Deep Dive: The CAKE Framework & Building a One Click Experience | Hart Lambur & Stephane Gosselin

Transcript

we in the cake framework we added like you mentioned this additional layer that sits between the application and the solvers which we just call the permissioning layer um I think it was the observation that so far everyone has taken a sort of a view that a user goes to a chain and interacts with a chain and has like assets sitting on a chain um but I I sort of think a different perspective which is actually like chains have users and those users have state and that state exists onl multiple different execution environment but it's all controlled by generally the same key and so it's more that like a user account has multiple different chains hey everyone this episode is brought to you by say after several months of

effort say's V2 launches live whoop let's go and introduce the first high performance parallelized BM to the world stay up to date by following say it's say that's SEI Network or you can experience the speed firsthand at say. today thank you very much for being a partner to BCR say hey everyone this episode is brought to you by real a new permissionless L2 built on the arbitrum orbit stack by defi natives for def natives for tokenized real world assets it's very cool chain highly recommend that you go check it out and they just started their Rewards program so you can type in re. al/ rewards you can use the code in the show notes below all right thanks everyone home with the show all right everyone welcome back to another episode of bell curve before we jump in

quick disclaimer the views expressed by my co-host today are their personal views and they do not not represent the views of any organization with which the co-hosts are associated with nothing in the episode is construed or relied upon as Financial technical tax legal or other advice you know the deal now let's jump into the episode all right everyone welcome back to another episode of bell curve this is a special episode I'm joined by last season's co-host Hart lamber Hart good to have you back on the show man thanks Mike uh happy to be back and happy to be doing this live and in person yeah this is a live episode I think I've only recorded a couple live podcasts ever uh so that makes this special and today

we're also joined by Stefan of one bounds Stefan welcome man hello this is fun I'm very excited about this yeah we're coming at you live from Brussels right now uh ET yeah everyone is UN mugged um I trust which is good um I had a close call did you really yeah a couple nights ago just outside my hotel someone was like being very aggressive pulled a knife I had to like get running it was like really yeah it was kind of scary oh man did you yell at them in French uh no but he was he was yelling at me in French a lot interesting choice for a conference I did not realize Brussels was a uh was a bit of a safety hazard but political capital of Europe that's okay let's let's stay on topic we

stay on topic yeah we didn't mean to get political okay uh so this will be a really fun callback episode to the multichain season that Hart and I did together and Stefan we should have had you uh on the show here because you've been really pushing the envelope forward here with your first your cake framework and then one balance I think is um a really interesting project that sort of Builds on that but before we get into the weeds of of one balance can you just describe this framework that you have of of cake yeah of course um I'm I feel very grateful to be able to work on this problem again this was something that I had initially started working on back in 2019 and I had like built this framework to be able to do like chain abstraction across ethereum and all of its

nuts which like in retrospect was a very useless thing to do or not man or not or not yeah led to this planted the seeds yeah exactly um and so to be able to like reapo this after my my flash B journey and everything that I learned there about about me sort of allowed me to to bring a whole new perspective to it which is that actually um in any sort of cross chain interactions for users ibe like plays a really really important component to it um and so when we approach it we approach it from a a research perspective of trying to put together a framework that outlines all the different components that need to be um to be working in coordination to be able

to provide this sort of seamless cross chain ux experience and maybe for like listeners that like aren't exactly quite sure what like chain abstraction really means just imagine that you have a CI like experience so like working you know doing something on binance or coinbase but it's fully non custodial um that's really sort of the the holy grip um is that you sort of don't see that you're interacting with a chain you don't have to think about gas um and you don't have to think about bridging you just directly go and take the actions that that you want to take but you still have the great properties of of being non-custodial um so you just click buttons is the way I like to think about it I guess we always just click buttons no but seriously I want it to like my version of this is like you're just

clicking and the buttons aren't switch Network and like authorized thing they're not the buttons are just I'm clicking the button to do the action I want to do it's one click Experience One Click experience yeah oh that's a good tagline that is marketing one balance one click one balance one click wow this is great we need to talk more often um so yeah the cake framework was like this research like you know having the benefit of everyone who spent so much time and money and efforts building up so the components of of the solution it was clear to me that it made no sense to try to come in and like rebuild the entire thing from from zero so I I wanted to sort of see how all the pieces of the puzzle um came together the main Insight I think in the cake framework is

the idea that to provide uh sort of seamless cross chain experience to do chain abstraction we really need to introduce the solver layer um that's able to do routing or take operations on behalf of of users um and the question is how do you sort of convert the transaction supply chain where like solvers are mostly used as as Searchers and doing me towards something that provides a productive use case of um helping fulfill you know whatever desires that the or intents that the that the users have so it was U yeah the K framework came from that and uh it's been great to sort of have a unifying flag for everyone who's working on this problem to to come and share discussion and and and create common language around it so maybe because well I have a

bias here too from my own intent-based uh perspective with with AC cross but um the cake framework to go into the layers of the cake here like actually Stefan do you think of this as something that is intent Centric like or do you actually think of it as more generalized than that in your mind can you tell me what intens Centric means I mean the idea that a user uh declares what they want to do and we can make this not like make this more constrained I want to move from uh chain a asset X on chain a to said y on chain B and maybe do a thing mhm that's the thing that's the quote unquote intent Bridge Swap and call

Bridge Swap and call mhm um and I want to specify that in a in a place like my well you go into layers of the cake but kind of top of the cake um and that is how Bridge Swap and call Works to create this unified ethereum experience um I would say so yeah I think that's a good way to describe it like the mental model that I have around intents and how they differ from from regular transactions is a regular transaction defines the input whereas an intent defines the output and then when you like Define the output you need to create an entire infrastructure that's able to securely fulfill that and provide it to the users um and yeah I

definitely think that's what the the cake framework aims to provide yeah okay so then going into the layers of the cake here right um and maybe maybe I'll do the throwback to our season um cuz in our season we did talk about this uh to some extent but kind of from a three- layer cake framework uh and this is the way I've generally looked at the world um with a cross where you have like intent generation sort of the D the DAP or application that's generating the intent of what the user wants to do and again we're going to call this like Bridge Swap and call um I like that um I do too constraining Factor got two taglines out of this podcast

