Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
THORSday with Pragmatic Monkey / Rujira
Recorded: Jan. 22, 2026 Duration: 1:55:09Space Recording
Short Summary
ThorChain is set to launch Rujira, a new app layer that enhances its decentralized exchange capabilities with lending and token launch features, while also focusing on strategic partnerships and innovative liquidity strategies to drive growth and user engagement.
Full Transcription
ご視聴ありがとうございました Let's do a mic check.
The music is still playing.
That's interesting.
Yeah, it is okay there we go i had to out sing it you guys that's how you do it whatever you get challenged in life you have to mimic what is happening and just go the next level that's how
you win let me tell you guys share the space share the space let's get some people in here
this is going to be a good one today. I love it.
Ruggira.
Let's get Ruggira up here too.
How are you doing, Kenton?
Yeah, good.
Thanks.
I was actually looking forward to trying this Riverside, but they can't.
We got LinkedIn to work and we got YouTube to work, but it won't stream to Twitter.
I don't know.
I'm going to try and fix it.
But so you guys know were we were doing some testing
is it monday patriot we all yeah yeah five of us yeah we started playing with it
so once we get twitter figured out then we can start using it um so i don't know later today
or tomorrow this weekend maybe or maybe later today or tomorrow no patriot if we can play with
it um maybe try and get it done for Saturday.
We'll see.
Yeah, I'll be free after this space
if you want to play with it.
Yeah, we'll do that.
Absolutely.
If TC intern is,
if he's, yeah,
a couple of you guys are,
maybe we should while we're all here
and then see if we can hammer it out.
Cool.
Should we get this intro going? Yeah sure all right guys awesome all right everybody welcome
one and all let's get this intro going for chain is the biggest decentralized exchange for bitcoin
and now you can use every bitcoin wallet in the world and you don't have to connect it to a website
memelist baby same with ethereum xrp, Tron, Doge, and more. Eventually,
you'll be able to swap any token from any wallet to any token. ThorChain is turning into a full
layer one liquidity engine where apps can be built on top of it. Speaking of which, today's topic,
the new app layer, Rujira, unlocks lending, perps, Bitcoin back, stablecoin, token launchpad,
NFTs, prediction markets, and so much more.
You guys, ThorChain isn't just a DAX.
It's becoming the protocol of pure uncensored liquidity.
Swapping on ThorChain is permissionless.
There is no KYC.
Anyone in the world can use it.
And to use it, you go to swap on ThorChain.
Go to ThorChain.org.
Click on swap.
New features and functionality will be added to the site over
the next few months thor chain's token is called rune that is spelled r-u-n-e um oh someone's uh
someone's uh transmitting sound if you can mute yourself um you don't need to buy or hold rune
to place a swap on thor chain but the fees deducted from your swap are used to buy rune
and this rune is the yield that goes to liquidity pools and nodes. There are no block rewards on Thorchain. 100% of the yield
is real, and Thorchain is deflationary with 5% of the revenue being burned. If you hold Rune on a
centralized exchange, you need to withdraw into self-custody because those tokens can be used to
short-sell Rune and drive the price down on yourself. And once in self-custody because those tokens can be used to short sell rune and drive the price down yourself and once in self-custody you need to look into bonding your rune to a node to earn some of the
yield a really great side to do guys is runebond.com it is so easy all you have to do is select a node
request a whitelist and then bond your rune you can also anonymously communicate to them on runebond.com
as well runebond and runetard and many other people, guys, we are having an
initiative here where we are looking for new node operators and we want to be a broker to find new
operators and provide them with bond providers. So if you want to bond your rune, reach out to
at Runtard on Twitter. You can also reach out to me, Kenton, a lot of people. We will hook you guys
up and get you started. Thorchain has another token called TCY. This token is kind of
like a preferred stock where 10% of the protocol's revenue goes to these token holders. If you deposit
crypto into savers or took out a loan on Thorchain, make sure to claim your TCY token so you can start
collecting this yield and anyone can buy the TCY token on thorchain.org when you click swap.
There's a Thorchain community discord and telegram You can join to learn all about ThorChain and make lots of friends like me. To find the links, go to
at ThorCommunity. That's at T-H-O-R Community account on X. Guys, these spaces are geared
towards anyone in your ThorChain or Rajira journey, whether you're brand new or you're
a hardened veteran. We're going to be dropping some bombs today. We will shake up things today.
I promise. Okay, guys, let's get this party started my name is denny my other account
is patriot sounds and we have the runebon account up here today i've been doing all this thwarting
stuff for about half a decade now content creation education all the good stuff i am so excited for
this episode you guys so i'm going to kick it to my buddy kenton how you doing kenton yeah good thanks man half a decade it's crazy you start measuring this stuff in decades now
it's becoming a significant part of my life and i think yours as well brother
yeah uh it has i mean i do this i've been working non-stop for the last few months um
but like i was talking to some people about it here this week and like it's just you
know it's it's it's interesting it's exciting like we're in the forefront you know we're changing the
world here and um especially I think about it you know people talk about like being an OG you know
you meet people who are like oh I've been in crypto since 2012 or 2014 whatever and blah blah blah and like i feel like you know the ogs and
door chaining are the people who are in it right now all you guys listening people who stuck around
in 2025 like might be not technically be an og but like if you're still here now you're sticking
it through and you're with door chain through all this like you definitely deserve to be considered an OG. So yeah,
pleasure to be on this journey with you guys. Absolutely. 100%. I see Redacted in the audience.
If you want to come up Redacted, I'd love to have you. But we have Rogira and the Pragmatic
Monkey account up here or there. I'm going to kick the mom to my french monkey how you doing sir hey hello all good guys very very excited today a lot of
very good developments on our side so yeah very happy to be here and catch you up right so um i
think we'll to catch up um i'll just do a brief intro into exactly where Jira. I did mention it, but guys, what it is, if you don't know,
where Jira is the app layer built on Thor chain, all the,
the like economic primitives on a centralized exchange where you surrender
custody and you don't know what's going on in the backend.
Think FTX, right.
Where the money, the,
the numbers on your screen weren't real and there was no assets there and
everyone got rugged. That does not happen, right?
We are building something truly revolutionary here in a complete DeFi suite.
It is absolutely incredible and it's just getting started in 2026.
So Pragmatic, I'm going to kick it to you.
What is the latest going on with Rojira?
What is happening?
Okay, so first I'm gonna touch on credit accounts
because that's what's supposed to be the initial topic
when you reach out and there have been some development there
but most of this space will be focused on the other side
which is a spot trading side.
So if you remember last time when we had this chat,
Hans was there as well.
And the way we frame it is there is really two parts in the product. We have the credit
part with the credit accounts that allow you to do a CDP loan, but also the PTC backs tablecoin
and pervs eventually. And then there is the other part, the trading part, with RUGITRADE, the 100%
exchange order of DEX, and then the IMM RUGPULS, that's add liquidity with value
strategy on top of RUGITRADE.
And that will be the focus for today.
But on the credit account side, so we have been running, so we have the contract live with a simple CDP loan for what, over a month now, maybe a month and a half.
And we have been running for the last month this audit competition with Code for Arena. It conducted two or three days ago,
and we got a massive number of submissions,
1,400 plus something.
A lot of that is a scam or very
very less proposals, AI-generated stuff.
But quite a few interesting findings as well in there.
So, of course, it's going to take a bit of time to,
so we have a judge from C4 with it being triage everything,
but it's going to take a bit of time to review everything and correct that.
But that will be the next focus after concentrated liquidity.
We'll move back to that.
Get everything sorted and then start to raise the caps and allow people to borrow more
and pay a bit more with this primitive.
But in the meantime, what we have been focused on,
and I think that's so early year,
first week of JAD, effectively, I met up with Hans
and we had a bit of a very productive chat on the roadmap on what we should prioritize short-term.
We always have a bit of this dichotomy as it was on the call last time where he was more focused on the debt product and I always was trying to push more on the trading side because my belief is that,
it's not just a belief, it's fact, it's numbers.
If you look at revenue generation,
anything that is trading related tend to generate much more revenue
just because of the velocity.
If you can have 1 million of capital
deposited as collateral doing nothing on a CDP loan.
Maybe you have 50% LTV loan on that.
Maybe you charge 10% APR on this million effectively.
And of this 10%, 90% goes to the LPs and just 10% is
collected protocol revenue.
It's not much.
Then if you have the same 1 million of TVL in your IMM and you churn this liquidity every day
and every time you churn it, you get a fee,
just like basically your pull on door chain,
you get a much higher velocity of capital
and the same 1 million of TVL will bring much more protocol revenue.
So even though, of course, we are not just here for a number of work, it's important
to start with what's going to generate most revenue, most traction, because then it gives
us also the tools, the power, the attraction to get more liquid into the ecosystem.
The more RUGP prices go up, the more we can set some from the ecosystem
form, for example, with limit orders,
not cancel any
upside, to not create any
downside pressure, just muting a bit
the upside. So with very
responsible
policy, we can set down a bit.
every dollar we sell,
we put that into liquidity on the applayer
and that trade permanent liquidity that generates money on volatility,
effectively, if we put it at work on the AML.
And so I'm really excited because now that's what we've been focusing on.
Historically, we have the order book, which is the DEX,
just a place where you can put orders by yourselves.
But it's separated from the IMM, and we have different contracts
that act as automated market makers that add liquidity to the order book.
That's something very unique of Ruggirabh architecture. And it's very good because it allows
to aggregate liquidity from multiple sources. So some of
the sources will be just regular user order. You put a limit
order. Canton put another limit order, like all of that
liquidity. Someone can come swap with a taker order and take
consume this liquidity.
Then we will have a X, Y, K strategy, so similar to what
you have on the base layer pool, very basic, what was
effectively Uniswap V1 built on.
