Avril Dutheil: Neutron – Interchain Smart Contracts on Cosmos #504

Transcript

welcome to epicenter the show which talks about the Technologies projects and people driving decentralization and the blockchain revolution I'm Felix and I'm here with my co-host meheroy today we're speaking with Avril dutyle also known as Spate who's the general manager of neutron Neutron is the first consumer chain secured by The cosmosavia Interchange security and is focused on providing secure interchange defy via Cosmos and smart contracts welcome Avril to the epicenter hey folks thanks for having me yeah uh great to have you and congrats on the recent launch I think very big milestone for Cosmos at large and we're as many people know epicenter hosts and people are quite uh hyped about Cosmos

generally and so yeah we're glad to have you on and would love to hear first as it's custom about your background how you how you got into crypto how you got to where you are today yeah for sure um I think there's there's there's a few things right like there's part of it was kind of random just a friend you know told me about you know hey there's this uh electronic cash system called Bitcoin that you know um that exists now and you should look into it and at the time I had been um looking quite deeply into a lot of privacy related like concerns in in society and in different technological stack that we use for our day-to-day operations

um and you know they like Snowden Revelations and such had made me pretty um wary and untrust like I I wasn't trusting establishing institutions and big companies um tremendously and so you know the fact that one it was unmediated um value exchange and that it was at the time at least considered pseudonymous and so therefore pretty good for your privacy um were two of the things that initially drove my interest into it and so I ended up like reading the the white paper and like finding it like finding it kind of fascinating although you know um I think at that time I was still in high school um and so just bought some Bitcoin at that point I think on cobase or

something um but then you know life happened um and I K and I got back to things around the time where um device summer was a thing um that sort of brought me back into into the ecosystem because now it wasn't just hey we can send this asset back and forth it was also that we can make programmable you know applications that live on the blockchain entirely have the same properties but the use cases are like way more diverse and so that that brought me back entirely into the space and I basically started having you know my day job uh plus my nighttime crypto job I guess of researching how these things worked and um what could be built on top of them um that led me to become more and more

active on train and in like web3 communities um some on ethereum like later but also some on on Pera with a bunch of the protocols that were there I ran some AMA well I helped with some amas of anchor protocol the infamous back in the days but in any case that eventually led me to you know like pretty random thing right which I was that you know light on Tara was I'm going to do an upgrade and they posted about it in the anchor forum and the last line said something like hey by the way if you think you have skills that we could use just like get in touch with us on on DMS right and so I did and so we started having like calls and stuff in a few months later I joined the the team initially as a community manager

um and our team at that time was very strong on the technical side we had like a lot of very very skilled and knowledgeable Engineers but we lacked a lot of like the the software functions like Business Development marketing and all of these things like nobody wanted to do it that's not what people you know were good at and so you know from Community manager just like managing social medias I started doing more and more of these things basically became I guess head of marketing so like de facto and then head of growth handling some of the business development for the project as well um and so that's sort of like how I eventually um was asked to basically hey did you want to actually lead the team um which is what I do now and what I've

been doing for um for quite some time now um so it's you know it's pretty random sort of Life Journey but it has been you know an honor but also something that has taught me a whole lot so that has been really really cool to go through all right so so basically initially you were working mostly on Lido on Terra and then that fell apart and or or was it like you switched to Neutron was it already its own team or or how about that yeah so like our team built light onto like built the architecture the code that ran like ontar in the past um and the thing is like while we were doing this like Lido ontera was the second most successful implementation of Lido uh Beyond ethereum it was like

before the terror crash it was about a 10 billion dollar tvl protocol so it was like a pretty massive protocol actually and so you know that that was a big part of the work we were conducting like onboarding phases for validators and such so like that was a big part of the work but it like aside to this right there was the fact that the vertical was really big on on Terra but Terra was you know in our head you know part of this wider Cosmos ecosystem but it wasn't very well connected with it and because you know there's quite a bunch of peripheral State chains in in Cosmos like the ecosystem is made of of them it made a lot of sense to try and and allow the protocol to um to scale and basically provide services for these other options as well the problem was that you know the like

so we basically started doing a lot of research on like Hey how do we expand this protocol and make it available across chains basically and at the time the sort of like easy answer was like Hey you take the small contracts and you redeploy them wherever you can but that doesn't really scale and most of the cosmos blockchain don't even have small contract capabilities so the the model was like flawed right we there needed to be another sort of like um playbook for how you actually do crushing applications in Cosmos and so that's sort of the the research that led us to develop Neutron at the end of the day right the three sort of like pain points that we we were faced with was one a lot of these blockchains lacked security like Economic Security and that meant that you know if if any protocol

really was going to be tremendously successful and attract a lot of like tvl it would turn into a Target and potentially you know help justify attacks against the blockchain itself which is you know not ideal let's say so security was an issue um the lack of Crossing infrastructure for Cosmos my contracts was the other main blocker whereby you know like token transfers were generally something that you could do um at the time already but you know ICA so interesting accounts which had already released where was very unwieldy to use and for small contracts you didn't have any bindings for for your smart contracts you actually leverage that primitive and so you essentially would have had to you know make small contracts that

essentially Port the code of ICA into the cosmosom layer um so that you essentially rebuilding the entire infrastructure and while you know that that may be fine for one team that has you know a lot of bandwidth and a lot of experience with these things it just it doesn't make a lot of sense from an architectural perspective like why should every dab basically end up recreating the infrastructure that they need to to to to do crushing stuff basically like that should have been part either of IBC or like sort of like the the platform that the small contracts were on and then the last one was also that you know Tara had a very strong Community was like you know like a lot of big blockchains um like Solana and then ethereum and such was pretty tribal and as a result it didn't really

um it wasn't very homogeneous with Cosmos right and so if you had uh primitive going from Tara to the rest of the ecosystem the chances that the immune system of the cosmos ecosystem would actually repel that primitive fight against it or don't want to adopt it too willingly we're high and sort of the other way around as well right like Cosmos Primitives were tricky to adopt on the Terra ecosystem as well right Beyond osmosis which actually um was eventually fairly well adopted so you know finding some way to have either one of credible neutrality or sort of like ecosystem alignment by default was something that was also important and so that's those are kind of like the the early premises that let us develop Neutron the way it is today

um whereby you know of the three problems security Prussian infrastructure and credible alignment one in three are actually solved by replicated security we have very high Economic Security from the box thanks to you know all of the stake and all of the validators of the cosmos Hub and we also have very strong alignment with the cosmos Hub itself right and so you know if you're part of Cosmos you probably have interest in the cosmos sub remaining or leading blockchain a very strong blockchain and sort of like the the the shelling point for the ecosystem and so you know replicated security solves one and three and then the crashing infrastructure was the remaining problem and so that's that's why we focused on on this one and we implemented

