Welcome to epicenter. The show is talks about the
Technologies projects and people driving decentralisation and the
blockchain revolution. I'm suggesting with you.
And I'm here with my co-host, Brian crane.
Today, we're speaking with Zaki mannion, co-founder of
occlusion, and Ethan, Bachmann co-founder of Cosmos and head
accountant had Formal now he's a CEO of informal but based on how
he's dressed, he could be the HR manager.
But I will be talking about adding 3.0 and Diving deep into
this topic, which I feel like I've been just talking about for
the last three weeks non-stop. Unlike podcast interspaces and
everywhere. But hopefully, we have to the
bottom of it today before we talk to Zach and Ethan about the
people in the white paper and some of the recent changes,
their first like to tell you about our sponsor this week.
And that is Tallyho, Tallyho is an open source wallet, really?
Finding the wallet as a public. Good with Tallyho you can safely
connect to defy and what 3 with everything you need from a metal
mask, plus a lot more, you can view and if he's in a wallet in
the wallet across a theory and polygons optimism and Arbitron.
There's also no need to manually add these networks.
As they are already plugged into, Tallyho Tallyho, still,
the best Ledger support around and built.
A community of developers that listen to users, you can swap
between assets in wall. Latt at a fraction of the price
and conveniently view. All of your account balances
across multiple networks, with their new and improved
portfolio. Type over a hundred thousand
people signed up to their Community pledge.
It's a letter to the way through Community orchestrating their
commitment to building a well, that accessible for everyone,
radically transparent and fully community-owned.
Tallyho isn't just building a wall of that work.
Stella who's building a web three wallet that you can
believe in. It's time to defend web 3.
Visit tally. Ash sign, the pledge and
download the wallet. Also, we're hiring we're looking
for a community manager to help grow our audience and take
epicenter of the neck. Lex level.
If you're a passionate about crypto and creating great
content, we want to hear from you full details can be found at
careers dot chorus, dot 1, ÷ ö, ÷ ö, epicenter, Dash Community,
Dash manager. That's a bit of a mouthful.
We'll put that in the show notes and please show this with
anyone, you think might be a good fit for this position, so
Thank you for joining us guys. For this very important
conversation about Adam 2.0. Yeah, give us a bit of a.
Give us the arch of how this, how we got here.
Yeah, I don't point. I was announced that Cosmo verse
I guess now three weeks ago. What's happened since then and
did it go as you expected. I mean I think the main the main
goal was to kick off a vigorous conversation about our Adam
political economy and I think that has clearly been achieved
this is the most you know vigorous set of discussions
we've seen today that it's quite delightful to actually see all
that and you know to see the passion and enthusiasm about
about the project and there were some very bold you know offers
let's say in the paper and so there's you know, Rightly.
So there's that's kicked off a lot of discussion, some
controversy, you know there's there's going to need to be
changes but you know we wanted we wanted to kick this thing off
with a bang and put out a really strong vision for what the
future of the cosmos up could look like and that should
include some you know, potentially large controversial.
Controversial changes that might need to get worked out.
And so I think we're really excited about the level of
Engagement we've seen. And, you know, there's work now,
on a charter, there's a lot of discussions around, you know,
how We're going to do governance moving forward and all this
stuff. And so you know, at Kauffman
verse, I sort of talked about how there's these sort of three
big faces of Cosmos, you know, start with this initiation
phase, which we completed, which started with a white paper,
which we shipping completion, right?
And now, we're moving into the integration phase and this has
its own white paper for the Hub. But, you know, there's a lot
more to it. It's really about upgrading the
overall political economy of the interchain ecosystem of the
cosmos Hub. And and, and that process is
kicking off now. So, you know, this podcast and
all the other discussion These are kind of a big part of that.
So yeah. And what's that?
What's that face? Three phase 3 I called the
illumination phase. We're all finally awakened to,
you know, the reality of the payments graph and and, and
crypto finally has its impact on the world and we can break out
of our, you know, speculative crypto Bubbles and actually you
know, meaningfully restructure, the global monetary system.
So of course, I'll have to be wearing.
Yeah, I might need a different tie for that.
You're going to need a three-piece suit for that one?
Yeah, exactly. I gotta be the tax.
Maybe one thing we can also I think makes sense to ask about
this point. So we have this white paper,
right? And there was a lot of authors
on there, there's like ten people and then I think there's
like, you know, other people that were involved in some way
that, you know, aren't even on there.
So can you talk a bit about like, what first of all, what
was the goal of this white paper and what was the process of
writing this paper? Okay.
So maybe I can I can come at the the two things.
One, the goal of this white paper is to is to let out a
vision from that basically takes.
I think there is a group of people who work on Cosmos who
feel like the cosmos Hub has been abandoned.
That was like a it was it was just collectively abandoned over
the last few years. It did not have any strong
vision. So many people who used to work
on, you know, Adam and the cosmos Hub started their own
chains. You know you have this vast post
all in B diaspora. You certainly had a team at the
inner chain Foundation but they, their mandate was much more like
maintenance and following a relatively conservative roadmap.
Not, you know, change what? Adam is change, what?
Adam means, all this stuff. What?
Like the whole, you know, the whole political economy about
Adam? We had an ambitious roadmap,
tried it. Try to even imagine what Adam
would look like. As I could tell top-10 crypto
acid, what an atom looks like as a driving force for change for
like, all of, like like economics.
Generally, like how do we so. So there's like just sort of
this abandonment and lack of ambition that was like pervading
the cosmos Hub as a culture. Also, the political economy of
the cosmos I was in The NeverEnding sort of back and
forth between all in bits and the ICF Birth who is supposed to
even be involved in charge of this thing with neither party
really wanting to be in charge. And so like that was, that's
kind of the framework. The framework was break out of
that cycle. The second component of it was.
So then, what was the process? Like the process was like, in
short of, I would say. So, you know, the liquid staking
work that inclusion has been working on has been going on
since 2021. It took quite a bit, you know.
Has been. It's been it's been a slow
burned, bring to figure out how to make liquid staking.
And it liquid, staking always seemed like a very important
formative because of the fact that we don't want to have defy
on the Hub. We needed to figure out like
liquid speaking is a very natural solution to the problem
of how do we get out of an exponential issuance regime?
And if you're as long as you're walked into the exponential
issuance regime like your ability to change anything else
Is very limited, right? Like the the potential
capabilities of. So we have this like, sort of
long-term thing where like the occlusion, co-founders me
Christie, Tony Cella, a team at occlusion.
Have been like diligently, pushing forward, liquid staking,
because of the fact that it unlocks a lot of other
possibilities, but the other thing that we saw during the
sort of, you know, 2021 cycle is we saw a lot of new economic
crypto. Make experiments.
We saw Mev become go from being like a thing that people have
been in the cosmos Community have been hypothesizing about
since 2015 and 2016 becoming like an actual industry.
We saw like, you know, Sonny was tweeting about and like sunning
and me internet. Oh, like DMS about, you know,
how fascinating the like Olympus Dow mechanism was and all of
these things, kind of got sort of eventually started.
Come together as a set of building blocks.
And then, an R&D effort was kicked off with many, many
people, many of whom are authors, but many more people
are not authors. We also, you know, we like
Christy and myself, we invested in Mecca Tech.
We invested in skip. We were talking to all of the
Mev people. I spent a lot of time at the
fleshpots people. There's this like whole research
effort that like was just kind of many different people.
I met Max, She want me to, you know, really turn the allocator
from being just like a set of bullet points for a long time.
I met him at the hallways of Oz work on and Max and Sam were
able to like work together to turn the alligator and do it
like a fully fleshed-out idea or at least a partially flushed out
idea. You know the idea of you know
Jahan and the and like the informal ICS team became like
big contributors to the idea of the scheduler.