The issue with that is that it's not capital efficient at all.
On TorChain, on the base layer, you get some good capital efficiency
because there is a streaming trap.
But generally speaking, as an LP, as a liquidity provider,
it's not how you are going to make a good return.
Because pricing from zero to infinity effectively means most of your liquidity is never used.
And then we have another strategy, which is a virtualization strategy,
which allows us to automatically tap into the liquidity provided by the Bayless Layer pool,
by effectively borrowing upfront from RUG landing vaults,
using the Bored Fund to fill a quote on the other side.
And then at the end of the block,
do a base layer swap to repay the loan with a small margin.
And this way, we can have atomicity,
even if in Torchained design, it's technically not
possible to do anything on the app layer before, after. Like, you can do something on the app layer before, after,
like you gotta do something on the app layer,
then do a base layer swap and do something else
in the same block.
All the trades are executed at the end of the block
on the base layer, and they are executed
after all the smart contract actions have been completed.
So this strategy is a different source of liquidity,
and it allows us to go around this limitation of Torchain
and tap into base-day or liquidity,
but not in a super-efficient fashion
because we have to factor in the risk of price moving inside the block
and add a bit of a margin.
And then now we start to build a consolidated liquidity strategy.
And so the first one that is coming is called CCL, so Custom Considerated Liquidity.
It's using effectively a similar design to Uniswap V3, so you can define a range and provide liquidity inside that range, but with some improvement to that.
So one of the improvements is you can really customize the spread.
So how much you can see?
So let me try to take you through the user journey.
How does it work?
You come, you have, let's say say you want to provide liquidity in btc
usdc so you have the views that ptc is gonna go up but it's gonna stay more or less in the
range and you're happy to take uh the risk like you don't want to be just holding btc you are
happy to effectively have a mix of btc and usdc and within your range, make money on volatility by selling whenever
people want to buy or buying whenever people want to sell.
That's the job normally of international finance that market makers are doing.
And one of the beauty of DeFi is that it allows anyone to become a market maker.
And LPs using this type of strategy effectively are traders.
They are like most people who trade, want to make money trading.
Don't do that.
I mean, you can trade like very long term time frame and do that manually.
But otherwise, if you want to trade like at fairly high frequency,
you're not going to stay in front of your computer and buy and sell every five seconds or whatever.
This is not going to work. And even if you have to do that, you will have to be insanely focused.
And you could do that only for one pair at a time, most likely. It doesn't work this way.
So most of the volumes you see, trading volumes those days, whether it's in traditional finance or in crypto,
come from algorithmic trading, automated trading.
And either you are tech savvy enough to design your own bots,
your own strategy and trade,
or DeFi offers incredible opportunities
that everybody can do systematic trading via IMF strategy.
So becoming an LP and effectively make money on trading price movements,
trading volatility.
Can I?
With.
I'm sorry, can I interrupt you real quick?
Yeah.
Apologies, sir.
I just want to be clear.
So like when it comes to, because a lot of people on thortain they you know they
think that you know the amm design the swapping against the pool is an obsolete or it's it's at
least a less efficient thing but is it true to say with custom concentrated liquidity the concentrated
liquidity element that you know that is coming to thortain via the app layer and so we essentially are getting both systems
right is that is that my understanding correct yeah so so i'm i'm gonna come to that uh in a bit
how it benefits the base layer but yes short answer is yes uh via some a bit uh convoluted
indirect mechanism but it's it's going to come to the base layer,
and it's going to eventually change things a lot, I think.
That is a new liquidity model for Torchain.
But maybe I'll tell you a bit more,
like just on the user journey, what you can do with it,
and then we can discuss how this will impact our chain. Good with that?
Absolutely, brother.
Go for it.
Okay.
So as a user, so now let's say you come, you want to trade the volatility on Bitcoin.
So you look at the chart and you will define, okay, I'm happy to be 100% in Bitcoin below $70,000,
and I'm happy to be 100% in USDC above $150, for example.
And then you provide liquidity into this range,
but our custom consolidated liquidity means you can set some parameters.
So you will be also able to do...
So there will be three key parameters, effectively.
And we will abstract that away, like we'll guide the UI users so they can decide.
We'll have preset parameters, so even people who don't really understand, want to dig into
how the things work, can use it still.
But effectively, so on those parameters, you will have one that is the sprite you want to take
so because it's an order book the way you make money effectively is so you will have as a trader
a market maker you will have a stock of bitcoin and the stock of usbc and you have to manage the
stock to buy and sell and so every time price will move up a bit, you will sell a bit of your
Bitcoin. Every price price will come down. And then you can set a custom spread, which define
how much profit you target between each buy and sell order. That's really the easiest way to think
about it. And then you can set a very tiny spread.
So you will do little money on each trade,
but you can do a lot more trade.
And that's what's going to tighten the spread on the other book.
Or you can use it more as a grid board, set a fairly wide spread.
You need price to move more in one direction or the other
before you can do a round trip on your trade and materialize some
profits.
But that's also a very valid strategy, especially when marketer are all attack.
So it allows this type of expressivity.
So that's the first parameter, the spread.
Then second thing you can do is set a custom fee.
This custom fee has to be maximum equal to the spread you fix.
And what it defines is how much of the trading profit you are making,
you will be able to claim from the LP.
So that's very cool.
It means that instead of having your yield auto compounding in the LP,
no matter what, you can have the yield separated.
So take your trade profit and claim that.
And that starts to create a way to generate cash flows
for your trading activity.
So either you can set the speed to zero,
and effectively what will be happening
is that all your profits will compound inside ZLP.
Or you can set it to your spread, and then you will be taking those profits from your LP
as you generate return over time.
So this is very cool because suddenly,
it makes accounting and tangibility of things
much more accessible.
Now, it's the same way as when you bond your rune,
you can claim your yield rune, but it's not actually
super like you have a UI that shows you that's very clean.
But you can claim very clearly your runes,
and you can know how much you are making.
Well, it's the same way you will be able to claim a mix
of USDC and BTC if you're providing these markets,
and use that as cash flow.
And this also means that then we can build
all sorts of automation, the auto regera,
and other projects to use those cash flow
to do other things, like buy BTC or repay debts
to have some self-repaying loans,
or do pretty much anything you want to do.
You could even tokenize the heat, separate the heat from the principal,
like with some more fancy primitives.
But that's a very cool feature.
So it also means that as a person who works with a separate stream of income,
you can really start, thanks to DeFi, to be a market maker.
Take some of your savings, pick a range where you're comfortable
in a pair you are comfortable with, and put your capital there,
set your parameters, and start to generate income
that you can claim every month, every week,
and that complement your revenue.
And the more you do that, the more you grow your position,
the more revenue you can make.
And this is probably only one of the most sustainable way
of generating returns in DeFi.
So that's the second parameter, a custom spread, custom fee,
that you can claim your YIP, separate it from your principal.
And then the third parameter, this may not come right away
because it's a bit more challenging to implement
in smart contracts, but it will be a skew parameter
that also allows you to customize the shape of the distribution
inside your range.
So you can, by default, like on Uniswap,
that's how it works.
You have a uniform distribution.
So between the bottom and the top of your range,
you will have the exact same order size at each level.
If you set your skew in a certain direction,
you can have much more liquidity towards the center of your range.
So that's good if you want to trade bigger size for smaller profits.
So if you have a market that is ranging and not trending,
and that's the view that your view is that it will stay this way,
it can be a good way to maximize the market making side
of this trading activity.
But price move further away from your range,
you will have less and less capital put at work.
Or you can do the other way around and have more of the trading,
taking profits, buying the low, selling the high type of view,
and you reverse the skew.
And that means while you are in the middle of the range,
less of your capital will be at work.
So you will be making less yield. But as price goes towards the middle of the range, less of your capital will be at work. So we'll be making less yield.
But as price goes towards the end of your range,
you will be buying bigger and bigger size of BTC.
And then when price moves back towards the top of your range,
we will be selling more and more BTC.
And effectively, you are automatically
making capital gain inside your IP.
And you can plan a share of that as cash flow,
and you can all let it autocompone.
So that's as a primitive
and it's really exciting because for for the first time like you are going to have something very
like interesting to do uh on the rogera a way to make money to put your asset at work and generate
an income which is what a lot of people in defy are after the way to to uh complement their their
revenue a way to effectively uh get a chance to compete in this world
and get a bit more freedom of monetary rewards.
So that's super cool.
It's also going to be very unique
because for other chains that don't have smart contracts,
of course, if you look at the EVM chains or Solana,
they all have this type of primitives,
not this level, not with another group, not with this level of customability, but they all have Unisoc V3, for example, or V4.
It's very good for that, and it's well established as over 4 billion of TVN, so people like it and use it. But for people like in the PTC world,
in Bitcoin, you don't have smart contracts.
Never before were you able to do that with native Bitcoin thanks to TorChain using secure.state.
Now you will be able to do that and put your Bitcoin at work
100% in the decentralized fashion acting as a market maker.
Same for Litecoin, for Dogecoin, for all those other ecosystem.
And that also means for those people,
we can even start to chat with a foundation, with Weaver,
as capital.
That is not productive.
And it's not just that you can now go and do Jira, take a loan,
and monetize this way.
You can also put this capital at work actively
and start generating a return.
And that's CCL strategy.
It's just the first one.
I have designed two more that I'm super excited about that are
nothing comparable to anything else in DeFi,
because this one is very much inspired of something
that's a proven model, which is Uniswap D3.
But there are more stuff we can do that are unique to us.
And so there will be more to come.
And notably, the next one should be one that uses Oracle orders to reprice and put liquidity,
provide liquidity in a very, very tight range, always on one side of the book, while tracking
the average entry price of the pool.
So it never crystallizes impermanent loss.
It's always probably only on one side, and either it averages down on the position,
or it's taking profits when prices move in your direction.
