Bankless - Finding Common Ground | Solana, Avalanche, Terra

Episode Date: February 9, 2022

✨Finding Common Ground✨ Crypto has grown a lot in 2021! New ecosystems have put new private keys in the hands of so many new users.  Our interests overlap by 99%! We bring on the leaders from three killer DeFi ecosystems to discuss all the things that we align on, in order to start 2022 off in positive vibes! ------ 📣 ZERION | Move Your Assets To Layer 2 https://bankless.cc/Zerion  ------ 🚀 SUBSCRIBE TO NEWSLETTER:         https://newsletter.banklesshq.com/  🎙️ SUBSCRIBE TO PODCAST:                 http://podcast.banklesshq.com/  ------ BANKLESS SPONSOR TOOLS:  ⚖️ ARBITRUM | SCALING ETHEREUM https://bankless.cc/Arbitrum  🍵 MATCHA | SMART ORDER ROUTING https://bankless.cc/Matcha  🚀 SLINGSHOT | LAYER 2 SOCIAL TRADING https://bankless.cc/Slingshot  🏦 GEMINI | TURN FIAT INTO CRYPTO https://bankless.cc/Gemini  🦁 BRAVE | THE BROWSER NATIVE WALLET https://bankless.cc/Brave  🦄 UNISWAP | DECENTRALIZED FUNDING https://bankless.cc/UniGrants  ------ Topics Covered: 0:00 Intro 6:00 Ground Rules 8:16 Why Are You in Crypto? 12:58 Personal Values & Backgrounds 18:26 Who are your Heroes? 21:56 Crypto Tribalism & Politics 27:06 Competing vs Collaborating 31:58 Decentralizing 37:04 What is True Decentralization? 45:00 Are Your Tokens Money? 51:31 Do Kwon Arrives 55:01 Layer 2 vs Multi-Chain 1:03:15 Predictions for 2022 1:07:11 Closing & Disclaimers ------ Resources: Anatoly on Twitter: https://twitter.com/aeyakovenko?s=20  Do Kwon on Twitter: https://twitter.com/stablekwon?s=20  Emin on Twitter: https://twitter.com/el33th4xor?s=20  ----- Not financial or tax advice. This channel is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. This video is not tax advice. Talk to your accountant. Do your own research. Disclosure. From time-to-time I may add links in this newsletter to products I use. I may receive commission if you make a purchase through one of these links. Additionally, the Bankless writers hold crypto assets. See our investment disclosures here: https://newsletter.banklesshq.com/p/bankless-disclosures 

Hey, Bankless Nation. We are back. We are live streaming this special edition, a panel episode. The theme here is Finding Common Ground. So we have some alternative layer ones, some the founders of Solana, Avalanche, and possibly Terra. We'll see if Doquan shows up in just a minute. But David, give us some context for this panel. Why are we doing it? What's the context going into this? Yeah, I think the industry is still unpacking 2021 because it was such a crazy year. Definitely the craziest year in Crypto. history, period. And the mental model that I have for this is that the start of 2021 was really Ethereum rising out of the bear market and having a lot of success. And then a lot of that, and then in the wake of that, a lot of newer L-1s to crop up on the scene with different design structures, different

blockchains also capture a bunch of users. And there's been a ton of demand for users to do crypto stuff. And a lot of these newer layer ones have innovated in new ways that have enabled a lot of new people to come into the crypto ecosystem. And so we want to unpack just a little bit about where we all have common ground with all of these different blockchains. All blockchains are blockchains, which means we have common ground somewhere. And we want to find where that is and then grow that ground, grow that area of real estate of which we all share.

So that is the panel that we are having today. We invited Anatoli, Emin and Doe from Tara, Solana, and Avalanche. Doe is. I don't know where Doe is. We don't know where Doe is. He's an MIA at the moment. If he comes in the next few minutes, that would be fantastic. Otherwise, we have Anatoly and Emin, who's imminently about to show up right after we get through some of these other messages. Ryan, what else do you have to say about this fantastic panel? Well, I think I just want to say that the theme for this panel is good vibes only, you know, in 2020. So we're going to have a productive conversation. I think crypto is a little bit tired.

of a lot of the tribalism goes on. So this is a great opportunity to not be tribal and just have a great conversation. So that's what we're going to do. Guys, some other announcements, housekeeping things as we get in. The first is we've got a conference coming up. This is the permissionless conference. I believe Avalanche and Solana are going to be there. Tara may be too. Not sure, but this is a fantastic conference coming in May 17th to 19th. Just wanted to let you know to get your tickets soon for this event. Tickets go up every two weeks and batches are released every two weeks as well. So grab your ticket to this event, both David and I will be there. Also, wanted to give a quick PSA from our friends at Xerion because they've incorporated some new layer two and multi-chain

features in particular. This is a Zirion portfolio. You see this, David? Look at this. What am I doing here? It looks like you're swapping networks, Ryan. You can swap networks now in Zirion. All of your assets. it's in one place, one user interface. Really cool. Also, tell them about bridging, David, because Zirion enables some bridging as well. Yeah, bridging is a very complicated world because there's going to be so many bridges of so many different types. And that's why I'm kind of bullish on the world of bridge aggregators or bridge obfuscators, where unless you do exactly what Ryan is doing right now, which is not care about what bridge you're using and just simply being able to send your assets to the place that you want to go without having to worry about the details about

how you got there. And so that's what Zirion is doing is making bridging easier so we can all become bridge oars in 2022. We are all migrating to layer two, all migrating to different side chains, getting off the Ethereum L1. That's the message here. Get on layer two. Connect your wallet. Use Zirion to hop across those bridges. Get started. There's a link in your show notes to do that. All right, guys. We're going to be back with our guests in just a minute. But before we do, we want to thank the sponsors that made this episode possible. Slingshot is a decentralized trading platform that combines the performance and ease of a centralized exchange with the openness and transparency of DFi. Slingshot aggregates liquidity from all of DFI in order to find the best price on thousands of crypto assets.

