Anything built atop of the EVM stack is going to be
susceptible. We're going to see a billion
dollar hack, and that prediction came through.
I think it's only going to get worse with time.
The stacks that exist today in Web Three are inherently unsafe.
If you can coordinate what people do online in a very
programmatic way and in a composable way, you'll solve the
world's problems. Whether they're buying or
selling assets, whether they want to build rules around their
data and decide who can see that data, who can't see that data.
If they want to give you access to a file, we will access to a
file right now on the Internet. Do not talk to each other to
make that possible. So our narrative is very, very
different. We're really rebuilding the
Google stack, right? The AWS stack.
We have a decentralized KMS. We have a decentralized stories
layer, we have a decentralized coordination layer.
All these things are now available with SWE and it's now
getting adopted. For example, you can have all
front end of your website logs from Walrus and you get
guarantees that it's not been hacked to get guarantees around
the packages you're engaging with online versus the Internet
today. That gives you no guarantees
that you're engaging with the right program, should I say?
Welcome to the episode of the show which talks about the
technologies, projects and people driving decentralization
into blockchain revolution. I'm Brian Crane and today I'm
speaking with Danny, who is the chief product officer and Co
founder of Miss and Labs, the company that's built SUE
Network. Of course, SUE doesn't need much
of an introduction. It's been one of the L ones.
So the next generation L1 has been getting, you know, the most
traction and the most activities.
So super excited to talk with him about the history, the
technology, the technology and some of the things going on in
Sui. So just before we get started
with Anthony, we want to share a few words from our sponsors this
week. If you're looking to stake your
crypto with confidence, look no further than Course 1.
More than 150,000 delegators, including institutions like Bit
Go, Pantera Capital and Ledger Trust Course one with the
assets. They support over 50 block
chains and are leaders in governance or networks like
Cosmos, ensuring your stake is responsibly managed.
Thanks to the advanced MEV research, you can also enjoy the
highest staking rewards. You can stake directly from your
preferred wallet, set up a white label note, restake your assets
on Eigenia or Symbiotic, or use the SDK for multi chain staking
in your app. Learn more at Chorus .1 and
start staking today. This episode is proudly brought
to you by Gnosis, A collective dedicated to advancing a
decentralized future. Gnosis leads innovation with
Circles, Gnosis Pay and Metri, reshaping open banking and
money. With Hashi and Gnosis VPN,
they're building a more resilient, privacy focused
Internet. If you're looking for an L1 to
launch your project, Gnosis Chain offers the same
development environment as Ethereum with lower transaction
fees. It's supported by over 200,000
ballot errors, making Gnosis Chain a reliable and credibly
neutral foundation for your applications.
Gnosis Dow drives Gnosis governance, where every voice
matters. Join the Gnosis community in the
Gnosis Dow forum today. Deploy on the EVM compatible
Nosis chain or secure the network with just one GNO and
affordable hardware. Start your decentralization
journey today at nosis dot IO. Cool.
I mean, thanks so much for coming on.
It's great to have you. It's an honor.
Look forward to always talking to you.
I thought it would be interesting to start a little
bit with the origin story maybe both in terms of like your
interest in crypto. And then I mean, I think my
understanding is a lot of this early initial work happened
still at Meta, at Facebook. Yeah, so by way background, I've
been in crypto since 2:00, late 2011 actually.
So I've been in crypto for a long time going along with
Bitcoin space. Very early it was mining
Bitcoin, buying Bitcoin at 10 cents.
Oh, wow, interesting. I wish I didn't sell a majority
of my coins, but it is what it is.
But I've built a number of companies in the space.
I got involved in Facebook actually on Libra.
I was working at VM Ware and Facebook had taken one of the
top distributor systems researchers that we had and I
got interested in their project as a result of that and realized
they were building something really compelling.
That's where I met my Co founders.
Interestingly, Sam, George, Costas, Evan, we had a really
good time working on a project. I still say today it's the
probably the second best job I've ever had working at Meta on
Libra. And of course, the best job I
have right now is working on SWI.
So we had a number of regulatory, regulatory hurdles
in getting Libra to market, which it never got to see the
light of day. But still the spirit of the
projects lives on through SWI. When we left Meta, we actually
didn't use the although the code is all open towards we didn't
use the code that we had at Facebook for, for SWI.
We learned a lot from buildings Libra of what not to do.
We're we're building to a very specific timeline, very specific
set of primitives. And it was really going to be a
more permission system at the beginning.
When you're launching Libra, it's going to be, you know,
between 25 to 30 members that started the consortium.
And over time, the plan was to decentralize and build up
something more scalable over time.
When we left Meta, we had the opportunity to just start with a
blank slate. We also knew that the way you
succeed here is not trying to build just a layer one.
We believe there's a pristine opportunity to build a layer for
the Internet, a decentralized stack where developers who
wanted to build new business models can thrive.
And the Internet today lacks that.
You know, if you had before to build anything in the Internet
today, you're really using existing centralized stacks who
have very difficult primitives that don't really all gel
together really well. And there's no programmability
or possibility across these assets.
So we felt that there was a big opportunity to build a multi
trillion dollar of business in trying to basically decentralize
the entire stack and compete with the likes of Google or
Facebook or wherever in terms of providing that level of
infrastructure and and surfaces for people to engage with.
That formed Mr. Labs and Mr. Labs first product was Sweet and
miss Lab. Second product was launching
deep book and 3rd was Sweden ass and now Walrus as well.
We have a number of protocols coming out very soon that extend
that you're going to have general purpose computation that
you can do verifiable often computation that you can do with
with Nautilus that we'll be launching very soon.
You have seal and the two based, you know, encryption scheme that
lets you manage keys using pressure signatures as weighted,
not have to manage keys yourself to encrypt and decrypt files,
which is what you're going to need for the Internet.
But all this stuff is very composable.
It's all programmable. You can build whatever you want
with this new decentralized fact.
And we're the only company in the world that's doing this.
So when you think of the the long term vision of SUV, so you
describe it as kind of this decentralized Internet stack.
So sounds like quite a divergent from the way people are full of
L ones historically or like how do you feel like the vision kind
of it diverges here? Yeah, People building L1,
they're just really thinking mostly about trading.
To a large extent, they'll try and tell you it's more than
that, but realistically, they only care about tokens being
launched. Our vision's always been, hey,
if you can coordinate what people do online in a, in a very
programmatic way and the composable way you solve the
world's problems, and LA 1 is what you're meant to use for
that, right? It's meant to, well, Swede does
that, right? Most of the ones don't.
The goal of Swede itself, that layer is to help coddle what
people do online, whether they're buying or selling
assets, whether they're owning concert tickets or transferring
it, whether they want to build rules around their data and
decide who can see that data, who can't see that data.