[Laughter] you're in work here one balance one click Bridge Swap and cl call Umar two soon um uh so second layer in my in this world was like the solver layer um Rel layers fillers solvers that are going to fill the user in this bridge swap or call um and fill the user with their own Capital uh importantly um and able to do that extremely quickly which is something we're going to get into um and then the bottom layer is the settlement layer which actually the way I look at it is I think of it as like escrow plus intent fulfillment verification so it's escrowing the user assets and only

releasing them to the solver after we verify that the intent was fulfilled do you agree with that and then why don't we add in the fourth layer of the cake that uh that I think you guys have been focused on I definitely agree with it um I think that's the correct way to think about it we when in the cake framework we added like you mentioned this additional layer that sits between the application and the solvers which we just call the permissioning layer um I think it was the observation that so far everyone has taken a sort of a view that a user goes to a chain and interacts with the chain and has like assets sitting on a chain um but I I sort of think a different perspective which is actually like chains have users and those users have state and that state

exists on like multiple different execution environment but it's all controlled by generally the same key and so it's more that like a user account has multiple different chains um and what you're trying to do when you're introducing a solver layer is you're saying this solver can take some actions on subsets of my state so you're really issuing a permission to the solver to do something with the validity condition if the solver fulfills this requirement they get y asset um and uh and just the observation that all of this ends up being permissions over user states that L us down the track of sort of adding this permissioning layer and seeing like oh wow there's all kinds of complex

permissions that you can do so um the like very um uh the very like coar grain permissions that um that we've had so far which are like infinite approvals um for erc20 tokens are very um are very restricted in what you can do relative to something that can like literally run an entire like Ro base Access Control policy with like full simulations or call traces and whatnot the other component that the permissioning layer adds is uh protection against equivocation Um this can get a little bit technical but um for a solver to bring a state transition requests on

chain on behalf of the user it needs to know that the user isn't is going to have those assets still by the time that um the solver tries to get paid out and um typically the way that we that that this is done is that the user first interact with the settlement layer before passing a message to the solver um but you can offer those guarantees directly at the permissioning layer such that you don't have that in the in the critical path of the of the execution so I think it'd be then fair to say that this permissioning layer and what you just described and we can try to build some more analogies for this too um but this permission later what you just described kind of led directly to this product one balance um yeah exactly and I mean the name is great

right so one balance and the concept here in terms of what you're saying where uh a user effectively wants like one key uh I'll I'll try my own analogic here and we'll go let you go deeper in this but one one key to control State on different chains um and hence it's uh sort of the substraction that one balance becom that Gateway give or take yeah um it it makes all the different rollups act as if they were just one chain um and so the user just has eth and then they can use the eth to do anything anywhere they can use it to do stuff on salana they can use it to do stuff on

bitcoin l2s they can do stuff on any um any roll up um and the interesting part is not only do they not have to like think about the bridging but they also much like you know in a cross they get to execute at the speed of the destination chain so they no longer need to wait for like an ethereum transaction to go through they're still holding their assets on ethereum but they can just transact at the speed of salana yeah and the the constraint here well maybe they were getting too early but we have to get you have to get assets into one balance yeah right um and once you're I don't know you keep going like tell so one balance gives us this sort of well you want let's introduce the term

credible commitment machine because uh I I like I like the term me too commitment machine and we're not going to call it a CMM we'll saym CCM fine this is all just like uh branding training for me is but yeah from the best so this is good just describe it so like what uh you because you talk about credible commitments which frankly is like such a cool concept generally that blockchains give you um that not a lot of even like trafi systems your credible commitment is enforced by like legal recourse which is [ __ ] and doesn't isn't that credible so yeah what is this concept

how does it apply to one balance and what's it give you yeah so the sort of catch line that one balance has been going with is that we bring credible accounts to web3 um to do this we sort of are implementing the credible stack which is a framework that's based off of the C cake framework but specifically oriented towards these sort of cross chain experiences that um that I was referring to um so credible commitment machines are things that like have been explored for a long time um I think a lot of the theory around it emerged in like the 80s and like 90s and the idea was how do you get enforcement of contracts without relying on like the state to enforce it um if and you mean

the state like the government state sorry that's also an overloaded word but yeah without like uh like a nation state like the US government and specifically the like judicial branch of the US government to like be able to enforce it um cuz maybe you know maybe this is like a little abstract but like that is also a consensus finding mechanism right like the fact that you have like a jury that like eval a bunch of the original consensus finding mechanism exactly um and so um it's a it's a very nice sort of credible commitment machine that you can say like hey if we both sign this contract then I'm like bound to this even if in the future I may want to defect because

there's this external thing that's going to come in and sort of put me in jail if I don't you know follow it or you know um force me to pay with a threat of violence um and a lot of the um a lot of the research or you know theory of Cipher Punk or whatever it is in the in the in the ' 80s 90s was around is there a way to um to enforce these types of commitments without the threat of violence um and the entire sort of um theory of smart contracts came from this and um and was in many ways the Inception of why vitalic ended up starting um starting ethereum was to be able to create this this credible commitment machine so all blockchains really are credible commitment machines

the the observation that I have with this is you don't need to have 5 100,000 validators attest to every single commitment that you make um in many ways that's overpaying for um for what you actually need if you're just transaction between two people um and uh and so these these blockchains that are designed with global consensus in mind sort of only provide a single way to enforce these credible commitments um but for example in the case of chain obstruction when you're really just trying to create a commitment between a user and solver you don't need to have the entire um network of ethereum ATT test to uh to a

commitment so let's let's make a concrete example here because I think it's super cool and I want to make sure um Everybody GRS this so the naive way that you have a user and a solver interact here would be uh user says okay here's my intent and they lock their assets initially with a transaction um they lock their assets into effectively escrow account um and the solver will only go and compete their fill after uh they I'll use the word think those assets are locked in that escrow account um and uh where you and I have a lot of conversations right

is this is how AC cross works today um so the deposit transaction locks user assets in that scre account and then if solvers trust the pre-confirmation for example coming from uh the arbitr or optimism sequencer they'll go and fill them on the destination chain basically immediately um waiting only for the uh the pre-confirmation to come back MH uh the flip side the other way of doing this the one balance way of doing this is the user and the solver enter into a different type of credible commitment kind of ahead of time where the user assets get uh tell me if you agreee with this language but they effectively the

user assets get escrowed into this credible commitment machine that says the user cannot immediately withdraw them um and but the solver knows that the assets live there and the solver can spend them um to fill user transactions without waiting for uh like a per transfer deposit yeah that's I mean there's a few things maybe in there that would touch on yeah um the core point that you're making which is so far when we've thought of bridging it's like okay you want to bridge something you escort your assets on chain a you wait for finality then there's a message that goes to chain B and then you like have