Every token on Slinghot comes with a price chart and trade logs to give you insights into the market's activity in real time. Slingshot is available on Polygon, Arbitrum, and optimism, saving you from the high gas feeds and low transaction speeds of the Ethereum L1. There are no fees to trade on Slinghot and any positive slippage is given to the users. Trading on Slingshot is a social experience. You can even set your chat avatar to your favorite NFT, or soon a Slingshot 2099 NFT avatar. Once you bridge your assets to Polygon, Arbitrum, or Optimism, go to app.

dot slingshot.com to share your trades with others and find other tokens to ape into. The Brave browser is the user-first browser for the Web 3 Internet, with built-in privacy and ad-blocking to keep you in charge of your digital footprint. Inside the Brave browser, you'll find the Brave Wallet,

the first secure crypto wallet, built natively inside of a Web3 crypto browser. Web3 is freedom from big tech and Wall Street. More control and better privacy. But there's a weak point in Web3, your crypto wallet. The Brave Wallet is different. Brave Wallet is built natively inside the Brave browser. No extension required, which gives the Brave Wallet an extra level of security versus other

wallets. With the Brave Wallet, you can buy, store, send, and swap your crypto assets, and you can even manage your NFTs and connect to other wallets and Defi apps, all from the security of the best privacy browser on the market. Whether you're new to crypto or. Season Pro, it's time to switch to the Brave wallet. Download Brave at brave.com slash bankless and click the wallet icon to get started. Arbitrum is an Ethereum scaling solution that's going to completely change how we use

defy and NFTs. Over 250 projects have already deployed on Arbitrum, and Arbitrum's DeFi and NFT ecosystems are growing rapidly. Arbitrum increases Ethereum speed by orders of magnitude for a fraction of the cost of the average gas fee. When interacting with Arbitrum, you can get the performance of a centralized exchange while tapping into Ethereum's level of decentralization and security. If you're a developer who wants low gas fees and instant transactions for your users,

visit developer.offchainlabs.com to get started building your application on Arbitrum. If you're a user, keep an eye out for your favorite defy apps or NFT projects building on Arbitrum. Many of your favorite apps are already live, with many more coming over soon. You can find these apps at portal.arbitrum.com. And you can bridge your assets over to Arbitrum using bridge.arbitrum.io in order to experience defy and NFTs the way it was always meant to be. Fast, cheap, and friction-free. Hey guys, welcome back to the special panel edition.

This is the Finding Common Ground panel with some alternative layer ones. We've got two here that we're going to talk to. First, I want to introduce you to Anatoly. He was the co-founder of Solana and also introduce you to Emin, who is the founder of Ava Labs. We're missing our third panelist, Doquan. He might show up in the episode at some point in time. If he does, we'll just let him right in and roll along with the conversation. gentlemen, it's great to have you on Bankless. Welcome.

Nice to be here. Thanks for having me. All right. This is going to be a fun episode, I think, and I think it's something the crypto world is craving. And I just want to throw out some ground rules as we enter this conversation. So I don't think this is really a debate. I think this is about finding common ground that we all have. Some ground rules, I think, for our guests. Good vibes only. This is the podcast. We want good vibes only. I think the crypto community wants to see good vibes from the leaders in the space, including David and myself. Also, plain speak. We're going to try whenever possible not to talk technical. The community has asked that we sort of speak at a

plain speak language as much as possible, not get too in-depth in the weeds. And the third ground rule is letting people finish their sentences. I know we're very excited, have a lot to say. Let's let everyone have an opportunity to talk. David, you and I have some ground rules as well. we are not representatives of Ethereum on this episode. We are merely moderators, not today. So we're not arguing aside. We're just here to be good hosts and move the conversation forward and be as hospitable as possible. Great to have you guys on bankless.

You ready to start? Yeah, let's do it. All right. Let's start with this first question. I think this is an important values alignment to question. And I expect we'll have a lot of common ground on it. And the question is, why are you in crypto? Why are you in crypto?

Anatoly, you want to kick us off with that? Yeah, I had this idea that it's possible to use these Byzantine-Fault-tolerant systems to build an environment where there's no intermediaries for trading. And this was because this was something that I did in my spare time. I did it for fun. I used to, you know, like connect interactive brokers or a bunch of Forex trading platforms. to trade via their APIs. And I was always feeling like my trades were getting in a little later than everyone else's. The data I was getting was a little slower than everyone else's. And there was this barrier to entry there that was kind of impossible to cross as a hobbyist. And I kind of

had the technical idea for what, for building a system like Solana, that was the first use case that I thought of. And that's really what drove the first, I would say, three years. of development, how we were thinking about the use case we're building and like everything we're trying to deliver is that, okay, a hobbyist can connect to this network with just a piece of metal and they're in the same level playing field as, you know, Alamedo or jump. And that was the goal and still is the goal. Just curious, Anatoly, quick follow up on that. A lot of people came to crypto for like a, you know, sound money thesis, right, as a result of, you know, what they would say is misuse of monetary policy and kind of the fiat world. Is that you or is that not? No. So like despite like but I totally

get it and I thought that was a really very like important thing that crypto could enable. My family growing up in the Soviet Union saw the failure of government like to experience it firsthand. Myself included like my parents, you know, we, they left in 1992 with $350 to seven people. That was it. That was the only thing that the Soviet Union will let you leave with. So that was kind of, I get it. Like I strongly get it in a very core sense. And I totally appreciate the folks working on that side. But what I was passionate personally was like bits and sending these bits as fast as possible around the world and as fairly as possible, which was where my skills set lies and what I was inspired to do. And not trying to compete in the sound.

money thesis at all, but definitely appreciate it. I'm in curious, same question to you. Why are you in crypto? So I like building big, big things that work. And it comes from a different kind of background. I grew up at a time and in a country where things did not quite work. You would go to the airport and, you know, the systems were down. You would go to the bank, they'd say come back the next day.

When you close the door, it wouldn't close perfectly and completely. Now, I remember going into my middle school at the time in American school and seeing that everything actually perfectly matched. The doors were no longer drafty. And that instilled in me a sense for things that have a life of their own, that live on the internal in some virtual universe, subject to their own rules, and continue functioning in a predictable, perfect manner. And that got me going into distributed systems. And starting in 2002, with the karma system that we built. I start getting into digital money. And the goal, of course, is to digitize all things of value,

to create a universe where anyone can digitize something, send it around the world, and trade it. And in so doing, eliminate all the middlemen. You should not have to get permission from anybody. You should not have to be beholden to anyone else's rules in transacting with your valuable goods. Guys, I think I find your quick background is actually really fascinating because I think both of your guys' backgrounds actually show up in the in the blockchains that you guys work on.

Anatoly, you talked about how you were working with trading and you just felt like you were getting front run by people with more access and better privileges than you. And so that inspired you to make Solana, which I think has similar properties that make sure that everyone can do that. And so, and Emin, same with you where you like big things that work, where perhaps how you, the experiences that you had influenced why you're here in crypto and also the nature of the blockchain that you guys are building. Can you guys just speak a little bit to that about like the values that you learned when you were when you were deciding before perhaps getting into crypto and how it came to actually shape what you consider to be important inside of the crypto industry?

