Heslin Kim @HeslinKim

@BRICSinfo Eh. x.com/liderfiscal/st…

Valy 🎩🎭 @liderfiscal

a day ago

#URGNTE El ministro de Defensa del Reino Unido: "Asegúrense de tener efectivo, agua y alimentos enlatados en casa" "Las familias con bebés deben preparar comida para bebés y pañales. Si tienen mascotas, ¡también comida para mascotas y agua!" (22 de octubre de 2026) El jefe del

643 3K 9K 2.9M 6K

@gimsuhwan2379 @CantonNetwork @blockworksDAS Correct, no ZK is needed with Zenith EVM the public, permissionless environment. If you want a zkEVM, then yes, you’d need proof generation and it’s an entirely different construct.

@_imhamzah @diegoxyz @Securitize

@therollupco

@andyyy

@CantonNetwork @blockworksDAS I need to use a few more synonyms for broader and we’re golden on the clipping.

@Mudit__Gupta Was immediately my read between the two tweets.

@MurielMedard @get_optimum

@kentlinyy

@POCtoPROD @The_DTCC @CantonNetwork @viv_diwakar

@get_optimum Nice drop.

Happy to see the portco cooking. When I met @MurielMedard we had really amazing strategic discussions out the gate, so I knew I had to support. I really appreciated the @get_optimum team’s ability to architect sophisticated tech while also having a knack for constantly seeking PMF. $3.4B in staked $ETH is no small endeavor. This team was clear to win from the onset though. Thrilled for them! It’s just the beginning.

Optimum @get_optimum

6 days ago

x.com/i/article/2112…

46 64 249 30K 12

@zerohustletunez @Captain_snowboy @ZenithFdn Not at all. Time to go grill our engineers. We’ve not had any complaints outside of the faucet accessibility thus far, so I need to go crack the whip and figure out what happened.

The Universal Burn CIP is still in draft, but it has important implications. @bc1pxxx + @ShaulKfir just put out this CIP that unifies Canton MainNet’s economics. What it is: Today, Global Synchronizer traffic burns $CC and pays rewards. Dedicated synchronizers mostly sit outside that via license fees. This CIP makes every production synchronizer burn CC at the same list price ($60/MB ≈ $1 per typical ~16.7 KB transaction), extends app/validator rewards to all traffic, and makes dedicated synchronizers fully permissionless. It adds volume pricing + commitment discounts (backed by staked $CC) so high-throughput, low-value workloads can actually live here. Hard dollar numbers (not yet approved): → Volume curve on dedicated synchronizers: price halves every 10× sustained throughput: ≤1 TPS stays at list (~$1). 10 TPS → 50¢. 100 TPS → 25¢. 1,000 TPS → 12.5¢. → Commitment (1yr+, 20% collateral of annual fees): 50% off the volume price. Extra collateral up to 100% of a year’s spend stacks further (toward ~74% off volume price). Loyalty adds up to another 60% after four years. → Full stack example: a 10 TPS app drops from 50¢ gross to about 5¢ per transaction. Most of what’s burned is expected to come back as rewards (≥90%), so the net cost is substantially lower. → Why the curve exists: a flat $1 everywhere would make 1,000 TPS cost ~$31.5B/year. That prices real payment and trading volume off the network. Scale implications: The current split leaves high-volume dedicated capacity economically outside the @CantonNetwork $CC economy. Universal burn turns that into net-new burn. Volume + commitment pricing is what makes sustained institutional throughput (payments, trading, composed RWA flows) viable without forcing everything onto the Global Synchronizer or leaking value as licenses. Collateral commitments lock $CC and make future burn more forecastable. Dedicated capacity becomes additive rather than fragmenting. One network, one economy. The framework decision is the one that matters first. Numbers follow. Zth.

Canton Network @CantonNetwork

a week ago

CIP-TBD: Universal Burn and Synchronizer Pricing > lists.sync.global/g/cip-discuss/…

11 27 151 13K 4

Thanks for the detailed feedback. This is exactly the kind of real-world stress testing we need right now. 1) Inaccurate transaction confirmations (hashes marked successful that never land) is a serious issue, and the first I’m hearing of this. We’re already looking into it with the engineering team and will share what we find. The faucet is under constant heavy load / DDoS attacks. We’re not incentivizing it, for anyone thinking otherwise, and we’re treating this as useful stress testing for the environment. We’ve needed to tighten rate limits and protections. 2) This alpha version had no performance optimizations and several known rough edges. We’re planning a testnet reset before the end of the month to roll in fixes and improvements. Our primary focus has been the subnet/chain work with institutional clients; the public EVM instance is secondary for now and won’t be the production target until next year. Other chains will come first. We’re a 13 person team, so we’re sequencing carefully. 3) We’re not aiming for a MegaETH, or Monad, style high-performance EVM environment. Zenith EVM is an unmodified Reth instance, it should behave like deploying to Ethereum mainnet. That’s the continuity level the institutions we work with expect and are comfortable with. Direct comparisons to purpose-built high-throughput EVMs aren’t the right frame. Appreciate you flagging these. We’ll keep iterating. If you have any specific questions I’m happy to share them directly.

@andyyy “We are moving closer and closer to the financial singularity.” Only 10-20 more years and we’re all in 👀

@FTDA_US If you’re applying for this role and actually think you deserve it, I also want to speak: ➤ Head of Franklin Crypto Capital Formation

@Nick_Researcher Happy to chat on it if you’d like to learn more.

