Today's article comes from PolkaWorld's latest English livestream where we invited 6 ecosystem builders to share their respective teams and progress in Polkadot, covering mainly:
Team Introduction
Polimec: Fully supporting mobile, allowing ordinary people to become investors.
Mandala: Helping Indonesia's largest province launch their Substrate chain.
HIC: Continuing to develop LP in Singapore and establish an advisory committee.
Papermoon: Successfully tested and operated Uniswap V2 on PolkaVM
Acala: Acala dApp is migrating to version 2.0
Hyperbridge: Seed round secured $5 million in support!
Mainnet launch is coming soon! How Mandala is bringing Polkadot technology to Indonesia
The treasury should distinguish between 'grants' and 'investments', exploring more sustainable methods.
We should shift our thinking to be 'token-centric' instead of the current 'chain-centric' model.
Users really don't care about decentralization? Hyperbridge believes that true competitiveness lies in decentralization.
This year's main focus is on PolkaVM and Polkadot Hub.
JAM can run for 816 years? 👀
'Profitability' should not be the core criterion for measuring whether a proposal is worth funding.
Continue reading to see the full content!
Team Introduction
Kristen: Welcome to our monthly summary live broadcast! Just by watching this episode, you can get a comprehensive overview of the key developments in April. In this episode, we invited Travis from Acala, Junius from Papermoon, Max from HIC, Michael from Mandala Chain, and Luca from Polimec. Welcome to all the guests! Now let's get to the point; please each briefly introduce yourselves and your projects. Let's start with Travis.
Travis: Awesome! Thank you for inviting me to participate in this roundtable discussion. My name is Travis, and I am responsible for business development and marketing at Acala Network. Acala is a DeFi center in the Polkadot ecosystem, and one of our main products is the liquid staking product for LDOT, allowing users to stake DOT while maintaining liquidity to participate in other DeFi applications. We also have a liquidity distribution platform called Euphrates, along with some other exciting new features. Recently, we have launched some very exciting new content on Acala, and I will share more later. Acala is an open network, compatible with both EVM and Substrate, making it relatively easy to deploy on Acala regardless of what type of project you are developing.
Kristen: Okay, thank you. Next, let's welcome Junius from Papermoon.
Junius: Hello everyone! I am Junius from Papermoon. I am the head of DevRel, which is developer relations. Papermoon itself does not have its own projects; we provide DevRel services for other projects, such as those within the Polkadot ecosystem, including Moonbeam and Tanssi. In Papermoon, my main responsibility is to maintain relationships with the Polkadot developer community, and we also test new features of Polkadot. Recently, we have also taken over all the documentation work from Parity. In addition, I also represent Papermoon in various online and offline events. That’s my introduction, thank you everyone.
Kristen: We warmly welcome your arrival; this is also Papermoon's first participation in our program, and we are truly honored. Alright, now let's welcome Max.
Max: Hello everyone, Kristen, it's great to be back on PolkaWorld's show. I actually have two roles in the Polkadot ecosystem: the first is the founder of Harbor Industrial Capital (HIC), a venture capital fund focused on Polkadot. We are currently preparing for the fundraising of our second fund, and I will share more details shortly.
The second identity is the head of PolkaPort East, a Hong Kong development project supported by the Web3 Foundation's 'Decentralized Future Plan', mainly organizing Polkadot ecosystem activities and developing investor relations. Many friends in today's conference have participated in our activities, and it's great to see you all again. Our events include fireside chats, ecosystem gatherings, etc. In addition to members within the ecosystem, we also invite external guests to participate. We are also working on investor relations to attract external capital into Polkadot while promoting the real application of Polkadot-based projects in Hong Kong.
Kristen: That's great! We greatly appreciate HIC's contributions to the Polkadot ecosystem in Hong Kong; these efforts are crucial. Next, let's welcome Michael.
Michael: Hello everyone, thank you for inviting me to participate in this program. I was a viewer of the show before, and it’s really special to be a guest this time. I, like Max, also hold multiple roles in the ecosystem. The company I am with is Republik Labs, one of the largest blockchain media and research platforms in Indonesia. I'm Australian, but I have been living in Indonesia for the past seven years. We operate Indonesia's largest blockchain-neutral community. At the same time, as an official ambassador for Polkadot, I have been promoting the integration of Polkadot's technology in Indonesia and other ecosystems.
Then I am also one of the co-founders of Mandala Chain, which is a parachain that will soon launch on Polkadot. We also cooperate with many projects present, such as collaborating with Polimec to conduct funding rounds and working with Max. Mandala is about to go live, and we will share more related content today.
Kristen: Welcome, Michael. You hold multiple roles in the Polkadot ecosystem and have made many contributions. Now let's welcome Luca.
Luca: It is a great honor to participate in this program. Thank you, Kristen, for the invitation, and greetings to all the guests. I will keep it concise and clear; I am very much looking forward to the upcoming discussion. I am one of the co-founders of Polimec. What we are building is a funding infrastructure for Web3 projects, to put it simply, helping Web3 startups achieve efficient funding. We utilize the Polkadot tech stack, which is the blockchain portion of Web3 technology, to implement a more efficient and compliant funding mechanism. I will elaborate more on this later; I'm very excited.
Polimec: Fully supporting mobile, allowing ordinary people to become investors.
Kristen: Welcome, Luca. With Polimec, ordinary users can also become investors now. I'm glad to have six guests here today; six is a lucky number in China. Let's officially start today's first segment—April project progress review. Each guest please share your team's most important milestone or achievement for this month. Let's start with Luca?