Sam also is a huge driver of the schedule or idea but we all talk
to Our friends at Skip and megatech extensively.
So like there's just this whole sort of somewhat organic,
Community Driven R&D effort to try and bring all these pieces
together and then we decided to set ourselves a hard deadline of
having something big to announce.
It caused me a verse and and we were able to get a draft of the
white paper out by then and kick off this conversation.
Yeah, I think this is one of the things that stands out regarding
the right here, but it's just, there's a lot in there, right?
There's a lot of different, you know, things have been worked on
and, you know, on a new things, right?
So some things that I think are like reasonably well known and
some things, I think we're very new.
So I think maybe we'll make sense as we can talk a little
bit about some of those changes that, you know, either are like
coming and in works or that are, you know, being proposed here
and then talk. And then maybe step it.
Take a step back talk. Also about governance is entire
process and maybe, but I would say, let's start with
interchange security. I think interchange security is
something we've actually never talked about on this podcast.
I think in the cosmos communities like reasonably well
known, but I think I wouldn't say it's something that's well
known in a large group the community.
So like what interchange security and what is the role
that information security will play in Cosmos in the future?
So if you don't mind, Before we going, we go into interchange
security because the just to add a little bit more framing to the
structure of the white paper. And you know why we would jump
right into injured, interchange security at a high level.
You know, the white paper is really putting forth like three
key pieces that of like how to think about the future of the
hop, right? The first is that there's a new
secure economic scaling layer, that includes interchange
security and liquid state, right?
And it proposes that interchange security is the way to build new
functionality for the Hub and liquid staking is the way to
extend. The economic zone of the cosmos,
not like certain sake, was referring to before, right?
And and and you know, that inclusion, did all this work on
it on limits, taking photos are all this work on interchange
security to set this foundation for how we could extend the sort
of economic reality of the Hub. So, that's the base layer,
right? And in some sense, the everyone
kind of knew where was supportive of these two kind of
key features, but then the question, the paper want to
answer is, well, how do we build an actual product out of this
and a vision for the Hub that is built on top of this news,
secure economic Base layer. And so, you know, the next sort
of key piece of the papers that okay, we can create an economic
flywheel on top of these two things.
Using, you know, these new proposals of The Interchange
scheduler and the interchain allocator, which we can
obviously get into, in a lot more in a lot more detail later
on. And then, in order, you know, in
order to make all of this work, it's going to require basically
a new governance system and and treasury to oversee development
and facilitate the sort of on chain on chain coordination.
So those are really the three pieces.
Secure economic scaling, the economic flywheel with The
scheduler in the allocator, and then the governance and the
treasury, and the being proposed as an integrated whole, because
the idea is that we kind of need all of this to put forward a
new, a new vision for the ha, right?
So that's the kind of higher level, higher level Framing and
then we could start going through, you know, all the
different, all the different pieces.
And so, starting with interchange security, the Crux
of energy and security, you know, just just base layer is,
you know, we want the Hub to be a simple.
Minimalistic low surface area. High-security, trusted reliable.
Will place to custody assets to you know enter the ecosystem to
integrate against and and so on and that requires a particular
kind of care around its software development life cycle and
because there isn't a virtual machine on the Hub and there's
General agreement that there that there ought not to be a
virtual machine on the Hub. The, the idea is that the proper
way to extend, the functionality of the Hub is to follow, you
know, standard good software development principles of
modularity, you know, and build things in separate modular.
Donuts. And because we have IBC because
we have the power of 10 or mention all this amazing stuff.
We can actually build additional functionality for the Hub.
As separate block chains, where the validators are the same as
the validators for the cosmos top, right?
And that's the sort of core base idea of energy insecurity is
it's a way to extend the functionality of the cosmos up
by spinning up. New blockchains that inherit the
same the same validator separate and that can resolve a lot of,
you know, tensions. We've seen in the past over
governance proposals, some new features wants to be If someone
wants to ship, you know, cause mom's into the hob or something
like that, there's there's you know, a bit contentious boat and
there's a lot of concerns around around the security, what kind
of service area this would open up on the Hub and and so on and
so interesting security allows us to preserve the minimalism of
the core Hub, while still allowing the functionality to
expand around the hub. Using, you know, all the
protocols and all the, all the pieces we've already built in
the sort of bottom-up way, right?
And so while we see many other projects in the ecosystem
pursuing, Security Solutions and charting and all these kinds of
things and sort of a top-down way.
You know, we built IBC. It was obviously, is a
general-purpose communication protocol for arbitrary State
machines essentially, and it was always sort of known that on top
of IBC in a more bottom-up way, we build these more complex
cross chain. Protocols one, obvious one being
entertained security where you can simply inherit the validator
set from another change. So that's the, that's the sort
of high level high level initial framing.
Of course, you can do a lot more with interchange security, it
can become. A vehicle for other chains that
aren't just trying to extend the functionality of the hub for
say, what are you know, looking for a secure validator set to
launch an application and will maybe spin out to a sovereign
change over time or existing Sovereign chains want to spin
and sort of join the economic zone around around the cosmos
table. There's a lot more sort of
political economics that can that can play out.
Once you have this feature of interchange security but it's
really a sort of Base functionality that enables the
economics economic zone around the Hub to start to expand.
Yeah, I mean I think that you brought it up right?
Because I feel like that that's one point where it's maybe
little bit confusing. Sort of you know, what is the
main vision for interchange Security in the future, right?
Because one is okay, there's a hub and you know there's this
idea or let's put Cosmos on the Hop.
And then there was resistance is like, okay let's put it in this
separate chain. That still secured by the cosmos
hop by Adams, you know, what's kind of decoupled.
So it's it's sort of like maybe good compromise.
And you can imagine like different types of things where
like, okay. The Hop says, we want to have
additional functionality and we put it there.
But then the other thing is, is okay.
We you just have some some chain and they don't want to run their
own validator set, right? And they want to use the
validated set of the cosmos top and then they kind of like
buying basically not that dissimilar from something I can
polka dot right. Where pair of chain, basically
leases the slot and then gets his file data set.
And you know this Security and processing of transactions.
So how do you season the future? Do you think disc there's going
to be, you're going to be able to evolve into, you know, some
marketplace. Where, you know, like lots of
new chains can come and kind of bit for places or So first thing
I would say is empirically, I was wrong about interchain
security, I was wrong in a couple of different ways.
So one was so like the reason I supported prop 69 was I thought
that the demand for energy like energy and security was going to
be low for sort of external teams that we wouldn't actually
be able to grow the developer base of the Cosmos Club.
So we would just end up in a Relation where you had like the
same Cosmos of Team supporting like 15 chains.
So for each feet like for features that we wanted on the
cosmos Hub instead of and so that was kind of a little bit of
like, why I thought prop 69 was a good, what good thing and I
was completely wrong about this empirically.
Like we have attracted an enormous and expanding set of
Builders into the cosmos. Have ecosystem through the
feature of energy, insecurity, like I was completely wrong
about Out it empirically, you know, just from talking to all
these this entire universe of potential users.
There's an enormous amount of latent demand for interchange
Securities product. People are very excited about it
and not is a huge factor in how we are, have how we have
started, you know, and and basically going through the
sales cycle, like I think the sales cycle of actually trying
to convince projects to join inner to use energy and
security, like, kicked off, seriously, maybe in the Spring
of twenty 20 of this year. Yeah, and so when we, when we
kicked that off initially I don't think it was going it was
it was going about as badly as I was expecting and then we just
started hitting user after user after user and it has just been
so that like really reshaped, that was a huge influence on the
white paper because it said, hey, like we really do see signs
of product Market fit here with interchange security.
We should design the white. A ver to like to like, you know,
push down on the gas and go go as fast as we can.
