Matt | Arch

4.9K posts

Matt | Arch banner
Matt | Arch

Matt | Arch

@proofofmud

CEO @archntwrk ⋒ BTC class of 2013 ⋒ 🟠 🏦 Obsessed with building out the Bitcoin-native financial layer

Katılım Haziran 2021
3.4K Takip Edilen36.7K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
We’ve been quiet for months, building in the background. But it’s time to show you what we’ve been working on. Over the next few weeks, as we prepare for mainnet, we’ll be shipping (with receipts) , everything we’ve built in silence. Our north star was simple: programmable Bitcoin, without bridges. That meant building everything from scratch: a new VM, new cryptography, and a new consensus , all capable of doing real Bitcoin things. This has never existed before. I’m beyond proud of the dozen and counting brilliant engineers who locked in on this vision and made it real. Read our manifesto, our mission, and our values for Bitcoin’s next chapter and sign it with your Bitcoin wallet to be part of the movement. The quiet build is over. Let’s show the world what’s coming. Bitcoin proved it could store value. Now it will prove it can power finance. Arch World Order.
Arch Network@ArchNtwrk

x.com/i/article/1980…

English
89
49
348
19.8K
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
"The problem was not a lack of cash. It was an inability to redistribute cash quickly enough through existing infrastructure. The plumbing could not move liquidity where it was needed at the speed the market required" Trustlessness without capital efficiency is a dead product. Bitcoin-backed lending lives or dies on how fast collateral can move when prices and risk cascade. If zk verification adds latency to settlement, LTVs have to be more conservative to absorb the gap meaning less borrowing power per unit of BTC, which means worse pricing, which means real users go elsewhere. The 2019 repo parallel shows this: cash existed, trust existed, but the plumbing couldn’t move value at market speed and rates blew out 10x in a day. Trust-minimization is worthless if the rails can’t clear efficiently enough.
English
0
0
0
25
Jay
Jay@jaypatel·
@proofofmud @david_seroy not really following how this is related. I agree some term structure to the market would help, but that exists beyond BTC as well
English
0
0
3
31
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
This is the right product idea However, it is and will always be trusted. No amount of BitVM, ZK, cryptographic break-throughs can ever over-come trust assumptions added when you bridge BTC into another consensus system. Only a Bitcoin Rollup + ZK overcomes this issue.
Zest Protocol@ZestProtocol

x.com/i/article/2049…

English
3
5
31
2.9K
Catrina
Catrina@dotcuriouscat·
It’s funny I’m still called contrarian for calling a comeback in BTCfi There’s SO much closeted demand for BTC-on-BTC yield from private whale convos What really happened is Merlin and the rest of the EVM “BTC L2s” cooked the entire category with their turbo-scammy yield schemes. On top of that — and I’ve said this over and over again — it makes 0 sense for Bitcoin solutions to be EVM... Glad to see the drumroll starting again now that the market looks ready to rip any minute
English
5
3
20
1.5K
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@laurashin I completely agree. However , to be fair , tokens engineered to stay pegged at a dollar are technically “stable”coins no? If anything , dollar backed stablecoins need a new name. Digital dollars?
English
0
0
1
63
Laura Shin
Laura Shin@laurashin·
"Ethena, Spark, syrupUSDC, these are receipts for a yield sharing strategy. Sometimes people consider them stablecoins. They're not." 🪙 USDe, USDS, syrupUSDC are not stablecoins. They're yield strategy receipts wearing a stablecoin costume. The industry keeps calling them the same thing and pretending the risk is the same. It isn't 🎭 x.com/i/broadcasts/1…
English
4
1
18
2.8K
Matt | Arch retweetledi
Laura Shin
Laura Shin@laurashin·
"Onchain credit in 2026 is institutional, underwritten, and composable. That was unthinkable in 2022" Matteo on the state of onchain credit in 2026 and why the market is in a totally different phase than people think "The borrower side has matured. Institutional counterparties like FalconX are accessing credit onchain with clear terms, defined collateral arrangements and legal structures that hold up to institutional scrutiny. That is a real change from the first generation of crypto-native borrowers with thin credit history" "The underwriting layer has been professionalized. Multiple professional underwriters now bring traditional credit discipline to onchain products. That alone is significant for the ecosystem" "Composability is starting to demonstrate real value. Using an onchain credit facility or RWA as collateral in another overcollateralized protocol is the meaningful proof of concept for what the next phase looks like"
Laura Shin@laurashin