Luca: Alright, I will try to focus on April's content, but sometimes products may launch in this month, but the development behind them took a long time, and everyone may resonate with this. For Polimec, a significant recent shift was realizing that our initial two core assumptions were actually wrong.
The first is: 'a large number of on-chain users is continuously growing', and the second is 'users are accustomed to using wallets'. But the reality is, we find that users are actually unwilling to understand complex concepts like wallets and mnemonic phrases. So what we are currently doing is to 'hide' the blockchain, that is, to transcend the abstraction of chains, even achieving 'wallet abstraction'. Users don't need to know they are using blockchain, nor do they need to understand what a wallet is.
A significant feature we launched this month is comprehensive support for mobile. As long as you use SubWallet or NovaWallet, you can complete the entire process of registration, KYC, cross-chain transfers, wallet deposits, etc., smoothly on your phone, making users hardly feel the presence of blockchain. We are achieving a reduction in barriers and an enhancement of experience.
Of course, there are many follow-up plans, but this is an important step we took this month: not just focusing on 'on-chain users', but allowing ordinary people to smoothly enter the Web3 world and enjoy the benefits of blockchain without needing to understand its complexities.
Kristen: I have seen that Polimec has indeed made many efforts in terms of user experience. Being able to operate on mobile is already a significant improvement.
Luca: Yes, we are currently preparing to deploy asynchronous backing, which will elevate the user experience to another level—for example, reducing block confirmation time from 12 seconds to 6 seconds. Although it seems like a small improvement, it qualitatively enhances the user experience.
At the same time, we have also migrated the entire front end to the PAPI (Polkadot API) infrastructure, and we are very grateful for the efforts made by the PAPI team. Their technology allows DeFi applications on Polkadot to have a more aesthetically pleasing and smooth front-end experience. With PAPI, we can directly integrate via API, bringing us closer to the experience of Web2 applications. This way, users feel like they are using a regular mobile app rather than a DeFi application that requires technical knowledge.
This is exactly what we want—to achieve real user adoption so that people feel like they are using an ordinary mobile application, rather than some kind of 'DeFi mobile entry'.
Mandala: Helping Indonesia's largest province launch their Substrate chain.
Kristen: This is truly amazing! Now let’s have Michael share the significant progress of Mandala in April.
Michael: Alright, thank you. As Luca mentioned, we are also doing something that has been long in the works, which is finally landing in April and holding a launch event—we officially signed a cooperation agreement with Indonesia's largest province, West Java, and helped them launch their own Substrate blockchain!
West Java Province has a population of 50 million, which is a big deal for us. Mandala is a parachain on Polkadot, and our ecosystem will include a series of 'permissioned chains' controlled by the government or enterprises, which will connect to Mandala, effectively making us an L2 role for Polkadot. The chain launched by the West Java government will be used for various government applications, such as data storage, security management, etc., completely managed by the government, but in the future, users can access it through our Mandala mainnet.
We have been working hard on this project for nearly two years, and it's one of our team's core tasks. It was incredibly exciting to hold a launch event in West Java in April and officially announce our collaboration!
HIC: Continuing to develop LP in Singapore and establish an advisory committee.
Kristen: This is indeed very exciting because Mandala will bring 50 million users from Indonesia onto the chain, which is a very important vision for the Polkadot ecosystem. Next, let's welcome Max to share the achievements of the HIC team in April.
Max: Of course, I want to mainly talk about two aspects: one is fund-raising, and the other is our newly established advisory committee.
Let’s talk about fundraising first. As a VC fund, fundraising is definitely one of our core tasks, and we have been working hard to promote the vision of Polkadot. You may remember that we originally planned to have Polkadot sponsor a series of conferences to attend some large investor meetings, to showcase this ecosystem to traditional investors under the name 'Polkadot'. Unfortunately, this proposal did not pass the DAO's approval. However, we did not give up and found another way—now Mario is pushing this forward in a personal capacity. For example, this week he met with investors in Singapore. Although he did not appear in an official capacity as Polkadot and did not have sponsorship support, we are still trying to promote the Polkadot ecosystem. I just spoke to him on the phone, and the feedback has been very positive; many traditional investors have shown strong interest in Polkadot. I think this is exactly what we should do: proactively go out and convey the value of this ecosystem. Although if there were sponsorship, we could put the Polkadot logo on it and have a formal speech on stage, which would have a greater impact, even without those, we are still in action, and the results are good, and I am very pleased with that.
Another progress is that we are forming an advisory committee for HIC. In our first fund, we did not establish an advisory committee; only Mario and I were responsible for all decisions. But this time we decided to adopt a more 'institutionalized' model, one of the main reasons being that the Web3 Foundation will serve as our first LP (limited partner). So we want to build HIC into a more mature, more institutionalized fund, and one important step is to establish this advisory committee. We are currently communicating with many senior figures in the Polkadot ecosystem—they have deep insights into the ecosystem and diverse perspectives, which can help us determine which projects are worth supporting and which directions are worth investing in. We are still in the selection phase and expect to have 5 or 7 advisory members (I hope it’s an odd number for easier voting decisions). Recently, we've had smooth discussions with several potential candidates, and there’s much agreement. They also recognize what we are doing: bringing capital into Polkadot while upgrading the operational model to be more standardized. I can't disclose these names yet, but I hope to announce them in the next monthly update. In short, this is an important step to deeply bind HIC with the Polkadot ecosystem.
Papermoon: Successfully tested and operated Uniswap V2 on PolkaVM
Kristen: This is great news! We are very much looking forward to it because I believe the role HIC plays in the ecosystem can fill the gap left by OpenGov and the Web3 Foundation, and this role will certainly become increasingly important in the future. Now, let's welcome Junius from PaperMoon to share the achievements of April.