And like, essentially, this become, you know, in some senses
like we're investing in the growth of energy and security,
because we have such strong signal of product Market fit.
Yeah. I mean, I would say, I was, I
was somewhat uncertain about the product Market fit of of
interchange security for other chains.
What I was confident and you know, the reason I didn't
support prop, 69 at the time was because it certainly, I always
felt that interchange security was the right way to sort of
offload. Risk of developing The Hub and,
you know, have the Hub be able to serve as this sort of stable
mature kind of minimalistic anchor where you could extend
the funk, right? So if you could extend the
functionality with energy insecurity.
So even if there wasn't the sort of demand from other change to
use it, there was still a base case just from, you know, better
software development life cycle kind of long-term development of
the systems that made interchange security.
Make sense, just as a way to expand the Hub and expand the
teams of the Hub, right? And once once a formal sort of
got building interchange security, and we had Something
real that people could actually start to believe.
Oh this is really coming soon. You know, then we started going
to Market and we started to see, you know, maybe somewhat are
surprised some what some people thought it would be you know in
high demand. Others were kind of less sure
there seems to be a huge amount of demand for it and and that's
going to that's going to change over overtime.
We don't know exactly how it's going to change over time.
We think we could build out a very healthy economy around the
cosmos Hub and and that's part of like succubus saying part of
the motivation for the paper was to kind of build on that on what
appears to be, you know, strong product Market fit for for
entertain security. But even without You know you
have to keep in mind that there's still this base case of
this is the right way to extend the functionality of the Hub
from a pure like sound software development, kind of principles
perspective and one of the things we are trying to achieve
is to transform the way software is built and deployed right in
the long term that's something Cosmos has been working on for a
long time. That's like part of it, you
know, informal systems mission statement and that's something
we're doing. I mean the way the way people
are building block chains today is you know unlike anything they
were doing five years ago and we hope that's going to you know
continue to have an impact on the wider software development
community. And you know we're trying to
prove That out with these new, these new ways of building on
the internet of blockchains. Oh, One of the things that I
find interesting about endurance Internet Security, I don't know
if this is still in the roadmap, but it's these different
versions that have been kind of laid out for how energy Security
will will roll out. So the first version I believe,
is this where a chain that's on interchange security, inherits
the entire validators, that and then there's a second version
where they can inherit a partial about or set or more like an
opt-in relationship with validators.
And then there's As a third version, where they can have
part part of their validator said, be The Interchange
security set. So, like the set that securing
the cosmos Hub and then they can also onboard their own
validators externally, right? So if another validator, that's
not on the cosmos Hub and part of the energy and security set
that validator could also on board and be part of that change
security. When I first heard this, I
thought there's a logical version 4 and that version 4 is
where like chains are just Dating each other.
And this this idea has been put forth recently by sunny and the
osmosis team and, you know, they're their vision for how we
arrived at say, a more interconnected entertained is
through this message, security model, and I wonder if I'd like
to confront maybe with this like this, this mess Acuity idea does
interchange security at some point, become more of a mesh.
rather than this more, like, hub-and-spoke model that I think
the Hub has been, Carrying for like a long time and is seems to
be carrying in these different versions or at least in this
Vision, this been laid out that there's it.
Arrived at where everything's just validating and securing
each other at some point that to some extent.
I mean, you know, if you look back at the original at the
original consoles, have white paper.
Yes, it's proposing a hub-and-spoke model but it's not
just proposing one hop, right? It's proposing a multiplicity of
hubs and it's saying we're going to start with, you know, we're
going to build one Hub, but there ought to be others and,
and that's in the paper. And so in some Since the, the
topology of the cosmos Network, and you know, what would Now
call, the inner chain was always left open and was always
expected to be a mesh, right? It's not just a pure Hub and
spoke model, but if you look at any any, you know, Network in
the real world, they tend to have kind of power law scaling.
They tend to have nodes in a more, you know.
Well, connect and others. They don't have singular hubs
but they do have, you know, it's not like a pure hub-and-spoke,
but it there are no nodes in the network that are considered more
Hub like than than others. And you know, the being a hub is
sort of a fractal, how you can look at airports and Um, and,
and things like this as an example.
And so again, that's always been sort of part of the idea of how
the inner chain would emerge, that we would build this
permission list communication protocol topology, with what
sort of emerge emerge from it. And there are many ways just to
share security over the inner chain and have different chains,
or to participate in each other's security budget, you
know, like you sort of articulated here.
There's, there's interchange security V1, which you can, at
the very least, think about, you know, just as a way, for the Hub
to extend its own functionality There's the fabled V2 and V3,
you know what, you're referring to, and then, and then there's
this, you know, V4, I guess you could call mess security.
If, if you like, I don't know if they like calling it calling it
before. It's also a very interesting
idea, but there's much there's much more to, right?
There's other ways to kind of share security across the inner
chain. There's now ideas around
Hemorrhage and his temperament right where you can basically
this something we talked about for a few years now especially
with the as well with the anoma team where you can leverage
overlap that exists between the validator sets to get stronger,
guarantees out of the consensus and of the ordering.
And so And my security sort of a start at that, but it's really
just about, you know, some slashing and, you know, it
doesn't really do much for transaction ordering, whereas we
could do a lot more. So, yeah.
Certainly always been the vision for this interchain to be a
match. The same way the internet is a
mesh but like any mesh in nature there, you know, there will tend
to be some kind of power law scaling.
There will be there will be nodes within the mash that are
more Hub like and and the Kosmos Hub through its you know,
through its mission to be a stable sort of anchor in this
thrashing. See in tends to be one of those
hubs not the only Hub maybe not even And the biggest Hub in the
long term, but but at least you know, I would hope the longest
standing Hub and and that's what's important to me is that
kind of that kind of long-term ism.
If you think of that, I mean of course one of the challenges at
least with this initial version of Shades or interchange
security is that, you know if you're running a violator on the
Hub? Now you also going to have to
run you know this other client right for this other chain and
so sort of like, you know, your demands increase a bit.
Now maybe that's like not that bad, but then if you imagine,
you know, 100 chains, then like complexity grows a lot.
So curious like what's the You know, like how, how much does
this scale like? Yeah, I mean there's a there's a
lot of work happening to start thinking about how to make it
scale more, right? And so we can imagine, I mean,
rabbit ears. Today.
You know, there's some valid ears that are running a dozen
chains, dozens of chains, there's a lot of work now going
into into 10 remain in the SDK to make them just more
vertically. Scalable.
There's, you know, optimizations kind of all over the place that
we can be doing to improve things.
And then there are some, you know, there is some research
going on. In at the energy insecurity,
level of how we can make that that more scalable.
And and so there is a lot of opportunity there to improve the
scalability. But, you know, it's funny
because the cosmos is the cosmos vision and approach is always
the same. It's like do the simple thing
that works, you know, that will likely that will likely have
product Market, fit and unlock new opportunities and then
things, you you didn't really know before will emerge to solve
your scalability problems, right?
And you know, as we did that with application-specific
blockchains overlooked. How's this going to scale?
And you know, no one's asking that question anymore.
But Now, we have things like Roll-Ups and all this other, you
know, ZK proofs and stuff to help them scale.
So we're doing a similar thing with energy insecurities like
let's do the simplest basic thing building on top of IBC
that if you know allows us to extend functionality in a secure
way. And and and we're sure we'll
sort of, you know, be able to take care of scalability in the
longer term, with all the RV that's happening within our
teams around our teams and so on.
So yeah, moving on here to another component of item 2.0
and that's liquid staking. And so, you know, if we look at
liquid staking is this mechanism Which one can leverage their
state Assets in defy, and other like Financial activities?
And so, the idea is that you solve this takers dilemma by
allowing State assets to become liquid, or at least some
derivative of that state asset to be liquid.