We'll start back with Anatoly. So I spend most of my career quality I'm working on community. communications, operating systems, like moving bits around through silicon. And that skill set is what I brought to Solana. And the use case that I thought of was, like, this system that I'm building, it has to be good at something useful to humans. That was like, that was a prerequisite. And there were plenty of people already working on the sound money thing. And I was like, I don't think I bring anything new to that space. Like, I don't think I can build a better Bitcoin or a better Ethereum. Like, so I never really thought of it, like, as. something for us to go after. And trading was something that I personally enjoyed as a hobbyist and saw a clear reason why centralized systems always kind of tend to get to a kind of a corrupted state where it's not in the sense that it's corruption where you're getting screwed. It's that you got to like, you know, pay 10 million bucks to Chicago mercantile exchange for that preferred access. And to even be able to do that, you have to know. You have to know,

the people to even like talk to them and be part of the part of the club and that to me always felt like just not not great it felt like i couldn't do what i was really interested in doing you know and i didn't think that initially i kind of thought you know maybe maybe these systems will actually flip cm and nisi and we'll see equities being traded on these open decentralized systems. What I've realized lately over the last year is that the revolution that we're seeing is that everything is becoming defy, art is becoming defy, social networks are becoming defy, and that long tail of new use cases is going to surpass all these old financial applications by, you know, 100 miles. It's just going to outgrow everything. So where if we've switched

kind of, you know, ideas that like what we're building is this thing for trading for price discovery, but we need to start building tools for humans to actually use it in day-to-day activity that they do on the web. And that could be NFTs, that could be using that NFT to participate in a social network. That's the monkey doubt that's now sticking with a validator, whatever is that they want to do, right? Like, it's kind of become much more consumer-driven. Like, how do we apply this stuff to now consumers as opposed to jump trading or Alameda or like, you know, even trading hobbies, even though I believe both of those joining together is really what makes a space really interesting. And Emin, same question to you. What about your

experiences in your young professional life led into how you decided to construct avalanche or what you care about now that you're in the industry of crypto? So there are a couple of things that struck me very early on. So one of the main things that I saw, I saw in the 90s, the very first attempts at digital cash and how they failed. They failed because the banks intervened. You can't go through the regular channels and do a revolution. That's just not how it works. You got to bring something to the table that is multiple orders of magnitude better than what's there. You can't come in with like a 15% 20% better thing and say, hey, this is going to change things. So that made me stay in academia for actually a very long time. I've been an OG in the space for a long,

long time, start out, you know, I remember single-digit bitcoins. So, you know, I didn't actually initiate Avalanche until I decided that there was something in our hands that was orders of magnitude better than what was there. So that's one of them. A second thing that characterizes my approach is to always build systems that are flexible, that to not have, I think this comes from my background. As a graduate student, I worked on operating systems. You want to build a system. You want to a substrate, something that lies at the bottom that enables other people to get whatever they want done. You don't want to be prescriptive. You want them to be able to customize whatever they're building. So Avalanche has this notion of subnets that allows anybody to create their own chains with their own rules,

with their own virtual machines. So that is something that's actually fairly unique to Avalanche. And it's quite different. And it plays at the place to the heart of our values. The third and final thing is that all along, I was always human-oriented, not alga-oriented. So there were a lot of people, especially in the early days, who were like, oh, you know, Bitcoin cannot be changed because, you know, the algorithm says 21 million coins, et cetera, et cetera. And so they're right, you know, in what they're saying. But they're missing out the fact that these systems have to be serving their constituents. They have to be serving their users. So that led us in a direction where we're building a system that is within given parameters

admits governance and modification on the fly by its users. So all of these had a fairly big impact on the ultimate design of the system we built. I'd love to know who are your guys as like heroes in this industry. Who are like ancient four fathers or four women who you guys think that have really like, you know, the cipher punks of old. For example, like personally, I really look up to somebody like, I mean Soleimani, Ryan here might like say Vitalik. Who do you guys look up to that are like the early OGs of cryptography or cryptocurrency

or who comes to mind? Emin, let's start with you. Let's see. So one of the first people I would mention would be Ron Revest is the R in RSA. He's a Turing Award winner, came up with. So the crypto that we use to sign our transactions is also. brilliant across the spectrum. And, you know, every time I chat with them,

I come out, come away enlightened. Another person that I look up to is Barbara Lyskopf, and she was a professor. She retired from MIT. Brilliant, brilliant researcher set the path for consensus protocols, which are at the heart of all of these systems. And so there are also some others who are more modern. So these are, I think, maybe two generations

or three generations older than me. A couple more people that I look up to is Mike Barrows. He's the person from Alta Vista. I'm not sure if you guys remember this, but it was one of the big search engines back in the day, probably the best engineered search engine of its day. It was just a fantastic builder all around. And Jeff Dean, someone that I went to graduate school with, who's an amazing builder at Google.

A lot of the Google infrastructure that we all use came from his vision or his actual fingertips typing away at the code. So that's sort of my go-to-go-to. to, you know, idols if I were to name them. And, Antoli, who are your idols or people that you look up to? In the space, I would say Zaki from Cosmos. He was one of the first folks that I talked to that was like a true, like crypto, he was like a true crypto developer.

And he's one of those people that you can call in the middle of the night and he will calm you down. Is this something that you've done before? You can call me too, you know. He's just an amazing person. Vitalik, I like, I haven't interacted with him that closely, you know, just a few times. But his writing, I think, is very crisp and succinct. And he's able to describe really complex topics to, like, an engineer.

Like, I feel like he bridges that gap between academia and engineering really well. at a personal level there's a few folks that I worked with that Qualcomm that really shaped my career in terms of like operating system design. Brian Kelly, I don't know if you would be listening to this podcast, but he was just one of the senior directors there that was designing a bunch of the operating systems on Arm while Arm was moving from architecture to architecture basically at every year. And it was such a breakneck speed of development and the hardware that I, really kind of learn what it's like to code under the gun when uh when you when you when you have like hardware that's shipping at a particular date and it's shipping with bugs and every every delay is costing like a company 10 million bucks or something like that you're under a lot of pressure to deliver and and solve heart problems really quickly so guys now we get to get into the to the meat of

this a little bit more and ask a question i think is on everyone's mind in the crypto community as um so you know, some of us in this panel represent maybe different tribes within crypto, although we have just so much, so much in common. But I want to ask like the meta question of why do you think crypto is so tribal? And does it actually have to be? Does it have to be tribal? Why is it tribal and does it have to be? What do you think, Antitoli? So I kind of came into tech in the 90s as a teenager. And I remember people arguing with passion and vitrole about Linux file systems, like the file system that you pick in your config and your kernel config when you're booting up Linux, people were tribal about that.