um interchange transaction module which is essentially a way to make it very easily accessible for smart contracts to use interesting accounts um and more so basically you can you know register accounts on other blockchains execute transactions retrieve execution stages and do callbacks as well um so you know you can have sequences of actions that execute across chains and the interesting queries module which allows you to retrieve data directly from the storage of other blockchains right over IBC so you know we like replicated security solves two of our problems and then we developed the solution to to solve the um the other one and we think that this together basically makes sort of the ideal package to build crushing applications that can scan across the

entire Cosmos ecosystem in a way that's more viable than it used to be let's say so um foreign listeners that may not have followed because most ecosystem a lot Could you actually give an example of a cross chain application so maybe one example like in theory where where we go like maybe three or four years in the future and say okay this is what a cross chain application on Cosmos could do and then maybe one example more in practice which is like here's the top cross chain application that is live today and and what it what it can do it may be primitive but it kind of demonstrates the point

yeah that's that's a really good question so I think I like there's a few like depending on the type protocol you're building your your architecture is going to be different I think a a pretty good example in general is um you know we talked about lighter a bit but let's say let's imagine like Russian liquid staking right because that's sort of like where the idea for Neutron came from so might as well so the way you could build it is essentially something like it could look something like the following you would have a set of small contracts on one blockchain Neutron in this case um and that set of small contract we could contain all of the business logic as well as all of the Cross chain management logic now um this product like this set of small contracts could um you know through either governance or

through a multi-sig or what have you you could accept a transaction that allows it to register a set of IBC channels and create a set of accounts on another blockchain so that it can start like an onboard that blockchain to liquid sticking basically and once that's done so that's that's like you know expanding to your new blockchain instead of having you redeploy contracts and making changes and such it becomes one transaction right you just trigger that happening at the protocol level and it doesn't and then that's that's mainly it um and then once once that's done basically you can have the same UI for the user um you know you have one UI that you go to that has whatever the protocol brand is um and they can choose whatever asset they want to stake probably their O2 are

detected by their wallet EG let's say I connect to that liquid signal protocol I have Adam it propose like it can offer me to stake that atom but if I also have osmo and that chain has been onboarded to the liquid sticking protocol it auto detects that I can have this and maybe I can stick both at the same time but what happens in the background is basically you know if my atom is on the cosmos Hub or my osmo and Osmar um there's essentially two ways to do it like the way that uh liquid's taking protocols like stride for example do it currently is that they essentially build the transaction that allow you to transfer all of this to their blockchain and then they'll eventually end up doing the staking operations by sending them back to their native chains and staking them with interesting accounts and icqs

you can do that like that's very easy to do actually especially with you know the improvements in ux and and apis that are available today in Cosmos but but you can also do it in a slightly different manner whereby instead of having to do an IBC transfer the user would simply on the same blockchain send the asset to an account that the protocol controls and the protocol will be able to verify that it has received the deposit using an interesting query basically right it could well that or just sending a message or like there's multiple ways to implement it but the protocol is able to verify that basically and so as soon as the protocol knows that it has received custody of the asset that needs to be staked it knows because it knows the exchange rate how many of the

derivatives it like the the sorry the liquids taking tokens it needs to send you right so basically as soon as it confirms the deposit it can send the the token directly to the user's wallet either on the Chain where the main business logic of the protocol exists or on the other chain where the user had their asset right that's something that the user can can choose basically the protocol itself is able to just do the transfer itself if needed like that's sort of like what happens in the background right you have one user deposits tokens into an account that's controlled by the protocol and then the protocol can verify the deposit and then the protocol can manage that that collateral for example by staking it and it can you know re-delegate actively by verifying the state of the blockchain to

know what are the performances various metrics of the of the the validators and just like moving stake according to its validator set like management policy um so basically all of this works across chain and then from the user's perspective it's actually really easy it's I log into one website I connect my wallet it detects what assets I have there tells me which ones I can stake with that protocol I select that click it and maybe there's one two or three transactions that pop on my screen and just confirm them and then I get the derivative so that's kind of like the whole point of this right is that it abstracts away all of the need to move from one blockchain to the other that currently exists in Cosmos although new apps are a lot better at this um than than previously they were but it removes

all of that crushing complexity basically it makes it so that there's one product if you want to interact with it you just go to the website and connect your wallet yeah so so the way I'm kind of imagining this is um one of the raw technologies that is kind of that is not maybe even Neutron specific but is is there because of the way cosmasters can communicate with each other is this idea of an interchain account where if you have like block shape A and blockchain B you can imagine an interchange account on blockchain B as just being a normal address for blockchain B it's looks like a normal address to blockchain B but it that address is not controlled

buying a private key as such but by the entire blockchain a itself so it can be controlled by the entire blockchain a itself or it can be controlled by some smart contrary that's written on blockchain a both modalities are kind of possible in in Cosmos in general you don't really have the the opportunity for contracts to control one of these accounts only the blockchain itself can do it right and so right like that's one of the things that that we had to do for Neutron to enable a small contract to control an account um we we did need like basically the the authentication logic still lives in the blockchain itself right but now your smart contract has a way to tell the blockchain hey I want you to register an

account on that other blockchain that I will control essentially um so so that that's one of the things that Neutron brings to the table basically so yeah so I mean if you think of like you think of that at this start if you think like Bitcoin then Bitcoin normal like if you add on like a very early Bitcoin address it was an address controlled by one private key then in Bitcoin came the Next Generation which is like in multiple sake whereas live against one address by it but controlled by three or five or seven private keys and then like it's ethereal kind of like generalized that to say that okay you can have an address which

now is called a smart contract and then behind that uh behind that address is not private keys at all but rather some like code and and data like logic and data and that's controlling like that that address at this this is my kind of like a further generalization of that maybe not generalization maybe the not right word but a new type of interaction where you can have an address living on a blockchain but it's controlled by another blockchain altogether all by risk our contract on another blockchain yes or money smart contract on another uh another blockchain so kind of like interesting Electronics yeah it's even like you can have multiple accounts on multiple blockchains all being

controlled by the same small contract on one block trade um which is kind of cool in my opinion exactly so like you can imagine that this kind of like like the generalization of basically single Sig address multisig address smart contract is like a blockchain itself controlling addresses on other blockchains and then a smart contract on that blockchain controlling lots of addresses on on other blockchains so really like that's one way to kind of like think of an interchail account another way to think of an interchain account could well be that sometimes like people are used to the idea of a custody service right like so

you you you you want to go to a custody service and have the custody service generate some private keys and manage your private keys and then the custody service will kind of interact with various depths on your behalf and so what kind of a cosmos change like interchange accounts or Cosmos shares fundamentally allow you to do is to think is to build a distributed custody service in a way where um you can imagine like a cosmos chain is like a decentralized network but because it can create addresses on other networks and and you can load those addresses with with funds you can start to imagine like a cosmos chain or Neutron specifically

as like a distributed custodian of assets on on multiple networks so do you think that imagination also works I think that works I think you could build an application that does that on Neutron for example or I think you could even make um you know an app chain that focuses on doing this um entirely in which case you would be able to I mean in both case you would be able to you know build some safety mechanisms and such in in into the code itself as well um so I'm pretty sure I've heard somebody at a conference recently talk about basically just like their thought process I'm doing exactly that so you know that's that's like to to tie this back to Neutron it's like

