Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
THORChain Spaces #53
Recorded: Feb. 10, 2023 Duration: 1:13:19Space Recording
Full Transcription
Hey, no background music while we're waiting?
The background thing is super wonky.
I think once you unmute yourself, it just stops the music.
I'm not really sure how it works, to be honest.
You can't just, like, turn it on.
I thought you could just, like, turn it on and leave it on if you wanted to.
Although nobody really does that, obviously.
But I'm playing around at the settings, and it doesn't seem like it's turning on.
Yeah.
All right.
Well, whatever.
Well, maybe you could sing for us instead.
But it'll cost you.
What's up, guys?
Hey, man.
Good morning.
Good morning.
And, yeah, I think you're right.
Because the other week, I, like, said one thing, and then I killed the music, and then it was very disappointing.
Yeah, you can't just, like, press a button and it starts back up.
I mean, Twitter's so broken that this shit won't be fixed until, like, June or something like that.
So, we'll just have to wait until then when we finally get a good platform for Twitter spaces.
Yeah.
If ever.
I'm hoping to make it more.
Like, why can't you do it on desktop?
Like, that just does not make any sense.
Why we can't just host these.
Or with video.
Like, there's so much stuff you can do with this.
Yeah, I was going to say the same.
That was, like, the desktop thing.
We were talking about that.
It feels like a year ago.
And, like, I don't know if they even care to fix that.
Maybe they just aren't even going to pursue it.
They could make Twitter into the biggest podcasting app if they really tried, you know?
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Don't worry me.
I'm just playing a little Wind Beneath Your Wings for you guys.
It's a classic.
It's a classic tune.
I think we all need to sing along to start these spaces.
Just like a little trio.
Harmonizing.
Someone to do a barbershop quartet?
Oh, man.
We could write, like, a Thor Chain-themed barbershop quartet intro.
I think that's what we really need as a community to, you know.
You guys say we need more marketing.
I think that's the ticket.
Dude, that would be hilarious.
We need a...
Somebody in the queue needs to, like, just record, like, a four-part acapella, like, 30-second spot song for Thor Chain.
That would be hilarious.
You know how some podcasts have, like, sick intros?
Like, they get, like, an actual track made specifically for their podcasts?
Like, we should do that.
We should have some epic, like, 30- to 60-second intro.
Actually, like, I was reading that OpenAI has this thing called Jukebox they're working on.
It's, like, coming out at some point, but, like, where it's the same thing where you can, like, ask or, like, describe something, and it'll just generate a song or generate some music.
So if you want to do, like, a Thor Chain-based barbershop quartet, you could, like, type that out, and it'll just, like, generate a song on the spot.
Yeah, that's what we got to do.
I was playing with one of those.
I don't remember which it was.
My friend was showing it to me, but it's, like, pretty impressive.
I mean, it has a ways to go.
I don't know if you could get it to actually say the words you want, because it's kind of, like, you know how, like, the AI image ones kind of have, like, broken words and, like, broken faces sometimes?
It was kind of like that.
Like, it seemed like a song, but it wasn't, you know, finished.
Yeah, but the words they've already got with the OpenAI, like, ChatGBT thing, right?
So you could, like, write me lyrics for a song about, you know, Thor Chain, I don't know, something, and then take that output and you put it into the OpenAI jukebox and then, like, combine the two.
Like, that'd be pretty slick.
Yeah.
Definitely possible.
I mean, it's kind of like deepfakes, too.
I mean, they're already doing people's voices, and, you know, we could make it sound like you singing all four parts.
I think that would...
That'd be hilarious.
Yeah, I think it's more likely that there's going to be some kind of AI that'll just replace...
So, like, we can just feed them all of the podcasts that we've done.
This is the 53rd space, I think, which is just insane to me, by the way, that we've done this many of them.
But, like, that's all just data.
Like, those are all saved, and that's going to be our replacement when we're finally done with this.
I mean, how does the audience...
How does the audience really know that's not what we're already doing?
Well, I'll tell you what.
If I get really bored this week, I will attempt to create a 30-second multi-vocal part, barbershop quartet style, just for the community.
It'll be terrible, but it'll be fun.
Break out the piano or the ukulele?
I know you got it.
I got somewhere deep down inside.
I'll have to find it.
Yeah, maybe you should work on the Rune Price instead.
I'm just kidding.
Can Dev do something about the barbershop quartet?
We need, like, $6 Rune, the theme song, maybe?
Dude, $6 Rune theme song?
That'd be hilarious.
Yeah.
There's a lot of rhymes.
Rune, moon, soon.
You can work with that.
All right.
If I get bored, and I got nothing else to do, which almost never happens,
but I'll throw it together in a few minutes.
Yeah, I'm sure you have nothing better to be working on, to be honest.
Yeah, guys.
So, TrustWallet iOS, finally, it's finally here.
Like, we finally made it to the TrustWallet iOS, and I'm just so happy to see that this
is, like, finally out.
Like, I don't think people realize how long the process has been.
I think it's about 18 months since, like, the first conversations with TrustWallet.
And that's, like, all-encompassing from, like, first, like, approaching them about,
you know, doing the swaps and then saying, like, oh, yeah, yeah, you guys are in the queue.
And then, you know, it just keeps getting pushed back.
And, you know, these product teams, they take a long time to, like, you know, research,
you know, Thorchain, and just, like, see how the product works and get their own assurances
about how it works and how they can offer it to their users.
And then we finally saw in December it come to Android.
And, like, the activity on there is just, like, it's really cool to see.
Even though they're only offering a couple swap routes, they're only really offering
Bitcoin, Ether, and a couple BNB beacon chain routes.
They're still absolutely killing it on swap volume.
And with the number of transactions, it's probably roughly equal to ThorSwap.
But that's in, like, a month of Android only with three chains on TrustWallet,
which is just incredible.
And now we finally get to see it on iOS.
So still only the three chains, I believe.
I don't think they've added any more swap routes.
Still working on that front.
But I just want everyone to know, like, how long of a time this has been, like, coming
and be, like, you know, just iterating through this and getting the teams to work together
on this stuff.
We're just so glad that it's finally here.
And I can talk about this in a little bit, but, like, Trust is really the first, like,
big, big Thorchain integration.
I think everyone here kind of understands that.
But it's just the first.
And it's, like, it's going to be the first of this whole line of dominoes that is, like,
ready to fall.
They're just so big that you can't see the dominoes.
They're massive.
But they, like, Trust, other people are looking at what TrustWallet is doing and what they're
offering to the users.
And they're going to want to offer the same services to their users.
And so this is just realizing the vision of Thorchain as this native asset infrastructure
and just where we're going to see Thorchain in the future.
Like, you know, we've been talking about how it's just going to be invisible in the
background of these apps.
And Trust is just the first.
So, and looking at the success of Trust, like, the success is really there.
And it's not even full featured as, you know, we want to push them to be offer Doge swaps,
Litecoin, Bitcoin cash, everything.