If they want to give you access to a file, revoke access to a
file. Right now, these systems on the
Internet do not talk to each other to make that possible.
You have to build things using duct tape all over to make it
work. And you end up realizing that
you just build a centralized system because it's easy to
coordinate when you own everything in house.
This is why we have these mask conglomerate, right?
We just do everything in the house themselves and you have no
real composability across services.
That is the opportunity and it's a deviation from what L ones do
because I believe you know that ambition is not something I've
seen voiced by any L1 right. Our ambition is beyond that.
We we believe that we can coordinate what people do online
using suite and you can marry that with the ability to have
people own their own data using walrus.
You can coordinate that with like allowing people to encrypt
and encrypt or give access to file, remove access to file
using seal and then you can also verify what they've done online.
Whether you want to verify bank balance in the bank account, you
want to verify the, whether you want to verify some computation
that happens off chain, but then attest to that user the
blockchain, we let you do that as well with, with Nautilus
coming out. So our narrative is very, very
different. We're really rebuilding the
Google stack, right? The AWS stack you imagine AW has
as storage as compute, as encryption KMS services.
We have a decentralized KMS, we have decentralized storage
layer, we have a decentralized coordination layer.
All these things are now available with SUI and it's now
getting being adopted as we speak.
So like let's say if you take like Solana, right, they have
always had this, you know, this description of the vision as
like or decentralized NASDAQ. And you know, like as you
pointed out, right, it's very focused on trading and financial
use cases. Do you also feel, you know,
there is a particular type of application or that you know,
this is most crucial for, right? Because in the end a lot of
stuff people just use normal centralized products and you
know, they seems to work fairly well.
But the what is kind of the the key breakthrough here?
Or like you know, the type of problem where this is really
crucial. Yeah.
So the three areas of focus we have it's we have a focus on
commerce in finance and then also in gaming.
Those are the three areas of focus.
But SUI and our platform and family of parts are very general
purpose. You can build anything you want
on them. And in fact I'd argue you can
build a lot more verticals across horizontal using our
stack than anywhere else. For example, you can have all
front end of your website, most from Walrus and you get
guarantees that it's not been hacked to get guarantees around
the packages you're engaging with online versus the Internet
today. That gives you no guarantees
that you're engaging with the right in future.
You're engaging with the right program.
Should I say it's something called binary transparency that
matters. I wanna start off with this
premise of, hey, we are building a decentralized NASDAQ because
they're mentors like hey, if we solve trading, we solve a
massive problem. We believe you have to go beyond
that, right? Three already has a
decentralized NASDAQ, right, which is called Deepak and
that's growing significantly faster.
It operates faster in terms of throughput than any other
central order book that exists in web three.
It performs as well as those centralized exchanges to large
degree. If you're going to do bulk
trade, you could do that on Depot today.
But our roommate is larger than that, right?
It's it's going beyond just trading.
It's things that you do on Internet.
Everyone does commerce, everyone does finance, and everyone does
some form of gaming. There over 3.1 billion gamers.
Last year we spent over $200 million.
That's more than movies, that's more than music combined.
But we're going after massive areas where users can engage
with the chain in very interesting ways.
That is that you don't have to be front and center.
I always say when you go to a website today, you don't think
this website is awesome because it's run on Google.
It's just a website right And our infrastructure is going to
be that well hidden in the back end.
It's going to power the most of the Internet.
You you can start running banking applications on SWE and
you can get guarantees that the banking application you engage
with is absolutely legitimate and the application is up to
date. It's not been hijacked.
We saw a massive hack that happened over a billion dollars
lost of recent. If this fact was built using
Walrus as a front end story layer and then Sui as a back end
coordination layer, that hack would have been absolutely
impossible. And we made the point that
anything built atop of the EVM stack is going to be
susceptible. We're going to see a billion
dollar hack and that prediction came true.
I think it's only going to get worse with time.
The stacks that exist today in web three are inherently unsafe.
They're very, very difficult to build predictable business
models because one costs are very, very high because your
business gets successful gas, you'd go through the roof.
They're built on the concept of block space being this finite
resource, and when you have a finite resource supply and
demand kicks in. The more demand blocked base
demand you have, the higher the price is to go to deal with the
supply and demand. Swede does not work on that
premise. In fact, the more resources you
need, the more block space you need for Swede, the more
hardware you throw. Therefore you scale it
horizontally. So Swede, the only chain has
been demonstrated that you add 7 times the hardware, you get 7
times the throughput, 0 increase in latency.
So in mainnet right now, our configuration would run at
297,000 transactions per second. You add 7 times the hardware,
you get 7 times the throughput with no increase in latency.
This is how the Internet should work, right?
Like it's horizontally scalable. Scalable.
This is how we build infrastructure for search at
Google. It's how we build infrastructure
for Facebook. In terms of anything we did,
everything needs to have an element of provide more
resources. And then you scale horizontally.
That level of expertise has not existed in Web 3.
It's the first time it's been possible, possible.
I think we're bringing that level of expertise of research
and development to Web 3 and that's going to be what's needed
to build next generation infrastructure that everyone is
really powering their businesses off.
Let's let's dive a bit into the technical architecture.
Like what? How would you describe the
technical architecture of Sui? So it's exactly what I was
saying, right? Like the first thing is what
makes me amazing is not the fact that there's one thing we do
well, the optimization is required, which is why I'm
against this like modular approach.
It doesn't make much sense, right?
You need to, the monolith works because you understand every
intrinsic layer right of the infrastructure and you can take
the Max opportunity to optimize the heck out of it, right?
We have a storage model that is object based.
So intrinsically we're using an object based system.
We know whether one transaction, another transaction have
contention and this is done statically.
There's no need to programmatically figure that
out, which means you can, the more CPS you have, the more
things you can do concurrently in parallel.
No blockchain does that. Everything is assumed it's a
single large database and then you lock the tide database every
time you want to make updates. So dealing with contention is
inherently difficult in other chains where Swede the data
models bit it's baked in. So we've got a date data model
that is object based. We have a program paradigm with
we move that takes advantage of that object based system and
allows you to build and crack real world assets, real world
systems using the object paradigm.
Most program languages are object oriented.
Most developers understand or object oriented concepts.
So building 1 Swede, they're learning it in less than four
days. People are getting very
competent in building in Swede move in four days because the
paradigms they're used to in traditional program languages
are forwarded to them in Swede. Separately, we have a very low
latency consensus scheme that scales horizontally.
So Mr. Seti, which we launched in base camp last year, took
latency into a latency down to 400 milliseconds.
Actual finality from when I submit a trade to when it's
final, we drop the latency down to 400 milliseconds.
This is, this is insane. So you, you're, you're really
have our block times are, you know, less than 100
milliseconds, something like 70 to 80 milliseconds.