Junius: We've made many important advancements in April, and I want to focus on the progress regarding PolkaVM and Revive (a set of smart contract modules developed by Parity). As everyone knows, PolkaVM will launch on Kusama in the second quarter. This month, our PaperMoon team's main task is to test the functionality of PolkaVM on the testnet (Westend).
We have now completed most of the compatibility verification for complex smart contracts. Just earlier this week, we successfully ran the Uniswap V2 contract on PolkaVM, and all tests passed. As everyone knows, Uniswap is one of the most complex contracts in Solidity, which means that PolkaVM and Revive have achieved 100% compatibility with EVM and Solidity, which is fantastic news. During the testing process, we also fixed some bugs in Revive and PolkaVM and submitted many PRs to Parity, and the overall codebase is becoming more stable. We are very confident about deploying PolkaVM on Kusama on time.
Another progress is that we are preparing documentation, such as how to deploy and test Solidity contracts, etc. We have also created multiple project templates on GitHub, such as Remix templates and Hardhat templates. Developers can simply clone the templates, add their code, and run tests directly on PolkaVM. This is a significant benefit for Solidity developers—they hardly need to learn new things to use our resources to develop within the Polkadot ecosystem.
In addition, we are also promoting educational work. Starting last month, we have launched an introductory course for Solidity developers on PolkaVM, and over 200 students have already signed up. We are also preparing to hold a small online hackathon for them, allowing them to practice through real-world exercises and win rewards. Approximately 80 students have signed up to participate, and we expect to conduct evaluations and announce the winning projects next month. In short, there have indeed been many exciting achievements this month; thank you all!
Kristen: Okay. You just mentioned the testing performance of PolkaVM; I have seen some people say PVM is 20 to 50 times faster than EVM; is that true?
Junius: Yes, that statement is true. However, our current focus is still on functional testing, and we haven't specifically done performance testing yet, but we will conduct evaluations in that area later.
Kristen: Okay, you just mentioned that PVM will be deployed in the second quarter; is it deploying on Polkadot or Kusama?
Junius: It should be launching on Kusama, likely in this quarter. Polkadot should go live in the third quarter.
Acala: Acala dApp is migrating to version 2.0.
Kristen: Great, thank you! Now let’s welcome Travis from Acala. What significant progress has Acala made recently?
Travis: Recently, a lot of exciting things have been happening at Acala. I think the biggest one is that our Meme and dApp development competition is now halfway through the six-month competition. We plan to take a brief pause at this midpoint. This competition is mainly to encourage anyone to deploy dApps on Acala EVM, and we are actively expanding this ecosystem. Many developers and community members have participated. If you are part of the meme community, you can also bring your community to participate.
On the other hand, our Acala dApp is also migrating to version 2.0, focusing on enhancing user experience. We will be adding many small features that everyone feels are necessary, such as night mode, notification features, a better user interface, and streamlined asset transfer processes, etc. Some version 2.0 features have already launched, and we are making final adjustments. Overall, our core goal is to provide users with a better and smoother experience on the Acala network.
Hyperbridge: Seed round secured $5 million in support!
Kristen: Thank you. Now I see that Seun has joined. Welcome, Seun! How's it going over there?
Seun: I just rushed in from an event, feeling sweaty all over. But the overall vibe was fantastic, and I feel like the bull market is back; the whole venue was packed, it was really crazy.
Kristen: Wow, I hope I can go see it too. What significant achievements or milestones does your team have this month? Before that, you can also briefly introduce yourself and your project.
Seun: Of course, thank you, Kristen. My name is Seun Lanlege, and I am the co-founder of Polytope Labs. We are the development team behind Hyperbridge. Hyperbridge is a secure, decentralized cross-chain messaging protocol that allows developers to build truly mission-critical cross-chain applications. We have now launched the mainnet and have already connected with multiple chains, such as Bifrost, BNB Chain, Ethereum L2, and the Ethereum mainnet. Our protocol not only supports cross-chain messaging but also enables asset transfers between different networks.
To summarize some of our recent progress: we just completed a public round of funding, exceeding $2.8 million. We also secured a $2.5 million investment from the Polkadot ecosystem fund. In total, this seed round received $5 million in support. This is an incredibly exciting journey for us. After all, we have been building Hyperbridge for nearly two years, and we are very grateful for the community's ongoing support and trust. We will continue to strive to provide cutting-edge cross-chain experiences.
Another significant milestone is that we are about to launch a feature called 'Intent Gateway'. This is a front-end application officially developed by Polytope Labs, based on the Hyperbridge protocol, supporting users in general ERC-20 asset cross-chain transfers. Soon you will be able to transfer ETH, WETH, USDC, USDT, and other tokens across chains right through it, and you can even achieve cross-chain token swaps through 'solver'. We are currently collaborating with some existing solvers, such as ChainSafe's Sprinter, which will provide us with technical support, and other partners are also in discussions. We will continue to update progress on this. This is a very exciting new phase for us.
Kristen: That's fantastic! I see that your public round of funding has been completed. Do all users participating in the crowdfunding need to complete KYC within the stipulated time, or they will miss this opportunity?
Seun: Yes, we set a KYC deadline, which is today. This is part of meeting regulatory requirements. We have completed over 90% of the KYC process for funding, but some small investors who did not read the terms carefully may have their funds returned due to not acting in time.
Mainnet launch is coming soon! How Mandala is bringing Polkadot technology to Indonesia.
Kristen: As we all know, Indonesia has over 150 million people and is a vibrant, beautiful country. So what do you think is driving the rapid growth of Web3 adoption in Indonesia? Michael?
