0xLocker

38 posts

0xLocker banner
0xLocker

0xLocker

@0xlocker

Building Conviction Lockers (CL-20's). Decentralized price based ERC-20 lockers.

D17 Katılım Nisan 2026
3 Takip Edilen205 Takipçiler
0xLocker
0xLocker@0xlocker·
@stoopid102 @xbt2027 100%, I've got a CLI tool that works well with Codex or Claude too. Will ship that later today. There's a local Uniswap style UI that's easy to use. Even complex contracts can be fully abstracted into simple frontends.
English
1
2
5
81
stoopid102
stoopid102@stoopid102·
@0xlocker @xbt2027 intrigued by this. hoping there will be a way to make this easy to use and understand for people not deep in the subject?
English
1
0
3
32
0xLocker
0xLocker@0xlocker·
CL-20 contracts have near infinite combinations of parameters and functions. Yet for users: - creating a personal locker contract - verifying a D17 launch access - buying tokens - verifying current liquidity and price - locking tokens all happens in a single txn
0xLocker@0xlocker

Introducing: Conviction Lockers (CL-20's) Programmable user-controlled lockers for ERC20 tokens. A base for experimentation with CL-20's for decentralized D17 LP token ownership. Repo: github.com/0xlocker/CL-20 Docs: github.com/0xlocker/CL-20… Example: github.com/0xlocker/CL-20…

English
6
3
21
1.5K
0xLocker
0xLocker@0xlocker·
Uniswap LP tokens are just standard ERC20 tokens. Custom ERC20 token contracts whether D17 or others, can create custom functions. Your Conviction Locker can verify the contract yet executes the rules within an account you control.
English
0
0
4
143
0xLocker retweetledi
xbt2027
xbt2027@xbt2027·
My work is focused around initial distribution and valuation. Every such event ends in TGE and creation of a liquidity pool. LP presents a potential misalignment of incentives. In XBT and 2027, we've eliminated that by removing deployer incentives. But for all other launches, this is a very important topic. One major feature (and a bug) of bonding curves has been the centralized ownership of LP's. This way, the structure itself won, by keeping all the pools. Consider the following scenarios; Give the LP ownership to deployer: They are incentivized to farm fees, and in the absence of fees, if the LP is not permanently locked, they are incentivized for the death of the project, unlock of funds etc. If permanent lock, in the case of thick LP's, even if all tokens are sold into the LP, some native tokens (SOL,ETH) may remain in the pool regardless, and then without a method of recovery, it translates into impermanent loss. This is where @0xlocker steps in. It's a brilliant approach that only scratches the surface of what can be done, but individually held LP tokens might solve this long existing dilemma naturally and beautifully. I want to implement a version of this approach to the infrastructure. That's been the one missing link in the whole system.
English
2
4
32
1.3K
0xLocker
0xLocker@0xlocker·
The focus is first on experimentation and showcasing a feature set the community can discuss and experiment with. As we narrow down a core feature set, we'll shift focus to security and minimising risks.
English
0
0
6
150
0xLocker
0xLocker@0xlocker·
Tomorrow we'll go into more detail on exotic functions, community LP ownership and the constraints and parameters available for each. Along with the behavior and games they can enable.
English
1
0
5
157