And it turns out there was one evil file system, but that's a different story. The thing that, like, I think what people get about these technologies, like movements, is that when you participate in these, you're thinking about all the future. your things that the single will enable. You're kind of putting a lot of faith in these ideas and how it's going to change the world. And that's almost a religious experience, right? Like this idea of an open source movement, taking down Microsoft, that was a big deal, right? Like, you were battling a company that was like a giant monopolist run by Bill Gates that was just squashing everyone, right? And this fledging community of people that are just coding for fun. Like, you kind of get bought into this.

And I feel that's true about crypto. We have, we're true. trying to change the world, right? And we buy into these ideas and they, and you think about what is this going to be 20 years from now. How is this going to improve the world and change everything? And that is a faith. That's faith, right? So we argue about it like we argue about religions. It's part of the human experience. Do you think that crypto is a bit more political than something like a Linux file system by nature, right? It's kind of about decentralization as a political concept. Does that make it a little different? I think at that time in the 90s, the open source was almost a political movement. And a lot of folks actually became like tried to interact with politics

and governance and get U.S. governments to adopt policies that taxpayer money should only be spent on open source software development. And these were really like core important things to folks. Like they were fighting, they took time with their own, you know, life to go do this, right? And I think we're seeing similar things now with decentralization and open finance because there is kind of not a single enemy like Microsoft, but kind of this, you know, you know, this vampire squid that's like slowly sucking the blood out of everything, both on the web through advertisement and those kind of negative loops and in finance through fees and everything else that people deal with.

And, you know, so that's, these are powerful movements. I mean, like, I feel like, I guess, blessed to live through multiples of these, like the web, open source and now crypto. But, you know, it's also a curse, right? To have that much, so much change happening in your life. Emin, what do you think? Why is crypto tribal and does it really have to be? Well, it shouldn't be.

My dream is that we would stop fighting over the same pool of users and focus on growing the space. You know, some total we're about one trillion. And some total, there's about 700 trillion worth of assets out there. And the chains that win will not be the ones that, you know, say the meanest things about each other. They're going to be the ones that can absorb that growth that can make those use cases happen on top of their platforms. So that's very clear to all of us. And you're right. Despite that, this area does attract a level of tribalism that I actually have not seen in many other areas. I've seen the open source movement, of course.

I have seen the editor wars, Emacs versus VI. You know, I fought on the side of one of them that I'm not going to name because then I'll lose half my audience. So, but, you know, but money is inherently political. And it's so deeply ingrained in our consciousness. Everybody thinks they're an expert at it. That's also another thing that factors into this. If you can balance a checkbook, then suddenly you think you're an economist.

And suddenly, you know, you've got all these people opining on all sorts of technical issues that really ought to belong to a couple of people who've done some measurements and ought to be resolved by science. And so instead of scientific discourse, we find ourselves in vitriol. And, you know, it's not a good look for our, you know, for the industry, for the space. But I think we'll grow out of it. Or maybe we won't. I mean, I actually don't think we're going to grow out of it entirely.

It's just always going to happen. But the folks who absorb the message that, hey, moving on and expanding is the right strategy, are going to be the ones that mean. That's cool. Thanks for these answers, guys. We're going to switch it up and throw some community questions your way from Twitter. The first is from Yankee.usT on Twitter. Ask this question prior to the show. Do you see your chains as compliments or substitutes to each other?

I think, Emin, you were maybe advocating for a more expanded pie, but at the end of the day, is there some competition between these chains? Are they substitutionary or are they, I guess, synergistic and complementary? They are essentially complementary. So, first of all, let's dispense away with the killer word. There is no killing done in this space. There are chains that are technologically dead. Anatoly knows this. Every techie knows this. They ought to be dead. And, you know, the horses lying down on the ground with the four legs facing into the sky. But yet, they're traded. They're round and they're not disappearing. So even dead chains are actually quite alive and walking. So that's, I think, something that everybody needs to absorb. There will be times when I will criticize Anatoly for some technical choice. And he will understand what I'm saying. He might do the same to me. But those are technical and technical discussions among technical people. So in general, it's not one against the other.

So all of these chains have a different vision, and they are far more in common, far more in common than they have against in opposition to each other. For example, Avalanche and Ethereum are working in the same EVM space. The more we have in the EVM space, the better it is for both of those ecosystems.

So Solana is pushing the envelope in a variety of different areas, in terms of engineering, in terms of building a community, community in terms of appealing to a different set of programmers. You know, their programming language is quite different. So, you know, I'll name other ones. For example, Tesos is appealing to a functional programming environment. So there are all sorts of different approaches to this whole thing that are essentially going to complement each other.

And it's not a, you know, I win a dollar by taking it from new kind of an environment. There is so much out there that isn't digitized, that hasn't come into blockchains, that that's where the real battles ought to be. are actually. That's where we are fighting because Avalanche, at this, you know, or Aval Labs, certainly is spending its time coming up with new assets to build on top. We're coming up with new use cases, new virtual machines to build on top of our platform. So that's, I think, the thing that's going to get us out of this morass of people who are, who seem to be inward oriented and at each other's throats at times. So I had a totally same question to you. Emin says there's no such

thing as a killer. There's no such thing as an ETH killer or a Bitcoin killer or a Salana a killer. At some level, we're all in this together. But there has to be some element of competition, right? I mean, somebody's got to win. What would you say to Yankee UST's question, compliments or substitutes? I think the killer part comes from if like the developers just stop building, eventually that thing will die. You know, the theory, right? Like as long as there's somebody working on this open source project over the weekend, you can't really kill it. And we saw that with Microsoft trying to kill all sorts of things that were much, much smaller than any of these chains. So that part, I think, is kind of like just a silly thing to think about.

But I think there's definitely competition because there's overlapping use cases. Every chain can run NFTs. So now, like, how we're competing in that use case, you know, those projects that are built on top, are now competing for the NFT space, NFT users, NFT enjoyers. And that competition, I think, is very healthy because that forces innovation at that border between complicated technology and consumers.

How do you figure out key management? How do you figure out what is a good UX for a wallet and all these other things? You get to see a bunch of different experiments run and the best of those are the ones that succeed, but they're not exclusive to that chain. And you start seeing people copy all the best practices, like almost instantly. And that's really the driver innovation, driver of growing the space, getting more users to,

you know, have their keys, so custody, ultimately a good thing. But it's competition. That's fine. I like competing. Let's set some context before we ask this next community question. So I think the context is crypto is very much on a path towards becoming more decentralized over time. at least at its best, right? Bitcoin is trying to do this through distribution. Ethereum is trying to do this via a variety of mechanisms. I assume your projects are trying to do this as well.

