3 ms·
Also noteworthy is that bridge technology is what allows these chains to have immediate utility to the market faster. Centralized Exchanges are extremely slow
by vmception 5y ago
Also noteworthy is that bridge technology is what allows these chains to have immediate utility to the market faster.
Centralized Exchanges are extremely slow in listing new blockchains, especially meta assets on those blockchains. For example, want USDC on Solana? Sorry even if your exchange listed Solana and allow for withdrawal of native SOL, they aren't allowing withdrawals of tokens to the Solana network. They dont know, don't care, don't have the development resources to prioritize that, aren't even familiar with a erc-20 standard of tokens yet, and legal hasn't gotten the rubber stamp from the New York Department of Financial Services anyway so why bother catering to the rest of the world..
Whereas the permissionless bridges plug in immediately and billions of dollars of assets can move in without bothering with a centralized exchange. Building starts immediately, forget about the permits.
So, private participants fixing a crucial bridge is the rational move.
- wmf 5y agoI was wondering how a bridge could hope to earn back $300M in fees in any reasonable horizon, but if we view Wormhole as a loss leader to pump the overall Solana ecosystem (which I guess Jump is invested in) it makes sense.
- dboreham 5y agoAlso noteworthy: this kind of "trusted" bridge architecture is probably now doomed.
- vmception 5y agoI don't get that impression. It's patched and more resilient now, the exploit occurred with someone watching the github about the patch, or even more likely it was someone on the dev team/discussion about why the patch was needed. The "guardians" are still there and distributed. I don't see more distributed bridge styles being real competitors at least to Wormhole on the Solana network. Individual users didn't lose funds and their exposure is always limited to a few minutes.