Octus Bridge PriceBRIDGE

What makes @NEARProtocol Intents special? It lets you swap 100+ native assets across chains: no fees, no permissions, no stress. No routing, no gas math, no bridge drama. You just say what you want, NEAR Intents makes it happen. It’s like cross-chain transactions… with Facebook login simplicity.

7/ Conclusion Bitcoin’s market cap: $1.5T Its DeFi footprint? It’s actually only less than $2B. Lombard are trying building the bridge that could change that. Keeping my eye on this one.

You know what looks good here $PENGU on @AbstractChain Bridge over to get XP just for holding 😘

You can now bridge $DREAMS to Starknet 👀 This has been made possible with the new @hyperlane integration!

Product review: @butterygg conditional funding markets TL;DR: trying their app made me realize just how far we have to go for making usable and understandable products in the futarchy space Overview So prediction markets can be divided into 2 - betting markets like @Polymarket or @Truemarketsorg where you simply wager on the outcome - decision markets like Butter or @seer_pm that predict outcomes on whether you make a product change or give funding vs you dont we've had PMF for (1), while (2) is still nascent with a lot of promise but much fewer active traders in them 1. User Experience why did Butter have their own account separate from the wallet you connect with? After i went through painful bridging to unichain (thanks @layerswap) it took me some time to figure out i need to deposit from there into the butter account? I couldn't clearly see the rationale for having 2 separate accounts, your own wallet and a butter account, esp since i needed to still sign txns when making trades from my own wallet? and even if there is some compelling reason for 2 accounts, I wish i could deposit funds on any chain in my wallet into the butter account which does bridging to unichain on my behalf but making the user first bridge to unichain and then deposit into the custom butter wallet was rather pointless. I would have honestly given up here if i wasn't writing a review on their product (as a side note, its quite ridiculous that i couldn't swap my ETH to USDC using uniswap from within metamask... on unichain??) 2. Comprehensibility I understood little from their tutorial on the implications of my trades So this basically means that if i don't accurately predict whether a project will be funded, i lose all my money? Why should i win or lose money by guessing which project is going to get funding, when i am supposed to guess at their growth in TVL? Ideally if i bet on a project but it doesnt get funded, my capital should simply be returned to me. since what we care about isn't accurately knowing which project will get funding but which will have the highest growth in TVL i didn't realize that @MorphoLabs was already selected as winner and bought some @eulerfinance funded up tokens, guess thats money down the drain 😭 and if i do correctly predict which project gets funding, but am positionally wrong in its up or down value, i again lose money? do i lose all or is there some other formula? why is the current estimate "273M" when i should instead be trying to guess the change in TVL over this period? so i basically need to first see what their current TVL is, calculate the expected change for myself, and then place my bet? why not instead just show the user the expected change in TVL rather than aggregate? I also liked @Lajarre insight from the pilot that traders want to simply place positional bets instead of a specific number of how much up or down their tutorial needs quite a big revamp to appeal to a wider audience, the level of complexity here is beyond users ability to grasp. i consider myself knowledgeable on futarchy and i had a really tough time figuring things out 3. Funding Allocation so from my understanding, they basically measured the difference between "if not funded, then TVL is X" vs if funded, TVL is Y" The difference of Y-X is then used to determine who will make most impact from the funding (this wasn't explained in their tutorial as you can see, i found it from their docs) So essentially to game their system, what you need to do is tell your community to - buy "funded, up token" - buy "not funded down token" and that would yield the highest impact according to their formula, providing the project with $100k without arbitrageours (almost certainly the case in these small pilots with early markets), it becomes a more complex version of quadratic funding where whoever disciplines their community better walks away with more funding this is where the work of @TheGabrielFior at gnosis ai on building agents to trade in such markets is key, as it makes decision markets different from just whoever mobilizes their community better wins Overall, with some improvements to - UX on bridging and swapping between these tokens - changes to the mechanism so even if the event doesnt occur i get my money back instead of losing it, allowing traders to focus on implications of the decision and not whether decision will happen - and onboarding arbitrage bots to trade against projects telling their community to artificially pump their up tokens so they get an allocation we could finally get a credibly neutral funding mechanism that letes degen traders contribute a price discovery function to regen funding allocations