Neutron was not designed to do only this but it would certainly provide tools that would allow you to build this if you wanted to and I do think that that technology can be used to to build exactly that at scale actually um so it's it's a pretty interesting so like the thought experiment yeah so I mean maybe you can imagine Neutron is kind of like this kind of like orchestrator chain where I can go and write a smart contract and I can kind of orchestrate assets on multiple Cosmos networks we are by using these interchange queries and and and and kind of nitrogen accounts one example that's particularly interesting here is an idea

that was um you know developed and published by Delphi Labs with um what they call the share liquidity amm the slam basically what it sort of like the the thought process that they had there is that they were looking at you know like uniswap initially was you know it's it's one amm on one chain that has its liquidity there and you can trade through that pool right and then we had another generation of dexes um like you know curve Sushi and others that started launching on other chains as well right so now you have you can be the same pool or different pools depending on what assets are available but basically you have you know numerous pools on numerous networks each with their own liquidity right and then the problem with that is that it's

not particularly Capital efficient because perhaps you have a lot of liquidity for ethereum on ethereum but if you want to have you know as much liquidity for that on another Network you'll need to you know compensate for the change in trust assumptions for for the efforts required with moving the liquidity extra extra so that dlps are actually interested in providing that on another Network as well right and so what you end up having is that you don't necessarily have a great match between the demand for various assets on each deployment and the liquidity that's available right because that liquidity may be maybe it's in a pool in that protocol somewhere on some chain but it you know there's no guarantee that it will be on the right pool so that you don't have a great degree of guarantee that just because that Dex is liquid on

ethereum it is also on the chain that you're trying to use it in and so from there there is sort of like another generation of dexes that tried to essentially have the Dax function in such a way whereby you would have a deployment on each chain and all of these deployments would be connected in a way whereby each of them would behave as if it had the aggregate liquidity of the system as a whole right that's a very appealing perspective because now it's you know fully Capital efficient it doesn't matter where people are depositing their their liquidity and such wherever you're trading you're going to benefit from it basically the problem with that though is that because there is some latency between you know whatever rebalancing operations may

occur between the the various deployments that means that there's you know plenty of opportunities for arbitragers to come in and basically are the pools and take the value before the the protocol itself has the chance to rebalance itself as a whole right um and so what what that led is that basically the impermanent loss becomes extremely dramatic for LPS and that sort of killed the Primitive um and so Delphi kind of like you know looked into all of these and they postulated the idea that you could still take the idea of that Improvement where whereby you want to connect these deployments so that they provide um the optimal training experience for Traders and um are as capital efficient

as possible but make it in a way where you don't get that like bad trade-off of you know like losing liquidity to Arbitrage and what they came up with was the idea that you could have a DEX that has all of its deployments connected um and then dynamically allocates its liquidity across pools on the various networks Based On Demand right when the easier way to do this is basically you actually physically move the LPS around um like the the assets around via IBC or another bridging protocol and you use um sort of like a reactive algorithm so that you're for example using interesting queries to observe sort of like the use usage data on the Chain

right how many transactions are there trying to swap for X asset or how many you know what's the volume or all of these metrics right you can retrieve them with an icq and then you can have an algorithm that just reacts to the changes in in this usage to basically reallocate liquidity accordingly that's one way that you can do it but the the paper basically um try to show that if you know even if it's not going to be accurate 100 of the time there are good chances that you can make algorithms that are actually good enough to most of the time predict accurately um where the liquidity will be needed and so by using that as an input rather than you know just reacting to the

protocol you can essentially dynamically move that liquidity around and another Improvement that you can do is like instead of actually physically moving the assets every time perhaps you can just have a centralized accounting of what liquidity is in the system and then allow the various satellites to essentially you know take on depth against each other and then settle with assets when required because the the you know there's not else liquidity to under a trade or you're approaching some threshold as such so that at the end of the day you're minimizing the cost of the entire protocol by not having to have you know like token transfers and such too frequently and you're maximizing how close you can get to the to the the ideal scenario of you know the the liquidity of the protocol is

used on on all things right so it's a compromise towards that first version but at least it's not vulnerable to to the same attacks and with you know architecture like like infrastructure like what Neutron provides it actually becomes a lot more manageable to build stuff like this and so I think you know you asked me before about um what's a good example to understand what you can do with this um the liquid seeking example is an easy one in my opinion because it's pretty simple you have you know one account you accept deposits you send the the derivatives and then the Slam in my opinion is a really good example of the change in experience that we may experience by um like in user experience that we may see by um you know witnessing the the the appearance of like Russian protocols

over the next few years basically whereas it doesn't matter where you're interacting with this protocol with you can sort of get the best out of it anyway because it sort of manages itself as um you know one body rather than separate segregated deployments yeah that's that's really cool so yeah so essentially like the the superpower that you can give developers is that they ultimately have to write a smart contract and deploy it on the neutron shade but that smart contract can control accounts on on a lot of different networks and it can optimize kind of liquidity across a lot of different networks which could be important in in like various applications

so I think there's a few benefits right like the first one is like as you said you can optimize liquidity across multiple networks um I think another one of the key benefits is that you can you can provide a Crossing experience that doesn't feel like a crushing experience right because no no one likes to be changing the chain in their wallet or stuff like all of these extra steps they're just burdensome they should be removed eventually for IBC to win it needs to be completely you know like like you don't think about TCP when you're using the internet just should be the same for I for IBC right IBC wins when we're able to make um you know front like like consumer facing products that are completely you know removed from the actual intricacies of the of the crush

infrastructure that underlies them right so basically you know new Trans infrastructure allows you to well first build question protocols right which was a lot trickier before and it allows you to do it without having to redeploy like re-create a lot of like infrastructure because they come so like clean hand for you basically you already have the bindings to use them um but but it also yeah so ux benefits and I think sort of like the emergent property of this is that it sorts of um flip the script of the playbook for how you make a successful small contract platform right like traditionally if you you know like I'm building a small contract platform I want all of the liquidity all of the users and I

want all of the apps uh on top of my network to be exclusive to my network because that's how I maximize the appeal of my network to you know the broader audience and and and the potential user base right now with with Neutron because it allows you to actually create intropical crushing protocols it's also flips the switch and that we actually need other projects and other options to be successful so that there are markets to interoper like markets and app chains to interoperate with right and what what it does is that it basically allows from the perspective of the developers instead of having to choose a platform by virtue of its specific market and Market size and its specific feature set it allows you to essentially