So just so excited to see, like, what's going to come out of this Trust thing.
And then the further implications of Trust in other wallets needing to match their features
and, you know, just kind of keep up with their users.
Yeah, totally.
Like, obviously, TrustWallet was a big thing for us and for the community.
And, you know, we've ongoing conversations with probably most major wallets that you can
think of off the top of your head.
We're probably already in communication and talking and advocating for and coaching
that are being made in other wallets as well.
So I'm hoping that everything will just get to a point where, like, if your wallet doesn't
have Torchain integration, then it's, you know, it's rather silly or like a basic wallet,
not even like one that people would actually really want to use.
So it's like it'll be interesting to see how this kind of changes over the next couple
of years.
But it's going to be a slow process to what Kyle was just saying.
I mean, it took many, many, many months to get TrustWallet integrated and it took more
months to get other ones integrated as well.
But once we do, for me, it's just like we're just like loading the spring so that when the
market goes bull again and well, probably in a couple of years or so, that we had like
already integrated with a bunch of different things.
And so when trading kicks off, like all these things will just spring off together in unison.
And so it's going to be really, really great for the project.
Yeah, it's really awesome to see.
And it's only going to get better.
As you said, hopefully they keep pursuing expanding the integration.
So many other things for them to offer.
And yeah, just the first domino to fall.
Have you guys checked even in the last just, what's it been, two days?
Like, has there been any noticeable uptick?
I haven't looked at the data.
Yes, but there is a slight issue because they aren't using their Thorname address.
So the old queries, like if you look at like that old Thorswap TrustWallet dashboard that's
together, I don't believe that'll include any of the iOS ones.
I think they're using a slightly different syntax for their swap.
So they're not using their Thorname, I believe, for whatever reason.
They might have just left it out.
Like, we're working with them on that.
So if you look at any of the old dashboards, I don't believe it'll include any iOS volume at all
until that's updated.
So just know if you're looking at like a dashboard, then that's probably not on there right now.
But I believe that, you know, people are updating their apps right now.
And it's definitely, there's definitely going to be like some kind of incline over the next,
you know, couple of weeks as people update their apps and, you know, get to know the feature.
And obviously we'll, we're going to be working on like the marketing side of, you know, getting
together with TrustWallet and, you know, just putting out some awareness for the feature.
So we're like in the process of coordinating them.
And so, yeah, hopefully we'll do some Twitter space with them, maybe Binance Live or, you know,
whatever else we can do, we're going to put some stuff together with them to just put some more awareness
for this feature.
We just got to work with their team to do that.
So, like, I think we saw this with the TrustWallet Android integration, where if you look at like
how many swaps happen, it's just like, it's a gradual incline until it finally like, you know,
plateaus off around like, you know, 200 to 250 swaps per day on TrustWallet Android.
So I think we'll probably see around the same on iOS, where the number of swaps per day will just,
you know, stay on an incline until eventually it levels off.
And there's some kind of consistent level for like, how much people are swapping on any given day.
So that's kind of my prediction for what we see with Trust iOS over the next like month or so.
You know, we'll see it increase until eventually levels off.
And then we get some kind of baseline for like, how many swaps are coming through TrustWallet per day.
Yeah, and then like Chad was saying, you know, when the market really comes back,
the compounding effect of that is like, absolutely insane.
Because imagine we're back in a period where everyone's trading more, everyone's swapping more,
TrustWallet is getting, you know, 10,000 new users a day, and everyone's onboarding.
I mean, like these, even like a small integration in this market is going to seem like a big integration.
Sorry, I got a call. I don't know where I cut out.
Yeah, I can hear you. You're back.
Yeah, no, just like even small integrations are going to compound so much and, you know,
become a big integration when the market's really roaring again.
Yeah, and Trust is definitely no small integration.
Like, as I said, they're just about matching door swaps.
I don't believe that the dollar value, because the actual dollar value of each transaction is smaller for the most part on TrustWallet.
But the entire number of swaps is about roughly the same, I would say, which is very, obviously, that's very impressive.
You know, being that they just implemented it with so few swap routes on just Android for now.
So, you know, once this integration is finally like up to, you know, feature complete, like I would say, with iOS.
And then what we would really like to see is them also integrating the other chains, which they have, which is, you know, native Rune, obviously, which is a huge amount of door swaps volume.
But that's something that TrustWallet doesn't capture at all right now, or just any of the other native chains, which is pretty much everything else that door chain supports is also supported by TrustWallet.
So that's just some more simple integrations, they can just be seeing a ton more volume.
And yeah, like what you're saying with, like, just loading the spring for the bull market, right?
We see this on any, like, really high volume days, you can see the APRs on all the pools just go, like, way up.
Or if you're at LP, you can see your yields, like, you know, shoot way up.
But I'm sure I'm not the only one that's, like, noticing that on, like, these, like, very volatile, high volume days where there's a ton of traffic.
They really do drive a lot of value towards BLPs and savers.
So, yeah, just so cool seeing this with Trust.
And, like, the point that I wanted to make from before was, like, that, like, 18 months that it took to get Trust implemented.
Like, that's probably around, like, that's probably a pretty average time frame for, like, how long we expect, like, a lot of some of these other, like, major integrations to happen.
And that's just because, like, these other teams, in offering a ThorChain product to their customers, like, they need to be doing the research and their due diligence and looking at the security of ThorChain and getting these assurances for themselves.
So, that way, they don't offer their users, you know, like, some kind of scam product or something.
And they're, like, really understanding what it is that they're offering their customers.
And moving these organizations that have, you know, millions and millions of users, they deliberately want to move very slowly because they don't want to break anything on their app.
They want to maintain, like, a consistent user experience.
So, it makes sense why these guys move so slowly.
And that's also, like, kind of why the ThorChain protocol is also trying to move slowly because now that we are the service providers for these major apps serving, you know, millions of users at this point,
and it's continuing to grow through these integrations, any network downtime or issues or anything, consensus failure, anything that could happen, like, these are all conversations that we need to have with all these partners.
And, like, you know, we don't want to be going up to TrustWallet and saying, like, oh, yeah, you know, trading's paused.
There's a, you know, there's something going on.
We need to fix something or whatever.
What we want to do is be this boring, reliable piece of infrastructure that, you know, Trust and all these other wallets can say, like, oh, yeah, we're just going to implement it because it just works.
And we don't need to worry about the security and, you know, these guys are taking their time to review, you know, new features coming onto the protocol and not make any decisions that's going to break and, you know, make this not a good move for us.
Like, if something happens at ThorChain, that's a negative thing for Trust as well at this point.
So it's, like, we also need to be just keeping on top of the security game there and, like, just realizing, like, how long it takes to actually implement on these protocols and just move at the same pace and offer a reliable experience to all the integrators and wallets and DEXs and things that want to use ThorChain's infrastructure because it's reliable.
Yeah, absolutely.
We're seeing the same thing on the ThorSwap partners side.