your assets on chainb that's kind of like been a transaction by transaction basis flow yeah let's let's name that because this is a core thing that like you and I are very aligned on that that flow sort of sucks it's like poor ux so I'm going to call that like message-based bridging where you like have finality On the Origin chain and then you send a message um to the destination chain uh but yeah keep going yeah and then you can speed it up by saying like Okay maybe you don't need finality you just need a belief that there's a reasonable likelihood that's going to settle and then you have the the fast Bridges um but this all focuses on this like transaction by transaction basis On the Origin chain of of creating this lock um the one balance inside is

just like actually you can like lock all of your Assets in your account at once and then at any time you can uh issue messages to solvers to do transaction on destination chains without needing to issue another transaction On the Origin chain um so it's like a onetime upfront migration of the account to enable it to do anything on any chain without needing to do a transaction by transaction um um signature um and then the I think the term escrow is is perhaps overloaded as well um really what you're putting your assets into is a time lock um so you're saying that these assets are sitting in a contract for which I still have full ownership over no one can take any

action against this contract without me requesting it but if I want to withdraw these assets um I need to trigger a time lock to um that sort of delays so this is somewhat similar to like the idea that you're depositing inside of a of a rollup right and then you get your assets minted in the rollup and then you can withdraw but you have to sort of like send the message to like the L1 contract wait for the finality proof uh the fraud proof period and then you have your assets so rollups are also time locks uh rather than um escros hey everyone this episode is brought to you by SE SE believes that the evm is here to stay but they also believe that the evm and its current iteration lacks performance and scalability for developers say's recent V2 upgrade has

introduced the first high performance parallelized evm which coupled Lightning Fast block times and finale of just 390 milliseconds that is sub 400 millisecond block time very very cool this V2 upgrade unlocks a new design space with 100x the throughput even the fastest evm L2 so if you're a developer who spent most of your time building in the evm you can do you can now build on say faster block times much quicker finality you get a lot of the uh benefits of the environment that you're used to so if you're a developer definitely go check them out and thank you very much say for sponsoring this episode hey everyone this episode is brought to you by real re. they're a new permissionless L2 built on arbitrum orbit for tokenized rwas so basically they've got this

portfolio of real world assets that actually exist out there that generate yields they import them on chain and find ways to reward their users very creatively uh so one of the cool things about real is that it's the first L2 where 100% of profits from transaction fees and fees from protocols deployed onto the chain acre back to the L2 governance token and currently I mentioned this at the top of the episode but they have a reward prayer program going on for early users of the chain where 10% of the rdwa tokens are being distributed which is very cool so you as a user can go over there and provide concentrated liquidity trade borrow and leverage tokenized rwas including T bills real estate and tokenized basis trades so again head over to re. rewards and you can use the code

found in the show notes here tell them that I sent you thanks real for making this possible I'm curious about the the economics of the solver layer moving one step below here because we're we're all operating on the Assumption here or first of all we don't really know which apps are going to gain a lot of traction like I think which has a big um is going to have a large impact on what these economics look like but we're all just kind of assuming that solvers will come in and execute all of these things on behalf of users and I think broadly that's probably true but it strikes me also that depending on what action we're asking solvers to take the economics probably look pretty different uh can you just say a little bit about like I mean both of you honestly like what you

think the S this like the ultimate um this solver layer is going to look like and then what do the economics look like for these different actors I'm I'm very curious to hear hard's perspective obviously he has like a system in production that deals with solvers my perspective is mostly from like showing up at events and gossiping with them so that's a good perspective yeah and you know we were at ECC right now in Brussels right and there was this this event Searcher WTF and I moderated this panel and like my main question is like how are any of you making money and they were kind of all looking at each other and they like well it's mostly token subsidies to be honest and so there's there's like question marks around this I think throughout throughout the

industry I sort of have opinions on how this this Market is likely to evolve but I would also say it's like we're still at the stage of these solvers being like individual dudes sitting in like their basement rather than being like sophisticated firms and so um this will this will greatly evolve over the course of of of time and as additional order flow comes into the into the pipeline yeah well okay so I'll keep this short because Stephan this about you right but since the question is on solver economics we we get across sometimes gets unfairly critiqued as saying oh wait you guys just have like one centralized solver you guys run or the other critique we get is oh it's just winter mute running

a solver for you and both those things are entirely untrue um it's we actually have it really is just economics at work um solvers in the across system make a small fee uh and it's really quite small because the bridge is pretty cheap but the fee more than compensates their costs and it's permissionless entry into this market and we now have about 15 to 20 active solvers um we don't really know who they are they are mostly grass like Stefan like you said they're mostly oneman shops like guys in their basement doing this um know them by Discord handles type thing um and uh they are generally like

interested people looking to make a little bit of money building some infrastructure which is really freaking cool in my opinion um yeah yeah I I didn't mean my comment to say that like being a solver is a terrible business model I think they they do they do provide real value yeah it's and I think it's unlikely that we will see a firm emerge and dominate in the short to medium term the reason why is it's actually like a really big pain in the ass to integrate like all the routes on like a new chain um and so there's a lot of room for specialization and then if you reuse a system like across the

solver no longer needs to care about both legs like they don't need to care about the origin leg and the destination leg um they can specialize on like a specific chain and just providing um the execution for that chain which helps minimize their their risk um and so um the there is room for specialization in this market and there is definitely room for being compensated for this because um it's not it's a lot of work that like most um sources don't want to implement themselves um and so exactly how the market shakes out it's like sort of unclear but the theory at least is as order flow increases inside of these

systems they're able to generate you know better returns so let me let me this is the um framework that I have in my head and I'd be curious uh if you guys see this evolving similarly or or dissimilarly but the the framework that I found myself thinking of when you were just talking is almost the way the Searcher Market evolved where in the beginning it was mostly dudes in their basement uh for the most part and then it evolved um and kind of segmented into my understanding of the Searcher market today is especially there's like longtail and short tail me most me is short tail um which is sex toex Arbitrage and there's like a couple big vertically integrated Searcher Builder potentially relays um that take most of that but there still is the opportunity

for longtail sort of weird uh B uh you know these that that still are Searchers in their basement that are able to execute on some amount of um and withdraw some amount of profit from the system so do you think that the that the uh solver Market is going to EV evolve relatively similarly because I could imagine like it's going to be a couple big applications in the beginning that are getting most of the volume and there will probably be some routes um like maybe 80% of the volume follows very similar routes and it makes sense to me that like a winter mute or something would just dominate those routes because they could just offer it cheaper than their competitors but then there'll be some weird chains where it doesn't really make sense for the winter mut to the world to integrate and there'll still be opportunity for like a smaller

more fragmented Market does that that analog kind of hit with you or you think it's going to evolve differently there's so many things to comment on here yeah um maybe like a one thing that I I would say to this is what I think a lot of the Technologies in the cake framework or the credible stock are looking to offer and certainly it's sort of the core thing that one balance um unlocks is the ability for solvers to minimize their risk so um solvers kind of have have like a few different jobs that they do they do like liquidity aggregation they like provide reliable execution um but one of the big Parts is that they have to manage risks this is like both like