Deploy on introns so that you don't have to choose right so for example if I'm really interested in in fast execution for parts of my protocol um I can deploy on Neutron and then leverage say for some of these interactions if I'm interested in privacy for some of like some other part of my protocol let's say I want to do sealed bid auctions or private voting perhaps I can just deploy an enclave on like secret Network and then you know anonymize some of the traffic going into my application so that I basically leverage their features um without you know in a way that's not like exclusive right I can deploy a neutron and leverage the features of these multiple blockchains but also because it makes it easier for me to bring my application to Market on these blockchains as well I know I'm no longer

constrained by the market size EG the you know the amount of value on Neutron and the number of users on Neutron I can now also you know with the same deployment I can also tap into the liquidity and user basis of other blockchains and other projects right yeah but you are basically still limited by the support for interchange accounts or like IBC in like but you can tap into this entire ecosystem for resistance the signal which is yeah or specifically yeah um there there are some dependencies in Cosmos though like icis are pretty well adopted um a lot of a lot of chains have the like icas have sort of two sides to that to them there's the controller side which allows you to register accounts on

other chains and then there's the whole host side um there's not that many chains that have the controller functionality enabled but but most of them actually have the um the host chain enabled which means that Neutron can register accounts on them all right do you expect that to change like many chains will become or will try to become sort of this controller chain since if you already like what are the benefits if you're the controller chain like yes it's like sort of go through you I guess you can sort of capture value there I think it really depends on the project right um if you don't have a use for your protocol to be doing stuff on other blockchains or or maintaining assets on other chains then there's no point in you having the the controller

functionality like in Neutron's case that was important because you know the assumption is that developers buildings or contract applications that want to expand crushing will want their smart contracts to actually control some of these things right so it was a requirement rather than than radio Choice um but but for other applications um you know you may want to use it for example let's say I'm a I'm um lending and borrowing protocol like Umi um maybe I want to use um maybe I want to have the ability to send tokens to an enclave that I control an account that I control on another chain to be able to liquidate through existing public liquidity on an amm or such um and so you know I could use interesting accounts to do that but now is that the most efficient way that I

can liquidate well that's not a given right because IBC and especially today is still um you know it's asynchronous and it's relatively slower than um than what you can do on one blockchain right because you do need to wait for multiple blocks to be passed for the entire sequence of events to unfold so that may be a good solution but potentially there's a better way to do it right and for example like Umi currently to the extent that I uh to the extent of my knowledge what they do is instead they auction off the collateral on Umi so that the cross chain transfers are not handled by Umi and they don't have to wait for that they just you know they just do the auction and whoever is is the fastest gets gets the bonus essentially so you know there are trade-offs here

especially in terms of speed today although I expect that this will become a lot less burdensome in the future because block time hasn't mattered so much in Cosmos so far but as more and more applications are built upon IBC like latency is going to become more of a friction point and so there will be more of an incentives for change to sort of like improve in this front in in my opinion so I expect block time to Trend lower in Cosmos because there's a lot of low hanging fruits in this regard um but now you know an alternative for what Umi might be interested in having interesting accounts for is for example how about they allow um users to deposit collateral from other chains right like that that's that's a lot more you know palatable for

you because it basically provides um easy access to the protocol um from other chains that people might have assets and interest in right and so for example they could deploy an outpost on Neutron that allows folks to deposit into the protocol without having to do the ABC transfers to the Umi blockchain uh just by sending to an account that they control on Neutron and then just moving and depositing the the tokens at a periodic interval for example something like this um so that would be possible and in fact that's kind of the route that osmosis is going for um it's not necessarily like ICA specific but basically they're going they're working on this Outpost model um where the Outpost is what do we call like a lean Outpost it doesn't actually

hold any liquidity so it's not synchronously composable but it's so it's it serves as like an interface an API for protocols that want to leverage osmosis so right so you have that small contract for example on Neutron and you know it can have a UI that allows you to use it as if it was a decimal Neutron or other smart contracts can interact with that smart contract to basically send calls to the osmosis blockchain right so if you send it to token to do a swap it will take that token send it to osmosis swap that token as long as your slippage metrics are you know are valid and the slippage didn't get out of hand and then return the proceeds to you basically right so it serves as like an API for Christmas essentially so there's a bunch

of models that that that applications can take right from the most heavy outposts kind of like Mars what Mars is doing for example on osmosis where the collateral actually lives on the blockchain where the Outpost is to the leaner models where like which osmosis or Cosmos lab are are doing where it's mostly an API all right yeah super interesting I I think yeah we basically you you mentioned the three kind of core things that you wanted to solve or that you saw the problems in the cosmos ecosystem right I guess we talked mostly about the second one now and you you mentioned I think ecosystem alignment and security which are basically coming out of the box more or less through interchange security so I guess we can

dive a little bit into your or like interchange security you know what is interchange security you probably start there and we can get into like how how you how you adopted it how you leverage it but maybe maybe you start simple and then you can sort of explain what interchange security is or replicated security we also hear it called sometimes so yeah maybe give our listeners a bit of a the basics of interchange security here yeah for sure so interesting security is a family of Technologies um from the great category of shared Security in blockchain which is essentially you know how do we use the same asset to secure multiple broadcast exchange and it's a flavor let's say it's a category of how many that is specific to Cosmos right because it

leverages IBC so interchange interesting security Now the specific variant that currently exists in production is called replicated security and um the the sort of like one-liner pitch for what replicated security is is it is a technology that allows the provider chain in this case today the cosmos Hub to provide the same Economic Security that it personally enjoys like that the blockchain enjoys to another chain called either a partner or a consumer chain and it does so by leveraging its validator set and its stake and IBC right so there's a connection between the two blockchains that allow them to

exchange messages and that allows the the sort of like proof of stake setup of there's a reward for validators doing their job and there's a punishment for them misbehaving and we just you know track as we go and as long as they validate properly they get rewards and it's a misbehave they get slashed um it basically allows you to reproduce that setup except instead of having every component um on one chain you have it you have them sort of like distributed on Two Chains I think like it would be interesting to cut us compare and contrast like replicated security to other kind of models that are there across the