Like, you know, just a really important piece of that is trying to get as many aggregators, for example, as many aggregator swaps through.
So, like, there's things we're doing.
There's things that, like, conversations with core team and stuff around that even just because we want this technology to disappear, right?
Like, that's kind of what we've always talked about.
And that's a huge part of these major integrations is, like, you don't want too many snags and hiccups and weird edge cases as little as possible.
I mean, obviously, this is, like, a lot more complicated than, you know, a spreadsheet on a centralized exchange.
So, there's always going to be, like, you know, things that are just inherent to this technology, like timing and fees and whatever.
But, you know, the more we can make it just disappear and be seamless, then that's what a partner needs.
So, they can just, like, they can just focus on product and customer and their user and delivering, like, the best app, the best DEX, whatever it is they're doing.
Yeah, so, I think we're going to see, like, you know, so, as I was saying, trust is, like, the first domino and people are going to see what trusts are doing and decide that this is, like, a service that they want for their own users.
All these, you know, self-custodial wallets that need a swap service and, you know, that want something that's decentralized and reliable.
And that's what ThorChain's here to be.
Like, this is, like, this is realizing the vision of the protocol and getting actual users using it.
So, yeah, super excited to see, like, what's next.
I think the next big integration that is probably going to come down the pipe is Unisim, which has been talked about a little bit.
Not a bunch, but they're a big aggregator, and they are probably the next one to come out of the pipe there.
So, they announced that already.
So, it's not like I'm breaking any news here, but many people here haven't heard that Unisim was integrating ThorChain for their aggregator.
They have a very popular and full-featured aggregator.
So, I believe they'll be the next major protocol to implement ThorChain swaps into their router.
Yeah, same with a lot of times we were talking about shapeshifts.
And shapeshifts also interface with their, like, the savers aspect.
So, I'm excited to see more protocols or wallets or whatever to do not just the swap side of things, but the savers side as well.
Yeah, savers will be huge.
I mean, if trust-type wallets start integrating savers, I mean, that is huge.
And that even ties in with, like, the staking shenanigans we're seeing in the last day or so, you know, on centralized exchanges.
So, maybe that makes that more compelling.
Yeah, I don't know if we want to get into that yet, but are you guys on top?
Have you guys been following that pretty closely?
With, sorry, with, like, savers on Shapeshift or just savers in general?
Oh, no, I was just, like, well, savers in general, but I was just comparing it to, like, the staking issue, you know, of centralized exchanges just in the past day or two.
Like, the legal regulatory stuff and that, you know, I don't know.
I haven't been super on top of it yet, so I'm curious if you guys have.
But maybe that's even a good thing for decentralized yield that is not through a centralized exchange unless it's just, like, an overbearing thing, which would be bad.
It's a bit odd and a little bit difficult to actually interpret just because, you know, certain actions that the FET takes is hard to understand what their intentions are or how does it extrapolate to other things?
Or when does it actually, you know, infringe in the thing that they're trying to, like, protect the investors from and when does it actually not?
And, like, maybe you can – maybe they would consider putting up Bitcoin into the Bitcoin savers as considered to be, quote, unquote, staking, even though it's actually not staking because on a different chain.
And so, like, their definition of these terms of, you know, staking, which is spelt S-T-A-K-E, not staking, as in the meat.
Thank you, Gary Gensler, for getting us – for confusing that for us.
Did he spell it wrong?
Did he really do that?
Yeah, he actually did that.
Like, he created a video talking about staking, and he – and, like, several times in that video, he had to, like, spell it and say, oh, I'm talking about S-T-A-K-E, not S-T-E-A-K.
And I'm just like, oh, my God.
He just, like, facepalmed that shit.
As if that was the confusion.
As if that was the thing that, like, nobody understood or something.
I don't know.
It was just – it was – it was – it was provable, for sure.
And the funny thing is, like, he didn't do it once.
He felt he needed to do it, like, multiple times throughout this, like, three-minute video to explain how to spell the word.
But I'm not sure if they would consider savers to be staking.
My assumption is that – and, again, my assumption is that it's not considered to be staking.
It's more aligned with an ERM product, which they've also pushed against.
You know, Coinbase told – or asked the SEC for permission to launch their own, you know, interest product.
And the SEC said, I don't know about this.
You better not do it.
We're not really quite sure.
We might come after you.
And just the whole thing, too.
That was, like, a year ago or so.
So it's difficult to tell, but anything they can do at the SEC is going to apply to, you know, Kraken and similar organizations and CeFi in general.
So it's just more bullish to push people onto decentralized platforms.
Like, you're just – you're acting as a catalyst for decentralization, you know, in a sense.
So in some ways, I'm actually kind of happy that it's happening.
Yeah, it seemed like the SEC commissioner also very much disagreed with the way that this was done and taking action rather than, you know, guidance and enforcement rather than, like, actually working with the companies.
Like, gee, who would have thought that that would be a better solution?
And apparently the SEC commissioner – so maybe someone has a head on their shoulders and, you know, actually wants to see, like, actual discussion between, like, regulators and these companies that are doing it rather than just, like, you know, coming down with some unilateral decision that's saying, like, oh, yeah, comply and pay us.
Like they did to BlockFi, right?
How much did they take up?
Is that $100 million from BlockFi and the SEC?
Aren't they the SEC's – sorry, isn't the SEC, like, one of the top five creditors for BlockFi because of that settlement or something like that?
It's just, like, I do not understand any of this stuff.
Like, it's just so crazy to me that this all just happens this way.
Yeah, pretty good business model for them.
Rob's just for figuring that one out.
Talking like the mafia and just walking around taking money from people, basically.
It's how it works.
Nice place.
Nice place.
Do you want insurance to make sure nobody comes here and wrecks this wonderful, beautiful place?
It'll just cost you a few months, a few dollars a month.
I don't know, mate.
I think it's – in some extent, it's interesting to see – it's interesting to see how this is going to play over the long term.
But at the same point, you know, what happens in the meat space, I'm not particularly interested in or follow too closely just because they're going to be, you know, wailing their arms and flailing around all day and yelling on the screen about X, Y, and Z.
And while that has a relationship to, like, the viewpoint or the perception that this industry has with the greater world, in the end, we're still just going to keep focused on what we're doing and ship what we're trying to ship and, like, push the envelope.
So they can start yelling, like an old man on this porch, yelling people to get off the wall and all that kind of stuff.
But we're just going to keep on shipping code and making valuable, you know, services and products.
Yeah, very bullish store chain savers, to be honest.
Especially, like, who could even offer a Bitcoin yield product at this point?
Like, does anyone still offer that in CPI anymore?
Or have people given up on that because they haven't figured out how to make any yield yet?
I don't think it.
Does anyone even offer that anymore?
I'm actually not even sure about this.
I should probably look into that.
I don't think so.
I think they all, to my knowledge, they all kind of collapsed.
I think maybe Gemini might be a place, possibly, maybe.
Yeah, Gemini.