Those numbers are interesting, but what really matters is
what's the user experience. So when people use a Defy
protocol on Twee, they realise all transactions are instant.
When you do a trade, when you do a swap, when you want to make a
payment for something, everything happens lightly fast.
It feels just like Web 2 to the point where you think it's some
centralized server running. That is the experience people
want. The idea of waiting and having
this optimistic finality is not how you build real compelling
applications. So that stack allows developers
to really build applications that are akin to the experiences
of web too. And then you add on to the fact
that we have something called ZK login, which is this
cryptographic primitives in SWE that lets you use your existing
Facebook, Google, WhatsApp, whatever account you have as an
identifier to create an account on chain and do that for you
permissionlessly. So if you're logging with your
Google account, you have a wallet in SWE.
Google have no idea what transactions are doing.
They have no idea between your Google account and launch an
address. Nobody can tell the difference.
That is a superpower. Which means you can onboard
users into SWE using normal web 2 perimeters and then need to be
none the wiser whether they're engaging with the chain or not.
What makes it super important though, if it's the chain itself
that verifies your session, It's not some third party middleware
that stick takes all your data and listens to all your
transactions that you do and tries to sell ads to you.
The chain itself verifies that session, which is super
critical. That is a game changer in terms
of the perimeters that we've launched.
Yeah, a bunch of stuff we want to dive in here.
Maybe we can start with the last one.
So this login, so it's kind of like a sign in with Google and
how does that work under the hood?
So we have, it's called ZK login.
It's something that we built in the house at Miston.
It's actually something we're trying to solve as a problem at
Facebook. We never had the, we never had
the time nor the resources, the time to figure it out.
It still was come to some, we still needed to hold
cryptographic signatures with what we have with ZK login.
What happens is we will generate A0 lawless proof using your
using your search, your cookie that you get from when you sign
in with Google. And that generation of a
mathematical proof is what we use to authenticate.
It creates a what we call, you know, it's basically a temporary
key that you use to sign transactions.
So these things expire out of some number of days.
You have to sign in again, right, which is what you expect,
right with any account. But once you've signed in with
Zika login, you can use that same once you've signed in with
your Google account face with a supposed cacao and a number of
other providers and it keeps increasing on a regular basis.
You then have that deterministic way to sign transactions in this
ecosystem. That means from a user
perspective, private keys are no longer a thing.
If you lose access, if you forget your password for your
Google account, you just reset your Google account password and
you still have access to your assets as well.
So it's done entirely in a fully transparent way from a user
perspective. It's a way you're on board using
asking people to go and download a wallet and then go and
remember some paraphrase or some PIN.
It's just not going to work, right?
I mean, if you're paranoid about a billion dollars, yes, maybe
you're going to do something elaborate with a legend device
or whatever, but for a couple of 100 bucks and maybe 20 dollars,
$5, even like $15,000, right? Most people are using ZK login.
It's actually, I feel safer with ZK login than using some key
management system because I inherently I've lost money using
key management systems before. But my Google account is
defended like Fort Knox, right? Or my Facebook account is
developed. Is, is, is is a secure that I
want it to be right. So I'll use those schemes
because I'm I'm comfortable with them.
I sign in to a number of services online today, even
those schemes, I feel more comfortable accessing assets
that way, so that's really what we've built here.
Yeah, Yeah. I mean, I think that's a
tremendous UX breakthrough for sure.
And I I do agree, I think having that on the base layer is, yeah,
very powerful. Yeah.
I mean, yeah, something called crypto agility, right?
We support keys with Solana, key with Eve.
You can use whatever key you want the Sun transaction with
Sweet, right? But the fact that you can now
use your web 2 keys to sign transactions with Suite, that's
another element of of that That's very.
Do you see that also as a sort of account abstraction thing
where then you could potentially use that to, you know, execute
actions on other chains? Yeah.
We, we actually have a project on SUI called EKA.
And EKA fundamentally does that, right.
It effectively lets you sign transactions on any chain you
want. It supports Solana, SUI, ETH,
you name it, right. You can effectively use SUI as a
layer for coordination. It does that all transparently
for you. But the transaction the as a
signature scheme, MPC scheme that will sign transactions for
you on any chain you want. So if you want to get the
security of SUI, where all your assets are governed by SUI, you
get that. If you want to still maintain
your assets and other chain, you get that as well.
So that's the element of how you can take the powerless we offers
you to other chains and use that as a way to control assets
wherever you want. So I also wanted to talk a bit
more about this object based approach.
So the object here is it, it can be a smart contract or it can be
an account or like what are the types of things that are
objects? So every so the the smallest
unit of computation in Swede is strongly typed objects.
In Swede. It's not bits or bytes.
They're strongly typed objects. That's the smallest unit of
computation, which means everything to a large extent is
an object in Swede. Your entities are objects.
Your coins are objects. Your account is an object.
Everything is an object. In fact, we don't really have an
account model in Swede, right? Everything is an object model in
Swede. So you know that paradigm.
The world doesn't think from an account perspective, the things
around objects like this is an object.
I own it in my hand, I hold it, I transfer it to people.
That element of transfer, transferring an object from one
person to another, it's inherently baked into the
underlying design for Swede that lets you do really powerful
things because it's from the type objects now, right?
I can take an object as an argument into a function and
it's a virtual machine to ensure the integrity of that object is
maintained. So it means I can build a, a
dex, right? And the assets of support are
can be dynamic or I can build, you know, an NFT that would take
that would take two objects and it would merge them and spit out
something else in the end. But ultimately it means now
people can build on the work that I have.
Interfaces are not the way to do that.
Interfaces in a world where contact, that's all we all say
is a sin. Light interfaces are a sin,
right? Objects is really what you want,
right? You have an object that's
strongly typed. We're very well defined.
You have, you know, you know, a function that really will take
that object as a set of inputs. From a programmability point of
view, makes a lot of sense because that's how you build in
any program language today. You're taking an object as a as
a bit of a function, you execute computation over it and you
split something else out. That is what Sweet offers you.
This is why most developers get Sweet very easily.
You're not trying to think of, hey, I need to put above some
bit stream and reconstruct something off the off the end of
it, you know, make sure that the integrity is maintained, have
some kind of hash table to manage everything.
And you know, it's all a mess, right?
This is why you have all these hacks, right?
And they're really bad systems design.
There's no real composability with majority of other systems.
Whereas with an object based system, what you do get is, is a
fully permissionless composability, which matters,
right? I don't need to give you
permission to use some kind of interface to engage with me.
There's no kind of standing inter formally, we adapt.
You simply just use an object which is what you're used to,
iteration probable languages, which is way, way better.
And everything is a single address space.