ecosystem for example maybe we can start with like comparing it to old car dot so in in polka dot there's like a Renee chain and then there are like para chains and then the the validators that are running the are the same as those that are kind of running the para chains so in replicated security at at high level looks very similar there's a set of validators that are running the cosmos of uh and then now those same validators are also running the the neutron J so it looks similar like what's what's the difference between uh is it just like Cosmos of

just copying What poonka DOT set out to do or is there a material difference between these these two designs now clearly it's just a copy um you know we were a bit jealous of of polkadot so we just decided to to apply the Playbook no I mean like like the first thing is like that has been in the works for quite a long time right so I I don't think it would be fair to say that it's just a hub like copying this but it as you said like they are very similar in sort of like the um the structure of that technology with I guess one well I I would say like two major differences the first one is that um in polka dot it's this mechanism is is required to join the polka dot

ecosystem if you you know if you don't get your power chain um attached to the relay chain you basically don't have a polka or chain um you maybe have some code but you don't have a functioning blockchain whereas in Cosmos like all of the cosmos Technologies are available for you to use and in your own project regardless of whether or not the Hub wants you to be part of the you know Adam economic zone um the sort of like you know like I guess you could say the Adam economic zone is uh to the cosmos Hub what polka dot is to the relay chain right it's the ecosystem of chains around it um and so like that does the first thing right interesting security is not required to launch in Cosmos and in fact the vast majority of change in Cosmos

today don't leverage like interesting security at all um and the second thing is in polkadot you have a mechanism for the onboarding of new chains that is very very formal EG there's an auction and whatever gets the most dot you know locked into that auction is what gets a power chain slot um in Cosmos for better for worse there is no formal mechanism right so it is um I guess as usual in Cosmos it's done through governance right so there is a sort of like public negotiation process and that has you know trade-offs on the one hand it's less clear you know it's the ex it's a lot more flexible but it's also less clear what should be expected

from there um but at the same time it also allows you a lot of flexibility because let's say um there there's sort of three main tools that you can um sort of like put into the the balance to get listed on like to get onboarded into replicated Security today obviously there needs to be something in in it for the hub for the for the the habitants Community to vote for your change to be onboarded um and that in my opinion can come mostly in three ways um first one it's either if you have a token if your project has a token then you can allocate some of these tokens either in one go or through streaming or whatever distribution mechanism you want to the cosmos Hub right that's a very

straightforward sort of like kind of the second one um is if you if your protocol generates Revenue in whatever way then it can allocate a portion of that revenue and that may be transaction fees on the network that may be fees on specific operations like for example for a deck swap fees or or what have you it can be me Revenue it can be you know whatever you can think of if you generate Revenue you can share that with the Hub and then the last thing um which is paradoxically I think the strongest element early on but also the one that is the like basically impossible to quantify and so it's very difficult for to take that into account into the thought process is sort of the Strategic value

um to the hub and to Adam as an asset that adding the project may have right so for example you know like one of the one like some of the projects that are looking planning to onboard to replicate the security in the in the in in the short term are liquid sticking app Shades so beyond the fact that these protocols through their financial services generate Revenue by taking cut on the liquids taking derivatives so that's one of the things right or maybe they have a token and they allocate some to the hub that's another mechanism um the this one of the deciding factors is that because these protocol actually handle and manage a large amount of atom which is crucial to the security of the

cosmos Hub itself there is a strong incentive to ensure that these chains are adequately secured so that they're not too easy to capture for somebody who would be like looking to try to do you know like a governance or economic attack on the Hub right because if you compromise These Chains you're going to be compromising the mechanisms like the you know the nutrition accounts that control the stake on the cosmos Hub as well and so that gives you potentially a way to lever up on the damage that you could do to the hub right and so here we have like this third lever that comes into play whereby there's a strong strategic incentive for the Hub to secure These Chains whether or not it's going to make a profit by doing so right um so there's this sort of like three categories that that apply in replicated

security and they're difficult to assess their currency doesn't exist a formal model on exactly how to do that the right way and there's a bunch of trade-offs EG one one approach that that we sometimes hear is that the Hub should launch as many consumer chains as possible because this way it has it optimizes its chances of having one two or three unicorns in in the batch in which case that's a really good outcome and you can just trim off the the projects that fail over time you know that's one way of doing things um but the the problem the limiting factor here is that while that's probably technically possible economically speaking that implies that validators now have to run you know 20 30 40 times more infrastructure which

means that that basically closely translates to 40 50 times the the infrastructure cost right running an additional blockchain in propagated security basically translate to the same cost as running another chain without replicated security at least today um and so you know that cost that burden on the validators is currently the limiting factor to the adoption and growth of the number of chains on on replicated security and that's something that's actively being worked on by numerous teams like we did quite a bunch of work on this like we were the first one to actually push for this to be modeled um but but but there's quite a few teams like Duality a whole bunch of validators um course one included included um are working on trying to push for a

more sustainable or framework or model for replicated security and there's a bunch of ideas sort of like floating around like having different commission rates on the various blockchains having a stipend mechanism having different types of emissions requiring like higher thresholds of Revenue share or tokens allocations to the hub extra extra um to to to you know try and find a stable economic equilibrium for this basically um now I'm like maybe long term I'm pretty optimistic that this will be found and especially because the current flavor of instrument security that we're talking about replicated security is sort of like the first iteration of the technology which enforces that all validators with a few caveats we can

touch upon them like later but basically all of the validators of the cosmos Hub have to run every consumer chain that is watch listed by governance and with a few caveats like again but basically um that means that there's no way for the validators to basically manage their exposure to the cost of consumer chains and the revenues that they or or rewards that they may generate right um in in a upcoming you know version of that technology which I think is the opt-in security validators would have the ability to decide whether or not they want to secure these chains that can create sort of a game theoretical problems whereby if you had the first validator by voting power opting in with just two validators from the bottom of the set up thing in you would end up in

the situation where the voting power on that consumer chain is basically like more than 70 is owned by the top validator and the other validators are basically irrelevant to the consensus so there needs to be some guard rails in place to avoid such a situation from from occurring um but but but that should make it a lot more manageable to onboard new chains to ICS because now you know validators that are generating more profits on on their initial activity of securing The Hub have probably stronger shoulders to secure more chains and enable The Hub to potentially accrue value this way whereas smaller validators could just opt out of some of these chains and therefore not incur any additional cost