Michael: Actually, Indonesia has a population of 280 million, not 150 million, haha. So the base is actually much larger. I believe one main reason for the rapid growth is that Indonesia is a 'mobile-first' society. For example, our platform’s data shows that in the first quarter of 2025, user engagement and traffic increased by about 50% compared to the fourth quarter of 2024. This is very significant. Additionally, Indonesia is very 'token-friendly' as a society. By this, I mean not just cryptocurrency projects, but for example, when you buy points from a business and use those points within that closed-loop system for consumption, such as ordering takeout, topping up phone credits, or surfing the internet. This 'points' system is very similar to the economic model of crypto tokens, the only difference being that it is centralized.
So when people first come into contact with blockchain and tokens, it's actually not unfamiliar—they've been using 'tokens' for a long time, and even internally, these companies call them 'Tokens'. Therefore, we believe that when entering this market, people will feel they already understand this ecosystem, so we are very much looking forward to bringing Mandala to market.
Kristen: How does the government support blockchain projects in Indonesia? Why do they support them? How do they do that?
Michael: Indonesia does not embrace blockchain payments as liberally as El Salvador, but overall, the government holds a very friendly attitude towards blockchain technology, as they value the intrinsic worth of this technology. One reason is that various data systems in the Indonesian government, especially like immigration departments, have suffered multiple hacking attacks, so they are very concerned about data protection and security. In this regard, the value of blockchain is very clear.
However, they are relatively conservative about allowing cryptocurrencies as a payment method because they want to protect their domestic currency. Therefore, currently, using cryptocurrencies to pay for goods and services in Indonesia is still prohibited. However, a few years ago, they clearly stated that crypto tokens do not fall under the category of securities and directly listed nearly 500 tokens that are recognized as non-securities (basically just the top 500 tokens on Coin Market Cap). So trading is allowed, but not for payment. Overall, Indonesia is very welcoming and open to blockchain technology. They hope to promote economic innovation. Compared to some already very developed, mature countries, emerging market countries are actually more proactive in adopting new technologies.
Kristen: Great. Indonesia is the fourth most populous country in the world, so how does Mandala plan to truly bring these people into the Web3 world? What are the biggest challenges and opportunities you face?
Michael: This question is actually the most exciting yet challenging part of our entire project. One of the main reasons we initially founded Mandala was that some government departments in Indonesia approached us to help develop blockchain applications. But we didn't want to just create a centralized 'fake blockchain' for them; instead, we hope to build a system that retains the spirit of decentralization.
Thus, we referred to Polkadot's parachain and relay chain architecture: allowing certain chains to be semi-centralized while connecting to a decentralized and secure network. And that secure layer is provided by Polkadot. Therefore, we are building Mandala according to Polkadot's design philosophy.
Secondly, we don't want to go it alone to create an L1 public chain; that would be too large and unrealistic. We hope to join a mature ecosystem, collaborate with other projects, and share this market. For example, we do not need to recreate bridging technology, as Hyperbridge is already the top cross-chain bridge in Web3. We also do not plan to create our own fundraising platform, as the Polimec team has already built one. As for DEX, Acala, Hydration, and StellaSwap on Moonbeam are already very well established. So we want to build a platform that invites all Polkadot projects to come together and collectively 'capture' this emerging market. This is why we must join the Polkadot ecosystem; we cannot and do not want to do everything alone.
Kristen: Mandala should also be launching soon. We are really looking forward to your practices in Indonesia and to see you lead Indonesian users into Web3 and the Polkadot ecosystem.
Michael: Yes, we are very excited ourselves. So please get ready, our public test network will be online within one to two weeks, and everyone will be able to deploy their applications. We warmly welcome local and regional developers to come and deploy applications.
We have always likened blockchain to a large shopping mall: there will be anchor stores (like supermarkets or department stores) bringing foot traffic, and then small and medium-sized businesses will come to set up shop. Over here, due to government projects' support, there will naturally be a lot of 'customer flow', so we welcome everyone to cooperate, deploy applications, or establish connections through XCM. Mandala is now open for business, and we welcome everyone to co-build the ecosystem.
The treasury should distinguish between 'grants' and 'investments', exploring more sustainable methods.
Kristen: Great, I'm really looking forward to it. Now let's move on to the next segment and ask Max. You are an ecological fund in the Polkadot ecosystem, what unique strategies have you adopted to supplement the funding system of OpenGov and the Web3 Foundation? What unique role does HIC play in the entire ecosystem?
Max: Hmm, this is an interesting question. I think we can look at it from the perspective of the difference between 'grants' and 'investments'. For example, a project starting from scratch, like Mandala Chain, or other project parties present might relate—projects go through several stages of development. Initially, applying for grants is a good choice. The Web3 Foundation has been providing this kind of technical funding and has done quite well. Of course, there is also OpenGov; many projects now apply for treasury funding, which is essentially a form of grant because these funds are generally 'no-strings-attached'.
I recently spoke with a project, and they said: 'We are building a project based on Polkadot and now want to extend our operational cycle—we need to pay salaries, rent, electricity bills, servers, etc. If someone can provide funding, we are also willing to give a portion of equity or tokens in return. But currently, it seems there is no such mechanism.' I thought about it and realized this was the case. Because now everyone directly applies for treasury funding, which is essentially applying for grants.
