a high-level description of Noble
and also understanding how Noble is thinking about this kind of,
you know, arguably more complex,
but also simplified UX space, right?
You know, how are you thinking of the use cases for Noble
and how are those use cases going into the design space
thinking that your team is doing?
So, yeah, thanks for having me.
So, as Magnus was mentioning,
we obviously have a lot of kind of mind-sharing users
and liquidity on blockchains such as Ethereum
and, you know, L2s like Erbitrum
and these monolithic blockchains have always had this,
like, incredible sort of benefit,
which is native stablecoin liquidity, right?
If you look at, like, the liquidity of something like USDC,
the majority of it is on Ethereum.
It's partially because Ethereum is obviously, you know,
was the first programmable blockchain to exist,
second blockchain to ever exist after Bitcoin,
but also just because you have all these, like, applications
like Uniswap and Curve and others that source their
liquidity natively on the Ethereum chain.
And so, you know, because you have this native access to liquidity,
you can build all these, like, cool applications and, you know,
go to market quickly and so on and so forth.
So, that's the benefit of a monolithic chain from a perspective
of native stablecoin liquidity.
But when you're building in an environment like Cosmos
where every chain, every L1 is technically sovereign
and independent from the next,
it's a lot harder to source this liquidity in a native fashion.
And so, the way that this has been solved for sort of
up until now has been bridge stablecoin.
So, before Noble existed, you know,
the main way to sort of get stables into Cosmos, you know,
to various Cosmos chains was via Ethereum bridge,
like Axlr, which poses just a whole lot of problems for,
you know, UX and security and from a developer's perspective.
And so, we sought to build Noble to solve for this challenge
in this sovereign context, in the sovereign app chain context
where you can have this one chain, which is Noble,
that is fully interoperable, fully, you know,
fully connected to the rest of the app chain ecosystem
and any chain developer, whether that's osmosis or agoric
or someone building on top of agoric or anywhere else,
they can simply source the liquidity, you know, from Noble.
So, it's this, like, central kind of mechanism
for this minting, for this burning, for this redemptions,
but you can source it easily over IBC,
which is just a really easy way to do kind of native bridging in Cosmos.
And so, Noble is pretty much trying to recreate this environment
that you have on other monolithic chains
where you do have this central point of native issuance
of something like a USCC, of something like a stablecoin,
but in an app chain kind of modular context
where, obviously, there is no native kind of base layer to source from,
unlike, you know, an ETH and, you know, in the L2 world.
So, that's kind of our, you know, our raise-on to Etra
and we're just building towards that.
Got it. Great. Yeah, Zucch, is there anything you want to add there
on that topic, but what are your thoughts as well
and kind of what you're doing?
So, I think like one of the, I think one of the things
that like Noble is really demonstrating is,
I mean, I think there was a lot of skepticism around this idea
that like, oh, is asset issuance an app?
And I think that like the, you know, Noble's focus on asset issuance.
So, like we, right now we have like two chains,
I think that like are in many ways like focused on asset issuance.
Like Stride is a great example of a chain
that is like aggressively focusing on asset issuance
and Noble is a chain of, that is like aggressively focusing
And the reality thus far has been that like this model
of being very focused on asset issuance
has like outperformed all other forms of asset issuance.
Like, you know, and like you could even like go so far
as to say like that's what the Cosmos Hub is doing too
with Adam is it just focused on like issuing this asset
and like issuing this assets, distributing the asset, you know,
trying to grow uses of the asset.
You know, this is actually a quite powerful model
for integrating liquidity.
Where I think smart contracts come in is where you're really
like extending the power of the assets.
So, like, you know, you have what, so like interprotocol,
which is living on the like Agoric general purpose chain
is like extending like what you can do with liquid staked assets
like the majority of the collateral is liquid staked assets.
It participates in a liquidity network that is like primarily
We've seen like the adoption across all Cosmos taxes
of Noble USDC as like the primary like liquidity routing
where that most assets get routed true.
And this like actually forms a very like coherent picture
that allows you to do like very sophisticated things.
Like, you know, now you can have this world
in which like all of this stuff is actually quite composable.
And so like you can, you know, you could take your,
you know, atom position, liquid stake it and like,
you know, yield farm the like stride,
Tia air drop by like building up a Tia position with your IST.
You can do like all of this,
like there are a lot of different ways in which
you can compose these pieces together.