But it's a very nice thing to add, because then we will have those market making strategies,
the one with Oracle that moves every block as Torchain nodes upgrade the Entrain Oracle price.
If the price moves enough, they will start trading against the fixed-range custom
conservative liquidity strategy.
And then there will be another one, I'll tell you more in another episode,
but that will be also very cool.
Similar to some conservative liquidity
should be a model where every user can have its own position.
And that will effectively allow you,
so with custom parameter, to trade and only buy
if you are averaging down your position,
only sales if you are taking the profits.
And that would be a very nice tool to add.
And then also strategies start to trade with one another.
We have set as part of the change we are making with FIIN 1.2,
so with Registrate 1.2.
We have changed.
We have added an IMM fee that is different from the fee
when you just placed a limit order.
So we have a standard maker fee of 7.5 bips.
For the IMM, we lower that to 2.5 bips,
so we can tighten the spreads much more.
And also because you will expect to have much more activity
on anything that is automated, just recurring volumes.
And so then, also strategy trading one against another
will generate 2.5 pips, which will be shared,
because this is all liquidity living of the app a year.
So share 50-50 with the base layer.
So that's going to be how we start to really offer better
pricing on the order book and generate generate activities that offer people things to do
to actually make money using the tool provided by Rungira.
And so that's the functional part of it, what's coming.
We have actually two pair now since today on which we are
testing.
One is runBTC.
So you can go actually on RunGira.network, go on the trade
and spot trading, you will see the order book.
And if you select the RunBTC pair,
you will see it currently has a spread of 0.06%,
which is very, very good compared.
And we could tighten that even a bit further.
At the end, it's up to the LP.
You have a trade-off between how tight you want the spread to be
versus how much profit you want to make on each trade.
So that's also good because it creates competition
for trying to get this volume towards the bid and the ask,
which in theory should further reduce the spreads.
And you can see this compared to any of those pair
where we only had XYKLP.
And you will see all the other pair have typically
either 60 bips, 0.6% effectively, or 0.8% spread.
So it's a 10x improvement. And suddenly, being sub 0.1% is quite a good metric.
So that's very exciting.
We have that on rune-BTC.
And we have that also on the WBTC-BTC pair.
And there, the spread is even tighter
because this is a stable pair.
We set out back one to another.
And so on this one, we made the IMM fee only one BIP,
and we deployed a bit of capital at a tinier, like two BIP spread.
So if you look at it on the other book,
we have 0.00% spread there.
So it's very, very tight.
So tight that with two digits, you cannot even see the percentage. So it's very very tight we so tight that with two digits you cannot even see
uh the percentage so that's that's very promising uh now what this means uh for torchain it also
means uh we are going to start to be able to have proper liquidity on the app layer to arbitrage
with a base layer pool so if there is there is anyone running app bots on top chain
that is listening, now start to look
into how to integrate your apps with RUJI Trade
or the Book Decks.
You will be able to, instead of having
to buy on the base layer pool and sell on a centralized exchange
or the other way around, you can buy on the base layer pool
and sell on the app layer.
And you will have a much faster, much more efficient execution
because you don't need to move fonts out of the base layer
to your centralized exchange.
And you can start to tap into a, so for now, it's still very small,
but soon there will be much more liquidity deployed.
We expect to attract users.
We're also gonna start to deploy
some of our own liquidity into those pools.
And then you have a very credible source in-house
to up against base layer pools.
So go have a look, start to look at how to integrate
with the app layer.
And if you need any else, get into the Discord on Telegram,
and we'll be able to guide you, provide
you the documentation you need, also things.
So that's very exciting.
That's one thing that is coming.
And then, well, maybe I have been speaking a lot. maybe i let you react to all that and uh and then
i can go into uh what would come after logical evolution uh i'll go real quick and then i'll
kick it to kenton um so there's a lot to break down there so right now how arbitrage happens
right um we well here's the thing is like for people listening, I'm trying to figure out myself.
It's like, how exactly is this all going to interchange, right?
Because let's say we have limit swaps, right?
Limit swaps do well.
Then we have rapid swaps where swaps then can trade against other swaps in the opposite direction.
And now we have CCL, custom concentrated liquidity on the app layer,
which basically allows anyone to help with arbitrage as well.
So how do those things interplay?
Does CCL apply after a rapid swap on the base layer?
To me, I'm trying to understand the order of operations.
Which would go first or they happen concurrently?
Is it just like a big fight?
How does it work?
So the order of operation is always inside the block.
Stuff will happen on the app player,
and then it's always at the end of the block
that the base layer swap are executed.
So that's always going to be the case,
unless the store chain changes completely how it works.
But this is a good design in a way
because it allows to protect base layer swap from the ..
So AppLayer has an advantage.
Do I understand correctly?
Yes, it has a big advantage.
And that was going to be the next part of what I'm going to cover.
But before we go there,
maybe I don't know if Quentin or if you want to dig a bit more.
But yes, the order of operation,
just maybe to,
let's just walk through the flow of arbitrage.
What happens when there is an arbitrage
and why 60% or so of the volume on Tarchila arbitrage?
It's because you have 40% of the usage,
which is real people, real users who want to do a cross-chain swap
where PTC on Bitcoin wants Ethernet around,
and they do one of these swaps.
And this big, large swap, they will turn to,
because the Bayesian pool are XYPK pool,
even a tiny swap tend to move the price quite a bit.
So the way Tarchila under that is with streaming swaps.
So they will break down the swap in a lot of different swaps
and stream that over several hours, multiple blocks.
And then every time there is one of those little swaps
that is made, it will deviate the price
on the base layer pool versus the market price.
What is the market price?
There are different ways to define it,
but for an arbitrageur, it will be effectively,
all what he cares is, let's say,
arbitrage using liquidity on Binance. He will care about the price on Binance.
And if now there is somebody buying BTC
and selling ETH on a base layer pool.
Now the price of BTC on the base layer
is higher than it is on Binance.
So the arbitrator, what he's going to do,
he's going to sell, he's going to buy BTC on Binance
and at the same time sell it on the base layer
and buy it at a lower price on Binance,
sell it at a higher price on the base layer,
capture this little profit.
That's what is happening.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I didn't mean to mute you.
Someone requested and I went to click who it was
and then it disappeared and then it became the mute button.
I muted you, Pragmatic Monkey.
Unmute yourself.
Oh, sorry.
Where did you lose me?
Just like...
No, I didn't lose him.
He's good.
I heard the whole thing.
Oh, I'm sorry.
We'll keep going, Pragmatic.
Okay.
Okay.
So you have this little price dislocation,
and then the arbitrator will come and buy on,
or let's say sell on the base of the airport
because it's more expensive now,
and buy on a centralized exchange somewhere else.
And now what we do with RUGITRADE,
we give a venue, a different venue,
the same way that you have Binance.
You can also use the liquidity that you have on the app
a year to do this arbitrage.
That's one thing.
And then there's actually more because the app
a year has a certain advantage, which I'll come in a minute.
That was just trying to answer your question
about order of operation effectively
and trying to wrap your head around how arbitration works.
KENZAN GOLDBERG, Do you have something?
I'm just curious.
If AppLayer is charging fees and BaseLayer is charging fees and base layer is charging fees you know
is it just more fees on top of fees and then um like i'm already worried about
base layer fees being too high relative to sexes and then if we go and add on app layer fees on
top you know we're just getting you know just more fees again could um do again. Could that be a problem?
Could that affect volumes and efficiency of all this?
And deter people?
So yes, there's definitely friction added by the fees.
So the good thing is we have a different fee tier
under chain for secured assets.
So for example,
that's why the visualization strategy
is good to provide debts to the order group,
but it's not providing any competitive pricing
because you have to pay the base layer fee plus the app layer
fee.
But the app layer has a different fee tier.
Like we have a min mint sleep fee bips min bips uh fee secured asset
and which is different for l1 mint sleep fee which is for a regular cross-chain asset currently
it's both are set at the same level it used to be historically it was the same as trade assets so
trade assets and uh secured asset at a lower fee 5 bips versus 10 bips for
a regular swap and since uh nairim started to experiment with uh with fees they ended up
aligning all the piece i i don't think like i think for the the secure assets it would make
a lot of sense to lawyers that and uh i think that's something we should do once we start to have the full value chain in place.
So yeah, fees are a consideration.
Fees-on-fees are a consideration.
And the fee, if you are talking just about arbitrage,
the good thing is the fee we take on the IMM side, on the release side,
is just 2.5 pips.
And we may even lower that at some point.
So it remains very small versus most
some for exchange and venues.
And we can play.
It's just a parameter.
And so much bigger one is on the 10 pips, the base of your text.
So I think there will be merit in lowering that.
And just experiment with those different features
and see what brings a net bigger increase
in not just revenue, but also volumes, I think.
I mean, there is merit in trying to maximize both metrics.
Eventually, probably revenue is more important than just volumes but uh maybe you want to increase volumes for a time first to get
back this big market share and then increase the period but we will have like flexibility to play
with that now uh maybe uh i can uh i can detail a bit more about what it could look like
and what we are going to do next
after we have all this consolidated equity strategy
on the app layer.
I have a question, Pam, about the fees.
I want to follow up.
Because app layer, you have to use a ThorChain address,
a wallet, right?
And all the secured assets exist on your on your rune address um
does that i mean it'd be easy to track that address on your trading history in your volumes
so could you adopt say binance's commission schedule and then apply that to someone's
ruin address so that they have effectively paying the same fees
on Applayer that they pay on Binance.
So you mean the volume-based fee tier?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
If you look at the issues we have on our GitLab, that's one of the things I would like to
It's not for now, but eventually, it's it's so a lot of things.
It's complex to do 100% on chain, these type of things.
But there is a way there are trade-offs
with sort of security risk to the system.