Repo Is $16T. Onchain Credit Is $5B. What's Missing? x.com/i/broadcasts/1…

English
3
5
17
2.6K
Guy Wuollet
Guy Wuollet@guywuolletjr·
Existing DEX liquidity isn't the moat. Users are the moat. As more and more traditional markets become available onchain the hard problem becomes building a cross margin engine to support the wide world of onchain asset.
English
29
0
115
16.1K
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud @jaypatel No it doesn’t. Because those assets are not BTC. I fully understand your point. But there are use cases where even incremental improvements in trust become outsized difference makers. If you’re in Miami for next few hours happy to chat in person. 🤝
English
1
0
1
65
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
You can run from STRC , but you can't hide from it
Matt | Arch tweet media
English
4
0
5
107
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@ryanconnor we have a vault for that with partnerships lined up on the physical side (turnkey GPU buy/sell/rent marketplace for GPUs already at data centers with energy contracts already locked in)
English
0
0
0
100
Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️
Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️@isabelfoxenduke·
Excited to share that I've stepped into a new role as Head of @MARAFoundation @MARA MARA Foundation represents the company's ongoing strategic commitment to Bitcoin—and our belief that Bitcoin is the most important emerging technology for self-sovereignty and human freedom in the world. Through internal initiatives and external partnerships, we'll activate programs to advance Bitcoin education, accessibility and R&D. Stay tuned @MARAFoundation_ to keep up with our work + big thanks to Fred Thiel for supporting this initiative 💫🙏
Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️ tweet media
English
70
11
204
52.2K
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@KyleSamani @guywuolletjr wouldn't deterministic and scalable risk management infra be the moat? cant scale lending and margin services when lenders cap exposure
English
1
0
1
76
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@CathieDWood Deflationary chaos + risk on / rate decreasing environment + hyper growth & productivity wave is perfect storm for bitcoin . With ai, rwa and tradfi adopting blockchain infra, BTC is the natural connective tissue that brings it all together
English
0
0
1
113
Cathie Wood
Cathie Wood@CathieDWood·
One of the more interesting signals in the data right now is that the yield curve continues to flatten despite a significant increase in oil prices on a trailing three-month basis. Historically, in a more traditional economic cycle, an energy shock that is being monetized by the Federal Reserve would steepen the curve, not flatten it. The Fed is not monetizing this energy shock. In our view, the bond market may be beginning to discount something much more powerful: the deflationary impact of artificial intelligence and technologically enabled productivity gains across the economy. The cost to train AI models is falling dramatically. Inference costs are collapsing even more rapidly. At the same time, productivity growth appears to be accelerating beneath the surface of the official data, while unit labor costs remain remarkably subdued. Much of the market narrative today is centered around tariffs, deficits, and structurally higher inflation. Yet the underlying signals increasingly suggest that disinflationary forces tied to innovation are building momentum. We believe inflation is likely to surprise on the low side over the next 6–9 months. If that proves correct, the implications for interest rates and long-duration equities could be profound. Historically, the market has tended to underestimate the speed and scale at which technologically driven innovation can reshape the macroeconomic environment. I share my thoughts on this month's episode of In The Know.
ARK Invest@ARKInvest

The narrative says: dollar crashing, deficits exploding, AI killing entry-level jobs, recession looming. We see something almost the opposite. What we think is actually happening in this month’s “In The Know” with @CathieDWood. ark-invest.com/videos/market-…

English
229
282
2.3K
584.2K
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@maxekaplan We just finished our kafka deployment . Such a beast of a lift with 100m requests coming in fast
English
0
0
1
143
Max Kaplan
Max Kaplan@maxekaplan·
One of the nastiest issues I ever had to fix in prod was a Kafka cluster where a broker didn’t shut down gracefully (hardware failure) and was a nightmare to fix. Also back when Kafka depended on zookeeper. When stateful services like Kafka / a db don’t shut down gracefully and are doing 10k-1M+ messages / sec, you get all sorts of terrible corruption issues. Sucks what happened to coinbase but good write up.
rob@rwitoff