So the question from Faithful Stewart is, what's your chain's plan to become more decentralized? So at some point on the centralization versus decentralization spectrum, assuming you want to become more decentralized, how do you do that? Emin, what would you say to Faithful Stewart? So the very first thing that's essential for any system to become more decentralized is to have, at its very core, a protocol that allows people to participate. If that is exclusionary, if it is, for example, as we saw in the case of Libra, it's just Zuckerberg and 27 of his best buddies at most, you know, going up to, they had visions to go up to about 100.

And you know they had to scuttle the whole project. It didn't go anywhere because they failed to decentralize. So if that's your path, then you're going to be limited. And we see, you know, for example, with Avalanche, we spent a lot of effort in coming up with a protocol that accommodates millions of participants in every single decision. So that's number one. Number two, of course, is the ecosystem on top. You want to accommodate as many use cases as possible, as many programmers as possible, and provide to them both a familiar environment, if that's what they so choose, or an environment that they can come. custom tailored to their needs. And that's what we do. We have both the contract chain,

which is EVM compatible, and we have the ability to create subnets for custom use cases. So these all bring in new use cases. And the ultimate in decentralization is the set of people that we attract, the set of people who are part of our ecosystem. And we're working, I think, overall, all of us, and not just Avalanche, but I think for all of us, we're trying to expand that pie. And I'm really excited. about what has happened. I think we saw in the last year or so that systems like Avalanche did not exist 15 months ago. And it went from zero to where it is today. And that's been a tremendous, tremendous driver for us, and we plan to continue on that path. And Emin, you look concretely,

how do you think Avalanche can become more decentralized? Like, what's the next thing that you feel like you could implement the chinks in the armor right now that need to be filled? Sure. So currently, we have only three. these subnets that are in production and it's that we have a couple of test net subnets that are really seeing a lot of use. So as we have more subnets where you're going to see a very exciting development, I've been saying this for a while now, nobody takes it seriously. But staking services and validation services are going to become a real revenue driver, not just for the platforms themselves and the people who hold those platform tokens, but also for people who are participating

as validators and stakers. Validators and stakers don't do much today, but soon there will be actual use cases for differentiated validation services, validators that do more than just vote on transactions. So that's coming. And as that comes in, you're going to see all sorts of people participate in making blockchains more decentralized, and there will be essentially a business model developing around them. That's one of the main ways in which we're pushing the envelope. And of course, another step forward for the Avalanche community is to bring the costs of joining the system as a validator, the default networks as a validator, so that more people can participate in Avalanche itself. And, Toli, how would you answer that question? What's your, what's Salana's plan to become more decentralized?

So I think there's some things that we can do, and that's more engineering focused, and that's similar to what Emmons talking about. reduce the cost to join the network, make sure it's permissionless to entry. I mean, those are the obvious things. And reduce the number of failure points. And that could be things that you see Ethereum do like multiple versions of the same client. Because the more teams you have that understand the protocol at that intimate level that they could be able to write it, the more kind of you're reducing kind of

keyman risk, right? The bus factor is much lower. And all these things are parts of decentralization. And I think the bigger picture there is, do you have enough humans that actually care that this thing is decentralized to use it, take advantage of these features that decentralization buys them, that there's a reason for this thing to exist and for that to move forward? Without the latter, right, without actual demand for self-signing, self-custody, actual humans signing transactions and doing something on these chains, the work that you're doing a decentralization becomes pretty pointless, right? right? Like it's, you may do the work, but then, you know, no one's actually going to run these systems and care about them and make sure that they're operating correctly. So that latter part is, you know, a mixture of like time and use cases that have product market fit. And that's, that latter part is the harder part. That's the hard. That's not engineering. That's actually trying to understand what humans need out of these systems and building for them.

And it totally the bankless thesis has very much emphasized decentralization, particularly at the base layer, the layer ones. But there are others with kind of like a different thesis on the space, basically pushing back and saying, hey, like the most decentralized chain doesn't always win. Do you believe that? Do you think decentralization is the thing that makes a layer one failure succeed? or do you think there are other things that are even more important? For our particular use case, if it came to a point that it's possible for some set of the network to prevent a hobbyist to plug in and get at the same information level playing field as everyone else,

I would consider that a failure, and I would probably start a different chain. So that part of it, right, that physical guarantee that anybody in the world can throw a piece of metal, even if it's a very expensive hunk of metal, right? But at least they can do that and permissionally start getting in the same level, playing field in terms of information as everyone else. That, that to me is a critical piece.

And I feel like if we succeed there, plus there's humans that want this system for something, right? There's some real product market fit on the human side. Everything else would just be taken care of over time. That's just a function of time. So that core part, I think both of those need to exist. And that's a different thing than sound money or something like that or, you know, whatever nuclear war resistant finance, bunker coin, whatever you want to call that. Two different use cases, you know, three different use cases potentially.

So guys, that was all of our serious philosophy type questions. Oh, hang on. I didn't get a chance to react to that. Let me say a few words. Yeah, let me say a few words. Actually, Ryan, I'm actually really worried about the issue you raised. So the issue is, does the market know enough to evaluate the claims of these chains? And something that you always worry about if you have a high quality product is a cheap knockoff. And many of us, in fact, everybody on this podcast, obviously, is working on chains that are working really, really hard to get,

truly decentralized or have worked really hard to be truly decentralized. Now, and then along comes Joe's centralized check, okay, Joe's centralized blockchain. And you've got to worry because they can suddenly excel in metrics that are really hard to excel in because they've given up on one of the most important things in the space, which is decentralization. So they can boast all sorts of numbers. They can cut corners essentially. And the thing is, will that be seen and evaluated properly by the market? Or will the market just go along because most of the time, everything is good and it's a sunny day

and you don't really have to worry about the leaks on the boat until the storm comes in and starts shaking it, and that's when it sinks. So this is something I actually worry about quite a bit. At the end of the day, and we have seen this happen too. We have seen chains rise and we've seen chains get adopted as if they, are fundamentally sound when, you know, many of us knew that they were at their core, they had centralized points of failure or they weren't decentralized enough. So this is something that actually does worry me and that we've worked really, really hard to be able to compete even with

those folks who are at the extreme ends of that tradeoff. That is, our algorithmic innovations are so good that we are competitive with them, but it's still something that worries me. And at that level, I think we do have to just rely on user awareness. We have to get the word out that there is a big difference between chains that are deep down centralized versus the chains that are actually bringing something new to the table versus the ones that have true technology and true decentralized foundations. So I think at that point, it's up to all of us to educate the public about the differences here and the values in the space.