Genesis isn't doing so hot right now.
Yeah, I think, well, I'm not, like, up to the latest, but the last I heard, it was, they were not doing hot, but they were still technically operating.
But there was, like, signals showing that they might.
Oh, no, no.
Genesis filed for bankruptcy back in November, December.
Yeah.
Womp womp.
Yeah.
Well, I think they're all going away in some sense.
I mean, they'll come back, too, like, to be fair.
Like, there'll be new Block Fives and Genesis and new Voyagers that will arise into the future, for sure.
So, they're not gone for forever.
I'm sure they're going to come back in another form, but the same fundamental thing.
But, and we'll see how those go, which will more or less be the same.
Yeah.
When's the first one going to come out that just uses Thor Chain Savers?
But then just, you know, they just custody it, they enter in the yield, they maximize, they minimize the slippage and everything like that.
And then they just pass off the yield and take a cut.
Maybe we'll see something like that.
That's what I would like to see in the future for a Bitcoin yield product.
That'd be fairly tough for them just because the amount of capital that these large institutions can pull in is obviously a lot.
And it's significantly more than what Thor Chain can possibly support from a saver's perspective.
That the yield is not there to support, you know, $10 or $30 billion of Bitcoin being thrown into the network or whatever.
Maybe that might change into the future, like in the export market.
It might be possible to be shifting and changing as Rune's price performs well.
And also as we get more integrations, like TrustWall, as we were saying earlier, just to create more yield and increase the revenue of the network itself.
But I don't think we'll see that anytime soon, to be honest.
Yeah, so I guess the next to talk about is Binance Smart Chain, which is looking like it is happening most likely.
I haven't seen anyone really speaking out a lot against Binance Smart Chain at all.
So, like, I believe that some initial work is being done right now to, you know, get Binance Smart Chain off the ground.
And that's also something that would be very strong to loop in with the whole TrustWallet integration.
And part of the reason why, like, you know, I think it'd be successful is because just look at Binance Beacon Chain, which has no volume basically anywhere else in crypto, like at all, really.
And it is, you know, one of the biggest chains on Thor Chain itself.
Maybe that's just because the deepest has been around for the longest and it's one of the oldest BEP2 DEXs and the only surviving one, really.
But Binance Smart Chain integration just makes, it's just a, it's valuable because all these partners, they, like, people want to be able to settle onto these, like, you know, very, very cheap chains, low gas.
And there's a lot of user adoption with Binance Smart Chain.
So, yeah, I'm curious to hear your guys' opinions on BSC and, like, you know, just putting new chains on the network.
I know it's kind of been on pause for a while, but it seems like there's more of an appetite, but it's, you know, kind of shifts by the day on, you know, kind of where things are going right now.
But it seems like people are kind of hyped up on, you know, potential BSC integration right now.
Yeah, was there any update on, like, kind of providing the node operators with cost estimates and stuff like that?
Like, has that already happened?
I think there was a cost estimate of, like, 800 bucks or something like this or something around that vicinity, if I'm not mistaken.
And if you're – we've seen more better metal pop up in the last few months.
And for those people, it may be significantly more difficult to support Binance Smart Chain just because I think the resources are more intensive.
And depending upon the hardware they're running on, they may or may not have the additional, you know, capacity in terms of memory or in terms of CPU or disk storage.
And so, like, each individual bare metal person will have to, like, do their own little analysis of, like, how problematic it is for those individuals that may need to buy new hardware, which takes, you know, time to get, like, shipped out to their, you know, their mom's basement or whatever it is.
So, yeah, it's going to cost some money.
So, like, what's interesting, what's unique about Binance Smart Chain is that it could possibly lead to us decomming the BNB chain, right?
Because – or maybe not.
I don't know.
It's debatable, like, what we can't – the BNB assets on both chains and they're – you know, they are the same asset, just like USDC's on multiple chains.
And so, like, you could make a reasonable argument to drop the BNB chain and just replace the Binance Smart Chain.
Whether that actually happens or not, I don't know.
That's something we can discuss as a community later on.
So, do you think that's actually, like, a positive thing if that were to happen?
Because, I mean, there's a huge amount of liquidity.
It's the deepest, you know, stablecoin pool with BUSD.
And unless there's a way to, like, you know, quote-unquote upgrade it to Binance Smart Chain, which I don't believe that there is because they're different addresses.
They're just completely different networks.
Like, do we really want to see that liquidity, you know, leave ThorChain and then potentially just, you know, not find its way back?
Yeah, that's a valid point.
It's something we can discuss as a community.
I don't really have a personal opinion quite yet.
I really gave it too much thought.
But you're right.
The BUSD pool is the deepest stablecoin pool we have right now.
And in part because it's the cheapest with the stablecoin.
Because we don't have two chains right now that have stablecoins in them.
That's ETH and BNB.
And obviously, BNB is a lot cheaper than...
We have AVAX, too.
Oh, do we have a stablecoin on AVAX?
I thought we just had just AVAX.
Yeah, yeah.
We have USDC.
And USDT is whitelisted, but I don't think there is a pool.
I don't think anyone's put liquidity into that one.
Yeah, I mean, it's something to be discussed.
Like, you know, I don't really have a strong opinion, like I said.
But if Binance Smart Chain launches and it has, you know, a larger adoption to it,
then maybe that gives Gartner's more support for, you know, dropping one for the other.
Or maybe not.
Or maybe just supporting them both.
Like, I don't know.
Yeah, I guess the idea would be the BSC chain overall has so much more demand
that a lot of yield is being generated.
And then that deepens those pools.
And maybe it's not like turn one on, turn the other off immediately.
But over time, the natural incentives just can shift the liquidity from BNB to BSC.
Because obviously, like, yeah, I mean, the reason it is so deep is because it's kind of
the OG cheap stablecoin on ThorChain.
But in reality, like, there's no real reason that it would be that and not BSC be USD, right?
Like, there's no actual advantage to that that I understand.
It's just kind of like the legacy one that is still there.
So hopefully, there would be a way to take, I don't know if it could be incentivized.
I mean, that's maybe not the route.
But to, yeah, to figure out a way to get that same liquidity over would be ideal, I guess.
Yeah, I mean, the step one obviously is to launch BNB Smart Chain to see what the adoption
is, how much liquidity is actually being passed.
I know there's a lot of people who are very positive on the liquidity of BNB Smart Chain.
And that may very well may be true.
I'm a bit more bearish in this moment about how much value BNB Smart Chain or even just adding
any chain for that matter will add just because it's the market is quite bare.
And it was really paying as much attention as they did, you know, six months ago.
And so we probably wouldn't see as much like, you know, large volumes of, and I could be
wrong.
I'm just making a reasonable guess here.
But like, we'll probably not see much.
That doesn't mean it's not valuable or it doesn't mean we shouldn't be adding new chains
like BNB Smart Chain.
It just means that we just can't temper the expectations.