which would allow them to you know stay stable in the set which basically like would protect the Hub from sort of like the main concern about replicated security and its economic model today which is that if not addressed it may create some centralizing vectors whereby the cost on smaller players would force them to either go bankrupt or drop out of the set because they weren't they wouldn't be able to um to support that that added cost basically um so that's sort of like the the limiting factor to replicated security and as a result of this um I think strategically and um and sort of like programmatically as well what's likely to happen and to be the best scenario for the Hub in the short medium term is actually to be very selective of

the change that it actually launches for two reasons the first one is like there's this whole economic thing right whereby you want every project that actually gets launched on on security to be tremendously successful to actually make up for the initial cost that it will generate because there's a mismatch in time for when the cost and the revenue are materialized right the cost starts from day one whereas the revenue sort of like gradually comes in right like that can change with token allocations which can be pretty meaningful from the get-go but still um so that's that's the first argument the second one being that because you need these chains to be tremendously successful and you want them to have as much Synergy as possible and you want to be betting on like the

the you know the change the projects that will move the needle the most and so uh one of the scenarios that could potentially be a losing scenario is to actually early on at least establish um competition within the atom economic zone itself right whereby instead of competing for growing the pie of the atom economic zone the project would be basically fighting for you know the the whatever is available to them like Adam liquidity and such uh Beyond them so like between themselves right and that's that's sort of like negative EV for for everyone involved um but if you know with that strategic approach of like carefully vetting and being selective of of projects initially before we have better technology better Frameworks for assessing the economic

value propositions of the various projects um I think like the technology is a tremendous potential right and I I think that it does um like having pioneered this um has been I think very significant for neutron as well so maybe like to to recap right like is it fair to say that but on a highly level board replicated security the atom economic zone and uncador they are going after the the same abroad concept which is let's build a good validator set and then get that validator set to to run multiple chains

so people can like kind of like launch their one chain and have already evaluated set that can that can secure the chain easily so on a high level it's kind of aligned but one of the big differences is that came with the design of a grand city right at the right at Inception right I mean if you go back 2017 there is a white paper detailing how that City will be built how if you if you want to launch your own chain on it what's what's going to be the process how is security going to work and then kind of they started with the with the

very detailed design of this city and all of its suburbs and then then basically like in building the in building the relay chain uh and the para chain and the software there they had the Grand Vision of the city at its suburbs already and then they kind of tried to optimize the decision of all of the sub components so that the overall City and the kind of suburbs and also uh work well I think like an infant debut whereas sort of like what the approach Cosmos Hub has taken is is more evolutionary the first kind of hey let's let's bend a let's build an app chain let's build

capture and a framework to build an app change so that comes first and then that's 10 limit and Cosmos SDK so that gets launched turns out that actually when that launches a lot of people want to build these app chains and 50 or 70 of these spring up organically then the next step is okay how do these app Chase communicate so that's IBC and turns out okay many of these apps start to communicate and now kind of like the cosmo service taking the third evolutionary step which is okay how can you duplicate the validator set across across Two Chains with the cosmos Hub being the provider of the valinator set and some other chain Neutron in this case be the consumer

at every step it's kind of because it's evolving kind of step by step it has the messiness of evolution where where the neutron kind of gets on board and what's the economic model for it uh nobody knows with the economy morning you end up centralizing the validator set nobody knows it has the messiness of of Revolution but it potentially may have the benefits of evolution as well that we might the ecosystem might end up discovering categories of solutions to problems that ceteries Plant City may may not have even considered

so we see that as kind of being a good description yeah I think there's some truth to that um I mean I I would push back against I don't think that's what you said but I would push back it against the notion that these things are happening sort of like you know just did at random like oh we figured out that we needed to do this or like even like biological mutations right where it's like literally random like that that's not the case but you're writing that it has been less of a centrally planned um long-term Vision that gets executed where every component is optimized for the interest of the sort of like system as a whole and it's more of a iterative process of like components themselves or like conducting themselves and making

this discoveries and improvement over time like this I I agree I think is actually closer to the cosmos philosophy anyway um and I think the one of the one of the benefits of that approach like it's obvious the the benefits of like the the monolithic sort of like Vision um getting executed the benefits of those are obvious like on the other hand the benefits of like cosmos's approach has been that it's a lot easier to actually on board because the system itself imposes fewer constraints over what you want to build right and it's very difficult to plan ahead um for everything that people will want to build and how that will actually work and so by you know having a less you know systematized mechanism and just

building um so like the tools that people can then use to do whatever they want to do um that has allowed Cosmos to be a lot easier to onboard on and fit into the Grandeur scheme of the ecosystem and then then perhaps bulkadot has been and I think that's true for replicated security as well right whereby the the system to onboard to ball cutout is very formal um and that may you know work absolutely perfectly um for specific types of project or even on average be very consistent and sort of like efficient for the system as a whole it may not actually work with some some chains right like for example um I think you know like one of the assumptions of the of the auction model of olkadot is that there will be significant crowd enthusiasm for the project because the crowd is what

usually has to actually bootstrap the the amount of dot that is required to secure the slot right but how about let's say you know a chain that does a very Niche but important piece of tooling or infrastructure for for developers right like that's probably very useful for the commons but it's actually very difficult to drive so like widespread enthusiasm for that right so perhaps that would be um kind of like one of the limitations of the model Cosmos sub and replicated Security on the other hand are a lot less formal and so that has you know obvious drawbacks of like it is possible to do things that don't actually make sense if we're not careful but at the same time it does also offer some flexibility whereby

something that is purely an infrastructure play could still happen pretty easily as long as it's um as long as its value is Justified to the comments right so sure that would be added cost to the system but if if the benefits of having that are demonstrated then we can have it basically that that's not a like sort of like economic blocker to to get that in into the into the overall system so yeah I would agree I think like your your analogy is is pretty good actually right yeah it's very interesting and I think really only now many people start to realize what it means I think actually also from our side right we were once that like posted about these implications of running like these many chains I think there's a lot

to come in terms of you know how are we going to solve for that since I think uh you know there's also no clear path right now how do you actually off-board a consumer chain especially like it is very clear how that works it is very clear how that works there's um there's I would say there's like sort of like three layers of politeness that you can have in your of boarding of the chain um the base layer of politeness is not the issue here um which I wouldn't argue for but is technically possible it's just just like any other Cosmos chain if a third of the voting power stops running that chain then that chain just holds but because the composition of its body Digger set is dictated by The Hub there is no way unless the composition of the Hub uh

changes that that chain will start running again right so that's that's a pretty strong signal that hey we're not running your chain anymore like you can Fork it and become your own Sovereign chain if you want but but that's all right in general that doesn't seem like a very good model to um to follow because um it you know there is like no protection here for the consumer chain and so what that means is that you know taking on that risk is is going to be a barrier a hurdle to the adoption of ICS right and ideally you want ICS as a feature and as a sub ecosystem that you can be a part of to be as attractive as possible so that you end up having you know really really really strong projects that you can select into rather