And liquid, staking has been, you know, tried and tested and
etherium with like platforms. Like Li do also like, in Solana
and lots of other chains in Cosmos, we've been talking about
liquid staking For a while. And there was a number of
participants like companies and startups in the space that are
building liquid staking Solutions.
So stride is one of them. Peace.
Take was early to this Market as well.
Quicksilver, of course, what does the cosmos implementation
of liquid staking have, that's unique?
And what are the characteristics of the the cosmos ecosystem as
this kind of, grouping of layer ones have it?
That makes the implementation unique compared to something
like aetherium where you have One layer one.
And basically everyone's taking on the same on the same chain.
Yeah, okay, so inclusion has been working, has been sort of
spearheading the the liquid staking.
Well what we've what inclusion is been building is specifically
A Primitive for liquid staking to make liquid sticking adoption
easier. So, you know, in most chains
that have liquid staking they could speak Was sort of an
afterthought in the sense of hey, we we built the system.
We had stinking, we need to have stake in order to have to drive
to waik secure the consensus layer.
Maybe there's this desire for have liquid sticking on top of
it and then whatever programmability your your your
platform enables you can glue on some liquid staking components
on top of that and, and do it. I would I think of is maybe like
the occlusion perspective and what I hope to become the cosmos
perspective on liquid. Staking his Wicked staking is
not just interesting from a individual Staker trying to
optimize their returns point of view.
It's actually unlocks The Dilemma that like was sort of I
think one of them was clear. It was very clearly articulated
in the original Cosmos white paper which was hey, you have
this problem, right? Is everyone, everybody.
It's the idea of, you know, cryptocurrencies have been very
attracted this idea of fixed Supply assets, deflationary
assets. These are very powerful ideas,
but if you have a staking system, you have will have other
economic use cases for your, your stable asset, and you will
constantly have to be in equilibrium.
And the only way to stabilize that equilibrium is to
constantly meant an exponentially increasing amount
of those assets. And if you actually get to a
world of large-scale adoption of liquids, taking IE everyone.
Nearly everyone in. Your stinking ecosystem is using
liquid sneaking. You basically have created an it
and use new security ecosystem and you security system in for
the chain that no longer requires exponential inflation
in order to be maintained to be stabilized.
And that's, that's sort of, that's one piece and so what
inclusion is, but trying to do Has been trying to make adoption
within the staking Market because basically if there is a
world in which to adopt liquid, staking you have to, you know,
wait 21 days unstaged, give up 21 days of rewards, just the
workflow of, oh, I'm a user. I'm going to like click a button
on a website. Wait, 21 days, come back to that
website in 21 days. Then like a DOT liquid staking
like the the adoption of looking staking will take forever and
what inclusion has been working on.
And is slated to be merged the default Cosmos.
That's the case. Taking module is a set of
Primitives that allow you to have life sort of a layer in
which people are able to adopt a liquid sneaking solution
instantaneously through a transaction without having to
wait a non-bonding period to join the system.
You want to talk about the expectation and liquid taking is
actually going to be carried out by block chains themselves,
rather than by centralized providers, or interchange
counts, and sort of how that How that connects?
Yeah, yeah that was my next question actually.
I think there's a there's a real user experience challenge here
that were probably going to end up facing which is that you'll
have these kind of ecosystem level liquid, staking providers,
like, the ones I mentioned earlier, but then each chain may
also opt to do their own want to capture those assets and do
their own liquid staking. Then we end up in this situation
where you have all these assets, essentially represent very
similar things but that aren't fungible, And we already have
this problem with USD, stable coins, maybe not so much in
Cosmos, but like any Theory. Mm, there's like a ton of
different USD representative sample points that aren't
fungible. And, you know, for users is very
hard to reason about like what are the security models behind
those those coins. So how do we solve this without
creating like a huge cluster? Fuck.
So I guess a couple of things that are I think are important.
One is so I think that the fact that we have many USD stable
coins is a good thing. It's good for decentralization,
it's good for the economy because basically what you want
to have for like every there are multiple categories that
naturally occur in stable coins optimizing for, you know,
different tolerance, risk Tolerance on minting mechanisms
different regulatory stances different.
You no affiliation And brand affiliations associated with
your stable coin like there's a there's a very large like
high-dimensional space of stable, coin designs and it's
good to actually have Market leaders.
Kind of optimizing for each different thing.
What we what I suspect is the case with liquid staking is it
is a similar sort of thing where there are at where it is
actually awake. There's a lot of different
dimensions to optimize for for with it's taking Solutions and
the whole point of the occlusion with mistake a module.
To make it possible to for people to spend on projects.
It's for all possible sets of optimizations around creating
the great liquid sticking product without specifies doing
specifying or picking winners. Just making life easier and you
have better for all of them. And I think the optimal outcome
for Cosmos is in many ways, probably, at least for Adam is
going to be like a liquid state can provider that like wins the
market as like, The permission list retail oriented
decentralized. No kyc sticking.
Provider, another sticking for liquid state.
A provider is going to hopefully win the like institutional, KY
exeed at everyone involved. Like the entire pool is kyc Aid
model. Like and you know, there may be
other variables here about how governance works or about how
like liquidity is incentivized and defy by and like whether or
not your energy. Secured and whether or not the
treasury is helping secure liquidity for your asset or
you're an independent Sovereign chain and you're using your own
governance token to incentivize liquidity.
There's so many different variables here that I think it's
particularly, it's probably a good thing that we have a lot of
that. We have a lot of different
choices just at a higher level. Like again, you know, we built,
we built IBC general-purpose protocol for communicating
between blockchains and obviously allows other chains to
steak on each other, right? And liquid-liquid staking is
kind of an inevitability having you can, you can, you know,
stick your head in the sand or or think you're going to play,
you know, whack-a-mole, till the end of time to stop it.
But it's it's it's kind of inevitable.
And so you need to you need to account for that.
And you know, we're moving into a world where ideally more
liquid staking is going to move from the centralized providers
to block chains themselves that are staking the assets back
over, IBC onto the Hub and and the module that it Didn't feel
that gets deployed on the Hub, makes it easier for folks to
sort of take their stake position from The Hub and move
it onto those liquids taking providers.
But it does. So in a way that, you know,
they're initially non fungible on the Hub, right?
So it's just like a, you know, a kind of transferable delegation
token but not really a fungible currency by any means that could
then get moved into these liquid taking providers pooled, you
know, have the risk managed and and so on and made made liquid
in various different ways according to you know different
criteria like He was saying it so having having blockchains
themselves, play a larger role in you know, issuing basically
you know, a medium of exchange token to circulate within the
wider economy that's backed by state.
Datum is kind of the the approach here and to build that
representation directly into the system, right?
Where there are, there are realities that exist kind of
potentially outside the system, you want to represent them a
little bit better in the system so that you can manage them and
monitor them. And and so on, that's also kind
of part of the cosmos philosophy is to try to better represent,
you know, the reality of the world within the structure of
the state. Genes are not just like deny
something, you know, that you might not like, or you might
think, you know, is, you know, his wrist or something.
You actually try to try to bring it on board and manage it
explicitly. Absolutely.
I think, I think this is going to be very mind-blowing when
people see these interchain account applications that are
going to come. And I think it's going to be
really amazing right there. Now, everyone at the power of
things here is tourists, are you can build, you liquid, staking
protocol on your own chain and then connect to different
Cosmos, Chain Reaction accounts. And basically it's just like
like we staking out of the Box, which is very different from the
way liquid staking Solutions. Have worked so far, where, you
know, basically each time for each chain, something is
developed deployed, you know, it's a lot of effort in there.
And so having that kind of scaling is going to be like,
super powerful People just still probably think of IBC is like
some simple token, bridging thing, but it's really not.