It always seems on that, like, I mean, the thing that trips people up, is like people don't know where to draw the line, right? So Bitcoiners will say Ethereum is too centralized, right? And some people in Ethereum will say, you know, Solana, Avalanche, and Terra are too centralized. And then maybe this panel collectively says, well, we've got Binance chain and Tron and Zuckerberg coin. And like, that's where we draw the line. So that is the hard part, I think, for new entrance to the market. What gives me peace, I'm wondering if the panelists agree with this, is,

in the long run, the market will just figure this out, won't they? Like, well, things will happen, hacks will happen, you know, centralization vectors will be attacked, single points of failure will fall, and the market will figure this all out. But in the interim, there's a lot of, you know, I guess, miseducation and noise and questioning about these things. Would you both agree with that? Absolutely, 100%. I think the storm inevitably comes someday. That's the nature. of these tail events. And when it does, it exposes problems with, with decentralization very, very easily. And I definitely agree that this is definitely the hard part about onboarding people into

crypto, because these are the hardest lessons to learn, right? Like decentralization is such a new word for so many people outside of the crypto industry that when they come into this industry, the newer, I knew that I remember coming into 2017 not really appreciating decentralization and just kind of thinking that peer-to-peer money was like the cool new thing and not really realizing actually how to measure or reason about decentralization. It's a very hard thing to reason about, especially for the newcomers. And so guys, that was all of our like philosophy serious type questions, but in the second half of the show, we have some more candy type questions. I want to tease the second half of the

show with this candy type question here. If you didn't, what is your favorite blockchain that's not the one that you are working on? So if you're, blockchain went down, God forbid, and you had to use a different blockchain. What blockchain would it be? Anatoly, let's start with you. Shoot, I don't know. I haven't thought about anyone else's blockchain in a while. I would try, I would like to try Avalanche, I guess. I haven't tried it Yeah, so I'll just be nice to have. Sounds good on that today. We'll give you some coins if you bridge over.

So that's a very easy question for me, without a doubt, Ethereum. So, you know, I'll just flip over my network and pay the extra fees and go back to what I used to use. Well, that question was going to be a little bit more fun if we had dough here for a three-person panel, but we don't. We just have you guys. Oh, yeah, okay. Guys, so we have questions like that, such as,

do you think your own asset is money? And what do you think about L2s versus L1s and bridges and some very fun questions coming up right after we get to some of these fantastic sponsors that make this show possible? When you shop for plane tickets, you probably use Kayak, Expedia, or Google to compare ticket prices.

So why would you limit yourself to just one exchange when you trade crypto? When you make your trades, you want to make sure you're getting the best possible price on your trade. And that's why you should be using Macha. Masha has smart orders. routing that splits your trade across all the various liquidity sources in Ethereum and is also operational on Polygon, Avalanche, finance smart chain, and other chains. Trading on Macha is super

easy because it pools the liquidity for me in a single easy-to-use platform and allows me to make limit on-chain orders so you can set and forget your D-Fi trades and they will go through automatically while you're away. So when you're making a trade, head over to macha.xy-z slash bankless and connect your wallet to start getting the best prices and most liquidity when you trade your crypto assets. The Gemini exchange has been my exchange of choice ever since I got into crypto. I use Gemini to both buy the dips and also manage my regular automatic monthly purchases of my preferred crypto asset. On Gemini, you'll find over 50 different cryptos, including many of the top defy and Metaverse tokens like Wi-Fi and Axi Infinity. Using Gemini earn, you can earn yield

on your various cryptos, including 8% on the GUSD stable coin. Gemini is available in all 50 states and more than 50 countries worldwide. So if you're looking to upgrade your crypto exchange, sign up at Gemini with Gemini.com slash go bankless and get $15 of Bitcoin after you trade $100 or more within the first 30 days. That's Gemini.com slash go bankless. Bankless is proud to be sponsored by Uniswap.

Uniswap is a new paradigm in asset exchange infrastructure. Instead of a cumbersome order book system where trades are matched with other humans, Uniswap is an autonomous piece of software on Ethereum that lets you trade any token at the current market price. No human counterparties or centralized intermediaries, just autonomous code on Ethereum. Input the token you want to sell and receive the token you want to buy.

The Uniswap Grants Program is accepting applications for grants. Do you have something of value that you think you want to contribute to the Uniswap ecosystem? No matter how big or small your idea is, you can apply for a unique grant at Uniswapgrant.org and help steer Uniswap in the direction that you think it should go. Thank you, Uniswap, for sponsor. sponsoring bankless. Hey, guys, we are back with the Finding Comment Ground panel.

This is with the alternative layer ones, Anatoly from Solana, and we have Emin from Avalanche. Guys, when we finished the last conversation, we left a few questions hanging, and one, I think is really important, at least has been important as David and I have sort of explored crypto. And that is the question about the monetary value of the tokens underlying your platform. So are your assets money? Is the Avax token money is the sole token money? The reason we think this is important is because that can be what gives the token additional value.

And of course, in these economics, crypto economic systems, additional value means increased security. So let me throw it over to you, Anatoly. Is sole money? Are your layer one assets money, would you say? So if you lived in some planet where you could magically communicate with everyone simultaneously, and that was guaranteed, you wouldn't need Nakamotok consensus, you wouldn't need BFT, all you would need is cryptography to build money. That would be the only thing that you'd need.

So in a world where Solana is at its peak, right, it's the system where information, state transitions pass through it at speed of light through fiber. It is that thing. that planet and you can build money on top of it. But I don't think of the token or something like that as a money in sense that users don't need to use it from day-to-day services to to transact in it, to buy coffee in it, or to use it as like a, I don't know. Yeah, I think of it as like an access to that magical communication bus where I send a message, it's guaranteed to arrive to everybody in the world. So not a store of value then. And it's a

You can build a store value on top of that in that planet, right, on top of this Tesla planet where you stick a rod into the ground and you can talk to everybody. All of you need is cryptography to build a store of value on it. We're going to ask these same questions to Emin, but just a quick follow up while we're talking about. So what makes the sole token valuable then? Why number go up, Anatoly? This is, I think, a tough question because it's not clear that there is a clear. I think the only clear business case that I think I see in the systems is that owning soul gives you a percentage of the stake.