You can, you know, liquid stakes,
you could have like a calc finance strategy
that is automatically selling your validated rewards
but hold them as ST atom and have it routed,
you know, in the USDC or IST or any other stable coin
in a fairly seamless manner.
Like the composability that's actually achievable
in Cosmos today is really extraordinary.
But I don't think we have in as like all of the examples is,
is this like strong culture of using that composability.
The other problem is, is that like accessing all
of this composability is a lot of clicks,
is a lot of implicit knowledge, a lot,
and I think like what chain abstraction is about,
is about like trying to like essentially deliver
a user experience this year,
where developers have to know all of these details like,
oh, I'm putting together all of these different app chains
and applications across a cold complex,
multi-chain liquidity network.
But a user is just like, I would like yield,
I would like leverage, I would like X and like the network
and we should build systems that can just deliver that flow.
And I guess that's a lot of what like we built,
what like Som has been building for the last,
you know, almost three years at this point,
which is like, you know, we,
and we do this on Ethereum and we do this on L2s
and we are, you know, we recently expanded to L2s
using XOR, GMP and like, it's exactly this idea.
Like we want to give people a simple user experience
where people are like, I would like yield on my asset.
No, I do not know how Uniswap V3 works.
No, I do not know the intricacies
of the liquid staking token market.
No, I do not know like whether or not this,
like whether or not this yield farm is safe.
No, I do not know what Athena is.
I just like want to hold an asset
and I want to earn the best deal possible on it.
And Som has been delivering that infrastructure
and it has been steadily growing through the bull
and through the bear market
and has now grown, you know, quite a bit in the bull market.
But it is, you know, that opportunity and like, you know,
it's like people are also willing to, you know,
essentially pay for this.
Like Som strategists have made millions on the platform.
Som Stakers are generating hundreds of thousands of dollars
a month and like about $100,000 a month in real yield.
It's like, this is like a really important
It's really powerful, it's really valuable.
And in some ways is it what Som has done,
has kind of unlocked a very intricate back end process
and simplified it for the user.
Is that an accurate way of kind of, you know?
Yeah, like, I mean, like what Som strategies do
is like very sophisticated, right?
Like we, like the strategy will go out,
it will like take out a position on a lending protocol
It will refinance that lending protocol
if there's liquidity on a protocol like Morpho.
It will use flash loans to like,
in a gas efficient way, like lever up your position.
It will like, it will do all kinds of stuff.
It will manage Uniswap tick ranges.
You know, this protocol has been the largest liquidity
rider for RAP staked ETH on ETH mainnet
for, you know, almost a year.
These are like all very, very sophisticated things.
And, you know, if like DeFi for users,
like we want users to be their own bank,
but with like software automation and abstraction
under the hood so they don't actually have to like run a bank.
Right. Yeah. Yeah. No, no, thanks to that one.
Go ahead, Roland. I don't know if you had a comment.
Yeah. You know, I see it as sort of like there will probably,
there will be a range of these services, right?
And so for users that think they can do better on their own,
they will always have the opportunity.
But, you know, you will have.
I think one of the other things that was like really,
my co-founder Christie's vision with Sommelier,
the Cosmos tech under the hood.
But if you interact with the app,
it is somewhat abstracted for you.
Now we're like starting to build out, you know,
like the point is not to make Cosmos invisible.
In fact, we have lots of,
we're definitely working on a bunch of stuff right now
that will sort of leverage the Cosmos side more.
And like now the Cosmos side is doing regular auctions
It's not to make these things invisible,
but like if you are an Ethereum DeFi user,
you should be able to interact with things feeling like,
oh, I'm just like living in Ethereum
or I'm living on Arbitrum or I'm living on another L2.
But like you should have the entire multi-chain ecosystem
I love that. No, that's great.
And so maybe, Helena, going back to Noble,
you know, we talked about asset issuance.
Like how does Noble think about its kind of proliferation
across all of these potential use cases,
both, you know, you know, I guess primarily in Cosmos
but also kind of through extensibility
to these other ecosystems?
Yeah, I mean, our focus is really to standardize
like a lot of the processes around how we do things
like cross-chain communication and interoperability
between app chains and in the future,
even the rule of ecosystem.
So one thing that we built is the Cosmos standard
for the cross-chain transfer protocol.
So Noble is one of the partners to this CCTP protocol,
which pretty much allows any user
to natively burn and mint USDC
between any CCTP supported chain,
which includes right now Ethereum, Arbitrum,
Optimism, Avalanche Base, and Noble.