None of the sharding nonsense that people talk about where
hey, where's my Shard? Where's my data is in Shard 1,
Shard 2. It's a single space that you
worry about from a developer point of view, which means
everything is accessible from a single address space, which
which is where you get a composability and everything is
atomic in essence. So I'm curious how that connects
with, you know, how you guys process transactions.
So you have all of these different transactions coming in
and you know, some of them kind of touch different objects and
because right. So we one of the ways you guys
achieve this kind of scalability is through being able to process
transactions in parallel. So do you guys then try to
upfront see, OK, which you know where do you have it?
Because obviously one of the challenges, so let's say now you
have one transaction that touches a bunch of others.
And then so I think in Solana, right, you have to say upfront
what what the counts or contracts you touch and then and
then they kind of paralyze it. So it's a little, is it a little
bit similar to that or like that?
That that there's no need to do that kind of nonsense and sweet,
right, because everything is an object in the space you're
defining the object you're using at any given time.
For example, I'm submitting my object X into the function of
object Y, right? And that's very well defined in
normal programming paradigm. It's very easy to think about
that from a normal programming perspective.
You're not thinking of addresses you're not thinking of how do I
deal with contention from that point of view?
You're simply just writing applications.
But the separate, the, the key thing is you almost incentivize
to write code that takes advantage of Swiss
parallelization in this scenario, let's say for example,
right like because there are two objects and they're, they're
touching different bits of state, they are processed
automatically in parallel and suite, no questions asked.
You don't have to worry about that.
But what about if you have something that's a hot object
where there's real convention, when somebody's contentious,
there's contention, there's there's no magic art, right?
There's no nothing you can do around contention.
You've got to be able to still process things in in, in a
sequence, but deal with that contention.
So Swede does have localized flea markets that will increase
price on hot objects only, but effects nothing else with other
transactions. So if you have an object that's
hot, there's high, high contention, no other
transactions in the Swede ecosystems affected, you won't
even notice because there's nothing to do with you, right?
But what you'd notice is the gas heats for that particular
contentious object starts to increase.
So what you as a developer can do, let's say for example, I
have a pool that's GPYUSD and I'm finding it's contentional
GPYUSD. But what I can do is I can
create multitude of pools for different price points, right,
to start to spread that contention a bit more broadly
across a number of objects. So what you can start to do is
breakdown objects into smaller components to spread that
contention over a number of objects and get that
parallelisation as a result of that.
So that's more of a natural way to solving the problem than this
brute force of tell me what you're going to touch and I'm
going to decide what I'm going to, if I'm going to be able to
parallelise it or not. You know, that is way more
natural for programmed programmed design paradigm than
what is afforded to people using other schemes today.
So that basically means, let's say now there's a decks and a
lot of people trying to trade with the stacks.
So the the fee stand for interacting with the decks
they're going to go up whereas normal transactions that.
Particular pair, not the entire. Deck pair, yeah.
If that particular pair is hot and the other pairs aren't hot,
you'll not see any increase for anyone else, right?
It would just be that particular pair.
And and then the order and then you basically say, OK, now we
have a particular block and there's like 10 transactions
that will interact with this particular pair.
Then they would get executed in order of, you know, basically
highest fee to lowest fee. Yeah, OK, OK, interesting.
Yeah, Yeah, I think kind of touches on something I want to
come back to later. It's just that the MEB topic,
but let's talk a bit more about the developer experience.
So I know move is obviously, you know, you guys are the the
leading move chain and and move is, you know, today, I guess we
have the three leading ways, right?
If you have risk more contracts is solidity EDM, right, still
number one, and then SVM, Solana and then move right.
So if you think of those three, what are the main differences
from a developer perspective building on on sui and on move?
So SUI is not account based, whereas Solana and EVM is.
SUI is strongly typed in terms of dealing with strongly typed
objects where everything else doesn't really solve that
problem for you. The programming paradigm allows
you for parallel execution natively, which it doesn't give
you for wanna nor does it give you for EVM.
Well, Solana's actually better than EVM from programming
perspective, right? But still doesn't give you the
same kind of safeties that move that's fundamentally built,
purpose built for for assets give you the developer journey
is a lot easier. I mean, people make a lot of
noise by chewing glass as though that's a good thing, right?
It's actually a bad thing. People are learning move very,
very quickly. They're we're saying up to four
days. People are picking it up and
become quite adept to writing interest, actually interesting
applications very, very quickly. From a dev X perspective, the
fact that you've got primitives baked into the layer one, for
example, randomness is baked into layer one.
You don't need an Oracle for it. Zero knowledge proof are baked
into the layer 1. So you don't need like any of
your mechanism for that. The ability to verify people's
identity directly is on chain with Zika login done in a very
private in a very private way can be done directly on chain
only for off chain oracles or off chain third party
middleware. So we come from the perspective
of you provide as much functionality in the base layer
so developers can compose and build things that are
interesting rather than counting on 3rd party integrations to
make that work. So I think from that
perspective, you can build more interesting, more engaging
businesses on Sweden, you can on Solana or East.
Now Swede, of course, is the youngest of all these chains.
It's only been around for two years.
So there's some catching up to do.
But I think Swede is doing relatively well.
If you had to benchmark where Solana started his journey and
where, where it was in two years, where Swede is and in two
years it's a, it's a, it's a there's an ocean device for how
we've performed versus of the change in our timeframe.
Let's talk about the consensus. So how does how does that work
and how are you guys able to achieve, you know, such low
latency and such high throughput?
Well I'm not a world expert in content as myself but my Co
founders are and so is the engineering team.
But I can talk about it from a high level perspective.
So we've been able to build what what is called a DAG based
consensus scheme. In fact, it probably the first
DAG based consensus scheme that people fully understand and can
teach us at college. So some colleges, some Ivy
League colleague is actually teaching it as part of their
distributed systems courses now, because you can actually make
sense of it. So it's fully understandable.
So this DAG based consensus scheme reduces the amount of
verification. It's a verify is a non verified
DAG, which means you do not need to verify the the steps in each
transitioning of a DAG over time.
You get that verification by proxy of getting enough
signatures rather than have to do the verification upfront.
What that means as well is it reduces the amount of round
trips you need to do before you get certainty on the
transaction. So that reduction in the amount
of round trips you need to do to get certainty on the transaction
reduces latency. So Swede's by far the lowest
latency chain when it comes to actual finality.
I'm not talking about block times because block times are
numbers like to make up all the time.
It there's no resemblance to what finality really is.
And I'm not talking about optimistic transact finality
because if you want to go there, Sweeze like 20 seconds
optimistic finality, 20 milliseconds optimistic
finality. But who cares?
That doesn't matter. What you care about is from when
I click a button, when is it final?
When is it irreversible from a finality standpoint.