And again, it's the same thing I was saying before about like loading the spring for Trust
Wallet and other wallets that are coming down, like chain integrations are the same thing.
You load the spring now, which takes a lot of time and effort and validate the code is
good and, you know, wind out all the bugs or issues that BNB Smart Chain may have.
And so that when the market does go, you know, bull again, we have a lot more connections to
a lot more chains, which offers much more value.
So kind of like how in social networking, the value of a chain is N squared or N referring to
the value of a social network is N squared and referring to the number of individuals in that
network.
So you have an exponential increase in the value that a social network has, the more people that
has.
And that's conceptually similar to this to some degree, although not the same thing, because
people are all the same within a social network and the chains are not all the same in crypto.
But generally speaking, the more connections you can make, the more chains, the more valuable
you provide to a larger community, which is also very like positive things.
And so when we position ourselves to have like access to more, you know, economically viable
systems, when we do go bull again and everybody starts trading, everybody's getting excited
again, euphoria is coming back, like all of those things, it's quite beneficial to have
all these chains, whether it be BNB Smart Chain or Dash or Monero or, you know, whatever
other chains that are people want to add downstream.
Yeah, that's the way I see it.
It just really further fulfills the vision of Thor Chain of agnostically connecting the
most economically significant chains.
And by those metrics, BSC is clearly way up there and is an obvious yes.
The only reason to like question that is like the current economics and, and like whether
you personally, how you feel about BSC.
Like personally, I don't use BSC at all.
I don't really care.
I won't, I probably, I don't know if I'll really use it, but I just think it, it does
make sense when you just consider how big it is, how much activity there is, how relatively
like, I mean, yeah, there's some costs, but it's not, it's not technologically super,
it's EVM.
I mean, it's not like something that would take the devs like a year to figure out or
whatever.
So it seems to make sense overall for, yeah, positioning Thor Chain as the, you know, just
the agnostic cross-chain infrastructure.
And that's going to be super valuable, like whether it's valuable immediately or it takes
six months, 18 months, whatever it is.
Yeah.
It feels important.
Yeah.
I mean, also we like the economic value of a chain is a good, it's good attribute to
look at, to look at how much value it can provide in theory to our own ecosystem.
But obviously it's not the only one.
And so like in this particular case, because EVM chain, there already are a host of different
bridges that do exist to bridge, you know, to other, other chains already.
And so the value prop that we have for buying smart chain is probably less than it is to
something like a Monero where, where it's completely isolated or a Doge where it's completely
isolated now.
EVM chains already have connections through, you know, layer zero or Stargate or like other
similar concepts and bridges, although flawed in design, they may be.
So I'll be, I mean, I'll be curious to see what happens over the next, like, you know,
the first 30 days after this thing is launched, whenever that does actually happen, which I
don't even know when that's actually going to happen.
But the first 30 days, let's just see what kind of a Dogexner is.
But to be honest, I'm just not that, I'm not that, you know, I don't think it's going
to be some massive amount of liquidity coming in.
I think it's just about loading the spring.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think liquidity is the harder part here of the challenge.
And like, that's something we've seen with, I think, both AVEX and, and Adam is just
the lack of like, it's what you said, just the lack of liquidity.
And I wonder if that's because of the, like the dual sided, you know, the dual sided mechanism
of staking where it's just more complex and it's more difficult for, for someone to, you
know, stake, you know, two assets on two different chains and, and to do that.
And it's, there's more things to think about mentally than just like, you know, the single
sided staking of, of like Sabres or something like that.
So I, that, that is one other thing is just growing this pool with, with like, let's say
we're in this world where, you know, POL is activated and since they're at 50%, like, can
this pool grow just from Sabres deposits and POL growing the pool?
Like, is that the more, is that a more sustainable way to grow a pool rather than relying on dual
sided liquidity from, from the start and, you know, having very shallow pools are taking
up a lot of fees, but the UX isn't great because, you know, fees are very high for, for swappers.
Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting question, something that could be debated.
I think that, well, one way you can look at it is, and there's multiple ways you can look
at it, but one way you could look at it is if you're bullish on the 14 network or the
room in asset, and probably everybody in this room probably is, or at least the vast majority.
Um, and let's just imagine that the, you know, the big edge, say we launched BX minus
one chain, there's not a lot of liquidity in it relative to other chains like Bitcoin
or whatever.
Um, and the fees are very high because the, you know, the pool is relatively shallow and
we're sitting currently at a, you know, uh, around $1.50 or $2 room price right now.
Um, and let's imagine a scenario, which is not, you know, ridiculous, but you know, we
hit like a hundred dollar room, right?
Which is, to me, it may sound ridiculous to some people in the world, but to me, it's,
uh, not so much.
Um, and by doing so, inherently so the, the, the pools of those pools become much more deep,
right?
Uh, just because the, the room prices are getting larger and that will just cause more arbitrage
opportunity, blah, blah, blah.
And more, more things to be sucked in from more, you know, BNB on buying a smart chain
to be sucked in from the, the, the greater market.
And so it's like a natural thing to happen that as a room's price performs well, um, especially
relative to the assets that it's holding, um, it naturally just caused the pool to grow
even larger, even though nobody's actually, nobody knew is providing liquidity into those
pools.
So there are multiple facets you can look at it and that's just being one of the angles
and you can talk about savers and the yield being higher on those things.
And you can argue that BNB has a few different ways you can earn yield already within the
buying a smart chain that it's going to compete against, just like Adam has a staking mechanism
that Torchian's savers is competing against in a sense.
It's all these things are like different multifaceted and complex and they all interchange
with each other in complex ways.
So it's really hard to predict.
Yeah.
I don't know how many different yield products there are on BNB itself, but like, uh, just
looking into it briefly, one of the things I saw is, uh, BNB vault and the yield for like
it uses a couple of different, uh, a couple of different products to get its yield, but
the yield is less than 1%.
I think it was about, you know, 0.85% or something like that APR estimated, uh, which
is, you know, much lower than anything else that's on savers currently.
So, uh, if anyone here has like the knowledge on where people will get yield on BNB and like
what opportunities there are for like smart chain, not, not for, not for beacon chain,
uh, be very interested to hear about that because at least from what I saw on, on finance's
own, own pages, the yield is actually like very low and offering a competitive, a competitive
rate.
I mean, obviously it wouldn't be offered, but like, um, having, having a high yield on, on
savers, I don't think it'd be difficult to get a higher yield on savers than it would
be to be higher than whatever, um, the yield that finance advertises their own, uh, staking
products at, at like at 1% or so.
Like that doesn't seem like a very high bar for, uh, BNB savers to cross, but where, but
where's the audience?
It's like, who is, uh, actually entering these things and with, with how much, like you can
get a thousand people entering what they're putting in one BNB.
Uh, it's, it's not going to add up to an insane amount to make, um, just to make fees
that much lower and to put that much more liquidity into the network.
Um, yeah, you need, you need a lot of people to get a lot of liquidity and there's a ton
of liquidity on finance beacon chain right now, which is just very impressive.
