The P2P Revolution

The future is P2P!
Welcome to the P2P Revolution.

With the basic primitives of HTLCs and PTLCs in place we can now begin development of a truly decentralized p2p trading market.

Bridges will enable us to provide liquidity where people expect it now.
We will build the liquidity of the future.

As Vitalik says in his recent Sunday post:

  • Cross-chain bridges: similar logic as oracles, but also, try to minimize how much you rely on bridges at all: hold assets on the chain where they originate and use atomic swap protocols to move value between different chains.

Later today, we will release a test build of Syrius which (thanks to Vilkris) has a best in class Atomic Swap UI. We will also be posting instructions on how to join our testnet so that everyone can try Atomic Swaps and begin experiencing the P2P Revolution.

This is just the first step, and there are a lot more possibilities when it comes to the potential of P2P, such as orderbook based interfaces.
I am asking a minimum of 150k ZNN, 1.5 M QSR for myself and other team members for continued work in this direction.


Can u be more detailed.

What all does 150k znn and 1.5mil QSR cover?

What exactly are you committing to delivering? Noting you’ve already submitted submissions for HTLC and PTLC

Is this to cover work already undertaken? If not what are the outcomes you are hoping to achieve?

What are the delivery and payment milestones?

How long will it take?

What benefits will it bring to Zenon?

Is documentation and support included?

How can you justify 150k ZNN and 1.5m QSR? How was this calculated? It is too much

Why are s the ask a “minimum”? Will there be more submissions?

How many people are working on it and who are they?

What will the distribution of funds look like?

Will you and other pillars involved abstain from voting?

Why have you submitted the proposals on chain without any engagement and linked to a forum that has only 15 registered users?

Any pillar that votes yes on this proposal in it’s current format is lost

1 Like

I agree there should be more visibility towards PTLC I don’t even know what that is and why it’s being built. Let me add a few questions:

  • Why PTLC when we all know atomic swap never got adopted on LTC
  • What about the UX ? How will it be developped ?
  • Will there be enough in AZ to fund this ?
  • What does it means for the Zenon ecosystem
  • Will there be a website
  • Why the funding is so high and how many hours did you work on this ?
  • Do you have credentials ?
  • Are you Mr. Kaine ?
  • Apu ?
1 Like

Thank you for the questions.
I love seeing the community doing its due diligence.

Currently the team is focused on supporting our public testnet roll-out that just went live.

I hope that the community can appreciate an inclination towards hands-on and accessible working demos.

I will talk with the team and start putting together some answers before our next big update.
I hope that our proposal will be evaluated under a fair and consistent standard.

1 Like

just when they feel like it


I see no answers and therefore will vote no to any further A.Z requests related to atomic swaps. I encourage all the pillars to do so as this technology never got adopted and nobody is able to tell us why we should implement it. Dull p2p markets are useless.

Hope it’s not just another atomic swap.
150k znn for an archaic utility doesn’t justify, even if we don’t have anything else to do

1 Like

Mr. Dog:

Don’t under estimate the capabilities of a 15 person forum when 33% of those people are rockstar contributors.

P2P = BigPP revolution

Watch this if you think P2P has no use case. Might be limited today, but we could be headed in that direction given what could happen with regulation in the US.

So all you got are cheesy jokes and wild speculation

Let’s start answering questions with who we are and what our purpose is:

1 Like

Alright, now that your team consists of 5 members, you are eligible to submit a 95K ZNN and 950K QSR proposal after completing 10 months of work.

Btw who’s the tech lead?

Among the HyperCore One team members there are no formal hierarchies or giving of orders.
All participation is opt-in.

Naturally, different team members have different talents and interests. So different team members will take on leading roles across the end-to-end delivery lifecycle.

One team member may be leading implementation in a certain area while other team members are testing, learning, peer reviewing code, and contributing to design. In a different area, the roles may be reversed.


I suppose the next question that would make sense to address is:

Why such a large ask?