So we have to take a view there.
For now, we are not there yet, still building
the important blocks like the market-making strategy.
But eventually, yeah yeah that's something
is there at least one way to do it that we we we have in mind uh if we are happy to uh which will involve using proxy contracts which can introduce some risk as well so if we can find a way that uh
we are comfortable from a security perspective to put in place, then absolutely this is doable. And that's something I think we should do.
Even so it's, there is a bit of an ideologic thing
that we try to create a fair financial ecosystem
where everybody has the same level paying fields.
Doing volume-based features is kind of a bit against that.
But on the other hand, if you pay lower fee
because you do much more volume, it still adds up ups and as long as everybody access the same ptier based on their
volume you can say it's still fair so that's definitely something uh we look into uh and that's
uh the technical challenge to implement but that's that's something like that is actually uh
it's on the roadmap so um yes because i i keep thinking like you know what
why isn't thor chain the biggest dex in the world or big let me phrase that why isn't
throwing the biggest exchange in the world and um you know you hear about volumes and
all these other dexes are taken off or high or whatever. And you think, well, what about ThorChain?
It's like, well, these other DEXs,
like they just, the tokens that are creating their volume,
those tokens only exist on that DEX, on that blockchain.
They don't really have any competition, those other DEXs.
And so they have all the volume for those specific tokens.
Whereas like with ThorChain,
we've got all the tokens that
treat Thorchain.
I'm not sure I follow, can you repeat that?
Okay, so I don't think we've been paying attention. Like in 2025, like a volume on DEXs actually went up. Like it's done well on Uniswap and PancakeSwap and other DEXs. And ThorChain volume went down.
And so a lot of these other DEXs have seen actually increases in their volumes.
And I've been wondering why.
And I'm inclined to think it's because those other DEXs,
like the tokens that trade on them are unique and specific to that desk they don't trade anywhere
else so the only way to trade those tokens is on that dex and um um whereas like they don't have
so those other dexes don't really have any competition whereas with thore chain i i don't
think that's the case uh well let me just let me finish my thought. So whereas with ThorChain, they're actually like the tokens that trade on ThorChain, there is actually a ton of competition on the centralized exchange space.
Right.
And especially obviously Bitcoin and Ethereum and every centralized exchange trades them.
So ThorChain actually has a lot of competition.
And I keep wondering, I'm like, I wonder if it's just as simple
as getting our fees down.
And that's how we compete.
So in my mind, I keep thinking we got to strive
to get our fees down to the same level as Binance.
Anyway, you wanted to say something?
Yeah.
So I don't think I agree with this view.
Because if you look at Uniswap, for example,
I'm on it right now.
Look at the volumes.
Go on the Uniswap, at the Uniswap, explore tokens.
Look by tokens, run by volume,
and you will see what's making the most volume in the list.
It's USDT, a different version of USDT, USDC, ETH, USDC, USDC, USDC.
Then you have one token that's some random stuff,
a few of the moments that will probably disappear in a few days.
Then ETH again, wrapped BTC, SOL,
some wrapped version of SOL on Ethereum,
USDC, USDT, BNB.
So you see it's mostly stables and the large caps.
ETH, some form of wrapped BTC, BNB, and SOL.
And that stuff that we can accept Sol, but soon Sol,
that stuff are already available on the Torchade.
All those values Thailand small token, at the end,
they are a very small part of the trading volumes.
If you look at it in aggregate, and usually it's
always the same stuff.
You have a few mems or whatever
that will really perform and go big,
but most of them tend to just have a lot of team dumping
and go down over and over,
and volumes get to nearly virtually zero
for the long run.
So I don't think that's it.
I think the difference is really about liquidity.
Torchain has been losing market share because it's been losing liquidity because there is
this reflexivity with Rune price.
Rune price, all asset, native asset, are fair with Rune.
Rune price went down for various reasons, which started with really the collapse of
TorPi.
And with that went down liquidity.
I remember looking at
the liquidity utilization ratio.
So how much volume you churn
on top chain for every
unit of liquidity
in the base layer pools.
And I could see it was actually
quite efficient, around
30-40%
long-term average.
And it did not matter whether you had,
whether you increased the TVL.
Like if volumes were a function of demand and not liquidity,
that would mean that the more the TVL increased,
the base layer pool,
the less volume you use compared to the liquidity of the pool.
But it's not the case at all, actually.
If anything, it was a very slight slope up,
meaning that actually when you have more TVL,
you are having some more volumes.
What happened is a run price went down a lot
because everything is fair with run.
It means every time the price goes down,
you lose liquidity in base layer pools,
and you can facilitate less volume.
And so you have to think about volumes for TorChain
if you want to model it.
Like a good way, I mean, that's how I model it.
At least I think it's quite a good way to do it.
You assume your revenue is not a function of your volume,
but your volume is actually a function of your TVL.
And you will be doing 30x to 40x your TVL in volumes typically every day.
And then the more you increase your TVL, this ratio will stay constant,
and the more you will scale your volumes.
So I think that has been the issue.
It's not Taylor's set that's going to move the needle.
It's really just increasing the liquidity
in the base layer pool, which is no longer possible top five.
And that's where RUGGIRA becomes so relevant,
because we are providing now an alternative model
to better use liquidity.
And you have two ways to increase
it. So if you
accept this assumption, which
I can pack with data, that
revenue, volume
is a function of TVL,
and the ratio of your utilization
ratio is fairly constant over time,
then you
have two ways to scale revenue
and volume.
Either you actually scale the TVL,
or you could use this TVL more efficiently,
so increase this ratio.
But Torchain with StreamingSwap is already
using this liquidity for XYK pool super efficiently.
So then how does it do super efficiently?
It does it using a streaming swap.
So what streaming swap do is effectively trading better price execution,
better pricing for time.
So you will have a slower settlement type for your trade.
It may take a few hours if it's a big one, but you will get a better price.
And that's how you keep using this liquidity well.
But you cannot expand further beyond that
without changing from the XYK model.
And this costs user time.
And there may be users that are time sensitive and rather
have the same price or slightly worse price,
but get their swap completed instantly or much faster.
And so I think that's just in terms of why is not Torchain the biggest DEX.
I think the constraint here is really we need to scale liquidity.
And then how do we scale liquidity?
Well, since Torfax, we can't scale liquidity of the base layer.
So we have to scale it in a different way. And how do we scale liquidity? Well, since we can scale liquidity of the base layer, so we have to scale it in a different way.
And how do we do that?
We do that with the app layer and by bringing
more better consolidated liquidity strategy on the app layer.
And then I can go on how this can then reverse back
into affecting torching competitive
competitivity.
But first, I let you react.
Because you don't agree with this issue.
No, I do.
That's great.
That actually makes sense.
Yeah.
OK, cool.
So then I see Coke has his hand.
Oh, Coke has his hand.
So maybe I take a question and then we go to the exciting stuff and how do we fit
all the pieces together eventually.
I have two questions. One was already before about what's the risk about the proxy contracts that's the question before but i actually disagree with the liquidity
thesis that you gave us because our biggest problem is actually getting the
swaps when there are like more amounts like let's say one or two grand so near it ends always gets
mass and when it comes to like huge swaps we are only provider usually when it comes to like huge swaps, we are only provider usually when
it comes to like 32 PTC or something like that.
So I don't see liquidity being the blocker for us facilitating the swaps.
So maybe you...
What I'm telling you is based on data.
If you take, you can download on torchinchart.org. It's fairly outdated, but let me try to find. I'm going through my many spreadsheets. I'm going to try to find the charts of liquidity utilization ratio and share that into the Ruggira telegram.
telegram that's where it would have been yeah i understand what you i i totally understand what
you mean but at the same time when it comes to facts we are usually missing out small swaps and
all the big swaps come to our way because they're here yes but one is not prevent the other. It's not because BigSwap comes to TorChain
that increasing liquidity won't increase the volumes.
Like, at least, I don't know how it scales when you get to the billion,
but I think from the data I had, I think at the top,
it was probably half a billion of TVL in base layer pools.
And the utilization ratio was still the same.
So volumes were scaling linearly with liquidity.
So that's...
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Yes, big swaps come to Torchchain,
probably because there is not a better price to do.
But yes, if you increase TVL, you get more volumes, and this has been the case historically and consistently over more than one year of data looking back at it. see swap kit or the they give the quotes they don't care about the liquid at all they even
don't look at what sort of liquidity they just ask for the quote and how can it be fulfilled
yes that's for like swap kit and the uh whoever integrates uh to provide swaps, that's probably...
Nobody's going to look at the liquidity.
They just want a price and a time, execution time,
and that's how they cost.
But that's like...
It's not preventing you from the hard fact
that when you scale liquidity,
you scale volume.
And one big part of that is, remember, the biggest,
like around 60% of the volume of Torchain is from arbitrage.
So no matter what the organic volume is coming from,
from the moment you have more liquidity,
you have more... When you have more, when
somebody else is doing a trade that has nothing to do with store chain, somebody like a mega
whale, like a micro strategy arrive and buy Bitcoin on, I don't know whether it's Bitcoin
base or Binance or wherever, and they start to buy for 10 billion of Bitcoin. It push the price,
start to buy for 10 billion of Bitcoin.
It pushed the price.
They do that over several weeks.
It pushed the price of Bitcoin up.
There's the fact that it pushed the price up,
creates an arbitrage opportunity with Torchain Bezier pool.
And the size of this arbitrage is a direct function
of how much TBL you have in this pool.
If the pool is very tiny, one person will now,
price is higher because
MicroStrategy has been buying a lot of stuff. Somebody will come with one dollar buying to a
very tiny pool. PTC price in that pool will go to the same level as it is in the rest of the market,
and it's gone. But if you have a pool that is a one billion size pool, but the price in this pool still hasn't catch up
with what has been happening with the cross strategy
in the overall market, then suddenly there
is an arbitrage opportunity.