than having just like you know whatever whatever chain comes up and then just being forced into selecting these because otherwise there is no demand for it for the future right um and so in general that that is probably not the right approach the the second approach is the cosmos Hub could just make a proposal hey um we're going to terminate your replicated security Elite thread it has the benefit of being a little bit more formal and to have a little bit more time for the consumer chain project to adapt um because you have this like two weeks period where like for the voting um it is governance decided so maybe it's going to get rejected but it does send a strong signal so it's already a lot more civil let's say um and it does give the project a little

bit more chance to be able to actually transition um in time now still not ideal because it's a very short timeline to be moving your entire security um like from from basically being leased by another chain to being you know independent or sovereign I think what's likely to be used in practice what I would argue for um at least at this point is probably this needs to be done by several proposals over a period of time EG you know there's some like social consensus going going on and if um you know the the the cosmos of social consensus sorts of reached this Tipping Point where people are actually considering of parting that consumer chain they should make a signaling proposal that says hey uh if this

proposal is accepted then it will trigger a three-month period during which the consumer change should either come back with um so like amended security um security agreement that might convince the cosmos Hub that actually it should stay on with these new terms it basically renegotiating the agreement or it will be terminated after a another vote down the line that would actually be triggering the uh the the removal of the consumer chain itself and what that does is that the first word is a signaling proposal and it materializes social consensus so that what was Twitter noises and and conversations on telegram become something that's actually measurable of the voting power of the cosmos Hub 65 think that that change should be aborted in three months

unless they come back with a better agreement and then it gives the the consumer chain Community a time to actually you know reflect upon this are there Alternatives that would be better suited for the for the consumer chain are there a way to salvage the relationship with the Hub in a way that is more mutually beneficial you know should the changes become a sovereign cured by its own token for example and these like it gives at least enough time to consider these seriously and for a few governance proposals on that chain as well to to happen right um and then you have the confirmation vote that basically um sort of like signals it like that sort of like does a temperature check again but because there's so much time in between um you know what like if the first proposal was triggered by something that

is more emotional in nature or like market conditions then at least you have some some time to recover from this before it actually leads to to drastic consequences and the the overall process is a lot more civil so that if that's the sort of like commitment on the social layer of the cosmos Hub then consumer chain projects know that you know worst case scenario they'll get that signal that hey they need to sort their out or the customer sub is going to offboard them um but at least they'll have time whatever happens to to react to it yeah I do I do find it quite interesting that Cosmos have going like for this very governance based currently at least system and then polka dot is like sort of more a market-based approach where you know you have that element of the

dot being locked and so through that you sort of can signal these are the most valuable chains right we have limited slots let's fill them with the most valuable chains and and you have that lease and it sort of takes away a lot of this governance overhead that is coming right now for for Cosmos so quite interesting to see how that can be I agree I think it's very characteristic of Cosmos though like you know Cosmos basically based governance in every Sovereign action that that actually launched into the ecosystem and so you know that's that's like one of the design patterns of Cosmos I guess whereby you know people are not completely removed from these computers

I guess so um try to get like a compare and contrast with something that's harder which is um you know like replicated security versus kind of like the modular blockchain stack which is represented by Celestia and ethereum potentially like a harder comparison to make but nonetheless interesting I mean just to recap it like the modular stack is roughly the idea that you can think of what a chain does and you can decompose it into Data availability making sure transaction data is always available uh sequencing or ordering where like

transaction EA for news transaction B and then kind of like logic and actual blockchain and when you kind of divide across these functionalities you can have systems where one chain does one part of the stack at another chain does another part of the stack and both Kerala ethereum and Celestia kind of like going down this part whereas get us Cosmos in replicated security it's like oblivious very similar chain designs and the entire value intercept is shared you have like kind of compare and contrast these two

approaches and strengths and weaknesses yeah I mean I I think it's uh it's a really interesting sort of like turn of events I mean when the cosmos SDK was produced um it you know like the cosmos SDK is a software development kit that allows you to build monolithic blockchains because like modular blockchains weren't a concept that was coined by Celestia later on um at the time that Cosmos was created right now there is some sort of modularity in spirit in the fact that like the idea is that Cosmos can scale horizontally right um but indeed you don't get the sort of specialization and well you do get specialization but not specialization of

the performance specifically that you do get with like especially Celestia which is purpose built for modular blockchains I guess um and so that makes it a very interesting ecosystem but you know funnily enough Celeste is actually part of the cosmosis like ecosystem as well right um so it's sort of like a nap chain that specializes in being the base layer for other blockchains to leverage um their consensus and data availability G now what I think is likely to happen is that like these Solutions are actually not exclusive we're already seeing a trend where numerous projects and Cosmos are working on bringing um Roll-Ups to the cosmos stack um you have like dimension for example I believe they are sort of like they're probably

live or soon to be live uh right now and they've sort of developed with the cosmos sdks or like a platform that intends to be um a settlement layer for application specific Roll-Ups um which is you know a very interesting idea I know that there's a whole bunch of projects working on similar things in in the Celestia ecosystem and that has now even sort of like leaked into ethereum ecosystem with the op stack and Hyper chain from zksync so I think what's interesting here at the fundamental level is that the idea that you can have one distributed computer like like one blockchain being tailored for one specific application or use case um is actually finding some traction

here we're seeing this idea which mostly started in Cosmos kind of like grow into other ecosystems and being adopted and implemented by various technological Stacks now um so that kind of like I think that's a validation of the thesis of the app change thesis that Cosmos kind of like has been riding on but it's also like I I also do think that there's a trap that a lot of folks in Cosmos considered that the Epstein thesis is everything should be accustomed to SDK app chain I don't think that that's true I do think that the option thesis in that there are significant benefits for to be had by having infrastructure that is dedicated to one application um like I think that thesis is true but