But in the long run, this approach is not ideal. Treasury funding is suitable for some early-stage projects, but most projects have their own tokens, right? They can actually give these tokens to the funders. The problem is that there are very few active VC (venture capital) funds in the Polkadot ecosystem, whereas treasury funds are abundant. This situation is actually an unhealthy ecological structure. I've talked to many VCs, and many are surprised that we focus on Polkadot, thinking, 'Why not go to other ecosystems? Isn't there more heat in other places?' Indeed, other ecosystems may have more buzz right now, but we are 'fundamental investors', we focus on long-term value rather than short-term hype. However, in reality, we still need some internal funding to 'fill the gap' because it's still very difficult to attract large external funds. They want to see user growth, more liquidity, higher activity, etc. So many projects still have to rely on Polkadot's own internal funds for development, which also leads to the role we play.
Currently, strictly speaking, there are only two funds in the Polkadot ecosystem focused on ecological investment, one is Scytale Digital, although they are currently mainly focused on the Mythical ecosystem; the other is us, HIC, we are 100% focused on Polkadot.
Of course, both of our funds are currently relatively small in scale. In comparison, larger funds like Aptos have a $200 million ecosystem fund, which is quite a clear contrast, but we are growing. Recently, I have been considering one issue: although the Polkadot treasury is substantial, the grants issued are essentially 'non-repayable'. By design, this is the nature of grants. However, I believe we could take a step forward; for example, when the treasury funds a project, it could also receive tokens from that project as a return and put these tokens into the treasury's balance sheet. This would be a more sustainable approach. There is currently no such mechanism, but we are exploring and promoting innovations in this area. Although there is nothing to announce yet, perhaps we can share more with everyone in the future.
Moreover, I feel that the most lacking thing in the current Polkadot ecosystem is 'applications'. We have entered a new phase centered around Polkadot Hub, making it easier for projects to launch applications. But the problem is that it is still very difficult to secure funding for these applications. If we can have ten, a hundred, or a thousand applications launched, one of them will surely become a 'killer application' that drives the entire ecosystem to leap forward, so we need more applications, and Polkadot Hub is where these applications will be born.
But the key question is—how to finance? I believe we can no longer rely entirely on grants. Grants are actually a 'lack of accountability' model. You take the money, but you don't have to deliver anything; this can be understandable for early-stage projects, but in the growth and expansion phases, relying on grants is actually very detrimental.
This is also why we hope that the HIC fund can grow larger, to be more proactive in supporting applications that genuinely build the ecosystem. We hope to support projects through investment rather than grants. You can see what Polimec is doing now; they are actually filling this gap. They are helping projects to achieve financing, and we are also working hard on our part. So if you ask us what we need? That is: we need more support, more partners, more resources, to jointly grow this fund and support more projects that genuinely build the ecosystem.
We should shift our thinking to be 'token-centric' instead of the current 'chain-centric' model.
Kristen: Polimec is now available for use on mobile. In which countries can it currently be used, and what are your expansion plans?
Luca: We are now 'globally available,' meaning users from all countries except sanctioned nations can access our platform via mobile applications or through computer web portals.
The upcoming expansion direction actually has two aspects:
The first is: how do we serve more projects? As Max just mentioned, with the EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine) deployed to Asset Hub, the Polkadot ecosystem has actually expanded significantly. Polimec itself is already compatible with Ethereum (EVM compatible), so we can provide financing services for projects in the Ethereum ecosystem—meaning projects can launch tokens on the Ethereum mainnet, while the funding portion can be completed on Polimec. At this point, we need to ensure that Ethereum users can participate smoothly. So we made a crucial upgrade (which will be launched soon): we do not want Ethereum users to have to create a Polkadot wallet to participate in projects; many of these users only use MetaMask or Rabby wallets, typical Ethereum native users. Therefore, our upcoming new feature will allow them to participate in project funding directly using ETH without needing a Polkadot wallet, and the tokens from the mainnet launch will go directly back to their Ethereum wallets, significantly lowering the entry barrier and facilitating our expansion of more Ethereum native users.
Secondly, we hope to reach those investors who 'don't want to use wallets at all'. At this point, we are using a 'White Label Solution'. Our entire protocol is built on-chain, meaning we can offer it as a suite of 'software services' to others. For example, asset management companies, brokerage firms, and traditional financial institutions can directly use our protocol to conduct financing operations for their users. For example, when you log into your online banking, the interface may not look good, but you still use it because you trust the bank. We will sync on-chain data to their interface via API, and users only need to invest in USD, Swiss Francs, Euros as usual. The backend automatically completes operations like converting to stablecoins, on-chain trading, KYC verification, etc., while the blockchain part is 'invisible' to them. This approach allows us to quickly expand our service scope, enabling traditional financial clients to indirectly access Web3 financing opportunities, while native DeFi users can also participate directly.
Lastly, one thing I think is particularly important: Polkadot emphasizes 'multi-chain interoperability'. A significant reason we chose to join Polkadot is that it is not a 'single-chain island'. In the next three weeks, we will launch a brand new 'token-centric' model to replace the current 'chain-centric' model.
What does this mean? Now, when users want to use USDT to participate in projects, they need to know which chain their USDT is on, like Mandala, Hydration, or Asset Hub. But we think this is unreasonable. Users only need to know 'I have USDT'; they shouldn't have to understand the technical details of these underlying chains. We will automatically identify which chains users hold USDT on, and then facilitate the path, completing cross-chain transfers and operations in the cheapest and fastest way, all done automatically. This will greatly optimize the user experience, making the entire ecosystem easier to use, more efficient, and more conducive for project parties to connect and expand.
Kristen: Will it be possible in the future to use USDT from outside the Polkadot ecosystem through Hyperbridge?
Luca: Of course, that’s a 100% goal. I don’t want to steal Seun’s thunder; he has more thoughts on this and can elaborate later. But I can say this is a target we are actively working towards. We already have related technical support within the Polkadot ecosystem to transition from a 'chain-centric' to a 'token-centric' architecture.