FX risk over like holding a currency and getting rewarded in a different currency at a different point uh but also sort of reorg risk from like operating on a different place um and then another part is equivocation risk that like a an account is not going to pay out but it like says that it's going to pay out so I think the role of people that are building infrastructure in the Ki stack like myself and and Hart is um to help uh solvers manage their risk and minimize the amount of risk that they're exposed to um and that makes the market more efficient it makes it possible for solo guys to operate for longer periods of times relative to these um you know larger firms that maybe have bigger

balance sheets are able to absorb more volatility um can have like draw Downs for like a longer period of time um and you know are sort of more sophisticated at predictive modeling um so risk minimization for solvers I think is like an important component of of the puzzle here um but yeah there's a ton of other factors that go into how the the market Dynamic will will evolve I guess what I'd add um I do think Mike at a high level I agree with that out that framework here so the other critique around solver stuff is that it's going to evolve to be like hft trafi yeah um and the core differentiator here is permissionless entry into this system

and like uh you cannot start an hft firm today it doesn't make sense because there's basically like huge barriers to entry both Regulatory and like capital and all this other kind of stuff here too you cannot start a 1 in solver today maybe not but you can start a solver that's filling uh like some new chain type thing in in our space and so this is just kind of going back to like your analogy of like in me searching today and stepan you are far more in informed about this from like flash bot stuff but I do think of like sexx Arbitrage is dominated by a future firms and then all these other forms of like me capture are much more longtail

and like more diversity there it's ALS well let me even like poke at the idea of because everyone says that like oh dystopia you know if HF if the hft dynamic and tradire merged and it's maybe I don't know this would be an unpopular thing to say but is that even that bad if that were to emerge like Finance is complicated moving assets around the world is a complicated very specialized task I it's I know that ideologically it sounds great to say hey this could be dudes in their basement you know moving your money around and it's not really clear to me why users would ultimately care that much or or want that to be the end state of the market um and we had uh Dan Robinson when we did the uh The Deck season

talked about this a lot where I think with something like Unis swap people really love the idea of individuals being able to passively Market make and be LPS but you know Market making is a really difficult task right you're managing risk uh you're doing a whole bunch of different very specialized tasks and it's not I don't know um I I get that we don't really want these systems to be co-opted by you know specialized actors and rely on like regulation and things like that to to create their remes but it's also I don't know what do you guys think about that it's not really super clear to me why we should be optimizing around just allowing a like basically retail people to do this stuff I'd be careful to draw false dichotomies here I think both will coexist different types of flow and

different types of demand will be filled by different types of providers I think there's definitely room for like sophisticated market makers but if you look at the current you like one in or us swap X flow like it's all the majors that get filled by them and then solvers are actually generally better at filling um those that don't have liquidity on CFI and only have liquidity on um on defi so there's all these questions of like where does the price Discovery happen um and that has a big impact on the type of um of uh of solvers um that that are better for that for those kinds of flow um it may be that the complexity of the intents um become an additional Vector of specialization here where you'll have like certain types of solver

specializing on certain types of complex orders um because whatever their simulation graphing libraries are like optimized maybe they've built a freaking Asic that like simulates this like path better like there's all kinds of reasons where this this this specialization could could occur um for sure um having access to Capital and like proprietary capital is like a huge Edge so like if you are a market maker like winter to cats all these like token Market making deals where they just have like a bunch of tokens on their balance sheet that they don't have uh directional risk on like you have an advantage there for

quoting anything that like relies on those tokens so I think that what we'll see actually is perhaps like an emerging category of solvers that approach token issuers and say actually I will do Market making for you on all the D5 platforms and so instead of like being Market making on CI being sort of the place where you like get these Market maker deals people would be like oh you want your token to be like accessible across all these different chains and make it easy for like users to go from all these different chains then we'll we'll provide that the only thing I want to add um I think we ultimately care about one thing and one thing only which is what's long run best for the

user and I say long run here because we could imagine sort of an HF T type framework that is really good really really cheap for the user in the short term but creates like an oligopoly that ends up extracting rent um and that's just again I'm pretty confident that because of the permissionless entry in our system that really isn't going to happen but this is the only thing that I'm concerned with is I don't care if they're professionalized or guys on the basement doing the solving I care about being a a market with free entry that uh gives the user the best long run experience that we can build part of um of our cake framework post was looking at what are the

trade-offs in designing these orderflow systems so I think the place where permissioning comes into the picture is on the private order Flow side um so none of the RFQ mechanisms today are permissionless they all run a white list of solvers that have access to the flow um and the reason for that is because there's kind of like fundamental trade-offs in designing these orderflow systems between speed reliability and price optimality and uh generally like a tool and the toolkit of the mechanism designers for these things is to say I will have some level of reputation scoring for all these uh these solvers and if they dip below something I will

just kick them off my white list and so you can enforce good behavior through just like a white list and so this starts to look quite similar to the way that like permissioning Works in in trafi um you end up signing legal contracts with the solvers that say that they have certain quality of fills or whatever else um so designing systems that like do properly maintain the permissionless on the um on the order flow um uh side I think is still an unsolved problem for our space yeah also a really fun problem and one that I think like there's stuff we're working on and stuff Stephan would know we're going to talk on to but I think there's like very very

fun ways to solve that um and I think it's important because I think the permissioning is bad um that's the thing that I think is not in the long run best interest and like across as permissions today and then solvers we're like the only ones that do that um but that's also because we're not doing swapping between assets we're just doing the price problem we don't have the price problem um and much longer very interesting conversation around that uh but can you say more about what is the pricing problem exactly so basically um if you are swap a cross doesn't swap between say eth and usdc when you're bridging right now it just does same asset or like like asset bridging we actually support usdc native to bridge

usdc for example um and when you swap between different assets you create a lot of me um and you need a way to auction off that order uh to achieve some sort of price optimality or not create like a huge Mev race type thing um is the the tldr of the problem so interesting yeah yeah it's an I mean even in uh like even in trafi this is becoming an issue where the the way that like a lot of orderflow now is private and gets internalized by like Citadel Securities uh and the way that they Define um the way that they measure and trafy like optimal price or like good execution looks like is they