Our holistic end-to-end delivery model means that we will work with the community to create larger milestones where the value can be experienced or shown through data.

But this model also incurs a significant amount of overhead.
While this overhead greatly enables us to deliver the value that the community needs in a fast and iterative manner, it doesn’t always make sense for these things to have their own AZ proposals.

Some current examples:

  • We intend to maintain production quality binary builds. This carries security, integration, and testing burdens. We’ve started offering public testnets and related infrastructure such as faucets and explorers.

  • The go-zenon codebase includes various hardcoded IDs such as spork ids and the new bridge and administrator addresses that don’t work well with testnets. So we created a backwards compatible patch that would allow these values to be configured. Over time, we will productionalize this solution. A lot of other tooling such as controllers will need to be made compatible with testnets.

  • Taking a holistic approach also means being aware of other work happening in the community. Oftentimes this means testing and validating the work of others in a systematic way. It means road-mapping and maintaining dynamic plans for future work.

As the ecosystem grows, this overhead will grow alongside it. In order to justify maintaining this overhead, we need a significant commitment from the community, so that we can recoup these costs over time as we deliver incremental value. This commitment will enable the five HyperCore.One team members to focus on end user value instead of worrying about if all the incidental costs will be covered.

In the next few days, we will begin working with the community to create a milestone/payout framework that the team and the pillars will both find agreeable.

As mentioned in our previous posts, all HyperCore.One participation is opt-in.
There are also some items of work that team members have delivered or are wrapping up that will fall outside of the new milestone/payout framework.


Ty ty for the elucidation ser. I’m absolutely certain everyone in the community is grateful for your team’s efforts and dedication to our ecosystem. A couple of questions:-

i) This is a very big ask and a very specific amount- how did you come to decide upon this 150k ZNN, 1.5m QSR no.? What does it come with- how many months/years of commitment can we expect from your team? Is this a full-time commitment to the Network? Is the plan to give each of the developers on your team their own pillar(s?) to run (not against this- in fact I quite like the idea of developers running pillars and taking an active part in network governance)?

ii) Would it be possible to get an introduction to the team (though I’m sure we should be able to hangman most of them) or for the team members to introduce themselves? What are their specific skillsets that they are bringing to the forefront? I do not doubt our community developers but since y’all are applying for a considerable grant- I’d like to know what all we’re potentially paying for.

iii) Finally, if the “ecosystem grows” the values of the rewards that you will reap from your pillars, sentinels, or from delegating, staking or LP’ing will proportionally increase. Can we come up with a payment plan that potentially takes account of this? Perhaps your team can requests payments of this large grant in batches/instalments? This way if the price value of ZNN/QSR increases the amount requested can be reduced. This can help ensure that our AZ Warchest doesn’t deplete at such an accelerated (haha) rate.

“The Future is P2P!”

Can you show a use case that has a significant, validated market demand for P2P which is currently un- or underserved, and for which Zenon NoM provides a competitive edge?

If you feel such a market exists but you need support in validating its potential, whixh one(s) specifically are you looking at?

Are you guys curious if PTLCs can be used for something other than an atomic swap of 69 ZNN <> 420 QSR between Alice and Bob? Don’t you guys have the feeling that someone knows EXACTLY how we will interoperate with BTC?

Curious? Yes.
Feeling? No.

1 Like

Based on the work this team has already performed, and continues to perform ie Eth Bridge dependencies(95kZNN get us what again?) + ongoing Syrius upgrades + every new problem that comes up… we are already relying on this group for basically all ongoing development. Would be highly regarded to shut down their efforts. Negotiating the amount proposed for payment is fair though, would be a great conversation for the community to get comfy with.

This is all aside from the fact that BTC interop is completely built around P2P so clearly i am in full support of the HCone efforts.

I see nobody trying to shut down their efforts. Just requests for more clarity and reasoning for the funding request.

1 Like