And from that perspective, Swee again is the lowest latency
chain from that perspective as well.
So that gives us a big advantage over all the chains.
Separately, the DAG based consensus, we take advantage of
it for ensuring transactions are done as quickly as possible.
It gives us the robustness that we have the, you know, 12 + 1.
Number of others agree. I mean, it kind of faults.
So it gives us a kind of speed that has never been seen before.
I mean, we already had a very fast consensus scheme with
Narwhal and Bullshock when we went to mainland and the goal
was always to get faster and faster.
We'll see what the key team comes out with next.
It's hard to imagine something faster, but it's actually a
Mississippi Version 2 coming out soon that would reduce latency
even lower to what we have to do.
Do you feel, I mean, so you mentioned 297 K transactions a
second, that's kind of like token sense or does it include
like smart contract transactions?
So those are just peer-to-peer transactions.
So if you want to do a pay, those are like payments if
you're doing payments. So if you want to do smart
contracts from DAC and it depends on what small contract
you're executing. But again, Swee is
parallelizable, so you can do many things in parallel.
What another thing that to bring up is Swee has this unique
feature called PTPS, which is programmable transaction blocks.
So I can atomically conjure up 1000 and 1024 transactions
together. And what I mean by that is
individual transactions. Let's say for example, I want to
do a trading strategy where I take a flash loan, take that,
proceed, put it into a lending pool, take instantly a borrow
out of our lending pool, put into a defy trade, take
advantage of an ARB, settle that back with my lending pool and
back again. In the normal chain, either
independent transactors, you have to do 1 by 1.
All you need to craft a smart contract that specific path.
As we know everything is dynamic, the paths not always
fixed and you want to be able to make decisions with off chain
data at times as well. With SWEET, you can craft up to
1024 heterogeneous transactions together and execute them
atomically instantly within 300 milliseconds.
So that's another game changer. So if you are a market maker, I
mean you're, you're trading on D book, which is a central limit
order book, You're holding 500 positions across D book and you
need to rebalance those positions or move them to
different pricing point. You can execute that movement of
removing the positions and then recording them in a different
price point with a single transaction.
You cannot do that anywhere else in the world, right?
You can't even do that on centralized stacks in an atomic
way. Whereas SUI you've given that
atomic atomicity where you can submit all your cancels and all
your new bids instantly with a single transaction batch.
And that's something you can't do on Seoul ETH or any other
change. You can't even do that on a
NASDAQ, quite frankly. So that's a superpower that SUI
has that I think starts to bear the question as to you know, I,
I, we believe that majority of trades in the future will happen
on chain as long as the stacks take can take care of a
bandwidth. Yeah.
I mean, it sounds honestly, it sounds like from the kind of
scalability you guys already have.
Do you think is, is that mostly soft or do you, do you expect
that? I mean, I guess it depends a
lot, right, how things play out. But do you expect that has to
scale still a lot more for you sort of eventually?
The next step for us will be launching what we're calling
Ramura, which is our skill, skill infrastructure.
Again, that let's you go horizontal, you add more
hardware, you scale as honestly we're not a capacity yet.
So there's no real need to release that release that right
away. But 3 has a solution for
horizontal scalability. The only thing we're going to
keep doing is just optimizing the single compute unit for the
computer, right? You make that more and more
optimized over time. We've already got the
scalability from horizontal perspective.
Other chains do not have that. Other chains will talk about
sharding. Then you lose atomicity and
there's no composability across shards.
And people have a tough time writing two face commit
algorithms, right? How they going to even solve
that atomicity issue when it comes to shards?
I, I think they, they're really and they're promising something
that they can't deliver on. So from our perspective, we
already have the scalability solution.
What we want to keep doing is working on how do we get the
most performance out of our virtual machines possible.
There are lots of things we can do around the move VM to make it
even more efficient than it is today, but that's not the
bottleneck at this point in time.
So right now it's really just keep on shipping more
functionality to make it the best place for desk to build.
Let's talk a little bit about Mevi think there's like very
different opinions on, you know, what is MEV?
You know, is it something change should try to prevent or and you
know, we've also had different architectures, right?
There are many chains, the validators build the blocks.
Ethereum of course, most importantly has separated it out
right with having proposers and builders and having those roles
separated. Like how do you think about MEB
and like how does MEB work today in Sui?
Yeah, I mean, the idea that somebody can put a transaction
ahead of me knowing. Knowing for what?
I'm giving them information to train on my behalf, and they're
using that information to rob me blind, I don't know how people
justify that as a good thing. I'm sorry.
I don't care what chain you are or what kind of school of
economy should come from. That's just wrong, right?
You can always say that's somewhat illegal for a large
extent using some information. I'm giving you the front run me
and it screw me on price and say OK, well it's MEV so it must be
OK. Sorry, that doesn't make sense
Swee. Now MEV is not impossible in any
infrastructure, but with SWEE it it's very it's almost impossible
to make money doing MEV on Swee, especially in a deterministic
way, right? We do have some schemes on Swee
and projects on Swee that are making Med more client friendly.
Namely if there's an opportunity to do any term of MEV, the
rewards go directly to those who are participating in the
ecosystem, namely token holders, the trader directly.
These are happening. So they're like fast paths to
execute trades really quickly that are happening right now on
suite. But MEV is an area that we're
very passionate about, but to the point where we would rather
shift the fate the, the direction in the hands of those
do are doing the trades themselves, not in some kind of
minor that's going to extract value from consumer experience.
I think about about it, right? I put in $50.00.
I expected to get $50.00 in Bitcoin, but I get $48.
That's all right. I don't know how you could ever
argue that that's a right thing to do in any world, right?
In a world where I put in $50.00 and I get 50 back, that's what
we want to be in. But also maybe if I get 51
because I'm able to take, take advantage of some other
opportunity elsewhere in some pool due to some arbitrage,
that's actually a positive from a consumer perspective.
And I'd always be in the side of a consumer rather than the
miners. Yeah, yeah, for sure.
I mean, it is interesting how, you know, in the beginning,
right, when the whole MEV concept came up, you know,
people were like, oh, this is really bad.
And and then I think in Ethereum, right, it's switched
so quickly to like, OK, that's that's just the norm.
And you know, everyone gets extracted to the maximum
possible. The problem is sweet so fast
that it's very hard to do right. So when you have a chain is very
slow like like ETH or even Seoul where you know there's a lot of
opportunity for Med on Seoul, right?
Because of the architecture, you don't have the opportunities on
sweet. So it's very, very hard problem
to solve for sweet. Namely if you do make it
possible, you want to make sure it's tipped in the favour and
balance of those who are actually doing the trades, not
some arbitrary member. So we actually think it's a
problem that you want to index on solving in some way.