We will release this feature in the coming weeks, and once published, the technology can be reused throughout the ecosystem. From the end-user perspective, this is just a front-end abstract representation. But if we look at the bigger picture, we can also connect this mechanism to other ecosystems, releasing the powerful potential of 'cross-chain interoperability', which is where protocols like Hyperbridge can leverage their strengths. We not only want to bridge tokens across chains, but more importantly, we want tokens to be practically usable on the target chains; that is 'true cross-chain interoperability'. This way, users can benefit from multiple ecosystems and applications without having to convert crypto assets into fiat currency, which is the real value we bring to end users.
Users really don't care about decentralization? Hyperbridge believes that true competitiveness lies in decentralization.
Kristen: Now let’s officially get into the topic of Hyperbridge. You secured $5 million in funding in a very short time; what do you think are the factors that have led the community to trust you so much? In the post-funding phase, what is your current main focus?
Seun: We originally planned to build Hyperbridge first, having a real usable product online before seeking funding, so the community could assess what we had done—our code is open-source, and everyone can try out the product, even imagining what use cases this infrastructure could facilitate. Throughout the development process, we have been very 'open and transparent'—we are a team that 'builds wheels in the sunlight': we release research results, and I have consistently introduced our progress at various meetings. I believe this 'open building' approach is key to establishing community trust.
We are very active on Twitter; I have also participated in many crypto-related voice spaces. I jokingly say that we managed to get the project up and complete funding by 'shitposting' on Twitter, but this is not entirely a joke. We have been transparent with our community, without any concealment, and of course, we also greatly appreciate the community's trust.
As for the next steps, our roadmap is also public and can be seen on the official website. The current focus is on supporting more chains, especially some non-EVM chains like Aptos, and even some newly emerging chains, like the privacy-focused L1—DarkFi, which is led by Bitcoin OG developer Amin.
Of course, we also hope to launch our own native applications. Currently, Hyperbridge is more like a developer tool primarily used by development teams to build their own applications, but we also want to release our own protocol—Intent Protocol—so that users can personally experience the security and decentralization brought by Hyperbridge.
In summary, our goal is to support more chains, more tokens, and more applications. We have also been communicating with other development teams to explore how to integrate Hyperbridge into their products, especially DeFi applications, like DEX. You can imagine a future where when you go to Uniswap, you can directly bridge your assets across chains on that page and use them immediately; that is the true 'chain abstraction'. Users actually don’t want to care about which chain an application is deployed on; they just want a 'painless' experience that transfers assets from Chain A to the application for immediate use, which is the core problem Hyperbridge aims to solve.
Of course, we will continue to enhance the developer experience, release more SDKs, allowing developers to quickly build applications without having to rewrite too much foundational code, providing many reusable components. So in summary: enhancing user experience, developer experience, supporting more chains, more applications, and more tokens is our current direction.
Kristen: Sounds great. As a cross-chain bridge protocol, what outstanding advantages does Hyperbridge have compared to other bridge protocols? What is your greatest competitive strength?
Seun: We started building Hyperbridge back in 2022 when LayerZero had just launched, and I was very disappointed with their security model, which was a '2-of-2 multisig'. Of course, this wasn't something they were intentionally hiding; it reflects the industry’s reality. I feel we are currently in a transition phase of 'Web2.5'; some people cannot produce truly decentralized products and instead settle for 'semi-decentralized' or even completely non-decentralized systems, merely building centralized systems on blockchain.
But there is a serious issue here: you are building a 'trust system', and trust systems can only expand within 'trust circles', meaning that people using your system are doing so because they might trust A16Z or those American investment institutions behind you, thinking that even if something goes wrong, they can rely on these institutions. But the problem is, if you are not American, and do not have judicial rights to protection in the US, then you cannot gain the same sense of security. Thus, this type of system can only expand within specific 'trust circles' and not globally.
There is a popular opinion on Twitter that says 'users really don't care about decentralization'. I think this statement is wrong. Just look at the top two protocols in crypto—Bitcoin and Ethereum—they are precisely the most decentralized protocols, and for this reason, they have been assigned such high value. Other protocols that are 'not decentralized enough' can only rank lower. So I believe that true competitiveness lies in decentralization; Hyperbridge does not require you to trust me, nor do we need you to trust Polkadot or our investors; you only need to trust the verification proof generated by the blockchain itself—this proof follows the same logic as confirming a transaction on an exchange. I know this difference may not be immediately apparent in the short term, but in the long run, decentralized systems will be more scalable to more use cases, more judicial jurisdictions, and more countries.
This year's main focus is on PolkaVM and Polkadot Hub.
Kristen: I also think decentralization is really important. Many users only realize its value when something goes wrong, so I believe this is a significant advantage for you. Now let's talk about Papermoon. Our community has actually heard about Papermoon for a while, especially in Chinese WeChat groups, but this should be your first public appearance in the English community, so everyone is looking forward to learning more about you. When did you start collaborating with Polkadot? What services do you primarily provide? What is the current progress of your collaboration?
Junius: Yes, Papermoon is participating in this roundtable event for the first time, so let me briefly introduce our team background. The Papermoon team actually spun off from the Moonbeam project, which is one of the first projects in the Polkadot ecosystem to promote organizational decentralization strategies. Many of our initial members at Papermoon come from Moonbeam's documentation team, developer relations (DevRel) team, and marketing team. They later formed Papermoon to specifically support Moonbeam. Almost two years ago, I was still in the Parity Asia team, where Parity began implementing a strategy of 'organizational decentralization', similar to Moonbeam's approach: decentralizing some work to community teams, such as developer relations, documentation writing, marketing, etc., so that Parity could focus on technical development, such as products, Kusama, Polkadot, PolkaVM, etc. After decentralization, we saw many new teams emerge, such as PolkaPortEast, OpenGuild, and some established community organizations like PolkaWorld, also began participating in new forms.