Even though there aren't a lot of new LPs, uh, like, you know, coming in and leaving.
It's all, it's basically been, uh, a lot of people just, you know, setting and forgetting
over long periods of time.
Um, yeah, much agreed.
Um, yeah, I say, let's just, let's launch it.
Let's get it out there.
That's the, that's the initial value prop right there.
Just having the ability to bridge another chain without requiring on wrapped assets and such.
And not, I'm not terribly worried about liquidity so much of that and those, in that pool or
those pools on the, on buying a smart chain personally, it's just something we'll think
more about it when we get further down the stream.
But right now it's just about integrations, integrations, integrations, like the bear
market in general, with the exception of some like major features like savers and lending
and such, uh, is mostly about, um, integrations, integrations, integrations, and loading that screen.
Cool.
Um, anything else you guys want to discuss?
We can let people up for questions too.
If there, if there's anything you get, anyone can hit the request button on the bottom left.
You gotta be on mobile to do it.
But, uh, if anyone wants to come up and ask or just, just talk about whatever, talk about
their opinions on, uh, uh, chains or, you know, stuff coming out of the gate or a trust
wallet or whatever.
Well, a lot of people are thinking about questions to ask.
Uh, one of the things that is kind of interesting that the, the devs are working on, I thought
kind of fun to briefly go over.
And I think there'll be a separate, uh, conversation, uh, in discord at some point.
Um, but, uh, one of the nine realms devs, uh, predominantly or Ursa is working on a new
like regression testing framework for the like Thor chain code base, which is really kind of
fascinating because it's a way of like, um, being able to explain, uh, test, uh, testing
various things just through like, um, uh, a simple text file, which is, uh, what's called
an IAML format, but it's a, it's a, it's a way for anybody, even if you're not a dev and
you don't know how to code and you don't know how to, you know, like, you know, write Golan
code or run unit tests or any of these things, you don't even need to set up your local environment
necessarily.
I think you'll be able to just run it through, um, using the online CI tools.
Uh, and so you can like, you know, uh, add a new, uh, test that tests that the scenario
that happens this way or it doesn't happen that way or whatever it is you're trying to
accomplish, um, which will just allow just to pull upon more of the community to be a
part of the testing and validation of, of, you know, the network itself and major new
features, um, which is empowering to all the communities or even for non devs to contribute
to the, to the, uh, reliability and quality of the, of the system as a whole.
Yeah, I got a little demo on it the other day and it's actually, it's actually really
cool.
Uh, like for, like I, I, I definitely would not have understood what you just talked about.
I'll try and explain it in my own words, which is probably gonna butcher the hell out
of, uh, what it actually did, but it is a pretty cool framework that, uh, from, from
how I understand, just basically just tests, um, you, you can run all these different tests
and, you know, make sure that whatever feature is being like put into, into ThorChain, like,
uh, can, is, is not like, is not breaking anything and, uh, just making sure that all
the, all the accounting is right.
So like, for example, this, this framework would have, it was developed because of the,
the issue with the, with the, uh, pausing trading the other week that, that accounting
issue with an affiliate refund.
So this entire new framework was developed just to make it easier to test when, you know,
new things are put into ThorNode, being able to verify that they work as intended and don't
have, uh, you know, these, these kinds of errors and things that could cause like, you
know, some kind of panic or potential exploit or, uh, you know, any other kind of vulnerability.
So, uh, I, I, the demo that, um, we saw was, was really cool and yeah, there's going to
be a discord stage probably, uh, next week and we will, um, probably, I, I guess we'll
probably do a live demo of the, um, of the framework and just like show how it works.
So that way, um, you know, all the contributors to ThorChain can, can check it out and just make
use of it.
And, you know, hopefully this will just make it that much easier to be testing lending and
things like that before things go live.
As, as we were saying before, you know, as ThorChain is maturing and other people, other
apps are relying on, on ThorChain to be reliable, to, to be online, to be secure, uh, we really
need these, these frameworks in place to just have those assurances that, Hey, there's not
going to be more issues that, you know, are causing having to pause trading.
There's not going to be these, uh, you know, any, any mistakes that's going to jeopardize
all the, like all the hard work from, from all the devs and all the contributors to, you
know, getting ThorChain to the place where, where we want it to be and, um, you know, making
this reliable piece of native asset infrastructure.
So this is, you know, one of the steps on that, on that journey.
And it's, you know, uh, just kind of what's been being worked on over the past, uh, couple
of weeks.
So, yeah, we'll, we'll do a stage next week and, uh, we'll show everyone the new regression
test framework and, uh, yeah, then people can start using it and, uh, you know, hopefully
that'll, that'll help, you know, nudge along, uh, you know, things like POL, things like, uh,
lending and, you know, whatever else is, is coming to ThorChain core.
So shout out Ursa, the goat.
Well, I would like to say, uh, in response to what you were just saying, uh, is that we
want to make sure we're doing the best we can to, to mitigate, you know, having production
related issues, like the only side of the day from, uh, pausing trading.
Um, but at the same time, we also have to acknowledge that it is, it is code, it is code,
it is live code, it's always going to have issues at some point in time.
Like Uniswap had a major issue just like a couple weeks ago, whatever it was, um, or
a month ago, whatever the hell it was, um, big coincide issues for, you know, decades
after it's, was launched, right?
So like, you'll never actually remove the problems entirely.
You will, any piece of organization or code, whatever is always going to have from time
to time, some things, um, as things get more ossified that the likelihood of there being
problems goes down over time as we're adding new features, um, you know, uh, or
making code changes like that one, uh, code change that one of the members of the
community, uh, before they created the issue to begin with, uh, you know, sometimes
some innocuous changes are not so innocuous.
And so it's, it's hard to unsee the, the, the car section of some of these changes
that would be made of the greater system.
So my point is that, is that like, we want to create a nicer, a new framework to make
it easier and faster to detect such things and protect ourselves from, from, from
things getting forward.
But there's nothing you can ever do to actually completely remove it entirely.
It doesn't matter how, uh, how many tests you write or, or, uh, you know, how much
validation you do, things are always going to get through.
It's just a natural thing to happen in any code base, uh, in crypto or in just in the
greater world.
Well said.
Cool.
Yeah.
We can show that off next week.
Uh, that'll be fun.
Have you played around with it at all, Chad?
Have you done any, uh, test yourself?
Uh, I was playing with it today.
Uh, I got like a little private demo from our side.
Um, we jumped in like a zoom to, to kind of like, to walk me through, uh, different aspects
of how his design implemented, it looks really good and really solid.
I like the structure of the way he did it.
I think he did a really good job of it.
Um, he's already added a, uh, a few tests to the lending PR, um, that is already, that's
still open, uh, and found like a bug, for example.
So it's, it's already, uh, I think he at least found two bugs so far, one in the production
code, like a small issue, not a big deal, but one small issue there and a, and a, and a,
and a bug on the, uh, the lending PR.