they match it up to what the user would have got on a on an exchange but now like significantly more order flow is actually moving through these private Market making Solutions where that's where price discoveries actually happening um and so then Market M there's like I'm starting to hear this question now come up in crypto as of like how much control do big uh Builders or internalizers have over actually are they taking a price or are they making the price themselves um and it's literally a problem that's happening in trafi right now that's unsolved and I would guess that you know a lot all this stuff is very complicated but um I think that's an interesting thing to pay attention to also sometimes we think that just because we're in crypto we've like solved all the

problems but at least my experience is some we kind of just speedrun recreating the same problems yeah um so yeah price setting um I think for Block space generally um is still unclear in the equilibrium who has a priz setting power um this has been something that I've been having more and more conversations with people about and I think the like ultimate criticism of MEF boost and block building and PBS um my belief is so long as you have an entity with asymmetric access to information they will have asymmetric ability to like set prices um and so you need to design systems that don't create those entities

otherwise you always end up in the same place I don't want to Veer too far off course but then what are your thoughts on PBS as a design philosophy in general I think PBS should get a Nobel Peace price okay so very supportive then I can tell you why so I think that um me is like something that just emerges whenever you have groups of people that create a share sh reality with each other and we call that um consensus um but that shared reality cannot include the complexity of the individual desires and so there's some things that are left out whenever you

create a shared reality um there's someone that like wants to have something that they cannot get because everyone has to come to an agreement on something this exists in like any sort of government it exists in training an llm IT exists in producing a block for a block um there's some people that have a higher willingness to pay over the output of that consensus finding process and what PBS is it's like an incredibly efficient way for the people to have that willingness to pay to be able to express it with dollars as opposed to with violence or any other like means um or latency or latency right which is just

another way to express it so but you know in like typical like governance you know um throughout the ages um you literally had people get assassinate you know and you had like coups and all these things that are like violent ways to like change consensus um but uh but this is just like a purely economic way to do it which is great um it does have side effects though right and so for me at least my criticism is not of PBS it's of the idea that we trying to put so so many things on global consensus that really shouldn't be on there the more things that you get Global consensus to do the more jobs that you give it the

higher the willingness to pay of certain individuals to influence it and that's just like a fundamental thing that will always occur um you know this is the philosophical underpinning behind one balance in many ways is to say like not everything needs Global consensus like I want people to be able to come to agreement on things and have a credible way to enforce those agreements that doesn't require the entire world to see it um and if we achieve that I think we can like significantly relieve the pressure that we put on um on me at the at the base layer essentially I there's actually I'm uh there's a new well like they're not

really public yet but there's a new uh L1 that isn't really an L1 which is designed with a lot of the principles that You' just described um um maybe soon TM for a belr episode but uh can you help help because I'm I'm with you on that in that uh there's an an analog here to governments in general this is like Empire buil it's like bundling and unbundling of civilization it's like lots of small civilizations and they become a big civilization and then you know there's a it becomes the group of people becomes so large that you can't find agreement um much like what's happening in the United States at at the current moment where it's like 50% divided um and so consensus might be failing in even the us right now but what's the ultimate alternative here so

how does this like translate what more local consensus would look like in a blockchain context because even in the even in something like one balance right there we still need to have a a global view of State across all these different you know subsections of state so in in a world where we don't have Global consensus on the Bas layer what does that look like increasingly the way that I think about things and I I don't have all the answers here this is like a field of exploration but increasingly the way I think about things is individuals associate with other groups of individuals you can call those Association sets and like ethereum is a like Association set of like everyone that holds eth and everyone who runs like an eth node and there's some things

that like I as an individual want to go to that group of people for services of some kind um but I should have the like most seamless way possible to be able to go do what I want to do with with different subgroups um and the work that we're doing with one balance is sort of enabling accounts to do this directly um so by being able to issue these these locks and basically solve the ability to go from one chain to another seamlessly bringing the group to the invidual it makes it much much more seamless to to interface with with different groups yeah okay so going back to one balance actually I want to do two things first of all talk about like where one balance is at today um which

want you to tell us like what users can do today with one balance and kind of the road map there and then maybe we can go into like a bit more of uh ideation around like what we think the L2 ethereum network is going to look like and where where um where chain abstraction what it ends up looking like and where it's going to be useful and and really shine and where it might be like important um but anyways what's one balance how do you how do users do use one balance today and I would add on to that as well like what is the uux going to look like here U because I have a I have a feel like I've got a good understanding of the value proposition

of something like one balance but right now like the like the you people kind of sign into their metamask if they're on ethereum right and then they have to use a cross to get up to do something on arbitrum or whatever but what is this in a in a one balance world just like what is the user interface going to look like okay I'll try to tackle all of this yeah yeah so break it up first of all like what can users do today so we've launched registrations for um for one balance accounts this is this allows people to sign up connect their like existing wallets and then get on the white list um they can also start building their accounts score there's going to be like an entire questing thing that allows for um for people to sort of accelerate how they get access

to these um to these accounts and where do you go to do that today one balance. one balance. okay cool there there's your there's your shell all right appreciate it um linkoln show notes um and then for for anyone that uh that's looking to build on top of these accounts so like applications and wallets that want to benefit from from what the capabilities that it provides um yeah reach out to us again one balance. and um and we can talk about sort of adding these credible accounts into into these applications to like to touch on what's the ux um what this allows applications and wallets to do is to completely remove the concept of a bridge a chain or gas

from the user Journey so you just like never need to expose the users to these things anymore all they have is assets that they hold and then applications that they want to interface with um and that's really really kind of like the goal of chain abstraction right like it's you don't need to think about switching networks you don't need to think about having enough fee to pay for the gas you don't need to think about um which bridge is going to be able to like be the fastest whatever you rely that the application is able to solve all that for you um without exposing it to to the users um so that's that's kind of the core ux but I do want to push on the because I also I mean Stefan I know

there's a road map here too but initially the still the way you're you get your assets into one balance do you imagine it being like you're moving assets into your one balance wallet on ethereum on arbitrum on Bas on all of them at the same time kind of when you kind of go live here or what do you think what do you hypothesize that's going to like look like we're doing a lot of work on on eips to like make this seamless today it means like depositing assets inside of your account contract and those assets can be deposited from any chain um so you don't need to bridge to do the deposit um but you do need to sort of

set up this new account and um and and transfer assets into it um I I think initially people will start to think about accounts as like different things so like this will be their like cross chain spending account um and they will just like deposit a subsets of their assets into that and then use it for all the cross chain stuff um eventually we want to work um we're pushing for 77 2 to to be adopted and and be deployed on ethereum which allows for migrating EAS into um into smart accounts and so you can have sort of a oneclick one transaction now my account is a credible account and I can use it anywhere um but yeah that will sort of come with time