And we at Papermoon smoothly took over the documentation and DevRel work for Polkadot at that time. Now, most of the content on the Polkadot documentation website is written and maintained by our Papermoon team. We also maintain some code repositories to provide developers with practical examples, such as how to use Polkadot's new features like the recently launched PolkaVM or some new development tools. Currently, we are researching how to enable 'auto-scaling' features in parachains, which have already launched on Kusama. This is how Papermoon collaborates with Polkadot and the services we provide for the Polkadot ecosystem.
Kristen: That's great. Does Papermoon have any special plans for promoting JAM and Polkadot Hub? Because in the coming months of 2025, this will be a very important development and focus.
Junius: Of course. We do have some plans to promote JAM, but currently, due to our limited resources, we are still primarily focusing on PolkaVM and Polkadot Hub, as this will be the first functionality released in the second quarter of this year. Once this part is completed, if Parity can launch JAM testnets or SDKs and other related content, I believe Papermoon will definitely be one of the first teams to use them. For example, we will first deploy or run these new features ourselves, then document the entire process, and establish code repositories on GitHub so that other developers can also try following the steps. So we will definitely work with Parity to promote the landing of these new technologies. Additionally, we are also preparing a course on JAM, which is planned for release by the end of this year, with the initial version in Chinese.
Kristen: Oh, will there be an English version translated later?
Junius: Yes, we will also translate the course into English and upload it to YouTube.
JAM can run for 816 years?
Kristen: Acala has also participated in the development of JAM and is one of the 38 participating teams. Can you introduce your role in this project and the latest progress in development?
Travis: Of course. Although I am not a developer, I can say I am the furthest from development, haha, but I have indeed received some updates from our technical team regarding JAM. Currently, there are three milestone goals, and according to the news I received from the technical team this morning, we have completed 90% of the first stage. The remaining 10% involves the final version of the gray book and some bug fixes, so we are almost done. Of course, the last 10% of the work may take longer (I'm not sure), but while waiting for the gray book, our team has already started on the second and third phases, with the second phase about halfway done and the third phase just started. In other words, our progress is actually slightly ahead of schedule.
Additionally, I also received an interesting piece of information: the design life cycle of JAM is until mid-August 2840, meaning it can run for about 816 years! So we shouldn't worry too much about its lifespan. Also, JAM has some developer incentive mechanisms, which are quite interesting. Overall, the progress is quite good.
'Profitability' should not be the core criterion for measuring whether a proposal is worth funding.
Kristen: Although our time is running out, I think there is still an important topic we must discuss, which is one of the biggest things happening in Polkadot in April: the launch of the fourth phase of DV is taking place this month, but there have also been some controversies and discussions during this process.
Today we will discuss the definition of 'Common Good' projects. Gavin mentioned that the original intention of OpenGov was to fund those non-profit projects that serve the entire ecosystem, as some projects can no longer obtain funding from other channels, and they cannot achieve self-sufficiency, relying solely on treasury support. So we really want to know what conditions a project must meet to be considered 'Common Good'. We also want to hear your thoughts: which proposals deserve priority support from the ecosystem? Which truly have a positive impact on the ecosystem? Let's first ask Seun to share.
Seun: Alright. Reflecting on our recent successful OpenGov proposal, I've also seriously thought about it myself. I believe that for a proposal to pass, it must clearly benefit DOT holders and the Polkadot network. Just like our Hyperbridge proposal, its purpose is to enhance the accessibility of DOT—through Hyperbridge, DOT can be extended to other chains, and this benefit is obvious: it allows more people to access DOT and bridge DOT back into the Polkadot ecosystem for use—whether in Acala, Hydration, Mandala, or other platforms, whether to earn staking rewards or to conduct liquid staking on Bifrost, all can benefit. This kind of proposal is clearly beneficial for the entire network.
But if it is a proposal like 'I want to develop something, but there is no clear output yet', then the treasury is actually 'risking' investing in this project, and its risks are uncertain.
So I give a suggestion to teams wanting to apply for treasury funding: if you want to apply for treasury funds, it is best to build the foundation of the project first, and then use the treasury funds to initiate the protocol's initial use case.
Projects like Bifrost and Hydration are doing very well; they occasionally apply for liquidity funding loans from the treasury to maintain their vDOT products, and their proposals generally pass smoothly. So I think we need to change our mindset from 'what can I take from the treasury' to 'what can I contribute to the ecosystem'. This is the correct perspective for evaluating public good proposals.
Additionally, if you are still in the early development stage, you can try other means of financing, such as grants from the Web3 Foundation or through Polimec funding. Once you have achieved some results, then apply for support from the treasury; this will greatly increase the chances of success.
Kristen: So if a project cannot be profitable in the long run, do you think such projects are still worth funding?
Seun: I actually don't believe that 'profitability,' especially monetary profit, should be the core standard we use to measure whether a proposal is worth funding. I think the truly critical metric is: what actual benefits can this project bring to the Polkadot ecosystem, Polkadot developers, DAOs, or DOT holders today? For example, a proposal like PAPI addresses a pain point within the ecosystem; Polkadot.js is currently not well maintained, and the user experience is not great, and it may have been designed for a completely different era. Projects like PAPI will likely never become profitable or revenue-generating, but they still provide clear value to the ecosystem. Therefore, I believe that whether or not a project can make money is not the focus of our evaluation; instead, it is essential to clearly articulate what value this project can bring right now.