So it's already kind of, uh, giving us some, some fruit in a, in a matter of speaking.
Yeah, that's good to hear.
Uh, brought up Keiko Fishing.
Hey guys.
Hey.
So I was just trying to see what, what's going on with the lending everything just seemed
kind of stuck in no man's land.
Is that not, not, uh, sounds like there might be more happening than meets the eye.
Uh, I know grassroots crypto put out a kind of a roadmap for testing and is anybody doing
anything with it or is it just dead?
That's all.
No, I mean, it's not dead.
Um, it's also, you know, one of the things that are happening, uh, from a dev perspective
that that's being worked on.
Um, um, so it's just, it's been in, in, in like the review process, uh, for, you know,
for a long time now, maybe a month or two, whatever it's been.
Um, but yeah, that, that's still, it's still going on.
It's still going on.
It's just moving a bit slower.
Uh, that's a natural thing to happen, uh, as you get larger teams and as the network
itself becomes more mature, mature that the, the, the dev cycle kind of elongates.
Uh, that's partially why, like, you know, you never really see a lot of coaching is
happening on Bitcoin just because it's so thick, so long period of time and making even
small code changes.
Um, so I, I wouldn't be, you know, concerned about it like that.
There's no, there's no problems or issues, you know, or anything like this.
It's just, uh, it's just becoming, you know, slower and slower to, to make,
changes in the protocol, which is bad in one sense, uh, if you lose that agility, but
it's also good in another sense, because you, you become more ossified and more careful
about the changes that are being made.
Um, back in the earlier days when, when, uh, you know, was first, um, you know, building
this protocol in the very early days, like myself and another dev, uh, Heimdall would,
would move very quickly and very fast and, you know, would just, you know, uh, move, move
a little bit loose in a sense, uh, just for, in the interest of, um, of progress.
Which is fine to do in those early days, but it becomes less and less able to do so
as the network matures and gets older, but also becomes, you know, as, uh, Kyle was alluding
to earlier in the conversation about, uh, as more other protocols and wallets and such
become more reliant on this network, they're looking for reliability rather than some, you
know, revolutionary new feature or whatever.
And so that all becomes like different, um, points of pull on the project in some, in
some sense.
So, uh, lending is still going on.
It's still being reviewed.
Um, I'm hoping it'll get, you know, merged in the next, you know, couple of weeks.
I'm hoping a week or so, I mean, that'd be great for my opinion, uh, whether it does or
not, we'll see.
And then after that happens, we sort of start the testing itself, which will be done on
stage net, you know, uh, either at the end of this quarter or maybe even Q2, who knows?
Okay.
Are you still thinking about, I know there was some chatter about collateral types.
Are we going to restrict it to like Bitcoin and Ethereum only, or are we going to have
all, all the...
Yeah, this is a, this is a debated topic.
Is that, is that going to be weeded out in testing?
Um, so what collateral types is obviously separate from testing, uh, and this kind of
stuff, but it's a kind of a debated topic and there's different people, um, within the
dev community that, uh, the dev team that, that feel differently about it.
But on the one hand, um, some people are on the mentality that, um, that, and this is
my, my personal stance is just that, uh, we allow any layer one, uh, asset or any primary
asset per chain, or we're sometimes referred to as the gas assets, uh, and, and just leave
it up to that and just be clean, straightforward, uh, go for a, a, a governance minimalist perspective
and not try to like get into a place where we're starting to pick winners and losers and
say, we'd like this asset and we don't like that asset.
Like that creates an opinion and we want, and for me, I always, I always thought this
network should be, uh, neutral and be amoral and without, um, any idea of if asset A is
better than asset B outside of the context of what's secure for the network.
Um, some other people think that we should just do it for the major assets like Bitcoin
and Ethereum maybe, or maybe even just Bitcoin, like, I don't, I don't know.
Um, I think that's a debated topic, uh, within the, within the devs and the community can
welcome to debate that topic as well.
Um, but it's, it hasn't really been determined what the answer is to that question.
Okay.
Thanks.
Um, yeah, to speak up the lending things a little bit, uh, a little bit more, um, I, I think
people are just kind of hesitant to, to merge things that aren't like, you know, fully complete
and, and like having, having all these tests run against them and, and things like that.
Uh, just cause any, any code that's merged to, to, you know, the Thor node and, you know,
is, is live in production, even if it's on stage net, stage net just runs the, runs the
code that is, uh, you know, already merged to, to main net.
Right.
So, um, even if it's being run on stage net, that means that that code is there on main
net.
And if there is some kind of exploit or something causes a consensus failure or anything, that's
just a huge pain and, uh, you know, not, not something that we want to be having to explain
to, you know, trust wallet and every other, every other wallet and exchange that wants
to integrate door chain, like, oh yeah, Hey, we're just implementing our, uh, you know,
experimental lending protocol and, you know, it broke and things are down for a couple of
days until we update.
And, uh, but Hey, the integration is still coming along, right?
We don't want to have those, those conversations, uh, and want to keep pushing on the integration
as hard as we can.
So, yes.
Um, I said, let's just shut up in his water bottle.
Sorry about that.
It sounds like you're opening up a blister, blister packaging or something like that.
Sorry about that.
I could have muted.
What is he doing, man?
Make it work.
You're good.
All right.
Uh, Juggernaut.
Hey, man.
Hey, um, everyone.
You hear me?
Yep.
Uh, wait.
Uh, first, uh, Save Rose is, uh, real success of, uh, of Trophy.
That's, uh, very, very great.
I will ask a, uh, a question for, not for now, for the future.
Uh, you, you, you will see the exponential evolution of, uh, uh, uh, barometer capacities, uh, few time ago, one year and a half or two year, I don't think, I don't think, I don't know.
Uh, two, uh, two SSD, uh, two SSD, uh, 120 gigabits was, were enough to, uh, to, uh, to build, uh, a bare metal with a double, uh, uh, Xeon processor and, uh, and, uh, 128, uh, giga, gigabytes of, uh, of RAM.
Um, well, uh, now, uh, now it's, uh, the recommendations are eight tera, it's exponential, the, the, the, the evolution of, uh, of the material.
Uh, uh, you see what I mean?
So, uh, the integration of, uh, of BSC, is it a problem of memory, of hardware, or anything else?
Uh, I'm not totally sure I captured all of that.
I think the question was asking about, uh, bare metals in, in the Binance Smart Chain, uh, Damon, and what the problem is there.
Uh, I think that just depends on the individual bare metal and what kind of resources it has remaining after setting up the current node.
Right, right, because, and I, does that make sense?
If I, if I answered your question, I'm not sure if I got your question correct.
Um, no, I'd just say that because, uh,
Torchain evolution means an exponential evolution of the hardware, too.
It's, uh, it's, uh, it's, uh, what I think.
Um, uh, uh, yes.
The other question is about the Cosmos, uh, uh, hard fork.