And you can do it much bigger because it will take much more
capital to move a one billion pool to the same price
as where the market is now than it will take in a 1 billion pool to the same prices where the market is now,
then it will take in a $1 pool.
So there is a direct correlation.
I mean, this is just data.
Just take a chart, download the long-term time series of TVL in base layer pool,
volumes, then calculate the ratio for everyday uh volumes divided by tvl
it gives you uh this uh youtube what i call the utilization ratio and then look at it over time
look at the fluctuation of tvl and see if this ratio should change and if this ratio doesn't
change then it tells you that the more you scale your uh tvl the more you scale volumes and that's
also explain why since uh the real price went down
and together with that liquidity in base layer pool, volumes have been lower. It's all like
the same, part of the same picture and you can observe it in the data.
But at the same time, from the aggregator, the liquidity didn't go anywhere else.
I mean, we just lost the OKEx, they never returned, maybe that's why the volume went down.
But okay, I have a follow-up question.
The volume could be provided in trash. I don't think people bring out when MicroStrategy buy a huge amount of Bitcoin and push the price up. I don't think it's anyone using OKEx or a scrap kit or any of those providers
that is doing the volumes to arbitrage against this new reality,
which is higher price because Michael Saylor decided to buy some more Bitcoin.
That's coming from just people running arbitrage, but from not people using them.
That's not the organic part.
That's not part of the 40% or so of organic volume driven by users.
That's part of the arbitrage volumes.
Let's go to this follow-up question, and then we'll go ahead and push the conversation a
little forward.
Go ahead, go.
But do you think that the limit orders will fix this issue kind of?
Because then we have like this endless time to bounce against, we have the endless time
with ARPS to bounce against the price.
Let's say that Michael Cera comes in and he wants to swap Bitcoin with X price.
We have a lot of time. Do you think this will help us?
It will help if Michael Saylor decides to use store chain to swap rather than using whatever centralize exchange.
But otherwise, it will not help if most of the volumes are, which is the case across all of DeFi and in most places at the end, most of the volumes run by arbitrage because we have this very fragmented market, which somewhere somebody else is going to take this arbitrage,
and now the discrepancy will be there.
And then on these days, you can buy cheaper,
and everything moves.
And this is the core of our market stay aligned,
the arbitrage mechanism.
And when you use a limit swap, it
can help get a better price for arbitrage, more certainty.
But I don't think it's fixed the issue.
When you have more TVL, you can arbitrage faster.
Those arbitrage, they will take it will be a function.
An arbitrage, you want to execute it atomically.
Atomically would be if you are doing everything on chain
in the same block.
You cannot really talk about atomicity when you trade
on centralized exchange, but it's super fast.
And effectively what you do is at the same time,
you buy somewhere cheap and sell somewhere high.
And you do that with a market order on each side.
If you use a limit order, if you add a time component to it,
suddenly you take the risk.
It's not an arbitrage anymore.
You are betting that there will be a price regression or something.
So arbitrage, they just use, they consume.
It's the other side of market maker.
Market maker make markets.
They provide the liquidity.
They are willing to sell at this price and buy at this price.
And then you get the arbitrage who are takers.
They take the liquidity.
They consume it.
And they keep price aligned this way.
If you have to use the limit, but you want...
Market arbitrage don't want to take inventory risk.
They don't want to take price risk.
It's supposed to be a delta neutral strategy. Every time you buy in quantity on one place, you sell the same quantity
on another place and you keep the profits minus the net of fees on each side.
So the only way limit order increases volumes without caring about liquidity is if
volumes without caring about liquidity is if we get real user, if Michael Saylor decide to use
Torchain or other than other venue to trade. But otherwise, if the volume is just the result of
Michael Saylor buying on another venue and arbitrage taking this, those arbitrage will be doing
be doing take care volumes using market orders and they will only be able to take without moving
the price and something that is a function of the liquidity available in the base layer groups
oh this is a pretty cool i love hearing this stuff so um guys just a reminder and pragmatic
monkey i'm going to kick it back to you in a second um because i know you have more exciting
things to tell us but if anyone in here has questions uh please go to the reger and telegram
and tag me um i already have some questions uh lined up but i'm gonna wait until pragmatic monkey
gets done dropping all the fun stuff so i'm to kick it back to you, Pragmatic. Okay. So now imagine this setup.
Like we are a few months, a year down the road.
We have also schooled consolidated market-making strategy on the app layer.
It allows users to put their asset at work and make money on volatility.
So we increase the TVL.
And now, you have arbitrageurs that
can use this liquidity on the upper layer as a venue
to have against the base layer.
Now, what we can do is, and that will be a priority,
something we did not mention in the roadmap,
but likely something we will look to do earlier rather than later,
we can go one step further and implement a contract that will participate in those arbitrages.
So the same way we have external arbitrage buying on the base day or pool selling on
centralized exchange, we can have, or doing that using the Aplio liquidity,
we can, as a protocol, have a contract that does that automatically
and arbitrage PayZR pool with Aplio liquidity every block.
And because the Aplio has this unique benefit,
because it's on Torchain, it's part of Torchain,
and because we have this on-chain scuttler,
we can actually inject transaction at the end of the block.
So we can already know inside the block
what's going to be the shape of the swap queue
and know exactly what people are buying and selling.
And we can use the applier liquidity to take the other side of the arbitrage and participate
in the arbitrage in much more efficient ways than a traditional arbitrage.
And where it becomes very interesting, and that's to be confirmed, like,
we'll have to look into the code, but it's just what we think based on our limited understanding for now of rapid swap.
Where it becomes very interesting is suddenly with rapid swap,
we can use that to increase the speed of settlements.
So it's not just we can, for sure, we can do that to improve price.
And that we know because we have been looking at long-term data as well.
And we can see that typically, arbitrageurs, in average,
let the price deviate by 40 bips before they bring it back
to whatever is the market price.
And of course, it goes a bit further than that.
And that's because, I mean, it makes sense.
If there is not enough competition on the arbitrage side,
that means you can let price deviate a bit more
and capture more profits on each arbitrage.
What we can do is come here, and by arbitrage targeting
a lower spread, a lower deviation,
we can make the pricing of the base layer pool
more competitive every block when there is a swap.
So that's step one, that's for sure.
But now step two, with rapid swap, in theory, what we can do,
imagine someone wants to buy 1 million worth of Bitcoin with USDC.
He put a swap for 1 million, then pays the airport,
or let's say 10 million.
It's too big in theory, like the pays the airport,
we need to stream that over many, many blocks to process it all.
Now, imagine we have enough liquidity on the app layer
to provide liquidity
on the other side of the trade.
So we are willing to sell.
We have an IMM strategy,
willing to sell at pretty much the Oracle price,
plus minus a small margin,
and willing to sell 10 million of Bitcoin,
or let's say 1 million even.
Maybe he told us that to consume everything,
but let's say it's willing to sell 1 million of Bitcoin
at Oracle price to something.
Now we can inject this.
We know there is this big swap, buy swap happening
from somebody buying from the BayZero pool.
Well, we know we have the liquidity on the app here
to fill that. And with rapid swap, we can inject know we have the liquidity on the app player to fill that.
And with rapid, we can inject a trade at the end of the block,
and with rapid swap, it's going to ping pong back and forth
and fill up to whatever the app player is able to provide
just in one block.
And now instead of having to wait to delay your settlement
over like several blocks, several hours,
you can
fill in part or all by the app here much more efficiently and so it means not only
it will help torchain to become more competitive on pricing but it also help
improve settlement speeds and that's that's very big and then of course there is always a bit of this friction
which is
the secure asset
means fee
which is currently 10 bps
I think that's what
was talking about
earlier, like we had fees on fees
I think once
we start to have enough liquidity
it would be interesting to experiment with that
and see how much more competitive we can be
on pricing of the base layer
by lowering the fee on secured assets.
And there is even a world,
theoretical world in the future,
where actually there is no fees
and 100% of the liquidity of the base layer
can go through and pass to the app layer fee free.
We only charge the end user on the app layer. And because this is with liquidity
that is sitting on the app layer, Torchains still get 50% of those fees.
So there is a way to completely remove this fee. Actually, not completely, because there is always be a fee, I think, proportional to the slippage.
But I'm with a bit of engineering,
actually, it's probably even possible
to go up with the same way completely remove this fee.
And there are a few considerations around that.
What about other people also trading with secure assets,
if they can trade secure assets without a fee,
then they can go around the base of your...
We can find a solution for that.
Usually they will still pay the uplayer fees,
so it's not like it's completely free for...
Okay.
But so there are a few considerations to take
and maybe a few changes to make to the base here.
But that's really the view.
We can turn the app here into the new liquidity model
for Torchain, which will be much more...
Allowing first to scale TVL once again,
because it's no longer possible in all of the major proofs
in Star5, to use much improved,
like brand new liquidity model, not XYK,
but more capital efficient ones,
and use that to improve both pricing
and possibly settlement time of basically as well.
So that's really super exciting for me.
I think that's...
People don't really see that yet.
It makes sense because so far, we have been just busy building blocks.
That's why I'm so excited that we are finally moving to building this conservative liquidity strategy.
And next, after that, once we put in place this arbitrage contract, I think,
things are going to start to become very interesting.
Very interesting.
And then it will be mostly a matter of upgrading
for all those swap kits.
And I mean, actually, it's probably
for the API, Mika API that provides the code of store
chain.
We just need to upgrade this logic
so it becomes conscious of the liquidity
available on the app layer
and how this will impact a swap given its size,
how it will impact the price and the execution speed.
And then based on this information,
provide much better quotes to Swapkits and other providers using this API
and make Tor chain much more
efficient and competitive.
Yeah, that's
the view. That's the plan.