And next week will actually be Solana.
So that means I can like natively go from my USDC on Solana
to my USDC on Noble in a like one-click,
like capital-efficient fashion.
And the reason we did that is because it just like makes
the most intuitive sense,
like from like a standardizedization perspective.
Like if you are bridging something like USDC,
like there's really no reason now to do like a wrapped version
or like a lock and mint bridge or use anything like this
because you now have the most capital-efficient bridge,
which is CCTP doing that native bridging for you.
And so that's like Noble's mission,
like a line on these standards.
Like we definitely have taken a big bet on like specific standards,
one of those being CCTP, another one of those, of course, being IBC.
And so that's really like our mission
for like other native assets,
like making sure we're kind of exporting that model to other assets as well.
I saw the other day that you guys announced
that you're going to be a role app and post-data to Celestia.
I'm curious how that sort of fits into your vision.
Yeah, Noble is interesting because we're an app chain.
We have actually a lot of flexibility on how we kind of evolve.
I mean, a lot of people that build in the Cosmos ecosystem
The stack itself is highly flexible, modular,
everything from Tenderman and ABCI++ to IBC to the SDK.
So one of the things that we're looking at is obviously,
we are keen on data availability as a product,
or rather more like a service for Noble.
So obviously, like in Cosmos already,
it's relatively cheap to have the validators kind of being that data availability layer,
but we see kind of plugging into the Celestia data availability layer
as one way we can more easily service Celestia role apps
with native assets such as USDC.
So we're still in the beginning phases of scoping this out,
but just from like a data perspective,
Celestia is something that we're interested in.
It's less so on the security aspect itself.
Right now, we're actually approved of authority chain.
So our actual consensus mechanism in terms of how validators produce blocks
and how we have certain trust assumptions,
that's all actually on the POA side of things,
and this will not change as we do Celestia DA.
So we're almost like evolving the Noble consensus in a step-by-step fashion
where we're clearly Noble POA, we will be doing DA,
but we still actually have another step to go towards actual economic security,
which stay tuned on kind of the updates there.
But yeah, just plugging into the Celestia DA ecosystem
is just another way for us to ultimately service role apps,
and it's just a cheaper form of posting data than is currently available.
So we've talked a bit about staking, we've talked about stablecoins.
One of the other things that I'd love to cover
in this kind of cross-chain, multi-chain discussion is our vaults.
So the concept of being able to lock an asset into a vault
that can fundamentally run or deploy, I guess,
auto-compounding strategies.
Within our protocol, obviously vaults are a big component
of actually minting the IST stable token.
And I think, Anil, we also have you here.
I know you guys are working on NFT rentals with Crabble.
I'm curious, and this is kind of for all the speakers,
but if anyone feel free to chime in here,
how do vaults go multi-chain?
And how do they start to expand,
and what opportunities are there across different ecosystems
for vaults that, again, are trying to be user-friendly?
And Zaki, I think you've touched a bit on this,
but I'm curious from previous or new speakers
on how do we start looking at the expanding landscape of vaults
and what's possible here?
Yeah, like for the NFT point of view,
how we, as Crabble, we plan to use vaults
is to actually make the rented NFT market more liquid.
Because within the given model,
when you want to rent an NFT,
what's going to happen is that the protocol
has to manage the risk of the borrower
not returning the NFT itself,
in the case where we are actually transferring the NFT
to the borrower from the protocol.
In order to make some kind of risk management here,
you have to use, as usual, a collateral,
where that actually kind of limits the liquidity of
and the number of the transaction volume on the protocol,
basically because people might not have enough collateral
where the owner of the NFT actually thinks that NFT is virtually
X amount, Y amount, I don't know.
But how we try to use vaults, in this case,
that's one part of it, the collateral side of things,
the risk management side of things.
And the other side of things,
when you think about the NFT space,
every network out there has its own valuable NFTs
or has its own NFTs that has its hype or whatever.
And when we look at the future of the NFTs,
we kind of need some utility attached to those NFTs
to actually increase the adoption of the idea.
So when we think about it,
one of the biggest reasons why someone actually lands an NFT,
borrows an NFT, is they have to be able to do something
And the multi-chain vaults here, actually,
we kind of think it answers these problems,
both of these problems very well,
is that let's imagine you have a media content
and you will be actually doing some kind of gated entrance
into the item of the video stream or whatever.