It's general-purpose communication protocol for State
machines, and with energy, security, and energy, and
accounts, and energy inquiries. And, you know, a lot of these
things that are starting to come online and, you know, will start
to have like real product usage. Next year, I think people are
really going to wake up to a new new breed of of
interoperability. That'll really, you know, really
shake things up and get them to kind of really understand where
Cosmos is going and kind of how how far ahead we are in thinking
about, you know, in the inner chain and Inter blockchain
communication and so on. Yeah.
So that's very exciting. So we've talked about two things
so far right and you change security liquid staking.
I think actually both of those things are things for basically
like everyone's on board, you know, and it's been in work for
a while and there's not much like controversial discussion
about it. Maybe there's like, I know some
minor things, you know, where people, but like over, all
right, babe, pretty much consensus.
And I think that the white paper basically, sort of, you know,
describes the state of If that describes, it's coming with been
in the works, but I do other things in white paper.
Right there are I think very new, very novel and let's get
into those. I think that's also where most
of the discussion has been so interchain allocator, right?
That's something that I think before this white paper,
probably hardly anybody's heard of you know that wasn't may be
directly involved in the creation of this.
So what is the interchain allocator?
And what's the idea behind it? I'll come up with it from my
point of view which is Is when we started Cosmos everybody was
like there was this ongoing there, you know, the most common
critique of Cosmos and the atom token was the technology stack
looks amazing. Like this seems like and like
you have product Market fit. I'm on Builders like lots of
teams like want to build on you. Why does the Adam accrue value?
And so you know, even from like the very beginning when you know
polka dot basically, forked the white paper, they were like
okay, we're going to have scarcity.
The pair of chain options, that's going to be aligned
incentives, between like the security layer, the beacon chain
rare and the application layer and my immediate criticism of
that idea. Was well, no one who is a really
great Builder is going to pay to join your ecosystem.
They're going to like like Sovereign, chains will exist.
You will be able to build outside of your ecosystem.
Like you're not going. You're going to adversely select
out the best builders for doing that.
And we've constantly struggled with hey, like what would make
what overcomes adversity? Like, how can you align an asset
with an ecosystem without introducing adverse selection?
And there's a second problem, which I would say is going on in
the cosmos ecosystem, which is we want to figure out a way of
generating revenue for the cosmos Hub to pay for the Budget
and pay for, you know, the ongoing development in the
ongoing Rd and all of the stuff that isn't generally.
Basically like printing you tokens like that is genuine cash
flows. And so as we've seen as sort of
defy, took off over the last two years, we've actually seen that
both Mev and some forms of yield like providing liquidity,
especially in stable, coin assets, can be it's reflexive
but like, Do represent real cash flows and not just, you know,
people buying speculative Assets in the system and so the
question has been okay? What we need to be able to do
like the fiery, the architecture of growing.
The Cosmos Club economy is having the ability to strike
deals with Builders with new Chains, new applications to be
like, hey, We want to support your application, we want to
partnership between Adam and the application and then we want to
leverage that partnership to make sure that Adam holders are
getting access to real cash flows that are coming out of
your application. Whether they are transaction
fees, whether they are Meb, whether or not there is a source
of true quite cash flow, positive yield that is coming
out of your system. An example would be like the
liquid. Any between a bunch of different
variants of ICS secured State data.
So, if we have a whole bunch of stinking derivatives that are
liquidity pools between them, that is actually like source of
real yield and real cash flow. That can be tapped into by
positive in the same way. Like if your originating their
state assets and then doing it a transaction providing like best
execution as a service by the scheduler is real cash flow.
So like the idea is this whole thing is one system but it's
basically how do we get out? Stu real cash flow within the
cosmos ecosystem. And basically we think that like
no other blockchain has ever really tried in a serious way,
probably etherium with some of their economic changes of
probably than the closest to try and tap into real cash flows as
a way of sustaining the security verb object.
But I think we all know that like the Block Chain space
cannot survive. If like, that is not the
frontier of experimentation. And so this is why I didn't like
the core motivating. Dr. Of the allocator of the
allocator is just a piece of this whole system of trying to
get access to real cash, flows into the security bunch of
customers. Yeah.
So I mean to add to that. I mean like, you know, the
interchange is obviously going to be way bigger than the cosmos
Hub and and already is. And the Hub is, you know, is it
is positioned well to lead and Steward the inner chain and to
help it grow. And we've already seen, you
know, there's always been a question around alignment
between the Hub and and the rest of the interchain we've already
seen a kind Natural approach to incentive alignment with, with
the cosmos table with Adam holders which has been through
air drops, right? And I sort of like the way Zaki
framed it in, in his in his talk and some other time I've heard
him. Talk about, you know, the
allocator. And what's happening, there is
like air drops are a kind of informal off chain, you know,
way to do incentive alignment, but we've seen a lot of them,
they've obviously, you know, created a tremendous amount
amount of value and bootstrapping within the
ecosystem and very, very Ways to do that.
And the idea behind the allocator is to actually, you
know, formalize that Better Built Tools around it, make it
something that can be arranged kind of more directly to create
the incentive alignment and more concrete, sort of political
economic relationships, between between different block, chains
again, over IBC. Using all the native kind of
cooling. We have governance
functionality, IBC, functionality, and and other
kinds of modules to be built to actually, you know, enable The
Hub to, to help grow the whole inner chain and build something
that's, you know, that continues to be.
Larger much larger than itself, right?
So the Hub as sort of being seen as something that helps initiate
this thing that is stewarding this thing and can remain
somewhat incentive aligned with something that is, you know,
whose goal was to be much, much bigger than it.
And and, and ultimately ultimately kind of successful on
its own. And the alligator is a way to
sort of, you know, help continue that process.
That was a bootstrap with with airdrops, but to become more
formalized and something that could start to be, you know,
reasoned about and more more sophisticated ways and could
build out, you know, additional kinds of products and
infrastructure and offerings, that can help change that are
booting up or that are, you know, entering new phases in
their life cycle, their leverage, the benefits of the
Hub, you know, to help them sort of Go off into this into this
thrashing, see of the interchange One of the things
that the paper talks about is the talks about the structure
for funds to be distributed through the allocator.
And so I think this is the thing.
Maybe that was the the least understood at least I went to
reading the white paper. It wasn't clear, like, how this
would work. And I think the thinking around
this has also evolved in the last couple of weeks since it
was announced. So, can you give us an example
of what do you think when the alligator is deployed?
And There are funds in the treasury and those funds are
meant to be effectively allocated, was this going to
look like talk about, you know, the these councils and this
community council and how is that governance got process
going to work and what are the assurances that Adam holders
have that funds are not going to be misallocated or Miss spent.
Because I think that's been one of the main criticisms of this
is the fear of Miss, allocation of funds, and things with things
like that. Yeah.
I mean the goal is to is to be setting up much more mature
governance processes, right? And that's something we have to
do together, that's something that's going to have to be
architected between core developers.
Adam holders community members, you know people who are, who can
oversee oversee funding. There's a lot of work happening.
For instance, on the ICF side. Now, to restructure things to,
you know, we're setting up the TA be the technical Advisory
board. We're bringing these bringing
folks together to try to match. Chur the, the funding process
and we're using new language to describe the commitments we make
to each other. The promises I was crew follow
up on things and and so there's a lot to mature there and we
want to bring a lot of that on chain as well and the reality is
it's not all entirely entirely specced out yet it's something
we have to we have to figure out together over time and to get
started you know were the The Proposal is to have some you
know, concrete things we can do that.
Include some limits, include some checks and balances as a
way, you know, to start kicking things off.
Right? Because we have this situation
with the cosmos that we have, you know, we have a community
pool. It's very small in the in the
grand scheme of community pools. And there, it has funded a few
things that have been actually quite successful.