I have a question, so I'll just make sure
it's right in my mind.
Okay, it's a contract, right?
It's an arbitrage contract,
and it uses rapid swaps
in the arbitrage contract to help
settle things on faster.
So when we're talking contract and you use rapid swaps,
are you saying there's a rapid swap mechanism on the app layer on secured assets?
Or when you say rapid swaps, are you talking about layer one swaps?
Yeah, but basically everything is layer one.
The app layer is also the same layer.
Yeah, it's the app layer using rapid swap feature
of the base layer.
So the rapid swap feature of the base layer.
And that, again, this is to be confirmed.
Like, we need to dig into the code.
But this, we are only confident that we can improve
the settlement speed with that.
In any case, the price part, by just having
more competitive arbitrage, so that arbitrage back market
price, whenever there is a smaller deviation
than what is current, this will already
improve the pricing of base layer pool.
But then the rapid swap thing is really,
you only need that on the base layer side.
On the app layer side,
because we can be much more expressive with liquidity
and because we have an order book,
on the app layer, in theory,
if Microsoft wants to buy 10 billion worth of PTC,
he can come put one limit order,
and as long as there is a counterparty on the other side
to consume this order, it will be consumed
without moving the price by one cent,
if we have 100% certainty on the price execution.
So we can apply the same logic on anything
that the app layer does.
The constraint is on the base layer side
because it uses XYK pool.
It adds to, like anything you do,
we always move the price depending
on size of the swap relative to liquidity.
And then rapid swap just allow you to compostate
when you have two swaps in opposite direction
to effectively match them one with another.
And what we do here with the app layer, that we can do,
that's unique to the app layer because it's built on the blockchain,
we can, instead of having to wait, like, oh, my seller wants to buy 10 million BTC,
you have to have the coincidence that at the same time
there's somebody else who wants to sell 10 million worth of BTC,
and then your rapid swap will match those two together,
the odds of that happening within the same six second blocks
are close to zero.
But if we have always liquidity standing on the app layer
ready to take the other side, then suddenly
you can have the app layer being the one, the liquidity
on the app layer being the one injected in the base layer
to be the counterparty of this rapid swap,
and do this ping pong to consume this order till it's fully full uh feed or till we exhaust all
the liquidity available on the app layer so the constraint will then become how much liquidity is
available on the on the app layer i wish chad bareford was here um because it really sounds
like this is a perfect synergy between trade accounts, rapid swaps, and the app layer itself.
I hope he hears this.
I hope maybe we can clip this and send it to him.
Have you talked to Chad about this?
I mentioned that a while ago before Christmas,
but we haven't had any serious discussion about it.
Again, it's a bit too early.
First, let's build this conservative liquidity strategy.
And then we have a science, by the way, every week with Torchain.
We are on the Torchain engineering call.
So we'll bring that up with Chad and we'll bring that up with him.
Perfect.
See how we can do that in the best possible way in due time.
So that's actually the question I have. You answered the other question actually, so that's
good. But one question from audience member is they're curious to know what Familiar
Cows meeting with Ruggiero will be about. Is there anything you can hint there or talk about,
or is that confidential familiar committee
oh no that was i think uh it wasn't a bit different that was the gp nami uh meeting up with him just
to exchange uh about which uh access he has which foundation that have these type of things
so nothing secret about that, just regular business.
Sounds good.
Kenton, do you have anything?
This is a lot for my brain to chew on here, but this is sounding pretty promising so far.
A lot of work to be done, of course.
Just listening.
No, keep going.
So just to be clear, you have the app player it has this contract it has used rapid
swaps and the the yield extracted from getting capturing margin on arbitraging the pools using
the app layer I'm sorry if you said this I didn't miss it how is that distributed does that go to Rooji Stakers, or how does that work? So yeah, in theory, and by the way, all of that, again,
I don't like to go to the space because then I feel like I'm
on the spot, and then everybody's going to assume what I say.
Yeah, no worries.
No worries.
I know that this is OK.
All of that is ID, map, what we think, what the scanner changed.
It may be construct we don't see.
Of course.
That's what of changed. It may be constraints we don't see. Of course. But so, yeah.
In theory, each of those arbitrages generates value for the base day here
because all of those arbitrages will repay the secure asset means fee,
which is 10 bips currently.
And therefore, we don't have to share anything.
We could keep 100% of the arbitrage profit
and use that to distribute to OG stackers.
However, I think it makes sense to share a share of that
and how much is TBD, but maybe 30% of that with the base layer.
And in exchange of that, this is a way to further align interest.
I think that's how I see it.
And reinforce this cooperation.
And also, then it makes it become more relevant for the base layer
to decide to reduce the secure assets in S&P.
And then there is probably an optimal point to find
where the mean-sleep fee is lower enough that we can arbitrage more volume.
So the more effectively the base layer lowers the mean-sleep fee,
the more competitive the pricing of base layer swap via arbitrage strategy.
And the money, the more volume of fully so actually it's possible
that even with the lower fee you still make the same way from that but on top of that it means
the more arbitrage volumes and it capture back some of those arbitrage volume plus actually like
the base here is insanely winning in the situation I mean, if you look at the economics,
especially if we distribute some of the arbitrage profit,
because that's pure profit for them
while they are making money on both sides.
So on one side, the secure asset means the fee
that is paid by the base layer.
But also on the other side,
the counterparty to the trade is app layer liquidity.
And so that we charge, especially this could be IMM strategy.
And if we charge, so if it's IMM strategy,
if we're feeling it, it would be the currently 2.5 IMM fee
we charge, we share it 50-50 with the base layer.
So they also get money on both sides.
We get the app layer to pay there for the base layer swap. They get a share of like 50%
of the profit of the equity consume on the applayer side. So it's a, we have to think of the
economic activity. Actually, we should treat that as the same as a virtualization strategy. So if
we are already the volumes we make via this arbitrage because we
pay the situation uh the best year should keep the actually that's a normal thing to do should keep
the 2.5 tips uh but there is uh yes a little equilibrium to find out here uh so i think it's
still good to share some of those profits also with the base layer as an incentive to lower the secure asset management.
Yeah, it's an interesting conversation.
So I think, so one of those conversations going on in Dev Discord right now about people wanting to be able to compete in arbitrage on the base layer, right?
I don't remember exactly how it's worked, but there was some discussion about changing the internal mechanics um to basically make it more fair right for people to compete in arbitrage
because right now sometimes like these really big swaps it's like one arm doing all the work usually
right um but i'm wondering if this advancement using the app layer kind and with rapid swaps
coming on board i wonder if that that makes that conversation moot now,
because it solves the problem, right?
Because now people can use the app layer,
which has an advantage because it goes first
in the order of operations in terms.
Is that right?
Would you say so?
Or am I wrong?
So I haven't followed this discussion. But I think it's not going to magically solve everything.
There is a constraint here, which is the liquidity
available on the app layer.
So we can only consume as much liquidity
as there is available to app.
So there will always be, especially for larger swaps,
opportunity for external arbitrageurs.
And there may also be arbitrageurs that
can swap more competitively, actually, than their player.
Because maybe they have a super premium fee tier
with a negative or zero fee on Binance or something like that.
And therefore, they can just beat the app player.
So you should see the app player as a very well-positioned competitor
to arbitrage, just participating in the mix.
But it's just good.
It will increase competition on apps, which results in better pricing.
But I don't think any discussion there are currently uh uh on improving uh arbitrage for for example
the treasure should be uh dismissed actually maybe there are things that can also benefit the player
and maybe uh yeah i mean we will see like we will see how the field evolve once we get to that
and uh and if we see uh an opportunity like there are chains that are being made that we can use
maybe it's also beneficial for us that's interesting point you raised it actually goes to what kenton
said about the need to reduce the fees on door chainain to be competitive with Binance or something. Because
if an arbitrage, or like you said, has a premium, a price premium available, and that's why they're
able to win these quotes, does it not flow logically? If we reduce the fees on ThorChain
even more, that it would make arbitrage more competitive. I know the constraint on the app layer is the amount of liquidity,
but let's just take that out.
Let's just say there was liquidity there.
Would that not help?
So, yeah, it's simple.
An arbitrage, you will have two market swap,
two market orders at the same time,
on two different venues, one to buy, one to sell.
You will have fees to pay on both sides. And so the profit you make is a function
of the deviation you have between the two price. So part of this deviation, so your
total deviation is your total available opportunity. Part of that is going to be
consumed by the fees and whatever is left is the profits.
So the more you reduce the fee, the less of a deviation
you need to be able to capture profits.
And so there is also a different volatility.
It will not be the same stuff every day.
And then where volatility is super low,
having very low fees,
will generate more volumes.
Because even if prices are not moving much,
you don't need to move as much to create this opportunity,
and you will capture it.
But there will be days where there is a lot of volatility
in that moment.
Actually, even with high fees, you
will still get those volumes moving.
But in general, the lower the fees, the less price deviation between two and two arbitrage.
So it's lowering the fee else.
But there is also, I think, a natural limit to that.
There is really an optimal point to find.
Especially, Torchchain is a fairly slow chain like
six second block time it's slow compared to uh well hyper liquid or other like a purpose built
chain for for higher frequency things or definitely uh much uh less uh fast than any centralized exchange,
which don't even have the concept of block time.
Effectively, it's just limited by the speed of light.
So I think another thing that will help
is if we eventually can reduce the block time from six to seconds,
as it was in the plan at some point.
It has complexity, but that can further improve volumes
and efficiency.
But there is a direct link here because if between...
So blockchain means you divide the world into blocks.
Blocks, at the end of each blocks, we do a consensus
and we agree about the new state of the world.
If we can only agree on the new state of the world
every six seconds, that means actually it
makes sense to have IRPs versus Binance, for example.
Because on Binance, they can agree on the new state
of the world, except there is no agreement
with the state of the world.