And I only want to join the event one time
and I don't want to actually buy the whole NFT.
And the NFT itself is on Omniflex and I'm on a gory.
So at this point, what we are doing is
we actually use an ICA to use as a vault
where the owner of the NFT sends their assets
and then over the application of Agorate,
they say that we want to land this.
And what we do here is that we get rid of the collateralization phase
because the protocol has the asset locked in a vault
and transfers and all of that.
Also, as the protocol, like we know the NFT is here
and for those other protocols who are integrated
into this kind of product,
we'll know that the utility of the NFT can be exercised,
but as the travel protocol,
we don't need to take on the risk
of actually sending the asset to the borrower themselves.
So actually using the orchestration API,
we kind of both solve the liquidity problem
of the lending NFT, rental NFTs market,
and also we are able to make use of all the assets
living all over the networks who are connected
to this multi-chain world.
Got it. And maybe it's a question for you, Anil,
as well as maybe Roland and Zaki,
more on the IST side of things too.
Why can't I just use any collateral in vaults
to get this asset or this utility asset
that I want to use for something else?
Why can't you just use any collateral?
So I think for a stable coin,
what is really important is liquidity and demand.
There is this sort of where...
You can think of stable coin protocols as kind of
related to the concept of lending protocols,
but they exist at the top level of the hierarchy
of collateral requirements.
You sort of need to, in order to maintain stability,
I think IST has scaled a total amount of collateral
and continued to be really stable.
And there's lots of interesting flows
and arbitrages that people need to be engaging in
And you can really only make those flows
and arbitrages work for really liquid assets.
And then the other side of it is...
Then you want to have lending protocols
that take less liquid collateral
and can offer yield for that underlying stable coin.
And this is sort of the flywheel that allows
for decentralized stable coins like IST to grow.
Yeah, if we look at the topic of this,
the connection I see between the BytePitch project,
Crabble, that Anil has been talking about,
and for example, Interprotocol,
is the idea that in this multi-chain design space,
you can do cross-chain locking,
which allows you to have some interesting UXing capabilities.
they can lock remote NFTs
so you don't need to transfer the NFT over IBC.
The protocol can own the NFT through ownership of the ICA
and that unlocks a bunch of capabilities for them.
For something like Interprotocol,
cross-chain locking lets you both sort of improve UX.
So for example, you could have an extension to vaults
that locks assets on a remote chain
and then mints IST directly to that chain
so that the user from their perspective
never has to really do any of this
front-end movement of assets to mint and then move IST back.
They just feel like they're sitting on their,
whatever application they're already using,
and then suddenly they've got a widget
that lets them create a vault and get IST immediately.
Or you can start to do things
that actually aren't really possible with IBC right now.
So imagine you have a position on a remote chain
and so I think like a concentrated LP position on osmosis,
I think right now you can't transfer that over IBC,
but you could ensure that the protocol owns it
and then that would be something
that could potentially be used as collateral,
obviously sort of subject to the kinds of limitations
that Zaki was just talking about,
but that's where I start to get really excited
around the ability of extending things
like interprotocol with multi-chain capabilities.
Yeah, is there anything else folks want to add to that
I know if Magnus or John go for it, yeah.
I mean, with Calypso, we could set it up so that,
I mean, the type of collateral that's provided
into an IST vault, it can be set as a default.
So say if you want to provide, I don't know,
token A to bolster the liquidity of token B,
it doesn't matter what token you have to start with.
It can always end up at token A on that vault
with something like a Calypso.
And I think that's how we get these multi-chain vaults
and other similar products to grow.
The people who actually create the vaults,
they can set their parameters,
whatever the heck they want as a default.
So if you want an IST vault fully backed with build in it,
you can make it so that no matter what currency
you're starting with, it'll always end up providing
So I don't know, just a little Calypso plug there,
but that's kind of something about how
I personally think multi-chain vaults are going to expand.
I feel like there's some interesting mech design things
that we could probably work on.
One of the things that I've been thinking about recently
is just the fact that we have
huge overlapping validator sets in Cosmos
and therefore have these very strong
implicit shared trust assumptions between them.
In some ways, at the end of the day,
Cosmos is essentially just the same validators
running different binaries.
And if you can leverage that fact
of the shared overlapping validator sets,
you can start to make really interesting
potential security guarantees
that could be important for things like
cross-chain collateralization.