I have noticed that treasury voters are currently very conservative. They have this right, after all, they are not venture capitalists and will not risk for potential returns. They only need to focus on how to make the protocol better at the moment.
Kristen: Understood, so what do you think proposals should become priority funding objects in the Polkadot ecosystem?
Seun: I think we should prioritize proposals that can expand the Polkadot user base and broaden application scenarios, as this is something the current ecosystem is very lacking. For example, holding hackathons and offline events to attract developers to join are the types of proposals that usually pass easily, while I see many rejected proposals where the applicants want to directly use treasury funds to develop projects from scratch. I think this is not the best use of treasury funds.
Kristen: Understood, thank you for your in-depth sharing. Now let's hear Michael's thoughts.
Michael: Yes, everyone may have different opinions on this topic, but for me, it's actually very simple—whether a project can bring value, usability, or users to the DOT token is the most critical aspect. Because ultimately, our entire network exists around the DOT token. One of the things I love about Polkadot is its decentralization: we do not own each other's project equity. Just like when I come on the PolkaWorld podcast today, I don't gain ownership of your PolkaWorld because I participated, and you won't gain ownership of my project because I attended the podcast. But we are all doing our own things while working towards the same goal—to make the DOT token more useful, more recognized, and to attract more users.
DOT is like the lifeblood of the entire ecosystem, so any proposal that can bring more use cases and users to DOT, I believe, is worth funding. I think Seun said it particularly well: if you just want to use treasury funds to 'incubate' your ideas, OpenGov may not be the best fit, but if you have had some practical experience for a while and proved that what you are doing truly brings value to the ecosystem—whether through hackathons, offline events, developing urgently needed software, or expanding business partnerships—then I believe such projects absolutely deserve funding.
I also think we are sometimes too cautious because there may have been some not-so-good proposals funded in the past. Therefore, we need to be clearer in distinguishing between 'speculation' and 'support'. I believe the treasury is not for 'speculation' but should be used to 'support' truly excellent and influential teams. Regardless of whether these teams aim for profitability, as long as they can bring actual value or users to DOT, they are worth supporting.
Kristen: Yes, but the word 'value' is actually quite difficult to define. Some people say their projects will bring value in the future, or that value will only materialize after the project is launched.
Michael: Yes, I think what we should look at now is 'usability'. If a project can bring actual use cases or scenarios for DOT, or can bring users, then it can be considered successful. This is also the dividing line between 'speculation' and 'actual support'. So I suggest that many teams can first bear the initial risks themselves, create a prototype, validate their ideas, and then showcase the achievements they have made to the community. At this point, applying for treasury support will be less risky for the treasury and more so for you, which will make the treasury more willing to support you.
Kristen: Thank you. Now let's welcome Junius; I would like to hear your thoughts on this issue.
Junius: I think it is quite difficult to reach consensus on standards among everyone, but personally, as a technician, I have two criteria. The first is whether this project or proposal can genuinely promote the widespread adoption of Web3 technology, as this benefits the entire industry and is a 'Common Good'. For example, at Parity, we built many underlying platforms like Substrate and some foundational libraries, which are not just used for Parity or Polkadot projects but are also utilized by many other projects, such as Cardano and Avail that use Substrate to build their chains. Therefore, I believe this is a broader contribution to the entire industry.
The second standard goes back to Polkadot itself; I believe we should genuinely support more technical proposals or projects. Because I understand that many developers choose to develop on Polkadot because they recognize our technological advantages. Although our platform itself is not low in terms of barriers for developers, we indeed need more practical tools to lower the development threshold and help everyone more easily launch projects on Polkadot. This is my view on this topic.
Kristen: Alright, understood. Your viewpoint is solid since you are a developer with experience in this area, but some people say we are already well-prepared on the technical front, and now we should strengthen marketing efforts because opinions always differ. What do you think?
Junius: Yes, I also agree with this view. In the short term, we can indeed attract more developers and project parties to join through some marketing or promotional activities, and this is an important part, I agree with that.
Kristen: Yes, we indeed should 'walk on two legs' and not rely solely on one side. Alright, now it’s Travis' turn.
Travis: Well, I think the first three have already covered it very thoroughly, but if I had to add something, I believe one of the core elements of 'Common Good' is inclusiveness, as well as its core functionality: how does it help the entire ecosystem? Does it help enhance the treasury's capabilities? Can it attract new users? I think the hardest part is how to measure this 'impact'. Although I am not one of the earliest members of Acala, I know our development team has done a lot of 'Common Good'. Take the tool Chopsticks, for example, many developers are using it. This was originally a small tool we could use internally, but we chose to open it up for everyone in the ecosystem to benefit, and I believe such tools are a typical example of 'Common Good'.
Certainly, some people now suggest 'first build the product, then apply for retroactive funding'. I think that could be a solution, but there are some issues with it. For example, some might say, 'You already built it, should we still pay you this money?' It becomes somewhat politicized, but ultimately, I believe the focus is still on practicality and whether it has clear, measurable impact. If a public good project is truly well done, its value should be visible and quantifiable.
Kristen: Yes, you make a very good point, and I agree. In fact, we often say that setting standards is easy, but when it comes to reviewing a proposal and making a decision, it becomes very difficult. Because behind a proposal is a complete team, and our decisions will impact many people, which is indeed a challenging process. However, I learned a lot from your perspectives, thank you very much. Also, thanks to all the guests for their wonderful contributions to April's monthly report, and thank you to the audience for your participation. If you want to learn more about Polkadot's developments, feel free to follow all our guests today, and please continue to keep an eye on PolkaWorld's updates. See you next time, thank you all!