“I see Zenith as Canton’s first credible entry point for Solidity developers. But it is still a testnet,…” We appreciate the nod! Respectable post. But if I may… A handful of testnets have been in prod for several months already with clients. It’s only a marketing choice when to announce things 👀 “…not an active application economy.” This is the core value proposition of having a single public, permissionless EVM virtual blockchain deployed to Canton. We could have just left it at Zenith Stack deploying EVM subnets for specific businesses, but like you noted, that would not yield Robinhood-esque results. You’ll be pleasantly surprised. Your post is accurate in its scope, but still only a small fraction of what’s possible with this technology and what we impact we can actually make. Zenith Stack VBs going live will be the first time the EVM has been baked natively into a non-EVM L1, with true atomicity - not marketing jargon. Brew on the implications. And hey, we can do any VM. “Zenith could solve the developer-access problem. It does not solve distribution by itself.” Could? It does. Can’t solve distribution? Says who? Unlike the ecosystems of yesteryear: 1. I believe bringing the technology to MainNet is only the starting line of the race. 2. I believe incubator/accelerator/start-up/hackathon driven application level ecosystems are doomed from the jump. 3. I believe only mature, robust, stress-tested and trusted applications matter. 4. I believe asset issuance is nearly worthless without bringing the entire value chain… onchain. Why tokenize if you haven’t found the buyer/lender? I could care less personally who the intermediary technology provider is to connect the two as long as it’s on the Zenith Stack and both parties agree to it. 5. I believe in focusing on PMF not market meta noise. I was steering the company in this direction since mid-2024. 6. I believe RWAs will just be called digital assets. Back to the basics. 7. I believe in 10-20 years global financial markets will be entirely migrated with some, if not all, of the backend onchain. Blockchain will just be a technology, not a trend. 8. I believe we’re in an institutional hype bubble with regards to the deployment phase. It’s fine, but there’s lots of noise and shaking trees. 9. I believe CMC/CoinMarketCap top100 is unlikely to include many Web3-first companies/assets in 10 years. 10. I believe applications should pay for protocol dependencies, not the network. As such, what if it could be amortized by all applications and subnets? 11. I believe you shouldn’t overly hype your launch. 12. I believe in rising tides and finding angles to work with all parties, even “competitors.” 13. I believe there is no winner take all. 14. I believe innovative technology isn’t the core element of a successful business. Just a useful piece of the puzzle. 15. I believe in my team. Between my co-founder, our head of ecosystem, and myself we have over 35 years of Web3 experience in core architecture, ecosystem growth, governance, advisory, investment, leadership/board seats. We’re not in Kansas anymore Dorothy. Zth.

Nick Research @Nick_Researcher

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2109…

28 15 112 23K 27

Metric just came out of stealth and the timeline is doing what timelines do. Been watching this one, and know the founder. Hats off @mick_metric 🫡 Active pools that separate pricing from liquidity: a Price Provider sets the bid/ask/reference from oracles (Pyth, Chainlink, custom logic), and the pool holds liquidity in percentage bins around that reference. When the external price moves, the ranges move with it. No more LPs constantly getting picked off because the pool itself is the stale oracle. That’s the actual problem with almost every AMM for anything that already has a real market. Tokenized stocks, gold, majors, FX. The pool sits wrong until an arb corrects it, LPs fund the correction, spreads widen, and the whole thing becomes a tax on real flow. Metric’s approach is the opposite: quote to reality, keep capital where the market actually is, and let the reference do the heavy lifting. Capital turnover numbers in stealth were absurd for the TVL. Live on Ethereum, BNB, and Robinhood Chain, and later 👀. Aggregators were already routing to them quietly. Now it’s open: trade, LP, or deploy your own pool. Audited (Zellic, Sherlock). Team has real DeFi LP and protocol experience; one of them just left Uniswap after a few years. Excited to see how this works for DTCC assets. A few thoughts here: 1. Most “RWA DEXs” still try to force real assets into AMM designs built for tokens that discover their own price. It doesn’t work once size and continuity matter. 2. Separating the price source from the liquidity inventory is the right primitive if you want professional market-making infrastructure to become permissionless. 3. The hard part is the freshness, oracle risk, weekend gaps on equities, and whether LPs actually get compensated for the residual risks (latency, inventory, feed integrity). This design fixes that. 4. If this holds up under real flow on tokenized stocks and majors, it becomes one of the few pieces of spot infrastructure that institutions can actually route through without the usual DeFi tax. That’s rarer than people want to admit. 5. Launch hype and airdrop farming will be loud for a week. The only thing that matters is whether the pools stay tight and capital-efficient once the early volume normalizes like Paper. Been waiting for this for awhile. The interesting part is whether active pools become the default way anything with a real external price trades onchain. They could be a fundamental piece of market infrastructure moving forward. Some people are claiming they’re the Morpho of AMMs. Zth.

Metric @metricxyz

2 weeks ago

Metric is live: metric.xyz Swap. Provide liquidity. Deploy your own pool. Now open on Robinhood Chain, @BNBCHAIN and @ethereum.

170 120 1K 283K 408

@evanvar @temple_ny x.com/the_dtcc/statu…

Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation @The_DTCC

a week ago

Take a closer look inside the DTCC Tokenization Service. From supported networks and eligible asset classes to launch capabilities and future expansion, our at-a-glance overview outlines the service and the path ahead. ➡️brnw.ch/21x6t0e

0 204 842 146K 165