Uh, which will, uh, mean, um, uh, Cosmos SDK, uh, evolution,
uh, uh, will, uh, will, uh, will it allow Torchain to use more than 100, 120 nodes without performance issues?
I mean, for the future, not now, now, there is no issue.
Um, I think you were asking about two different things there, but maybe I'm just misunderstood.
I think you were initially starting talking about the, the Cosmos hard fork that's coming up, um, soon.
Um, that's just so that because they're making a, um, backwards incompatible change to the code base of, of the hub, Cosmos hub itself.
Um, so we have to pause, um, trading and, and do the, and, uh, have all the nodes upgrade their daemons to the latest version and then continue on.
So it's something we're going to have to do on various chains through the lifespan of the, of their, those individual chains.
Um, and then your question is about some sort of code change that was made to the Cosmos SDK itself, about increasing the number of validators.
Um, yeah, maybe, um, right now we don't really see a need for that.
Right now, the, the theoretical limit on, um, the number of validators that Torchain can support is 125.
That's a, um, artificial cap that the code actually implements for the time being.
Um, but we're still at, you know, under a hundred now, a little under a hundred or whatever the number is.
And so we don't really see a strong demand for the extra 25 or so.
So it's not really, uh, uh, a question that I'm terribly thinking about quite at this moment, unless we start to see, you know, another 25 validators pop out of nowhere.
I mean, we can start thinking about ways to scale the validator set, but I can't imagine us really getting to, you know, hundreds of validators, uh, personally, just because the requirements are so high in terms of tech, technological requirements, as well as, um, capital requirements.
So I don't think, I think we'll probably, in my opinion, we'll probably get to a hundred validators, give or take, and we'll hover around there for the next couple of years.
Cool, thanks Chad, uh, Felix.
Okay, can you hear me?
Yep.
Okay, great.
Um, first of all, I want to say that I really love the DEX aggregator functionality that ThorChain has.
So thank you very much, guys, and big respect that you managed to do that and, um, get some DEX aggregations on the Ethereum chain.
Okay, and my question is, are there any plans for adding DEX aggregations of, say, for example, the Cosmos chain, like Osmosis, or other chains?
Uh, yeah, so we've talked about doing, um, Cosmosis, um, Osmosis, uh, in the past, um, it's not really, like, a top priority at this particular time, but I think, I think we're all more or less interested in doing it.
Um, I don't think anybody spoke negatively about the general concept.
The question is, how is it actually implemented?
And there's two ways of actually accomplishing this task, to my, my, uh, high-level knowledge, which is not, uh, in-depth, to be honest with you.
But there's two ways to accomplish this task, and one is, um, we can add Osmosis itself as a new chain integration into ThorChain, and then that becomes the way to swap to, you know, various other assets in the Cosmos universe.
Um, that's one way to go ahead.
The second way is, we actually don't integrate with Osmosis directly, and we just use the Atom token itself, and utilize, um, the newish feature within the Cosmos world of, um, of aggregating multiple, uh, transaction types together across multiple chains as part of a new IBC thing.
Um, so I think it's theoretically possible, although I haven't done my own due diligence to go into the depths of it yet.
But I think it's possible that you can actually, that, that, instead of sending the Atom tokens to an address, um, when we do a swap to Atom, it triggers, like, a, like, a series of transactions across multiple chains, including Osmosis, where it sends the Atom tokens to, um, by IBC to the Osmosis chain, and then also just does a swap to some other asset.
And then does it obviously transfer to another chain, which, let's just call that Juno, for example, which the final result of that would then be, uh, some Juno address on that, on that particular chain.
I think that's theoretically possible, for my, my, like, light-hearted understanding of it, and that may be the way to go, just because if we were to add a new chain like Osmosis directly, um, it would be more expensive for validators, but also, uh, it probably wouldn't have as much liquidity as the Atom token is.
And so it's probably more efficient from a capital perspective to support only the Atom asset as the only native pool on Thor chain, and then to get the, any other asset within that, it just goes from Atom to Osmosis to swaps to Juno or, or, you know, one of the other chains in the cosmos world.
Okay, thank you very much.
And, uh, I'd like to say, um, thank you all guys, um, for your great work for humanity.
I'm serious.
Pretty great.
Thank you, my guys.
No, you're welcome.
Cool, cool.
Um, yeah, anything else, guys?
I think we've pretty much covered everything.
Only thing I could think of is that, uh, ILP is now deprecated, so if you enter in a new dual-sided LP position, then there, there's no more impermanent loss protection,
and that's just in favor of, uh, of savers.
So if you're looking to not experience any impermanent loss, recommend to enter savers.
And if you don't care about, uh, if you don't care about IL and just want to earn double the fees, then dual-LP is still always there for you.
So, we're in that, in that part of the life cycle.
Yeah, and if you already have a position, uh, it's still valid.
So you still have protection if you want to hang on to that.
Just don't add to that position.
So if you're looking to add, just do it from a separate address so you don't forfeit the ILP if you're concerned about that.
So, yeah, for the long-term, ILP should trend down over the next, you know, um, six months or 12 months, whatever it's going to be.
So it probably won't really matter in the long-term.
But, uh, yeah.
Cool.
Any, any last thoughts?
We'll, we'll wrap otherwise.
Not for me.
I think we're good.
All right, ladies and gentlemen.
Nice chat with you guys again.
Yes.
Oh, I forgot to mention this last week.
Um, we're going to be at East Denver in, in March.
That's, like, less than a month away.
I believe it's March, uh, 2nd through the 5th.
And, uh, we're, we're, like, we're helping Shapeshift sponsor a, uh, a booth there.
So, some of the Nine Realms team will be there.
I'll be there along with some of the other, uh, guys.
And, uh, yeah, we're just going to spread the good word.
And if you're going to be at East Denver, then, you know, make sure to stop in and, uh, and say hi.
Because, you know, we'll just be hanging out with the Shapeshift guys and, you know, probably getting some more talks on for, for integration.
Just, uh, you know, meeting with people, talking with builders and things like that.
So, uh, hoping to get some, some nice, uh, you know, BD connections made there at East Denver.
And, uh, if you're around, then definitely come say hi.
Yeah, I'm trying to make my way out there.
So, I'm not sure if I'm going to make it or not right now.
But, I'm trying to figure out a way for me to get my ass out there as well.
So, if I'm there, I'm going to, you know, might be able to chat with some of you guys in person.
Yeah, definitely.
Let's do it.
And, uh, yeah, we need to see you chat the route out there too.
Maybe one of these times, uh, mix the meatverse and the metaverse.
If you come out.
Yeah, this will be a good one.
It seems like everyone's going to be there, uh, like just from so many different projects in the ecosystem.
So, yeah, ThorChain's going to be there.
Thoreau, if you come out, buddy, and I'm there too, I'll buy you a beer.
Oh, yeah.
Appreciate it.
All right.
Sounds good, guys.
Let's, let's wrap.
And, uh, yeah, we'll see you next week.
Later, guys.
See you guys.