So it's one person who can just decide every nanosecond what the new price is.
And so as soon as there is a little deviation in price, you can capture it.
So you can do much more volume because you are not constrained by these six seconds, wait six seconds, do your things, wait six seconds, do your things.
seconds, wait six seconds, do your things, wait six seconds, do your things. So in that case,
you have a much higher velocity of your capital and having lower fee can still mean
you overcompensate with volume and it leads to higher revenue. In the framework of Torchain with
this constraint of six seconds, weights between each time where we do things and refresh the state of the world.
Then in six seconds, the price can move much more than in one nanosecond.
So actually, because we have this constraint,
maybe it's likely that what maximizes your revenue
is having higher fees than the Binance or other things.
And you will necessarily do less volumes,
but because you have to wait six seconds with each block, you will tend to have higher price
deviation from one six period block to the next six period block. And therefore, because there
is a bigger price deviation, you can take, so there is a bigger price deviation, meaning there
is a bigger arbitrage opportunity, and therefore you can capture a bigger share of this arbitrage by having a higher fee.
If you just reduce the fee, but you don't increase the speed at which you can do this transaction,
all what you do is cutting your own revenue and give that as profits for arbitragers.
Okay. I can keep going, but Kenton, do you have anything?
That's really interesting.
That's a good point, Patriot or Pragmatic.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
That's a good, yeah.
I think it's a very good conversation.
It's good we discuss our things.
So glad we are all up to speed and then we can move toward,
well, working closer together, get this.
Yeah, that's the thing.
That's the game.
It's all about liquidity and volatility.
What we want to build effectively is a machine.
Like the only thing we are for sure in crypto is volatility. So what we want to build is a
management that optimize and make money based on volatility. That's what give us
and our users and our users and also liquidity providers. That's what gives you
the most attention on your potential return. Then how do we do that best? How do we
improve? How we use this liquidity? Well, we need to scale the tvl we need to have meters ready to
increase the rotation of this tvl and eventually we need to reduce the time between each sequence of
of hours each sequence of events of the block line to further increase uh
to further increase the volumes and the revenue.
further increase the volumes and the revenue
Okay.
It's a really interesting conversation, by the way.
I really love this.
It's really exciting.
So let's try a different angle.
All right.
Let's say the ThorChain developers,
I know you guys have a chat every once a week or whatever it is,
but from your personal opinion pragmatic monkey what should
thor chain focus on that is at the most utility to the app layer is what we're doing correct like
with trading um rapid swaps and things like that or should we focus on the block time thing like
or yeah could you give your opinion on that?
I think the priority seems good to me.
I think adding a few keychain is very important because, yeah,
I think Solana and a bunch of Zcash,
I think those are very good initiatives.
It's a big chain with large token with a very decent volume.
So that's one way to scale up SIN.
And then eventually reducing the block time,
I think, will be something we have to focus on.
But before that, yeah, I think the...
So we need to dig into it really.
But yeah, I think the rapid swap,
we need to make sure that we can,
using rapid swap or some form of mechanism,
we can find the optimal way to inject base layer liquidity
into the base layer.
So we can really provide more competitive swap.
And we can allow Torchain to scale TVL again,
TVL into liquidity pools,
not the .net, they put also bonded,
value of bonded assets into TVL,
but that has no impact on efficiency of swags.
So yeah, TVL in liquidity, in making markets in pools
is what we do improve.
So I think your priorities are in others.
And we are really getting there.
For me, it depends on hands, of course.
But for me, ideally, we would do those three
quantitative liquidity strategy.
Be done with that.
So already, we have a very good base of things
people can do at the up-to-year to generate money
on volatility.
And then next, do this arbitrage contract,
and here is where we need to nail it in terms of what we use.
And it's possible that rapid swap as equities,
we can use it directly.
Maybe it needs a few tweaks,
but I think that will be an important one.
And then once we have all that in place,
also upgrading the logic of the router
to make sure that the cut provided by the base
layer booths are conscious of the liquidity uh sitting on the app layer
makes sense to me um okay guys i'm gonna kick it to the audience here if you guys have any questions
whatsoever i'm not really getting a lot of questions i hope that means we're doing a good
job explaining things um i do love that um but if anyone wants to come up and ask a question um i
don't know how much time you have pragmatic, but we've been going for about an hour
and a half now. Really good conversation. Just to kick it back to the very beginning. So
we mentioned very early on, you had the code audit that ended January 16th, about six days ago,
about credit accounts and about potentially lifting the
caps. There's like thousands of, you know, a thousand plus submissions. A lot of them
are nonsense. But do you have a timeframe on roughly when, or if you don't know, it's
okay, but you have a timeframe on when maybe we might see the first cap race on credit
accounts, lending, borrowing?
You know the rules. I don't commit to any time frame, especially because at the end,
I'm not a dev.
I'm not the one doing the work.
So I'm not going to speak on the behalf of other people
and take the risk of putting them in a bad situation.
That makes sense.
Totally fine.
I know only once we go on long runs,
it's inaccessible, whatever.
But it's inaccessible whatever yeah but it's better the only thing every time we try to put a
time confidence into doing stuff usually like with pretty much every other software company
doesn't work and then people are mad so uh why okay let me ask let me ask it this way from
from what you heard is there any bugs that have been found?
I know we haven't gone through all the bugs yet,
but any bugs we found there far that are like super critical
or is it just, you know, minor, medium bugs or whatever you would say?
No, nothing super critical, but there are.
I was speaking with Zephyro earlier,
who has been reviewing all of the submission
and that he was making making a very important point.
And it's a consideration of how much flexibility
we want with those credit accounts versus how much risk
we are willing to take.
If you take all of the different pieces in the isolation,
all the choice we have been making works fine.
But once you start combining those pieces, which is really
what makes Rougira so powerful, if it's full stack,
things work together, it also adds a lot of room for risk,
for complexity, for unexpected behaviors.
And so there are some design considerations
and decisions we need to make on constraining things
more than they are versus being OK with taking certain risks.
I think that's pretty much how I would summarize the trade-offs.
Okay. Could you do a quick reminder here on the governance of the app layer?
So, you know, node operators, you know, they have supreme authority, I would say,
but you, like the core devs of app, like let's just say some bug happened,
some, do you guys have like a big emergency stop button on the app layer?
Like, how does that work?
No, we don't have a big emergency stop button on the app layer.
Only the node operators have this big emergency stop button.
They can pause either a specific contract or they can pause the entire app layer if they want to.
a player if they want to.
But as a team, we control parameters
of the contract we deploy.
We can put caps or lift caps, this type of things.
But it's built on top of TorChain, which
has this consensus mechanism run by node operators.
We cannot pause the chain or like
doing that and i guess it would be possible to uh and force some pause uh button in the contract
that's a very bad desire no no no what we're most of right finance yeah of course no i understand
that yes what my main problem my main thought is i don't think we've ever paused the app layer. I know the app layer is not really, you know, it's in its early stages, but I wonder if it's worked. Maybe I'll talk to Slam Bamber about doing a training ceremony
with pausing the app layer.
Because I don't think that's happened before, to my knowledge.
No, it doesn't happen.
And there was no reason for it to happen.
So that's a good thing.
There is a thing it would be good to test how it would go.
But they are so constrained with that.
By the way, that's something that Starsquid was working on.
But so if you... From the moment we introduced leverage products,
which is like, let's ignore Perp's by Levana, like this is going to be
depreciated and the value is nothing. But from the moment we have create accounts,
and especially from the moment we have Per Pairp 32 with high leverage.
Any pause of the applayer means like some people are going to win,
but some people are going to lose.
They may get liquidated.
And you take the risk that price moves a lot during the period
where the app layer is paused,
and then when you resume, prices have moved too much
and there is bad debt.
So that could be a potential risk.
So you don't want to stop it for too long.
But also for people trading perhaps,
you take the risk that somebody don't get liquidated
where they should have
been, and the same result, effectively,
creates a potentially bad debt in the system.
So posing like, and also it's a bit unfair for people.
I mean, it's paused, and you cannot adjust your position.
So one thing we have thought of is if the applier is paused, when it resumes, you should have like a one hour delay
or something like that before the Amshrine Oracle
come back online.
And therefore, it gives people one hour
to adjust their positions.
But yeah, ideally, you will never want the app player to stop.
I think that it's a great power to have,
but it's also a great risk.
And there is no magical solution to that,
because that's the thing.
If you're doing decentralized finance,
and you have to live with certain risk,
and one of these risks is a trade-off.
Like, you give the power to node operators to pause the app layer,
but that also means it has consequences for users.
And, yeah, so it's...
And we could remove this to give more certainty to users
that it will never stop.
Right, yeah.
But the unique position of Torchain first means that you may still have issues
because sometimes there is an issue with the connected chain, at least for this chain,
may create some trouble, but I think that's manageable.
But the post thing, if you remove it on the other hand,
then if there is something that goes wrong or a hack or whatever,
then there is no post button to anybody can press,
and that can also be an issue.
So maybe, I guess,
net, it's better to have it at least initially.
And as we grow,
as we ossify things a bit,
maybe at some point it makes sense
to remove this superpower from the operators.
I don't even know if we should use it once
when now the more I think about it. I don't even know. we should use it once when you know the more i think about it i
i don't even know because if let's just say like there's a primitive on the app layer that fails
well then it fails like it is what it is if you pause or jira then that could cause a cascading
problem right and more harm than good so i mean yeah dang you know it's a it's i mean it's the
same as with any blockchain,
even probably more complex blockchain
due to the blockchain connection.
But yeah, at the end, it's, hey, do you do DeFi
and the code is low effectively, and if something goes wrong,
it goes wrong, or do you actually have someone
or some authorities that can post things, that can rewrite the state of play,
it's a 3D5.
Right.