But it hasn't it hasn't funded core development hasn't funded.
It's kind of a little bit of core development, but not, you
know, not really not really much in the scheme of stuff being
developed for the Hub and it hasn't really funded larger
larger projects. It's starting to with Prop, 72,
and funding. Some of these interchange
security projects. And that's the sort of kind of
success. We want, we want to build on
and, and build structure around, right?
And so the idea with with who, with the council's and the sort
of assembly structure and and the new issuance is to take all
that off to actually start having you know, more
sophisticated on chain governance.
And so, you know, the new updates to the white paper have
a little bit especially with the new Charter that sort of being
drafted, you know, has a sort of more detail on what those
constraints will be and how governments can start to Work in
a, in a more, sophisticated way. Yeah, and maybe just briefly.
If I can, sort of, maybe a little bit of a simplistic
description that like, I would make of this allocator ideas,
like right then the community pool, we have like funded some
things, right? There's been some funding for
like different chains of different projects or I bought.
This has been like small and and also the decision making process
like doesn't work so well. Write like having this everyone
vote on it is. I mean can work well, but
doesn't scale well. And did you deals in is
problematic? And then, you know, you have a
proposal. You can just vote.
Yes or No. But like it negotiation doesn't
really happen, right? So, like the way I do, I feel
like a simple wave my eyes would describe is okay.
We want to like do this at the largest scale and then also
create processes and, you know, decision-making were.
Yeah, but you have, are you able to make those decisions?
In a better way at a higher scale leveraging, people's
expertise better. I think that's I think that's
basically right. Yeah.
One way I've heard this described as Juno subdues like
similar structure to Juneau sub tabs where the sub dials are
tasked with allocating treasury Capital to individual projects.
And so we could see a future where there are multiple kind of
councils, these are effectively Dow's.
These Dows have some amount of money that they can.
Kate on projects that is within this Dows particular expertise,
right? So it could be like there could
be a doubt that's funding core infrastructure, open source
software, the Dow that's funding like conferences and maybe those
are Dau. This funding people doing
marketing and producing videos and there could be another Dow
that's funding a specific type of like you know, like funding
Dex's or defy protocols or you know, similarly to see the kind
of ecosystem of dows that we we seen on aetherium but only the,
a lot of them, most of the funding would be coming from
from the treasury from the allocator, does that sketch out
a little bit of the vision for what?
This might look like in the future.
Yeah, I'll say a couple of things like one is on its head
like we want to move more of the bureaucratic, like the process.
And like essentially the bureaucracy of growing, the
cosmos of maintaining the cosmos Hub into the Cosmos on itself.
Like this is this this vision of the cosmos hub, no longer serves
the masters of the ICF and aib but it serves it becomes to the
master so that's like one piece I would like to like a little
bit dig a little bit more until I've decided these ideas that
are in the white papers of like allocator Dows and Covenants and
stuff like that. Because one thing though that we
want, like the Souls to be a doing, and the is like one
aspect of it. Is this idea of going out and
like what essentially running like a strategic initiative, or
like a long-term incentive aligned developed like growth
plan for some application, right?
Where you're like, okay, like we're good at like this is a
more complex deal. Like we're going to like this
much governance token is going to be distributed to stagers.
This much, governance token for your application is distributed
to To the treasury. We you are scheduler at able to
chain like like organizing and managing.
Like a much more complex deal is something that the like Covenant
idea sort of floats. It's like the Hub can really do
Partnerships, right? Like one of the biggest
challenges has always been another challenge that Cosmos as
is because we are so decentralized.
Like how do you partner with the cosmos Hub has been like white
people will come to us and be like, hey, we want to do a
partnership with Cosmos more like High We Do.
I have a way of doing that. Like, there's no one to talk to.
We're just like, you do a partnership as polygons.
Are you do partnership an avalanche.
If we have this mechanism, if we have this Council mechanism,
there will actually be ideally councils that you go and talk to
you and be like, hey, like we actually have a procedure for
doing this. We've actually structure a
long-term economically incentivized alignment with the
cosmos at the atom holder. So that's one piece.
The other pieces is we do think that a big piece of this stuff
is going to be just, you know, an allocation that probably
should be small in the Getting but is just going out to teams
to go out and try and you know maximize their revenue and
maximize their ability to you know maximum profit in a long
way so that there's essentially like a REV share back with the
treasury. So you're like go out.
So like we're going to allocate funds or get people who
participate in those systems are going to have to essentially
like Bond as like a surety Bob, their own liquid state assets,
their own liquid state atoms, you can think of this as a Form
of like leveraged investing where like or like where the
cosmos Hub is essentially like an LP and a fund.
These are all like Trad five terms.
But like these are this kind of model is a way of actually going
out and like doing a little bit more looser a little less
centrally planned growth by just picking teams of people and and
like encouraging them to go out and find the best way of sort of
of generating value in the ecosystem.
Not again here. I don't know if there's I guess
there's been some discussions about this, some concerns about
this, especially when it comes to, you know, how does this
decision making work and is their accountability and control
and like anything. That's, of course, totally
understandable. Since is like, it hasn't been
done before I think we're the most most discussion is actually
been, is in, I think, in a few aspects are like, you know,
related to this allocated all Laughing or but not exactly it.
Right? So one is the question of how it
is being funded and to the question of the magnitude of the
funding. So the in the in the original
paper and I think this has been modified a little bit.
Now, there was this idea of a pink pudding.
Well, I guess first of all, right, there's some some
fundamental economic changes are also being proposed right where
they amount of atoms. Being issued is going up a lot
in the short term and with most of this money going into the
treasury. At least, this was the original
I paper and and then it's going down and basically the staking
rewards going down dramatically and and then in total I think
there was something like fifty six million atoms.
If I remember correctly, that would go into this treasury in
the next three years. Yes, but again, I think there's
been maybe you guys can talk a little bit about like, you know,
what was kind of the idea behind this, the thinking behind it.
What is the feedback being and what are the modifications that
have been made so far? So at a high level, the thinking
behind it was, you know, let's correct.
The position of the Hub. Having a pathetic size treasury
in the form of the community pool by, you know, by a large
mint into into the control of the atom holders that would give
it a treasury that is, you know, competitive.
Largest treasuries in the market so that, you know, put a
ridiculous number in, and, and initiate a conversation about
what people think and that's where that's where the white
paper started and that was very effective for, you know,
actually starting to have that car.
I will also say that part of the perception was is if you meant a
very conservative amount like one of the goals of the out of
my paper is to move to a more credible policy around issues,
if you meant a small amount, no one will perceive that Mentis.
Your issuance was credible because they will say, oh, you
will you were just Mythic a small about and then you will
come back for more and like where does this end, right.
And so a big part of the of the intended messaging or which
many, I think a lot of people appreciated but it's the Optics
of around, it didn't win. Maybe as precisely as I was
expecting that like, the idea was like a largemont over three
years. It's just supposed to last you
till the end of time, basically. And then That gets you out of
the basis of much more credible monetary policy.
The revision is basically realizing we're the
communication around the intent of this went wrong and basically
saying okay so it turns out that like from my point of view Adams
that sit in the the custody of Adam holders and are the same
thing as atoms that are not minted, that could be minted by
Adam holders, but I think we've gotten from conversations with
lots of people in various And the forums and various chats
that like there's a significant subset of the population of out
of olders who view these things really differently.
So like atoms that don't exist don't exist and atoms that are
mentioned that they that are held by at holders do exist in
some sort of conceptual way and there's a big difference between
these things. So it's great, like, it doesn't
matter, like we can just wait, we introduced the trenching
concept, the tragic cause that implements the kinds of controls
that we always anticipated being in the charter.