Yesterday @coinbase experienced a multi-hour service disruption affecting trading, exchange access, and balance updates. Here's our initial read from Coinbase engineering on what happened, how we recovered, and what we're addressing. At approximately 23:50 UTC on 2026-05-07, our monitoring detected cascading quote failures from internal services that triggered multiple Sev1 incidents that engineering immediately began investigating. Customer-facing impacts included spot trading, Prime, International and derivative exchanges. Root cause: a thermal event (cooling system failure) inside a subset of racks within a single building in AWS us-east-1. We run a primary replica of our exchange infrastructure in a single zone, consistent with industry standards to reduce latency. To prepare for failures like this, we maintain a distributed standby, but during this incident, failures in the primary zone that were designed to be isolated were not, extending the duration of our outage. The failure cascaded down two paths: 1. Multiple hardware components beneath our exchange’s matching engine failed, requiring recovery and failover 2. Distributed Kafka clusters that manage messaging across Coinbase systems failed to remain available, also requiring partition failovers to new hardware brokers with many TiBs of data After isolating the incident: automated tooling drained ~10 Kubernetes clusters worth of related workloads out of the affected zone to stabilize internal services. Most services were back to normal within ~30 minutes of diagnosis. The two things we couldn't automatically drain: the exchange (dedicated hardware and storage) and Kafka (managed service that was designed to be resilient to this, with unique problems). The exchange matching engine is the core system responsible for processing orders and maintaining order books. It is a distributed cluster and requires quorum to safely elect a leader and continue processing trading activity. During the incident, infrastructure-level constraints in the affected datacenter left only a subset of nodes healthy, preventing the cluster from reaching quorum. As a result, trading across Retail, Advanced, and Institutional exchanges were blocked. Recovery required our oncall and engineering teams to execute our disaster recovery plan, restore quorum safely, and validate system health under constrained infrastructure conditions. The team built, tested, deployed, and validated the fix while continuing to manage the broader incident. Kafka recovery was a much larger scale operation. Our primary managed Kafka partitions process many terabytes of data daily and are designed with resiliency guarantees for uninterrupted operation during a datacenter failure just like this. In this case, those guarantees failed and required manual recovery. We again relied on disaster recovery procedures to recover stuck partitions onto new hardware (brokers) that enabled us to safely bring x-service messaging back online across Coinbase. During the lag, customers saw delayed balance streams which resolved automatically once replication caught up. No data lost. Once the engine came back up as part of our standard runbooks, we re-opened markets carefully: all products to cancel-only mode first, audited product states, then moved all markets to auction mode, before restoring trading on Coinbase Exchange. What went right: the team. Incident response across the company came together within minutes, followed well-rehearsed playbooks and used secure automation tooling to recover all services. We have a strong, senior team at Coinbase that worked through rare failure modes to recover all services. To our customers: losing access to your account, even temporarily, is unacceptable. We know that. We're sorry, and we’ll publish a full root cause analysis in the coming weeks 🙏