Because pausing ThorChain,
that's meant to protect ThorChain itself.
But if the app layer does not directly threaten ThorChain,
then I don't really see why you would have to pause.
So, yeah.
Coke has his hand up.
I'll kick it to him.
Unless you want to respond to that real quick, pragmatic monkey.
I have to use the restroom.
I'll just be absent for like 20 seconds.
No, nothing to add to that.
Yeah, I had just a small question you mentioned just before.
It depends how much risk credit accounts wanna take up on.
Can you explain what's the risk vector about that?
No, I mean, there are many, we have built credit account to be very permissive, so you
can do effectively, theoretically, anything from the credit account.
You could use any other product, you could use open per position, take that,
on NPS, do things.
But then all the things are interconnected.
So we just need to think carefully about what
are the second order, third order, consequences, risks
that could be there.
And maybe what is dangerous are the unknown unknown.
So maybe actually a better approach
would be to restrict what a credit account can do.
And instead, use a white list system.
And instead of being super permissive,
it's super restrictive, except you explicitly
white list something.
But that also limit a lot more
what you what can be done so it's uh we have uh uh we have to review all that and go through it
like it doesn't make sense i am not even a dev for me to to dive into uh towards that now
that now okay i understand understand but in that case what's the stance of team like should we go
super risky with credit accounts have all those different different uh as i just say like let's
review everything and think about it and then we will see which kind of restrictions.
So it's up to discussion.
I see, I see. But just to clarify, this risk is just for Ruggira itself, Ruggira holders
or the Ruggira permitting players, stuff like that.
When people are holding like the base layer torching stuff, they are not affected.
No, that would be more a risk for users, not for torching itself.
Okay, perfect. I had actually one question before, it was super like an hour ago about, I think you touched on like proxy, like proxy contracts and risk that that brings on board.
Can you touch on that as well for a second?
Yeah, well, same here.
It's just like, this would be more a question for a dev, but effectively a proxy contract would be like an intermediate contract
that can do stuff on the behalf of another contract and doing that would give us a lot of flexibility,
but it also means that it increases the risk surface because it's the same thing exactly as
with credit accounts. You can have unintended consequences and somebody getting some access
when you can do something it's he is not supposed to be uh so it has to be uh again
so carefully and wait the risk extra risk that's just the benefits okay okay okay now I see the risk.
So basically having all those different functions, I guess we are not going to have Flash Loans
on top of RootJira, but having all those different functionalities and combining them, that can
actually have a vulnerability for some kind of function, right?
Yeah, even we have a sort of flash-down in the sense like,
on liquidation, you could probably, for example, that's one possible reason I guess we have.
Like for example, when you liquidate a position
in a credit account, you can do certain things.
And there is some checks that are being made at the end
that you have repaid enough collateral
to clear, to put back the position, the safe level of LTV,
that you don't have repaid too much so that the user is penalized
more than necessary.
But it could be that actually the action that a liquidator can take, maybe actually
can take a loan and do some random stuff on the side and take some money from somewhere
it's not supposed to be doing.
So that's this type of thing.
Because with the Ruchira and with Orsgen, I think the prices of assets, it's always
the end of the block.
How is the flash loans working in a similar way as it does on Ether?
How does it work on Ruggira if it works?
There is no concept of we don't have a flashdown feature,
but a liquidator because he has said that,
it could take a loan to do something probably
and come back, like, repaid by the end of the block.
That could be a possibility and could lead
to unintended consequences.
But yeah, so those are just like a risk factor uh that uh exists in the apartment from the moment
you bring those uh this interconnected system and i i i don't know exactly what you expect me to
tell you it's just like stuff that we have to consider and and take into consideration
yeah just take it into consideration and take views on how we protect against that.
just take into consideration and take views on how we protect against that
I have no expectations, I'm just touching the ground trying to understand.
Actually mainly all the questions that I have in mind is like how much of this risk would
translate to the ThorChain because I'm a stakeholder of Jiro, obviously, but also in my mind, I would like to have this like a ground level third chain, the main blockchain be as safe as possible.
So that's my angle.
So that's something I can answer. And that's always one of the core principles, separation of concerns.
So no matter, those are risks for users. They are not risks for the base layer.
I mean, and directly, it's risk for the base layer because they are linked and they are revenue flowing,
and because revenue flowing, the base layer is something to lose, but there is no direct risk for the base layer here.
Remember, everything you can do,
like the app player or smart contract can do on Brugira,
are things a regular user can do on Torchain.
There is no special privilege or extra stuff that can be...
Yeah, that's actually true.
I remember.
I remember way back when you gave us the applayer speech, you said like the Ruggiero
only can do the send, receive, everything, everybody else.
But you know, after the third chain, you just, you have this like the PTSD, like you know, after the third chain, you have this PTSD.
I know it's a dumb question, but you still want to ask it twice.
I'm sorry.
But I hope you understand.
No worries.
No, I understand.
You always ask that question.
That's probably not the best to answer.
But they are valid question nevertheless.
And yeah, so separation of concerns,
no sense of risk, more for users, users.
I got a question, though.
How does raising the, is that like a value
that you guys can configure?
How does raising the caps work programmatically?
Is that just something that's toggleable or how does that work?
Raising the cap?
Yeah, there's a cap right now.
How do you raise it?
What's the government there?
That is that we have the multisig that deploy the contracts,
which are multisig deployers. And from RUGIR multi-seg deployer.
And from there, we can control certain parameters of the contract.
And one of those is how much you can borrow.
Gotcha.
And that we can update.
Gotcha.
Okay.
That was it.
Man, this has been a great conversation.
We're on two hours here.
Kenton, did you have anything else?
I'm not really getting any more questions from the Ruggiero community.
Yeah, this has been really exciting.
Pragmatic Monkey, I'll kick it back to you.
Is there anything else whatsoever that you wish to talk about
or maybe we didn't cover well enough on your side?
Go ahead.
I'm really very excited about finally focusing on source market making strategy, very excited
about putting my own asset at work and so using source where it will be possible. And yeah,
then yeah, I hope from there people come start to just try things out, get a taste of it and
come start to just try things out, get a taste of it,
and hopefully start making some return for themselves
using those tools and doing stuff
that you can't do anywhere else and doing
with native assets thanks to Torchain technology.
So super exciting time.
And then once we're done with that,
let's focus on how we further integrate this
into the base layer to make the world of Torchain more competitive,
both in terms of pricing and speed of execution.
Love it, dude.
Oh, and you know what?
I just thought of something because Redacted, they're a separate team, right?
Have they, I haven't heard, maybe I missed it, but is there a timeline for when they go live?
I know there's really like not a lot of systems that we can use,
but will that be concurrent maybe
with when lending and stuff gets going?
Yeah.
So at the end, everything has to be reviewed,
to be integrated to our cost base.
So it may delay a big thing.
But otherwise, they are almost there.
They are doing now user testing in our community user group.
And they are in the process of at least they have scheduled an audit.
I don't think it has started yet.
But yes, they were fixing a few issues we pointed at for that.
But it's getting very close.
Okay, that's crazy.
So pretty soon, maybe not simultaneously, but when Rujira really gets we pointed at for that. But it's getting very close. Okay, that's crazy.
So pretty soon, maybe not simultaneously,
but when Rujira really gets going,
we'll have an entirely functional private layer.
That is so freaking powerful.
I don't own enough Rujira, I can tell you that.
Holy crap.
So cool.
So cool.
Yeah, no, no.
It's a very cool thing.
Absolutely.
Prime C.D.O. on top of all that is very nice.
Absolutely, man.
Okay, guys.
What do you guys think?
Is this a good time to end it, the two-hour mark,
so we can get people mad at us because probably the space was still too long,
but at least it's not four hours.
I don't know.
What do you think, Kenton?
Yeah, I'm actually a bit tired, so I'm happy to go.
Yeah, don't work yourself too hard, man. I know you've been grinding. And by the way, guys, shout out to Kenton.
I'm always in DMs with him, and the dude is slaving away.
So make sure you take your little siesta if you need one, buddy,
because we need you tip top.
The year is just getting started, but you're freaking going for it, bro.
It's awesome.
I have seen your comments on the message report.
It would say.
Absolutely.
Okay, guys, I don't see anything else.
I think we're going to end it there.
You know, of course, Pragmatic Monkey, anytime.
If you've got some cool developments, you've got anything interesting, um, we can, we'll, we'll figure it out.
We'll make a space coming up guys.
But, um, uh, I appreciate it very much.
All right.
And then, uh, so this Saturday guys, we're going to have, uh, the let's exchange people
Monero, uh, the Monero sex sex excuse me with nadeen that's really
excited and then january 31st we're gonna have a swap d kit um it was a thor chain aggregator made
by valley i'm interested to learn about that i don't know enough about that i don't think
is that i don't know it's on the thing i don't know. I hope so. Oh, shoot.
Oh, sorry.
That could be my bad.
Sorry.
Did I put that in there?
I can't remember if he confirmed or not.
I need to follow up.
Sorry, guys.
Okay.
No problem.
But this is a new...
Sorry, Pitch.
I'll just jump in.
It's a new aggregator, like SwapKit.
He built his own.
So, yeah, I'm trying to get him up to talk about it.
Let me confirm with him.
Okay, no worries about it.
And scratch that, guys.
So we'll definitely do the Monero sex tomorrow.
And then if you guys have a topic or a team, maybe Redacted,
would like to come up or something, we want topics, guys.
So give us some ammo here.
Cause we're reaching out to everyone possibly can.
If you feel like we're falling short in area,
let us know.
We'll do better.
all right guys,
I think we're going to wrap it there.
I hope everyone has the rest of your work week and we will see you again
Saturday.
Take care of everybody.
Bye-bye.
Bye guys.
Thank you for having me.
Bye. bye guys thank you for having me bye