that's scheduled to be released sometime in in next year um with the with the Petra hard Fork um yeah yeah so kind of network structure thing here too because I I do and maybe you you don't want to like wed yourself yet on this but it just in terms of where users would hold their Assets in this world do you imagine them holding their assets I mean main net or really I would think that there needs to be like the kind of main net equivalent on an L2 so like optimism base arbitrum would probably be the three candidates

or do you think that in the world you're imagining these assets would actually be held on like a different chain maybe like I don't know like I don't think you guys are going to do a one balance chain but like conceptually where do you think this this sort of venmo balance cross-chain spending account balance will live it it's funny like I think there's always been kind of like this confusion with like ERC 20s where like the question is like does the erc20 live in your wallet or does it live on on the erc20 contract and the answer is it always lives on the erc20 contract like that's where the source of Truth is and everything on top of that is just access control like you're creating like a

chain of Delegation over the balance that says that okay now the balance is deposited into the L2 Bridge which like w like meant a wrap representation into the L2 which is then deposited into a smart contract which then has like a multi- access control on top of it and so like when you ask in that construction where do the assets live they still live on the erc20 contract on the base chain it's just that the chain of permissions is like all the way up into the L2 in with like a complex signature scheme so um for our like purposes specifically it doesn't matter where the assets are issued they can be deposited inside of the account and then the account itself the permissions are enforced with keys that the user holds

um and then um this credible commitment machine that uh forces that um any request that the user makes is considered a valid request for the tokens that are that are deposited um so practically for us um to start with um we've sort of published a framework that says all the different ways to implement credible commitment machines the simplest one to start with is a smart contract based um uh framework so we'll work with this my contract based framework to start and then progressively improve the guarantees that it provides um uh as uh as a technology matures ston does it matter does the does the path that users move their assets to one balance matter like

for instance if you start just as an erc20 uh but then you move and add another permission which is like the multisig on um optimism for instance and then you go to one balance is there some sort of security um like issue like having bridge to a multisig first or does it matter at all technically it's a different token okay right which makes it difficult and this is the whole like asset representation problem from the one balance perspective it doesn't really matter um so long as the solver is willing to be compensated in this token and the solver believes that that is like a valid representation then for our purposes it is right so there will be sort of like a market equilibrium

here where like some solvers will like believe that some tokens are too risky and they like won't be willing to support it which means that like users won't you know should not be able to go into them the way that you prevent users from going into those assets is at the application layer you like restrict the tokens that you like display for the users interesting so to go to like uh again pontificating on uh like L2 Market structure for a second um in the vision of chain abstraction that I think we all share where users just like let's let's simplify didn't say that user assets are just in one place like on their home chain which again

like you said it doesn't have to be conceived that way but just for Simplicity sake say it is and I want to go and use other chains I can use those other chains seamlessly when spending out of my like um my my venmo account like concept um this seems very cool very useful um but something that you and I both thought a lot about there is like some overhead associated with the cost of being able to do this um so yeah Stefan like we were talking about thisit before the show but when do you think this degree of chain abstraction um is is worth it and when may may it not be worth it and like do you think that this is going to be like

uh like every use case should follow this pattern or just how do you what are your thoughts on how this uh this L2 structure evolves so the ultimate place where I would like the ecosystem to be which is every single account um and this is where one balance accounts will will mer will um lean towards but every account is a rollup so every user has their own little rollup that they own that's their account and it sequences locks over the assets that it has solvers listen to these locks and they go do stuff on destination chains what I expect to happen is that let's say that you have another rollup that's like a gaming

rollup that the user is going to like interface with regularly they will just deposit some assets into that rollup ones and then start doing interactions directly with that rollup perhaps using the same keys that they use to be able to access one balance but it could be some other keys right they may just have like uh a you know regular eoa or a smart account there that has like a pass key login so they will use their main sort of cross chain account their main like rollup place where like they own all the assets to do cross chain stuff and then they will deposit into a destination rollup that's likely to be an application specific rollup um with an amount that they expect to be using there so like concretely we're like okay

if if it's a gaming rollup and the thing I'm trying to do is move my player piece from one position to another position and there's nothing I'm like buying or selling in that interaction I'm doing this a thousand times um it might make sense for me to move over some gas money to be able to pay for that and do it deeply and quickly right I think realistically like for the gaming rollups the games themselves will just like sponsor the gas I think that's accurate and they'll like charge like a onetime fee or like a subscription fee to their users so they'll abstract away all of that um I think of it more as like Farmville coins or whatever right like you know you're not going to have FarmVille coins in your one balance account but you'll have like usdc then

you'll buy Farmville coins with that usdc and implicit to that is this like cross rollup transaction from your rollup account to the Farmville rollup where like now you have all those Farmville coins sitting on that rollup Yep this this fits with my view uh too on that use case so it's like okay there's something I want to buy I can buy it seamlessly from my kind of home chain spending account and then it fits in the idea uh from if we take this in like nft land for a second too if there's a chain like Zora uh where I'm minting nfts or buying nfts or something like that um I could interact with Zora seamlessly in this chain abstraction

World um by spending from my home chain and having that interaction just paid for and happen and execute on the destination chain um a lot of this comes down to like one-time interactions versus repeat interactions for Commerce I think a lot of Commerce is like onetime interactions so it'll be like I have one my one balance account I'm connecting it to the Zora app I'm purchasing an nft and then like now the nft is in my one balance account and then behind the scenes you have all this like cross rollup transaction taking place but the user isn't exposed to this I've got a question about what let's just uh let's assume probably correctly that one balance is going to be phenomenally successful right and we're

having this podcast in a couple of years and everyone just keeps most of their assets on this cross chain wallet that we're describing how does that impact L like general purpose L2 business business models because it seems like when you look at something like the big l2s today what they're trying to do is make interop a huge part of the way that they're eventually going to monetize um and been saying this for a while but I just don't see much incentive for the L2 Frameworks to make interoperability work in between the big Frameworks because that's churn that's like user churn from their perspective so in this in this world of one balance interop actually does work very well in between different L2 framework so how does that impact their ultimate business model do you

think um and yeah I mean what's the reception been from like the optimism and some arbitr of the world I think that's a fabulous question and it's like super ahead of its time I do think that they're actively thinking about this and realizing this and we're seeing this shift towards the op stock the ARB stack the ZK stack like all these uh teams are seeing that actually supporting application specific rollups is probably more qu to to their business than the generalized ruup um so I I do see the market shifting in that direction um the other thing that I want to sort of um highlight we co-hosted sequencing day a few days ago with uh with um espresso