At least if you're going to solve it, you solve it in the
direction of consumers rather than, you know, fee fee how
they're still allowed to agree. So, but the way today this might
work is that, you know, a validator, they get their
transactions and then they still maybe plug into some sort of API
with some kind of, you know, MEB company builder.
And then they do some sort of transaction insertion or
reorganization, which obviously would be much harder if you have
less time for sure. But is is that the kind of the
main way something like this gets prevented?
So there are a number of ways. I'm not a MEV expert, so it was
probably worthwhile getting Sam or the call to talk more about
the intrinsic grade that we've built these protections.
They're actually two different applicants, They're two
different providers that are vying to solve this problem.
One with a validation validated integration 1 is simply just
some on chain integration that doesn't require the validated
upgrades. So the two directions that
people are taking towards this, but both are taking the approach
of. Value must be given to token
holders, others who are trading rather than those who are from
extra value. But intricacies of how it really
works is beyond my level expertise of the rain expertise,
yeah. Well, let's talk a little bit
about some of the areas that you guys are focusing on.
So I mean, one is gaming, right? Gaming has been, I'd say, kind
of a topic like crypto gaming, right, has been something that's
been for many years has something people felt like, oh,
that's a lot of potential there. I think the main, the main
reason for it I often heard was like, well, maybe games have
assets and then people don't really own those assets in the
games. And maybe it'd be nice if people
actually owned them and maybe they could like, you know, use
them, use them somewhere else. So like what?
What do you feel like is the the case for having gaming on chain?
Yeah. So I'm not a believer that says
games have to be on chain. I think I'm a believer that
games just need to be more fun. And the games that always
historically do well are the ones that can keep the user base
engaged for as long as possible. I can keep increasing the user
base for franchise SO3 or technologies that get involved
in gaming needs to solve that problem.
So the partners we're working with are massive, are large in
scale, and we've been able to convince them that their
business model is way more sustainable using Swee as a
chain. Some of these games don't have
to be on chain. Maybe Sweeze used for the App
Store concept of selling in game assets or it's used for
registering entitlements or rewards or it's used for token
gating, access a specific content or use as a mechanism to
build an incentive scheme that lasts the test of time.
So our work with game studios are along those lines.
We actually launched a games console called Three Players X1,
which were announced last year and it's actually going to be
shipping this summer. It's sold out as a result of the
work that team's done really good work by the team.
But beyond that is there's a game of process called the
Platon OS that's going to power the future of games.
So this operating system you can do boot your windows machine.
It runs on a steam deck or runs on sweet plays X1 anywhere you
want to. You want to play steam, Epic or
web three games. You don't have to make a
decision between platforms anymore.
It'll run all those games for you and then with that comes
with a deep integration with Sweet with ZK login.
So just by logging into a normal account, you now have a wallet
in the back end. We don't even call it a wallet
and you start to earn rewards for playing any Web 2 or Web
three games in addition to, to be given rewards for or at least
discounts. We have to buy games because
they find a there's a correlation between people who
play War of Warcraft versus some other game.
If we give them a discount, maybe they're more likely to
play our game, right? So the ability to engage and
acquire users much more frictionlessly is going to be
what Web 3 powers? And these are kind of
investments we make. We're more betting on big items,
long term things that can make impact from a business
perspective, not the hype stuff, right?
I think mass majority of games have been around in crypto, so I
always say our spreadsheets or things that are built by
accountants that pretend to be games rather than hardcore games
that people find fun and a part of.
We work with a build games that have grossed billions of dollars
a year in revenue and they know how to build fun and engaging
games. The web three element is an aid
to make the game experience way more compelling than a way to
extract value by overcharging on NFTS or putting some element of
token gate in there. That doesn't make any sense.
So yeah, that's our thesis over. And what was the I'm curious
about the sui play the to the console you guys are coming out
with what was like? What's the thing behind it and
and how does it work? So the three players are Quan is
a very is a highly powered hand held gaming device that got
great battery life, great screen, great graphics card and
lets you play your PC games wherever you are portable.
It'll play your games in your steam deck.
It'll play your epic games. It would also play web free
games because it has its own App Store.
Typically you happen to choose between 1 device or another.
Now with A3 player device 1 device does all that for you in
a single unit. Chief of that is the fact that
it's a web 3 integration right? So whether you're playing a web
2 game web three-game, it doesn't matter.
We don't even call it out. Where's the web 2 web
three-game? These are games and now you have
a single device from a utility perspective that will reward you
based on whatever games you play.
It doesn't really throw web 3 in your face.
You get to own your asset by your account that you create on
on the system and you don't need to worry about wallets.
The payments will be by stablecoins and you don't have
to be overcharged with the credit card fees that people
bill you on the element. The the thought process is in
fact, if you launch your game on a sweeper X1 from an App Store
perspective, you wouldn't have to pay those fees, those high
fees that app stores charge you. And that means those fee, that
money you saved as a game studio, can go back into
building a better game or rewarding the users with better
incentives to keep playing. Right.
OK. So basically from a user
perspective, I can kind of buy this thing and it's a it's a
good gaming console anyway and I can play my existing games.
But then they can also be more like blockchain games that have
maybe their own tokenomics and incentives and stuff.
And then from a developer perspective, it just makes it
easy to develop those games and then get distribution through
everyone who has the console. Correct.
I remember this operating system will get installed on PCs, set
up boxes, you name it. So everywhere they go, they're
countless with them. So it's a distribution play.
We want to be everywhere and within.
By 2030, most gamers will have a wallet in some form.
We think that wallet will be Ezekiel login.
Wallet was sweet. Cool, how many of the devices
have been ordered? We only made 10,000 to get it
started and that's already sold out.
We we have other manufacturers who want to build a sweet play
device for their own user base and things like that, which is
exciting. Cool, cool, very cool.
So you mentioned the other two big categories is like finance
and commerce. I mean D5 of course is the thing
that you know, I would say the thing that crypto has actually
nailed the best so far. How does the SUV D5 ecosystem?
How does it compare with others? Yeah.
I mean, Swedes 6th largest chain, probably top five chain
when it comes to D5 volumes and in the top 10 firmly in terms of
TBL. So Swedes are already showing
marks put a market fit in the areas of D5 transaction volumes.
In fact, one of the top 4 Dexes in all of our threes are Swede X
already. So that's already exciting from
a growth perspective. One of the areas of focus for us
right now is actually BTC 5. We want to be the chain that
brings utility from a ton of Bitcoiners.
That's exemplified by a partnership with Isha, who's
going to be launching this scheme that lets you control
your Bitcoin assets on Swede without ever having to use
bridges. And more than 10% of the TDL on
Swede has gone very quickly to Bitcoin.
That's only going to grow over time as well.