That percentage of the stake means that you get to produce X amount of blocks. And producing those blocks is lucrative for some use cases, such as, you know, MEP. But that's four degrees of separation. And this is the only thing that I've seen really as a real use case on Ethereum that it has clear kind of clear connection to the underlying token. But I personally don't think that may be the final use case or how this stuff plays out. Like, I don't know, right? This is, we're still, we're so early that we don't know yet. And you can say that safely because 9094, when you're looking at those bulletin boards and the first six degrees, like, email chain

went out. There's no way you could have predicted that's going to be Facebook worth a trillion dollars, right, like 20 years later. So we can safely say that we don't really know yet. So, Emin, same question over to you. Our avalanche tokens, are they money? Of course they're monetary premium. Okay. Of course they're money. They can serve as money in transactions. The system is so fast, you know, finalizing transactions in under a second that you can use it for payments faster than you can use most credit cards these days, so at least in the U.S. So that's a very good situation to be in. The token has other uses as well.

It's used as a primary means of access to this underlying network of networks, the avalanche system in which there's these multiple subnets live. And on those subnets, you can do things like creating smart contracts, interact with smart contracts, stake, land, swap, et cetera. So it has utility. It has use cases.

And it serves as the sort of the fluid that greases all of these financial wheels. And the main thing, of course, is that this thing, while it's money, our vision is not to compete with the world's monies. We are not trying to compete with Bitcoin's store of value narrative. So even though we're actually a hard-capped asset like Bitcoin, that's not where our energy is going. We're going after the use cases that are not on the blockchain. We're trying to digitize all things. So we have a very different vision intake than most systems out there.

Guys, I think a new player has entered the chat. I wanted to welcome Doe Kwan to the chat for Lattera. The YouTube chat is about to blow up right now. Hey, guys, sorry I'm late. It was supposed to be 5.30 a.m. my time, but I accidentally set the alarm for 6.30. So really sorry about that. No worries. Well, we appreciate you jumping on and joining.

This has been a really fun conversation so far. David, should we just throw Doe right into the last question there? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, that's the best question to start. Let's do it. All right. First thing in the morning for you, Doe. So the question is, are the underlying tokens of the Terra blockchain, are they money?

Should they have a monetary premium associated with them? And if they're not money, why should number go up? Yeah, I mean, if you look at our Twitter handle, it's Terra money. So definitely, the intention is for it to be money. But I think when I say, money, I mean that in a slightly different sense from, let's say, when people say Bitcoin is money or Ethereum is money. So we generally think about what we're trying to do as creating a price neutral asset, so a stable coin that is pegged to things like the dollar or the Korean

wand or the British crown and so on and so forth. And then the idea is that people can enjoy you know, programmable assets, so things that they can build in defy and so on and so forth, in a censorship-resistant context similar to Bitcoin or Ethereum, while at the same time, they maintain all the price stability characteristics of your local fiat currency. So, Doe, we're going to have to catch you up and speed run through some early questions to get you up to speed with the panel. So the first two questions that we want to run through is, why do you care about crypto and also, do you look up to in the space? Who are your heroes or your idols that have influenced you

in your time here in this industry? And it's okay if you name someone on this panel, Doug. Well, to answer the second question, first of all of you guys, obviously. Okay, but what about not on this panel? Well, I mean, so in general, I think the people that are inspiring is if you look at the type of people that started building, you know, like many, many years ago, most of them have semi-retired or fully retired at this point. And it takes a lot, right? Because crypto runs 24-7. It definitely does take a reasonable amount of toll on your health. Actually, used to be like 20 kilograms later when I started there, if that's a useful context. But yeah, so I mean, like the types of people that

find inspiring are, you know, the people that have been in the daily grind for, you know, three, four, or five years yet at the same time still going strong. So I think these are the types of people that add tons of value to the industry and, you know, hopefully working together for a long time. All right. Now that we got a little bit of your background, we're going through some of the candy questions. And so we want to kind of unpack. I think we want to, the listeners definitely want to hear about the versions of crypto that

you guys think will manifest. And there's always a, while there's spectrums in crypto, such as the decentralization centralization spectrum, I think another spectrum that we can all talk about is the L2 versus multi-l-1 world. And so what do you guys think about L-2s? Will your chain have layer twos or will it be mostly emphasis on a multi-layer one world instead? How do you guys reason about these things and what do you think, how does your blockchain fit into the future crypto world that you think is unfolding? Anatoly, let's start with you. I think defining L2 to strictly this idea of something like optimism or zero knowledge proofs that verify that some computation was done correctly. Those are implementation details. Anybody could build this on Solana. So the question is,

why would they want to, right? Like, what is it that they're trying to do with this thing? And the only reason they'd want to do this is because the execution layer in Salana is not sufficient for them, that it takes along for some really big computation. But right now, that's not a bottleneck. And it doesn't seem like that's going to be a bottleneck for the next couple of years, at least. I don't know what things would change, but cryptographic operations that are typically

the expensive parts that you run on Ethereum unless they're, you know, built in, And those are running at nearly native speed. And by native speed, I mean, like, SIMD accelerated, like, speed on current processors. It's to me, like, unlikely that will hit those limits simply because current hardware doesn't million these things per second, right? So computation is just not the bottleneck. And neither a state, you know, like, I think both of those are, like, fairly solved problems. it's a, I think, might be more necessary in the, this like, we only want to do settlement at the

layer one and nothing else. So we'll build a thing for settlement and only that and run these single core E2 style validators. That may be the necessary design choice, but I don't know. We'll see. I don't see it as like a necessity. Hey, David, you're muted. Emin, what's your take about the future multi-layer-2, multi-layer-1, how do you reason about these things and how does Avalanche fit into that? M-N-you're also muted. Okay. So every layer-two solution also works on Avalanche.