English
1
1
11
2.4K
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
@david_seroy @jaypatel Patronizing tone aside, does that also apply to Ethereum and Solana whose trust assumptions support over 100b in assets ?
English
1
0
1
72
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud @jaypatel Don't worry you'll understand why it makes a difference in the future. For now, I'll let you try to figure it out yourself.
English
1
0
0
60
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
Didn’t say that. Trust in a single entity is how we got Celsius BlockFi and FTX. But there’s minimizing risk through decentralization , and there’s trust-minimizing zk , and there’s trustless. Well if you want finance on btc trustlessly good luck. That leaves centralized, decentralized and trust minimized. Each optimize for something different , and some tech is just more efficient than others.
English
0
0
1
31
Jay
Jay@jaypatel·
@proofofmud @david_seroy So we will all just put our bitcoin at some centralized custodian that only settles once daily? Trust minimization is definitely important, albeit with tradeoffs
English
1
0
1
41
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud @jaypatel Matt I know you mean well. But your company is pitching a solution to use "real bitcoin", (which to be clear, it's not) while simultaneously telling me who cares are about trust-minimized bitcoin lol.
English
1
0
0
83
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
If people cared so much about trustlessness why is Solana (majority consensus) and base (centralized sequencer) beating chains with zk trustless features? Regardless of trustless or consensus driven, there are objectively scalability concerns with zk as seen with attempts with it on Ethereum, and that concern only gets amplified with slower blocks and more constrained data storage limits. IMO The optimal lending design will likely feature capital efficiency to limit risk versus optimizing for trustlessness. Talk to any bank or institutional lender and they will tell you effective risk management is a way higher concern over trustlessness. Hard to underwrite trustless designs. No underwriting = capped exposure
English
3
0
2
83
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@jaypatel > Do people really care though? Yes > also some value in not commingling utxo’s Not when it makes each vault non-fungible. Creates incompatibility issues in DeFi. How do you create a DEX of 1,000 different non-fungible BTC derivatives.
English
3
0
2
138
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud Your only valid point is DEX liquidity needed to perform liquidations. Same as all chains. You also (wrongly) assume bridge requires challenge period. Default path is instant N/N. Then you have atomic swap providers and trusted bridges like LZ or CCIP.
English
1
0
0
67
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
Repo, repo, repo. This is the kingmaker. No one in DeFi has captured it. This is a north-star for us. Winning repo requires three things: isolated risk, hyper-efficient liquidations, and low counter-party pristine collateral. If your favorite DeFi protocol is second best at any, you lose. — In theory, creating on-chain repo is simple: post collateral (Treasuries), borrow dollars (Aave / Morpho). In practice, it’s ruthless. Virtually all DeFi solutions fail at least one aspect: • If your collateral introduces counterparty risk ("hello RWA's & wrapped assets) → you lose. • If your liquidation engine caps at 90% LLTV → you lose. • If your borrow rates aren’t best-in-class → you lose. • If your bridge isn’t truly trust-minimized → you lose. • If you need token incentives to make it work → you lose. Repo works because the inputs are perfect: pristine collateral + ~zero haircut. That’s the bar. — The winning stack, as far as I can tell: • Morpho V2 creates isolated risk vaults, exclusively with Bitcoin as collateral. Capital is deployed into BTC backed loans across a variety of longer duration, fixed maturities, for higher yield. This effectively creates natively on-chain fixed income instrument I'm calling a bitcoin collateralized loan obligation. No other protocol can isolate risk, do fixed maturities and create this type of fixed income instrument like Morpho V2 can. • Fluid can take the Morpho V2 LP positions (Bitcoin CLO's) and enable looping. Fluid's Smart Debt gives it a lower borrow cost than other money markets. Further, Fluid can do theoretically 98% LLTV because of batch ticks and shared liquidity layer. No other protocol can do this afaik. — That’s the stack: Morpho → best in-class isolated risk + BTC-backed fixed income instrument. Fluid → best-in-class capital efficiency + liquidation engine. Alpen → best-in-class trust-minimized BTC — Together, they’re the only path I see to actually competing with repo on-chain. I challenge anyone to show me what can be better.
English
4
0
9
805
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
Once again, you are ignoring the very large elephant in the room. Liquidators only do their job if they have confidence that they CAN immediately liquidate that collateral for profit. When cascading risk happens, liquidity disappears, especially for a synthetic asset that takes time to unwind. If a liquidator cannot successfully liquidate atomically on chain because the pools are too thin, they either a) dont liquidate because its too risky or b) they take the risk and go through the redemption flow . In which case zk bridge redemption latency absolutely matters because btc price is moving and liquidator is exposed. So you have two options : 1. redemption (unacceptable due to latency issue) 2. ensure theres always enough liquidity to sell out of synthetic (unrealistic) If liquidator doesn't do their job, the protocol has systemic risk. You're talking about Bitcoin repos , thats billions to deca billions of notional loan volume with compounding risk.
English
1
0
2
64
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud Matt, liquidators sell collateral for stablecoins immediately. Very rarely do liquidators hold the collateral. There is no bridging involved.
English
1
0
0
53
Matt | Arch
Matt | Arch@proofofmud·
when there isnt enough liquidity to swap out of the synthetic, liquidators will have to go through redemption process. ZK Bridge won't be able to redeem the collateral fast enough to maintain the efficient liquidation claim. im not talking about chump change, im talking about cascading risk and so much one-directional flow that you cannot effectively liquidate all of the bad debt. you were talking about what needs to exist in order to scale lending and improve risk parameters. time to possession of the pristine collateral is what matters
English
1
0
2
56
David Seroy 🏔️
David Seroy 🏔️@david_seroy·
@proofofmud Right. Not sure what that has to do with ZK bridges and challenge periods. Also, just because you have liquidity doesn't mean your protocol is capable of efficient liquidations.
English
1
0
0
49