So our focus is really to grow the financial ecosystem.
We have stablecoins. We have something that for
stable coins on Swede, we're going to be adding another
that'll be announcing at base camp.
Separately from that as well, there is more opportunities to
onboard other currencies into Swede that we're looking at.
We think FX trades will be a massive volume driver for Defy
and Swede, especially if you're thinking about, you know, JPY,
you're thinking about you know, euro dollar baskets as well.
There's an opportunity for us there and I think Swede is going
to do really, really well when it comes to FX trades.
The carrier trade is going to be real.
And then when you think of commerce, do you think I, I
guess payments is 1 aspect, right?
So maybe stable containments? Are there other things that you
see there the. Whole thing, it's like the
ability to pay, send and receive payments, the ability to make
bulk transactions on behalf of your user base, and the ability
to reward your user base and keep them engaged with reward
systems, incentive systems, the ability to acquire users, target
users, reward users. All those things are an element
of commerce. I think block chains,
unfortunate. Well, fortunately, we'll do way
better than traditional ads. I think the ad business of just
like paint and spraying, especially with the session
cookie being gone, is going to falter.
I think blockchains and wallets and the idea of like entitlement
systems are going to be what you build ad businesses or ad
networks off the back of moving forward.
It's the element of shifting the balance into the favour of the
consumer and taken away from centralized systems.
Actually, it's better from a business perspective, right?
The ad spend you'd make might be higher, but the cumulative
rewards you get out of that ad spend would be better because
it's a better targeted audience than this prayer process that
you do today. And recently you guys launched
Walrus, which has gotten also like lots of attention and you
know, it's a very interesting like what's, what's the vision
for Walrus? Yeah, I made the point yesterday
that in three, in two years, Missing Lives has launched 3
unicorns, Waras being one of them, Deeper being one of them.
And of course, Swee Waras is a global storage layer.
I mean, one of the feedback we heard from a lot of developers
is, by the way, Swee is about 100 times cheaper to store data
than Seoul and about 2000 times cheaper to store data than the
ETH. But still, it's too expensive,
right? Because you've got this
replication factor. You're storing data on each
validator, and then you're multiplying that.
So if you're storing Amazon, maybe you're paying three to 4X
replication if someone's where you're paying 100 X replication,
which makes no sense, right? So you might have just one MB, 2
megabytes, fine, you have it there forever, no problem.
But if you want to start storing gigabytes, it's called petabytes
of data. You only really have our weave
that makes you pay 100 years in advance of data, which makes no
sense. Or you have file coin that
doesn't really give you the guarantees you want.
That's very, very slow in terms of downloads.
There's no real solution for fully decentralizing your front
and the back end. So we built Walrus specifically
to solve that problem that we're hearing from developers now.
You have a fully programmable storage layer that lets you
store petabytes and gigabytes of data for dirt cheap.
It's comparable to Amazon in terms of pricing.
Way more distributed, way more decentralized, way more
resilient to faults. And you know, your files are
broken up using a Redshift algorithm that effectively
splits them into billions of fragments across hundreds and of
thousands of of services. You only need to contact, you
know, 2, you know, 1/3 to 2/3 of those machines to get your data
at any given time. So it's actually a third of
those machines to get your data. So even if 2/3 of a network is
down, you can still access your files.
You don't get that kind of resilience with any service
provider that exists today. So This Is Us taking what people
expect from centralized services and making it possible on
decentralized services. And Wars by far is the most
scalable, fastest and most programmable, programmable way
of storing data. And what's coming for Wars next
is Seal, which is a scheme that lets you encrypt and decrypt
files fully decentralized. So I can use my Google account
to encrypt my files and it's all done fully in a decentralized
way. I can try, I can give you access
to the file to see it. I can get access to content
that's saying if you pay me five $350.00 or you know, one
Bitcoin, you can gain access to data.
Now you can. That programmability aspect
becomes very, very critical. You can do all that
programmability and get content for the first time using fully
decentralized schemes. Yeah, that's super cool.
So it like basically, I mean, one thing is OK, it it competes
or it can be a better alternative to things like 5
coin things like our reef, right, that, you know, you have
gotten some traction, but pretty limited, right?
Because I think they're also still pretty limited in terms of
yeah, like cost is still high, right?
And and performance. So there's that.
And then the thing of like having your entire application
on chain, right? So I mean, you mentioned the
example of diagnosis safe in the Bibe attack, right?
Where basically the issue, one of the huge issue.
I mean, there was a famous article known by Moxie
Mullinspike, the Signal creator, right?
Where he was like, hey, this blockchain thing is kind of
bullshit because you have the smart contract thing that's like
on chain and verifiable and then people interact with it through
these web applications where they have no control over.
He is spot on. He was spot on.
That's exactly it, right? You build this amazing, you
know, you're waving the arms. Oh, it's all smart contracts and
whatever and how do you access it?
Some third party website API that has been hacked, that was
hacked and people knew it was hacked for quite a while
actually. And you know, this has happened
all over in Web 3, whereas now with Walrus, you can get a
guarantee that the package or the website you're engaging with
is what the developer intended for it to be.
And you cannot have the subversion of someone injecting
something where it's not, it's, it's not possible anymore.
So I, I think that element of security that what Walrus brings
is going to take wars beyond web three.
Think about cybersecurity, think about government, right?
Think about banking, think about all the use cases where knowing
what you're dealing with, knowing what you're engaging
with is very, very critical. And you want to protect the user
funds, the user data, user information.
Wars is only going to let you do that in a fully permissionless
way and fully programmatic way. So that's a scheme that I think
is going to be critical for the future.
This is why, like I'm very bullish on the future of WARS
because it solves the boundary transparency issue.
At the same time, it's a programmable storage layer where
you can build arbitrary rules as to what accesses content or what
can update content, and that rule can be fully transparent to
the world. That's a level of security that
you do not get when you try to build something on AWS or GCP.
It's just not possible. And then you also mentioned that
Nautilus, can you walk us through that as well?
Yeah. So one of the next things we
heard of the global feedback was, hey, we've got storage,
we've got compute. I mean, we've got compute by
smart contracts, right? We've got the ability to run our
whole front end, but the things that we want to do off chain
that we can't get certain guarantees on chain about.
For example, if I want to do oracles, right for data that
that don't exist today, for example, I want to know what
burgers cost in Missouri, right? Like maybe who knows what use
case it is, right? I have no way to verify that
steam or verify that data. Well, with probably the worst
example burgers in Missouri, they're multiple.
But if you want to verify some computation that's happened on
chain and of happened off chain, but uses more contact to verify
that that competition happened correctly, you're very stuck
with options that exist today, right?
You don't need to pay a lot of money to an Oracle service to
provide that data at a great cost.