So we can accommodate anything, any layer two that works on Ethereum just as well. But that's not where our scalability roadmap is taking us. So I understand where Ethereum wants to go with its own layer-to-based solution. and I'm not headed that way. I'm not headed that way because I have some concerns about where one might end up if one were to go that way. And that is centralization land. All of these layer twos that exist today,

minus some of the very esoteric ones that people work really hard to build. Most of them that you've heard of have single points of failure. They're centralized. And then assuming at their best, some future date when they get finally, you know, whatever they are too, you know, the second version of them that has, you know, the sequencers all made redundant, et cetera. Even in that universe, the designs, the architectures lead to constructs where some central party is collecting all the rent. Somebody is collecting all of the extractable value from the user stream. So you can end up wanting to build a new

system that's really, really scalable, and you end up reinventing the system as we have now. you have Robin Hood and Citadel. And so I don't want to end up there. So that's why we have so much emphasis on layer one scalability. Everything that can be done on layer one should be done on layer one. These L2s, they essentially take an opaque blob, do something to it, and bring it back into the system. And that process, that happens away from users, in many cases,

is users of understanding at least. So there are many different paths for malfeasance. There are many different paths by which people can reorder what happens at the layer two level. So that's not where we're headed, but we can accommodate any layer two to come. So we have a very different path on that front. Oh, and our subnets are the natural way to shard,

shard things and shard by use case. So that allows us to paralyze as well. And Do, I have one more candy question after this serious question. So teaser on that one. But how do you reason about the layer twos versus multi-layer ones and how does Tara fit into that? Yeah. So from a non-technical perspective, it just seems that the main distinction that people are driving between L2s and L1s is two things. Like number one, this idea that you would have better security in L2s because you're borrowing that security from another blockchain.

But I feel like that that differential is going to get squeezed out over time as bridges improve and things get more secure. So the mental model that I have is that the world is really just chains and bridges. And the reason why I think there should be multiple chains is because at some point, every chain is going to run into, you know, it has finite state. Right. So in that finite state, there's a limit to how much transactions that you can squeeze in. So you need to offload into different chains. Now the question is whether you offload that to an L2 or to other L1s. And the way that I'm thinking about it is that once bridges become more secure and, as I said, that security differential gets squeezed out, it's all just going to be a world of chains and bridges.

So in that case, I think the only difference would be like where do these different blockchains declare their allegiance to? So for example, as we're fragmenting state in that world, I think the only difference would be. be that these L2s are economically benefiting the token holders of an L1 to which there's swearing allegiance. It's kind of like a feudal system where, you know, there would be like a lord that declares allegiance to like a duke and this duke declares allegiance to a king. So it's kind of like a hierarchical file system where you don't necessarily borrow security, you're borrowed community from other blockchains.

So I think multiple of these things would emerge. I think some, you know, blockchains would brand themselves as L2s. I think some of them would largely associate themselves as being entirely sovereign. And, yeah, I think it's going to be like the feudal systems. It's competing kings, competing nights and, you know, things like that. And the question that I want to ask you is, what is your second favorite blockchain after Tara?

If Tara, God forbid, went down or was lost for whatever reason, what would be the chain that you would migrate to? We actually spend a decent amount of time thinking about that. So I would say the straight up honest answer that I would have to give is that there's multiple different candidates. We're big fans of Avalanche. We're also big fans of Solana. But, you know, like, for example, around the time that we started, the reason why we selected the Cosmos SDK was because we were super focused on payments. And there wasn't really a way for us to be able to get those payment margins down using a different chain, which is why we had to, you know, pick a chain where we could control the rules in a sovereign type of way. But now that's kind of different.

So, you know, things are up in dear. Guys, this has been a really fun panel. And I think, I hope listeners saw that there's a lot of common ground between these three projects, these three platforms, maybe other projects in crypto as well. And, you know, thank you guys for being willing to do this. It's been a lot of fun. Closing question for all three of you is the same. Crypto loves predictions. It's really fun to predict various things.

wondering what your highest conviction predictions for 2022 are. Do you have any high conviction, high conviction predictions? Maybe we'll start with you, Anatoly. And I think we're going to see the first application with like 10 million users in 22, like 10 million active users that are signing stuff, doing stuff. First decentralized applications going to bring. that barrier. Wow.

Big prediction. Emin, do you want to go next? What's your prediction for 2022? Highest conviction. That's a good question. So, you know, I'm a techie. I'm not much of a market person, but I suspect that this year is going to be far better

than most people in the space think it will be. I suspect that a lot of the people that we are seeing are very much the early adopters. And the ones that have, the ones that actually have the loudest voices on Twitter are the ones that have been through many, many crypto interests. And those all happen in a very different environment. So I suspect that this year is going to be a huge boom year because the technology has finally come of age. So those

things that we dreamed of for many years are now here. So that's my highest conviction prediction. In other news, I think, you know, easy predictions that I could always throw out. The bridge wars are going to intensify. That's going to be great for the users because you'll end up having an opportunity to sample a lot of these systems and see how they are how they operate firsthand. There will be very, very big hacks as there always have been. And so that's always going to be fun. And overall, I'm super bullish in this space. That's my simple basic prediction. And it's totally predicting millions of users. Emin saying that bear market, bear participants be gone. This is going to be a bullish year. Doe Kwan, do you think you can out bullish these two

panelists. Your predictions for 2020. Well, I mean, I don't know if I have a super bullish prediction, but there's a couple of opportunities I think are going to be interesting. And, you know, these market cycles are difficult to predict, but at the same time, some elements are predictable. So as I think, you know, in 2021, you know, like layer ones were super popular. And right now, there's a lot of competition that's happening at the LPT.

and then, you know, the layer below that, like L0, so like bridges and things like that. So what I think it's going to be interesting is if you look at like the interface of some of the stable swap protocols like Sabre on Solana, for instance, or Trader Joe's on Avalanche, there's actually multiple bridged assets for the same thing. And it leads to pretty terrible user fragmentation. Now, the problem here is that the bridges themselves can't create products that solve this fragmentation problem. So I think the next project that can, you know, very low-hanging for, you know, be very highly valued is sort of like a wrapper around all the bridged assets that issues canonical assets, regardless of which bridge was used to bring assets on board. And this is fairly easy to do because every single app that uses bridged assets wants to solve this problem.

And it sort of helps to collocate liquidity around canonical assets instead of having seven different versions of, the same thing. So yeah, I think that's going to be powerful. Maybe I'll build it. Do it. As this has been awesome, Emin Anatoly, Doquan, thank you for joining us today on bankless. It's been a lot of fun. Thank you for having us. It really was a lot of fun. Awesome. We will do this again sometime. Of course, you know, hand clap, applause, these panelists. They have been instrumental. What? That's one. That's one. That's one. button. It's a wrong button. He killed the vibe at the end.

Rug pull. All of you guys, all of your projects have been responsible for onboarding a lot of users in the space and distributing a lot of private keys. And that increases the decentralization of our world. And that's a good thing. So we applaud you. Congratulations. Rists and disclaimers for bankless listeners, of course.

ETH is risky. Avalanche, Tara, and Solana. They're also risky. All of crypto is risky. So is DFI. You could lose what you. put in. But this is the frontier. We're headed west. It's not for everyone, but we're glad you're with us on the bankless journey. Thanks a lot.