We never anticipated. He do a deployment Of 50 million
atoms into the into the economy, anytime soon.
But, you know, like we learn from the from how people
interact with the communication, and I think the charter and the
updates to the white paper. Now, more clearly communicate
the attend. Well, getting to the same point,
which is communicating to the market, that atoms are intending
to move to a more credible lower rate of issuance.
And that like we have we have sort of upper bounded the
expected issuance In a way that the market can then set
expectations room. Yeah I mean I do these in my
eyes you know, kind of mean Bucky's himself.
Right. Okay.
The community pool was being kind of like, you know, very
small and and I think that was one of the maybe mistakes in my
eyes that was made. When I think generally, like the
Adam economics, in my view when Cosmos was launched was really
good and has worked very well and I I do feel.
There was one thing that should have been done differently,
which is, I think the community food should have been larger.
And, and I think if there had been a much larger community
pool, then I think they would probably also have an early
writer this, some organizations, like, how do we use this now,
effectively? So I also feel like here, okay?
They like the obvious thing would just be like, okay, it
makes sense that more money is deployed and there's like ideas
for how to do it and structure to be built.
So why not just I don't know like you know, I was writing
Streetside why not - put At the community pool at the moment to
percent of from patients going there and put that to 20%, Which
I think would be much easier to for everyone to understand to
accept this like, okay, it's also easier for like it, let's
just say, cuz Okay now my taking words going down by 20% but it's
going there, which kind of makes sense like, so yeah, I'm curious
like why not this path? And maybe talk a little bit
about like they did logic behind this.
Monetary changes that You know, going Beyond just finding their
the allocator. Right?
Because that's one thing. But that's that's not the only
thing that's happening here. Yeah.
I mean, you know what, we're not trying to do is make a few
little tweaks to the cosmos Hub to just like move forward a
little bit, right? And, and sure there's lots of
little tweaks. You could do, you could, you can
tweak the community pool, you could, you know, make some small
proposals for this or that we wanted to do was come out with
the material upgrade to the hub's political economy to set
it up for this new, this new phase of the cosmos project, the
integration. Face right where the Hub is
going to be you know, a steward and a leader within this wider
interchain it is going to support the growth of that inner
chain. And and it's going to work
towards being able to you know, actually make a meaningful
intervention into the to the global monetary system in the
long term. I mean that's that's kind of the
goal of this all is more sustainable monetary and
financial system, right? And so sure we could we could
tweak we could tweak some small things but we wanted to have a
more material upgrade of the governance structure of the
sophistication of decision-making and that was the
idea behind behind putting forward the treasury.
And so, If you just minted stuff into the community pool and kind
of didn't do anything else, then you're still sort of leaving it
up to, okay. Well someone has to come along
and build organizational structure and figure out all
these things and so we wanted to kind of put those more together
and say, look okay maybe minting you know, 50 million atoms in
toe into one undefined spot over.
The course of three years is excessive fine.
You know, that's great. Let's keep talking about about
what to do. I think there's General
alignment that there needs to be more sophisticated on on chain
governance. And that's, that's really what
the treasury proposal is all All about.
And then it's more a question of actually How We Kick this thing
off, right? And so and so, the new proposal
is that okay, rather than just some consistent issuance into
the treasury, you know, over three years, it'll be broken up
into tranches. It's up to Adam holders to vote
to have those tranches, actually, enter the treasury
pool, maybe one idea, which would be, which would sort of be
a, you know, a compromise between all these things that
would actually maybe help kick things off a little better is to
have the first tranche go into the community pool, right?
And that might be able to allow things to get started more
quickly, right into the first tranche, you know, ends up in
the Any pool. Now, we have a community pool of
say, you know, 45 million atoms, but future tranches, are minted
into the treasury and the idea is that gives the community
pool. The initial kind of Runway to
get make sure the treasury is set up in a way that it's
comfortable minting into the treasury, right?
Because the whole point of the treasury's that we set up more
sophisticated sophisticated governance structure to actually
oversee to oversee funding and and so on.
Right? So you know, something like
that. I think I think we make a lot of
sense but just tweaking the community pool tax.
I don't think it's efficient. Because it doesn't say enough
about the actual, you know, larger scale governance changes.
We need to actually set up more sophisticated, decision-making
coordination. And, and so, totally, I mean, I,
I do recognize that I think those governors changes are
needed, right? I think my, the way I could, I
would imagine that was more like, okay, you know, the
community pool is increased and then there's a proposal right to
the community pool saying, on. Hey, now I don't know.
This 5 million atoms in this community pool.
Now, let's move. Like I don't know, two and a
half million atoms to this, you know, governance structure
control that can, then maybe line with like, exactly what's
described, which I think we'd also give a sense of like Adam
holder. Still feel like in control,
right? Because they will have to vote
on like the money being moved from the community pool there
and it goes through this familiar process that that
people know. Yes.
I think I think what I would be proposing is that the structure
is that the initial tranche goes into the community pool?
Ooh, and we could do that, you know, as soon as we can get an
upgrade to have the community pool mint and but the the
commitment is that future tranches are going to go into
the treasury, but it's the it's the out of holders that vote.
They actually have to pass a vote for those tranches to get
unlocked, right? So the first tranche goes into
the community pool, the community pool existing
governance, you know, has to deploy it to get the treasury
built and they have to deploy it to get the treasury built in a
way that they will be comfortable with future tranches
being minted directly into the treasury.
And then, of course, there will be, you know, and as for the
charter there, Ways for Adam holders, to get funds to flow
back from the treasury into the community pool into the
distribution module, and so on. But that way we sort of, you
know, set things up with the expectations at like.
Okay. We start out of the community
pool community pool funds, the creation of of the the Treasury
System and then future tranches go into the treasury but
require, you know, an Adam, hold their vote to actually to
actually create them and that way, you know, beyond the first
crunch, there's nothing else created.
But there is, you know, the the sort of commitment that future
things can be created by the atom holders in this in the
somewhat. Predictable kind of segue.
I think that would be a really nice.
Kind of balancing of all the interest of would give the out
of holders control, complete control over the initiation of
this thing, but would, but would be a credible commitment to
moving towards a new system. You know, that they actually
have to take responsibility for funding the development of you
know, up front and that way we kind of balance all the the
interest I think quite nicely. Okay.
But that like the sounds reasonable.
What this doesn't answer those that this this idea of like, No,
decreasing the issuance in this way.
That's proposing the white paper right?
Where it's basically goes up and then goes down a lot over three
years and then and then basically goes to put sort of
like minimal issuance. Okay.
So this is a separate question, right?
Is the, the question of issuance just Acres right?
And, and, you know, right now, you know, the reason the
issuance is the way it is, is with this exponential thing is,
is to balance this tension between security and In
liquidity in the, in the token, right?
So you need some amount steak. And so to ensure that there's
some, you know, some high amount staked.
We have this x exponential issuance model that data just to
sort of, you know, ensure that that's taking stays around
around two-thirds, but with liquid staking and you know the
those Dynamics start to change. And what we don't want is just
exponential issuance forever because that's, you know, is
unstable for various reasons. Ideally ideally, the Of the
computation for security is actually coming out of the
conversation for the security provided by stake.
Adam's is coming out of the things that are being
Securities. Not just coming out of, you
know, unsustainable it sort of infinite exponential issuance,
right? And so the idea is that the
drop-off in issuance is more than compensated for by, you
know, proceeds from interchange security and the scheduler in
the allocator, and all these sort of things.
What is perhaps missing is a way to more directly tie those
things together. Right?
So, you know, maybe in And some Ideal World.
It's like, well, the issuance drops off in a way that is
directly compensated by, you know, new flows from interchange
security and, and so on. And if it's, you know, if it's
not well, then there's a risk because it would, you know, if
they could make a commitment today to say, okay, lower
issuance great, you know, take the money out of our pocket, but
we don't, you know, interchange Securities, not live.