There's no way for you to do something yourself to make that
verification possible. So what Northless gives you is
the ability to use Trusted Execution environments or TE ES
to do that computation. Right now, Amazon Nitro,
there'll be other enclaves over time.
It could do that computation and you can submit that attestation
that the enclave will give you directly to smart contract on
suite. And it can give you that.
It can verify that computation happen correctly and proceed
install the data directly on suite.
So if I want to get a pricing feed for, you know, beef in some
country in the world and do that in real time, I don't know what
the weather is in some part of the world and saw that on date
on chain. I want to prove that I've done
some kind of move in the game and then verify that on chain.
I want to, you know, ensure that you know, the horse race that
happened at the other top Derby in the world, have the right
right winner and I want to reward the right person to
submit the right. The set of bets are matter.
I can do that directly off chain and verify that with SWET.
What it really does, it expands the surface area of what you can
do with off chain data and you can bring veracity to off chain
data and do that in a fully trust and process where we're
Swede. That's what's key.
It's the ability to compute things off chain, bring the
attestation that was computed off chain and get that verify
basketball contract in order to do amazing to use cases.
Right, So you could like as an example, right?
So let's say if I I'm a lending protocol and I wanted to use
some data, right, some kind of credit scoring thing, right?
And that could be like, oh, I'm going to have this program and
it's it's, it's on chain, right? So you can see what the program
is, but then it's executed in Nautilus, maybe locks into my
bank, checks some things and then and then basically can
report some score back on chain and and and it also maintains
the privacy in this case, right? Correct.
You have a better analogy or a better example?
Now that you should take my job. You want my burgers and beef?
Maybe I'm hungrier. So I'm curious, so because your,
your title is like Chief Product Officer, so you work kind of
because this is like you work on those particular products as
well as kind of the, you know, overall chain or or do you focus
on it kind of also from a SUI as a product for the end user, SUI
as a product for developers or it's seems like a vast scope.
All the above, all the above, right?
Everything from what we do on the consumer front to what we do
on the developer front to the platforms we're launching.
Fortunately, we have a great team, right?
We have a great team that leads all these efforts and I'm here
as a help and an aid to ensure that we unlock decision making
as quickly as possible. So we've been very blessed with
to build what I believe is one of the strongest team this
space. That's why we keep executing and
always delivering all the time. It's it's front of a team.
I can't do it all myself. The team is is really over
delivered in the last two years. Right.
And then so do you guys spin out some of these things or Walrus
and they kind of been pursued independently or like you, you
kind of incubate them and spin them out or?
Yeah. So Swede Foundation is an
independent entity for Miston, so is the War Foundation.
As we know, Wars Foundation recently raised by $140 million,
that's independent of Swede. So it operates itself as its own
mandate, has its own agenda. We are here as a technology
partner to help, to help support and provide updates and upgrades
to the network. And over time, the goal that
other contributors, which is already happening with Swee are
participating in the improvement of the protocol over time as
well. So it's, it's, it's not Waris is
not run by Miston, neither is Swee run by Miston.
We're the original creators of it, but we're also core
contributors to it. And the plan always is like you
expand the contributor base to to Swede and Waris and
everything else that was launched.
So when you think of the, the road map for SUE, what are the,
I mean, we mentioned, you know, we talked about some of the
things, right, that you guys are working on, but what do you see
as the most important, you know, like milestones and things that
have to be done in the next like 2 years?
Developer growth and unhealthy infatuation with growing
developer base. That's what we're doing now.
We've got the platform, now we've got the dev tools, we have
the storage, we have the coordination, we have the
encryption, we have the option verification, whether trading,
whether at all. Now it's adoption and what
you're going to see us in an unhealthy way, overly indexing
on aggressively growing the developer base as fast as
possible. That's going to be what we're
our passion's going to be for the next few years.
So that's going to be the passionate, I think like we're,
we're building the what we believe is the new stack for the
Internet. Now it's time to go out to sell
it to the world. Cool.
Well, thanks so much for coming on.
And Anita was super great and yeah, I'm really excited to see
how this plays out. I'm curious for people who want
to, you know. They, I, I think there's
probably a lot of our listeners, you know, they, they know about
SUE, they've heard of SUE, but maybe they haven't played around
with it yet. They haven't experienced some of
the things yet. What do you think are some of
the best things that people can, you know, do to get started and
to to try it out as a user? Yeah, if you're a Phantom Wallet
user, Phantom is coming out soon, so you you can even use in
beta mode now. Download the Phantom Wallet and
get SUI on buy some sui and start playing around with
lending protocols or go to sui dot IO and look at the list of
wallets. We have the sui wallet, we have
the surf wallet, the number of wallet you can download today.
That's it's always the best onboarding to start with the
wallets. Even better still, if you don't
want to download wallets, go to get stashed GETSTASHED dot dot
com and then you can effectively sign in with a Google account
and you instantly have a wallet on Sui, you create a username
and you can start engaging with the chain instantly.
So we have it all for people to start playing with whether your
interest is defy your interest is casinos, you're interested in
NFTS, Sui has all that and above for you, and there's a lot more
coming to the ecosystem. We we announced A partnership
with movie pass the ability to soon be able to, you know, buy
concert tickets with stable coins and start engaging with
the movie industry in a lot more interesting ways.
We partnered with Eli Gold, who is one of the most prominent
guys when it comes to the horror movie industry, that that whole
space of the movies is very interesting and we think that's
going to be greatly changed with crypto gaming the horror movie.
Industry. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Why is that? Because now if you imagine the
problem with movie industry is like nobody owns a whole stack
from the time when you you don't believe, right?
Like there's some movies that actors are still waiting to be
paid for, right? Right.
You, you've done a movie 2 years ago, you still haven't been
paid. Or four years ago, you still
haven't been paid. No one could do the audit as to
how much it grossed, right? How many tickets were sold?
And how do you dispute disperse payment in the way that's
transparent. So now you're going to have a
full end to end system where the movie lovers can fund the
movies, get to watch the movies for free, in addition to sharing
the upside of the outcomes of the movies.
So it means that everybody's guaranteed to be paid, whether
you're the actor in the movie all the way to the person who
was killed in the camera, your payments would be guaranteed.
But also you build a closer relationship between those who
love the movies and those who actually create the movies,
which is always say commerce is a key thing is that it's a
problem across the world. Whether you want a publisher of
a game to build a closer relationship to the players of
the game, whether you want the watchers of movies to be closer
to those who actually the movies, That element of like
brittle building that bridge where there are 2,000,000
intermediaries that exist today is going to be broken.
That's what the decentralized stock solves for you.
Cool. Well, thanks so much for coming
on and it was really, really great and yeah, super exciting
to talk with you. Thanks so much, it was a
pleasure.