So for example, let's say I have USDC on Noble
and I lock it into something.
If the validator set is heavily shared
let's call it DYDX or something else,
if that shared validator set attests to that lock,
then perhaps I can take out a loan against it
knowing that there's a commitment
to slashing that locked amount
if let's say I get liquidated
or use that loan for something that
I no longer, that loan needs to be
I feel like there's a lot of primitives
that could be built for something like this
that would further enhance
the interoperability of Cosmos
because I do think it would be
to have this experience of
it doesn't really matter where my tokens are,
they can be used as collateral anywhere
on any vault or on any other protocol.
I don't have to move things to the actual destination
where the application is.
as we're starting to push into some of this
on-chain composability across Cosmos
and beyond, one of the things we're ramping up to do
is to start pushing new requirements into IBC.
In particular, getting notifications on balances
for ICA accounts, things like that.
It's little stuff that's in the details
of development from a lot of people's perspective
but that is holding back a lot of capability.
I'm excited over the next few months
as we start to get those things in
and then would love to talk about
how we could take advantage
of overlapping validator sets too
because that was a dimension I didn't really have in my mind
of how we might be able to push things forward.
Yeah, Noma's done some really interesting work
thinking about how a shared quorum of validators
can actually give you some really interesting
cross-chain composability guarantees.
I think the concept there is chimera chains,
which I don't think are talked about enough,
but probably some scaled-down version of that
that leverages cross-chain slash pull commitments
between two separate chains
to do something like guaranteed lockups
collateralization on a different chain
would be really interesting to explore.
Would the collateral end up being less than what's needed
because of that guarantee?
How does that affect the user?
The desired UX, I think, would be
I want to be able to access all this stuff.
I want to be able to take loans out.
I want to be able to open purpose positions.
I want to be able to get exposure to a vault.
Essentially, that USDC needs to be slashable.
Slashable is not the right word,
but redeemable by these protocols
that you're depositing into.
I think what you need to do is create
this cross-chain commitment
where essentially one chain is
promising the other chain,
saying, okay, if you tell me
that this money is now in jeopardy,
I will send it to you over IBC
I think there's a lot of different ways
that that commitment could be structured,
but I think there's an interesting space
of if you share a validator set
and the shared set of validators
can attest to that commitment,
then if that commitment is broken,
then that shared validator set
can sort of, in the worst case,
or perhaps essentially bond themselves
to this promise such that
they would be on the hook
It's essentially sort of a complicated
where basically you could
and put validators on the line
for doing this kind of thing,
and maybe there's a slashable event
if the commitment is broken,
but perhaps also that is so worthwhile
to the user that there's additional yield
involved who wants validators
who do attest to that commitment.
I just think more needs to be
thought about in this space of
the reality that all Cosmos chains
are secured by similar validators,
and therefore there's actually
a shared trust assumption
already existing between chains,
and you can leverage that
to make Cosmos more composable,
Of course, there's some mech design involved,
but it's very attainable,
and the basics already exist.
Yeah, that's really interesting.
I wonder what kind of end user
facing applications that could unlock
that are maybe too difficult
That's an interesting one to explore, actually.
Yeah, the way I see this is
it may take a Cosmos SDK view
of some of what Agorik is trying to do
with the orchestration layer
and where the additional capability is,
and I think definitely would want
because it feels like we could either
that it could possibly provide.
Though the challenge would be
as you're moving across many chains,
the overlap and validator sets
and we'd need to think that through.
Yeah, and I think the way
There's probably a bunch of people
who their desire for where they use
an application is fully separate
of where to place their funds.
You could think of someone
and only wants to go over CCTP
and therefore is comfortable
Or in the future version,
just wants to keep their money
on Ethereum, for example.
That might be completely separate
from their desire to gain exposure
or use different applications
So maybe they don't feel comfortable
sending all of their money over
let's call it DYX, for example,
or just because they have some
but they still want to take out positions
or they still want to use those protocols
and gain exposure to whatever,
whatever functionality they have.
I think that's sort of what
come to some kind of agreement
where I think a very natural one here
might be like Noble and DYX
where you can hold collateral
and then you can take out positions
And I think that would be really sick, right?
And then you can start to expand that
by sort of like building more
bilateral commitments between these chains
just like IBC expanded, right?
Which is just like a bilateral commitment
between two sets of validators.