and it was all talking about the different types of sequencing and how do you do this interoperability at the at the sort of sequencing layer Bas roll up pre-confirmation all these things um there's three things that matter when you're talking about interoperability um one of them is interoperability across an asynchronous environment one of them is atomic inclusion transaction a and transaction B are only included on chain if one or the other is regardless of if they revert or not the second one is atomic execution so transaction a and transaction B are only included if both of them execute successfully and then the third one is like Atomic composability which is transaction a is able to call transaction B do something

and pass back compute into transaction a before transaction a finish completing one balance only helps with the first two this is like a really important thing to highlight whereas a lot of this like interrupt conversation of like Universal synchronous composability tries to solve the third one which is atomic composability um part of the question of like how big will generalized rollup be is how important is atomic composability because within a generalized rollup environment you can do this thing of calling one from one smart contract to another smart contract and back um but across two different rollups it's much more difficult now they're trying to develop ways to do this at like the

proof aggregation layer I like issuing locks on two different sequencers um one balance doesn't touch these things it really focuses on primarily Atomic execution and specifically incentivizing Atomic execution through the use of resource locks so the solver is the one that's providing it the one balance account just incentivizes the solvers to do it I think Stephan if I were to push on that because this is like again what we're doing on the across stuff too I would say that the intent framework that one balance shares emulates Atomic execution correct um yeah and maybe to push on that just in case listeners are wondering what the hell we're talking

about here we're saying what the solver does is the solver is going to use their own money to execute that code in a way that looks like it just was atomically executed but it wasn't actually executed by the user it was executed by the solver um which is how a cross fills intense today and what exactly one balance wants to do as well um so the solver looks like it's atomically executing something but it's doing it on behalf of the user and then they get paid back later right um and that to me is the power of this like intent like architecture because it lets us do those things by having solver front money um yeah I I I totally agree like intent Centric Frameworks incentivize atomicity

as opposed to enforcing it yeah and it creates the opportunity for the solvers to go and provide it it doesn't mean that it like replaces a need for like proper Atomic atomicity at the sequencing lb level it's just that that becomes an optimization yeah which actually to put it back to Mike's question because this is something that I've been actually deeply involved in on um so restating your question there's a world we're potentially barreling towards where uh optimism super chain has native interop between super chains um and I'm going to put in like users can't listeners can't see this but air quotes what Native interop looks like but native interop on optimism super chain native interop on arbitrum orbit native interop on polygon Egger native

interrup on um ZK syns version of EG like elastic chain and you've got these sort of like siloed worlds that are trying to do interapy things on their stack um but aren't really talking to each other is it interrup at which level is that is that composability or is that execution so it probably depends on which stack in their version of interop so like even your thing like Atomic inclusion Atomic execution none of it is composability in my uh in my understanding but um they're doing different things to allow chains to talk to each other better right um but they're all doing it a different way and then from an ethereum Centric

perspective this kind of sucks yeah because like if you think falic he's like okay wait I like the diversity in my ecosystem but I still want a unified ethereum and now I no longer have this like unified ethereum anyways the thing that yeah Stefan is that true that why is that not a unified ethereum well from a user and from a developer perspective from both of them it kind of sucks so the user's like okay wait I can move my assets between super chain stuffs really easily I can move my assets between orbit really easily um this is a world without like what we're doing without one balance like what a cross is try we're very aligned on this so saying pretend we don't exist um uh I have like I can move my assets within each each of

those ecosystems but it's really hard to move between them that kind of sucks from a developer perspective if you're developing uh an application and you want to attract users from all of these ecosystems do you have to like interface with like four different bridging architectures let's say uh to bring assets over I I don't know could be messy I see I I understand the perspective I disagree that it's a problem that needs to be solved I actually think it's great that these ecosystem are developing native interop because I see all of that as just being better guarantees for solvers that's exactly my view too so I look at it interesting yeah so this is all great

the solution is um you create a standard uh that is a standard for intense and like stepan we got to talk about we got to make sure you build one balance on top of ERC 76 83 um but like generally speaking a standard for crossan intense very lightweight no vendor lockin approach um that uses native Native interop to make it better and faster and cheaper for solvers um but provides a unified experience across all these ecosystems um that was a big unlock for me that's super interesting when we talked about standards and even used the example of uh standards in terms of the wheels in in cars and in the US it it actually isn't prescriptive over wheel

sides it's prescriptive over whatever the The Hub is in the center there yeah um that's really interest so the right layer basically to be to prescribe standards at the intent layer yeah so okay what is ERC 7 683 that's um a standard for cross chain intents that a cross wrote with Unis Swap and a lot of impact input from the cake framework folks from Stefan and all that um but what what the effect is is like let's define a way of defining how uh an asset using Stefan's words it's like Bridge Swap and call let's define a way to do that um between chains and allow developers to integrate one way of doing this like balance the same way and then

under the surface the uh Native interop gives again I'll steal Stefan words it gives better guarantees for solvers around how quickly they'll get repaid the yeah basically the security around their execution so in in the one balance framing we have this idea which is a resource lock yeah and uh resource locks are just an implementation of the standard um it defines what are the resources that the user commits to and what are the Fulfillment conditions and what is the mechanism that enforces that uh fulfillment condition so yeah it's all built on top of of the standard which we love and then it just points towards um a unified e ethereum for both users and developers right which again

very much fits with like this one balance Vision which I love um you developers of applications Implement one thing and can Source liquidity from any any part of the ethereum land scape and maybe we add in salana here too that'd be pretty cool um Bitcoin l2s Bitcoin Bitcoin l2s as well blockchain um and then you just you know you have full abstraction yeah t why you laughing Mike no I'm not laughing a lot of users of ton right there's probably no there are there are there are I don't know how many people listen to your podcast but probably less than there are TA user um you know what this just points to though it's just I I it feels like the I mean the the business model of um

of a lot of block I think the business model of blockchains is is yet to be solved and it feels like the way that we've tried to figure this out is to hey I want users to come into my execution environment and be sticky and that's gotten more complicated as we've moved execution off like eth main chain into L2 land and what I'm hearing from the two of you is that there's going to be this the I mean we talked about this a lot in our in our season but that there's going to be this standard um and then at that the intent layer is going to it's going to focus like the sticky part of users is going to be with applications and I think a lot of this stuff where we're trying to actually build these Moes um around different execution environments are going to be