Yet, we don't know how, you know.
So, so that's the kind of thing we have to, we have to navigate
that and the, you know, actually building out a system where the
issuance drop off is, you know, commensurable who the new value
flows kind of directly in. Glee is is quite complicated and
you know, so we didn't we didn't propose doing that but there's
still quite a few levers that Adams takers can can control on
how this is going to happen on when the issuance drop off,
we'll start on on their ability to actually take funds out of
the treasury and redirect them back to the distribution module
to compensate. There's also the matter of if,
if, if there's not enough issuance and people on steak,
then once staking drops below the 2/3, It then then the
exponential issue with kicks in again, right?
So, there's a few different ways.
There are few different levers to kind of navigate this thing.
And I don't think we have, you know, the full picture the exact
mechanics here, but there's a number of things that can make
this work to allow the whole system to move towards a world
where the compensation for security is actually coming from
the system being secured rather than just from exponential issue
at the mat sort of the overall goal.
We're working towards the think is, you know, sound and
unnecessary the question, are you know, the details on how we
get there? There's a collective focus of
the mind that is required to get to among many different
stakeholders in the cosmos ecosystem and in the cosmos out
of itself. If we really want to get to a
world where we are securing the system by a cash flows, like I
think the like the cash flow there.
The cash flows appear to be out there.
Like there seems to be enough desire to build stuff on top of
the cosmos. Hub on top of interchange
security that we could plausibly get the cash flows.
Like Mev is plausibly large enough you know as an across the
block chain space, like there are enough new assets coming in,
there are enough things that could, that could potentially
generate the amount of liquidity.
So if he believed, if we attempt to go for an exponential growth
of the cosmos ecosystem which you know, a lot of sort of, you
know, investors in the box and space are I think is a very
large possibility and like hundreds of millions of dollars
of capital have been committed to this as a thesis, if we
believe in that as the cosmos Hub and we sort of focus, the
minds of Kosmos Hub stakeholders on saying, hey, like this is a
really important opportunity to make sure that we capture those
cash flows into the cosmos Hub, we end up, we can end up in a
really strong position around and Adam as an asset that then
like is the driving force for this change in the political
economy, rather than just another old coin.
Yeah, one of the things that struck me here is there's a
question that no one's asking here.
And I mean, like, these are, these are great ideas and I
think there are, it's great that we're debating them and it's
great. That there's a conversation
happening in ecosystem. But you know, the questions, no
one will question. No one is asking is what if Adam
holders are not up to the task? What if this doesn't work?
Like what if we decide that? Hey like, we need to relinquish
control of that. Like the ICF and sort of these
organizations need to relinquish control the Hub to the Adam
holders. But the in fact, in fact, the
atom holders are just not up to that task and fail miserably at
doing this thing, right? That we're talking about here.
Have you guys given any thought to that at all?
I think a lot about that lately. And I have a very
straightforward opinion on it, which is we always built Cosmos
as a way that could succeed in like, the cosmos ideas could
succeed without Adams succeed, right?
And that A little bit of that is a big part of the core goal.
And the vision is like we should take, we should take bigger
risks with Adam because Cosmos as the bigger idea.
The inner chain, as the bigger ecosystem is not somehow solely
dependent on the success of Adam.
And so, therefore, Adam should should take higher to take a
whole bunch of risk. Try to become something truly
amazing, potentially fail knowing that the core I'm that
we've constructed the, you know, F bows, osmosis Juno a gorik,
and like.you know, and Umbra, and anoma and Beyond are all
independent Locus has of power and energy, and are all going to
be running parallel experiments. And so, if the atom experiment,
does not does not succeed, all of these other experiments might
plausibly is exempt. I certainly, this is certainly
Adams, curse, right? Blessing and curse, is that it
created this thing that it's that that doesn't actually need
it to potentially succeed. Now, I believe that that that
Cosmos the inner chain, you know, will be have much more
probability of success with a strong, a strong chain committed
to upholding the values of The Wider interchain.
The way the way the cosmos up is that that's position to be, you
know, a sort of long-term ERM chain that stable and and simple
and follows the kinds of principles that were laying out
for its development of using interchange security to extend
functionality and so on. So the idea isn't to go and
take, you know, some, some crazy, some crazy risk with with
the Hub or, or, with the atom, but that's not to say that the
system can't evolve and that it can't evolve in both ways,
right? And, and that's what we're
proposing, is a bold way for the, for the system to evolve,
not, of course, to set it up for failure, but if anything to set
it up for, for success, in this new role, in answer to Leading
and stewarding the energy, And like, any Endeavor, of course,
of course, it might not succeed or might not succeed, you know?
The way, the way we expect when it comes down to, you know, this
problem of our, the atom holders up to it, right?
And people talk about it or decentralized governance and all
this kind of stuff. This is something we think about
a lot. And and you know, from my
experience, the thing that matters very significantly is
building sound organizational structure, right?
And you know, people like to throw doubt and say oh well just
have decentralized governance and you know, Nothing will work
and you pay a bunch of lip service to decentralization.
And you know, that's not, that's not a real thing.
That's not how we're going to actually, you know, materially
move move the bar on on decentralized governance.
And what's interesting about the position, the cosmos Hub is in
it, you know, kind of uniquely in the world, certainly the
world of in the world of blockchains is the level of
decentralization around the core, the core Development
Group. And the requirement that they
actually figure out how to how to coordinate and work together
to build this thing and build the organizational structure and
the institutional structures. To do it all.
And so it's not just like well throw it all up to the Adam
holders and you know, let them figure it all out without any
kind of support or institution building.
The entire exercise here is to actually construct political
Economic Institutions that can carry this thing forward and and
and it seems like we're doing it in a sort of deliberate and, you
know, constructive and thoughtful way.
Almost unlike anything else. Anything else we're seeing out
there, right? We're really trying to drill in,
on the structure of these things on how you set up good
governance on the language, you need to use to facilitate that,
you know, what I like about this.
What we call the Workflow language that he thinks it's a
cult, it might be but you know, every successful thing is a
called. So at some point in its in his
life but the point is to actually be very deliberate and
not just not just throw things up to the centralized governance
but actually to construct, you know, organizational structure
and and institutions that can support this thing for the long
term. That's something.
You know, we focused on quite a bit informal and something
we're, you know, we're building out and in the wider ecosystem
to get all these organizations to work together because it's
not just about some ephemeral cloud of Adam holders.
It's also about the individual people that they are that are
working together New concrete things and the conversations
they have and, you know, the commitments they make to each
other and so actually, you know, deliberately trying to sue for
subsurface all that and talk about it, and cut through the
awkwardness of, you know, making promises and commitments to
deliver. And following up on all these
workflows is super important, is how we're focused on making this
whole thing, a success in a way that's quite different from from
basically, every other, every other ecosystem and, and chain
out there, Let's move on to the interchange scheduler which is
the other part here. And, you know, just a give a
high level of The Interchange schedule as I understand it.
So, the interesting scheduler is a mechanism by which actors in
ecosystem are going to be able to bid on block space.
So validators will be able to auction off their block space to
Market participants. So it's effectively a block by
block space, Futures Market or a mechanism that allows us to
Market to them. Are you Walk space more future
blog, space Market not a black text based Futures market and so
this this will effectively allow Market participants to buy up
that block space. Probably do some some sort of
block ordering or like block construction block, building
work and reap the rewards of that of that Meed work.
So can you explain here? What's the, what is the
motivation behind the scheduler? And why does it need to be
something that the cosmos Most Hub delivers as of
functionality. And the reason why I asked that
is, I've talked to some folks who either directly or
indirectly told me that.