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