Preparing for Replicated Security

[common_spelling]

@ala.tusz.am

the discussion also involves prospective funding.

@lexa

4.1) Investing in consumer chains

Provider chain validators will need to take on upfront costs in acquiring hardware and additional labour hours in setup, onboarding, and maintenance. ICS is an emerging technology, and the benefits to both validators and consumer chains might not fully manifest until the technology solidifies.

The relationship between a provider and consumer can be seen as an investment that may not pay off until later. These investments might look like:

• A discount on security services for early consumer chain adopters of the technology who will help iron out bugs and work out issues that arise, such as the funding generated by Proposal 72. Investing in projects like this could also be way to attract talented teams to continue contributing to the ecosystem.
• An initial token swap between consumer and provider chains that could ensure that a consumer chain is well-capitalized early on, and that the provider will have direct exposure to how the project pays off in the long term.

@ala.tusz.am

Do you mean that your concern is that you don’t want to use up a slot in the Hub’s replicated security capacity to fund LSDs because you don’t see how a LSD token will drive value back to the Hub or act as adequate payment?

sure, this is an adequate approximation of what I mean. not that I am saying its impossible to some types of LSD to work.

smart contract LSDs like LIDO can serve the same function in defi and dont require the use of an additional consumer chain slot. if the same thing can be accomplished in a more efficient way, what justifies the added cost of the requisite nodes and implied funding required for an LSD chain to be a consumer chain?

with Babylon coming, will there even be demand for LSD chains?