I think the the fact that everything should be in a cosmos SDK app chain thus likely to be proven false over time and so what I think we're going to see in the ecosystem is that we're going to have so like an upgradation between you know like Roll-Ups and modular ideas with sort of like app chains and horizontal scaling the crushing interoperability technologies that Cosmos as as born and such and so I think sort of like to zaki's point in a pretty famous Tweet now that he made a couple of weeks or months ago now he said something to the point of Cosmos Social Capital has about 12 months to do something unique and differentiated before it gets swallowed by ethereum variants of Cosmos ideas essentially right and I think that's what we're

seeing right now we're seeing that the idea of an app chain EG dedicated blockchain for a dedicated application is actually now something that is being worked on outside of the boundaries of Cosmos and that creates sort of an existential threat to Cosmos because now that idea that has been like very fundamental to its development process is not no longer exclusive to the ecosystem but it also provides an opportunity because contrary to a lot of the other ecosystems that are now implementing these these ideas Cosmos has been working on this for a long time and so if it can you know leverage the existing work that it has completed with like IBC and such and make that sort of like the most suitable standard for these new type of hybrid blockchains

that we're seeing then it has a great chance in my opinion to you know be successful at setting one of the standards and therefore becoming a much more relevant ecosystem to the entire industry essentially yeah I don't see them as exclusive I think I think they're kind of like really interesting Trend in the industry that are actually complementary to sort of like some all right super interesting we've been going quite deep into interchange security I think here and comparing it but I think yeah it's hopefully valuable to people that are not as familiar and also uh very interesting to hear your viewpoints I think we can take it back a little bit to neutral maybe and and cover like few more things at the at the end it's been going quite for a while and then rev up so and I think one

interesting thing that we actually haven't really talked about is then sort of uh Neutron like token utility and kind of the the things you're doing around governance since now giving you a running as an interchange secure chain right of the token model that Cosmos sort of established where you have the staking function and that sort of gives your utility you have to now come up with like sort of another model essentially similar to I guess the problem that exist on ethereum already where a lot of the dials just come up like okay there's a governance too right I think uh you were also working like interesting things there uh with Neutron with the modular governance so maybe we can talk a few minutes about that

yeah yeah for sure um like Beyond just our interest in in you know like playing around with the governance in general the the thing is like replicated security exists as I said of Cosmos SDK module that replaced the modules that ins like out outside of replicated security are used for staking and governance right so using replicated security removes both of these modules so basically you have to as a consumer chain you have you know a few Alternatives um one of them the sort of like the default option that is proposed is usually to replace these by modules that essentially are pseudo staking pseudo governance um system like like modules EG you're going to have a token that is not atom which is you know Adam would be

used for staking on your chain anyway um but you would have another token and that gets used to you know calculate running power and you can delegate it to Governors they're not validators actually but they're Governors and they um they can you know wield voting power on your behalf in the case of neutron it felt less sort of um logical to go that route given that you know the as a small contract platform a lot of the Innovation that Neutron wanted to do was around empowering and leveraging the modularity of of smart contracts right and so instead what we did is we used a lot of the great work that had been done by the daudao team on um on you know like on building Dow infrastructure basically and we baked it into the Genesis file so that there's a set of

small contracts that exist at Genesis that constitute this um sort of like governance infrastructure and made it able to control the network parameters itself through something that's called the admin module that's perhaps less interesting for this conversation uh but so that you have like small contracts on the chain that govern the chain EG they're able to trigger updates of the entire network they're able to change network parameters extra extra and the interesting thing about having been able to work with the doubt offer like framework is that the you know not only does this allow you to have a functional um decision making process you you can have like single proposals multi-choice proposal you can have Target voting multi-sig style things like so you can already sort of like customize the main

chamber but more importantly you your system itself because there's like a library of code that can be pulled by the main dial at any time to instantiate um new committees new Chambers you basically have a governance system that is capable of like structuring itself so you have the Agora right the token voting assembly and then that has the power of creating new subcommittees that are dedicated to doing one one task or the other and they can have their art um you know like committee or like voting system or selection mechanism their own resources and the way that they execute changes to the rest of the chain can have you know customizable limitations like for example one idea for a grand style would

be that hey one person can give grants up to one thousand dollars freely and then 10 like sorry two person can give grants together if they agree up to ten thousand dollars right so I like having these sort of like customized customizable limits um and so that's that's one of the things you could do in general though one of those sort of like Baseline limitations that we've created that can be instantiated by that Agora is essentially when the sub die was created it has a time lock module which is so that one the subdial makes a decision through a vote um before that like which can be pretty fast compared to main Dao governance proposals like that's a matter of a few hours or days depending on the reactivity of the members um when that gets approved if that gets

approved it's time locked for three days and it can be basically vetoed by the main Dot and so what that means is that you can now have systems that are either you know like very large committees or multis or stuff that is more akin to multi-sig that is independent from the main doubt but still accountable to the main Dao and if um you know they betrayed the main Dao essentially they're not aligned the mind that has mechanism to force them to fall back on the main governance track so that decisions that are you know negative to the network cannot be executed without you know a significantly higher lift of just like capturing the government system itself right right I can hear a lot of the kind

of ideas or concepts that exist the Lido actually here right like with the Lego and some of the the things that that are actually much harder I would say probably to do in in ethereum because you don't have that the customizability of a Cosmos app chain so I think very exciting uh to have like things more codified in Neutron here that are Maybe like more on the social layer essentially in in Lido I guess um so yeah really excited to see where that's going I think we covered a bunch of stuff I hope um we did Justice to to Neutron we did definitely talk about a lot of like higher level things but I think you're you're the right person to do that so I've been going for quite a while so I think we were the good spot to to wrap

up maybe uh for final question uh and you can like talk a little bit about you know your roadmap uh sort of the the ecosystem things you're doing there there's been recent announcements around the this accelerator maybe maybe you can talk a little bit about that and um then then we wrap up so from my side yeah thanks so much for sure that's my problems actually yeah I mean once again thanks for having me this was uh this was a really fun conversation to have um so yeah I guess like one one last sort of like announcement or whatever um you know we talked during this this episode a lot about so like the structure replicated security and and how it creates kind of like a sub

ecosystem that benefits from being very deeply aligned and collaborative um that's something that we believe has really the potential to be tremendously valuable for both the cosmos Hub and the consumer chains um and so in an effort to sort of like further this uh We've teamed up with long hash but also the atom accelerator Dao in order to launch an accelerator program that is dedicated to that sub ecosystem right so that we can bring um like we can nurture teams that are building projects either as additional consumer chains or that are building on Neutron to join the atom and convex Zone and provide them with funding experience you know like like Scaffolding in their sort of like development and strategy

um so that you know they get the best chances of hitting the the market in a in a really good shape and being very successful um so if that's interesting to you check out you know Neutron or lungash or atomics or your Dow's Twitter and blog in blogs you'll find the links to how to register there um how to learn more about the project and such um I think I'm you know I think it has a good chance of being pretty pretty awesome for for the ecosystem thanks for giving me the opportunity to apply it plays that shell here at the end you know yeah important all right yeah thanks everybody for coming on and uh yeah hope all listeners enjoy this this breakdown of interchange security and then learn more about Neutron uh in the show notes

awesome thanks folks thanks for the great questions as well