In this case, it would happen to be
a shared set of validators
these cross-chain primitives
to allow for this like seamless
cross-chain collateralization.
And I just think that would be sick, right?
Like you can use your money anywhere in Cosmos
as like value for any other application.
Like I feel like that's a big accomplishment
if we could get to something like that.
Well, we should chat more
because I think a lot of this
is what we're driving towards with orchestration
and what we hope to be able to do
via smart contracts and ICAs
without the validator set.
But yeah, let's keep talking.
Yeah, I mean, go ahead, go ahead.
I was gonna say like, you know,
like I think from a very UX standpoint
and it's like you just need to make
these things easy and accessible.
I think it doesn't really matter
always like how it's implemented necessarily.
And like I think what you want to do
with these kinds of things
is you do want to sort of like have an error
of like, or have a approach of,
Like non-competition, so to speak, right?
if we're gonna build really good primitives
to make Cosmos more interoperable,
I think you have to build these things
in a way where like, you know,
it not only helps one chain,
but it helps like multiple different chains, right?
And like really can serve as like a baseline primitive
in the same way that like the Cosmos SDK
is infused as like helping one chain.
Yeah, this is like the space
where like I like to think about a lot
because I truly believe in like the expansion of L1s
as like an alternative path
and like building these kinds of things
in like the path to making that happen.
Interesting conversation.
I want to be cautious of folks' time is,
you know, maybe a question to all the speakers.
What are you kind of most excited for
in the multi-chain design space this year?
Maybe John, we can start with you.
Calypso's contract going live
on Agorq mainnet in any day now.
I'm very excited for that.
I'm also excited for the capabilities
is gonna enable between EVM and Cosmos and Solana
and everything else that comes with it.
like to integrate this orchestration API
into our own smart contracts
and also like explore the other
like features of this orchestration API,
like managing an Agoric account
which like has its own use cases that I can think of.
And I just want to really explore all those,
all those APIs in the SDK,
like I'm looking forward to it.
What I am excited about is
I think the frontier is going to be
when people realize you don't,
you don't have to be either like a one chain
or one ecosystem application.
You don't have to be an L1
and you still want a token.
And so I guess I'm excited for like the coming wave
of chain abstracted tokens to come with
the coming wave of chain abstracted applications.
What are you most looking forward to this year?
Well, I'm very curious about this orchestration stuff.
I don't think I've looked into it before.
So I'd love to hear more about that.
what am I interested about?
I think like I'm very interested to see sort of
the intersection of sort of the modular world and Cosmos.
I'm curious to see what like a lot of folks are,
a lot of outside folks are like getting more interested
in sort of supporting Cosmos core functions
like security via like ethos,
data availability, obviously with like Celestia.
And I'm curious to see sort of like the intersection
I think like Cosmos has a lot to teach
the modular ecosystem in terms of stuff we've already solved
in terms of what it looks like to have a bunch
of different state layers and interoperate between them.
And also I think like validator sets are important
in many situations and we can help roll ups
like build more powerful applications.
We also think like roll ups are going to be very exciting
for Cosmos once they're IVC enabled
and just bring a lot more users and applications
into the ecosystem with a lot lower barrier of entry.
So that like that collaboration
I think is very exciting to me.
And I think Roland, I think we have you back here.
We asked earlier what folks are most excited for this year
in terms of the kind of multi-chain expansion.
And you know, just selfishly,
I'm excited about the Orchestration APIs going live.
So, you know, that's going to be allowing people
to build Agorksmart contracts with straightforward ways
to create and manage ICAs, to make IVC transactions,
to, you know, PFM transactions, all sorts of stuff
from a Cosmos composability standpoint.
And so, you know, we're launching with sort of the most limited
set of capabilities we can,
but then we're going to very quickly expand
to supporting roll ups, supporting ecosystems beyond Cosmos
and just excited to see what people build
once they realize they can compose across Cosmos chains.
So, you know, looking for all the opportunities we can
to get the word out and get people coming to build.
Well, once again, thank you all the speakers
and the attendees of this multi-chain design space.
We're going to be doing a lot more conversations like this
over the next few weeks and months around, you know,
looking at the expanding nature of caution
and multi-chain across different ecosystems.
So again, thank you, everybody.
You can follow Gorg at Atagorg
and we will have this call up on YouTube,
We'll share that as well.
So, folks want to share that with their communities
who are totally welcome to.
And yeah, be on the lookout for more of these spaces.