commoditized over time that's what like that's my I think that's the macro Trend here block space is not scarse yeah it's abundant yeah um but like this is potentially very disruptive to our industry which you know for a long time people have made their money off of selling block space right um and that's like the kind of tried and true business model to date and so it does make my head hurt a little bit about what this would look like but if you step back and think about it from like a web 2 perspective the way a web two business makes money um there's actually two ways and Stephan we can talk about this with relational one balance too but a web two business makes money either by users and

having their attention and then like charging them I mean maybe it's paid for an advertising whatever but they they have users they have eyeballs and they make money off of eyeballs by either charging them for something or whatever else the other way a web two business makes money and I'm thinking like fintech here is they have assets um like you have a wallet with assets um think like Robin Hood makes money off of holding user assets and making money off of things people are doing with that money and in a sense seon I think we actually talked about this um it's interesting a while back but your one balance arguably could hold assets like if it really works it's kind of like this wallet that holds money um and

that's a valuable place to be which is kind of cool my VCS will like that you know what you know what I should just point them to you that's the third bit of yeah um here you know what this reminds me of though is there's there's a there's a phenomenal uh do you guys listen to acquired podcast I used to they do these like four hour like sometimes nine hour deep Dives on different it's awesome yeah um and I just listened to the one that they did on Microsoft in the early days and how they got their how they got their start and Bill uh Bill Gates one of the things that he got right was about not being super value extractive for building like the Microsoft platform and he always said you know the applications

that build on us um and the developers that are building application should create two three four times as much value as we're creating ourselves and I feel like that's the world that you know in the same way that we're speedrunning a lot of the lessons that uh Finance has figured out basically centuries ago I think we're speedrunning some of the lessons of web 2 at the same time I want to add a third category to to your framework wait what were the first two uh attention Capital yeah those are the two that you sort of mentioned I think the third one is trust um and that is what blockchains have tried to make scarse using block space it's the access to the um the validator set to be able to attest to a certain agreement um I do

think that trust is valuable and something that people have like shown to be willing to pay for um now with the reaking stuff we're kind of like saying how do we fractionalize this trust such that it's like you can pick and choose the amount of trust that you want using some economic metric it's good for some use cases I don't think it's good for all use cases but I still think that trust is something that is is valuable I'm going to push back on that I think trust is a it's an attribute it is part of a moat that fits into an asset business but I'm not I'm not sure like actually I think about trust a lot because when I think about the asset that we're building at blockworks as a media company it's literally trust at

the at the end of the day we manufacture insights and people have to trust them um but but I actually think media is an interesting example of this model of like trust and because it actually is it's trust but it's also attention and we've watched Trad media basically have half of their value proposition cleaved off because they no longer really have they're no longer Gatekeepers of attention but they still have trust and I think you're figuring out that I don't even know if they have trust anymore man I don't even know if they do either they're losing that to well well it's probably not an accident that when they lost the audience they're losing the trust because now there are other megaphones and uh places where audience live where they're getting different information and it's they're losing the trust um you

squirming when I said the trust thing I was squirming because I I I mean I don't know that I agree it's like trust should be free in a world of cheap block space is my thought and it's and not free very cheap in a world of cheap block space and I'm kind of like and I also that then goes into Mike's point where it's like for for you to have attention at scale with longevity you need trust which would be the web 3 version here too like applications that build in web 3 have to be trustworthy otherwise what the hell is your decentralization thing giving you and what do you make of usdt and Tron that's like the data point that

stands in start contrast all this right but also it has been like transferring usdt on Tron has been trustworthy to date yeah it's like one of those things that uh I think there's a little bit of like a western bias here where our versions of it and the way we think web3 should work doesn't follow Tron yeah but for a lot of people in a lot of places of the world it's offered them a valuable service that they trust yeah for not the same reasons we do or don't trust it but proof of authority is still a valid source of trust I also proof of Justin son proof of sun proof proof of Pro of sun Pro of Excell Excellency I think if

you you know maybe this is the I've been in the space too long thing but like if you look at any of these system I sort of reduce them down to some form of proof of authority there's social consensus like backing any of these things and it's easy to say like oh my proof of authority is better than that one but I do think that fundamentally kind of reduces down the I mean vitalic is better than Justin Sun though I like him better me too I think proof of authority it's funny that private blockchain's got a little bit of a Rebrand and now we call it proof of authority and it sounds less uh less grading on the ears but I think there I think that's going to experience a bit of a Renaissance and people are going to I I think one of the

big um things that people are realizing is vanilla proof of stake there are a lot of drawbacks with vanilla proof of stake and so now people are going to I think starting to I mean that's why delegated proof of stake is is a very different form of consensus but I think even proof of authority chains are going to people are going to start to experiment much more with those um and I mean they've already I guess done that but I think that's going to be continued continually coming into good graces and the other component to this is not every job needs to be done by the same trust model yeah so um I think it's kind of like the inside of l2s like if the custody is not part of your consensus thing then you can kind of just run a

centralized sequencer and everyone's happy um but that's is like proof of authority on sequencing but not on asset ownership do you think um and shout out to Espresso I know you guys did that day I'm a big fan of espresso as well do you think that five years from now do you think that all the the l2s are going to still be running a a centralized sequencer or they is there going to be more decentralized sequencing I think there'll be all kinds of flavors okay I think centralized sequencing will still exist in a major way um how major don't know but like I actually think the way you articulated that stuff on about like okay when C if it's not cussing your assets but it's just you know doing

execution on top of them totally cool to have that be done by a centralized sequencer for many use cases that's the OG State Channel payment Channel stuff yeah yeah yeah all right fellas um this has been a ton of fun I think we got to start winding down relatively soon here but Stefan um we already gave you the the one balance you know doio here but in case users missed that two times you got it twice twice yeah but if you want to find out more uh or whatever what's the best way for for them to do that yeah one balance audio is really the best way three times three times on Twitter one thing that we're doing now which is quite cool is we're doing like super technical deep Dives on the entire credible stack with Partners um and so

the next one that we'll be hosting will be around um solver networks and we're just going to go deep into saying like Okay what does the credible stack what do credible accounts what do one balance mean for for this layer um and so yeah we're just going like one by one in all this so just follow us on Twitter you'll get access to all this awesome awesome all right awesome fun guys we'll have to do it again soon one team one dream let's go one team one dream one click one one balance one click let's all right guys one more shout out here to this episodes title sponsor say there are a ton of reasons to build on say if you're itching to get started building or using the ecosystem head over to say. that's se. get started and be sure to let them know that we sent you thank you s