xpert.page - Latest Articles

Masters Of Illusion

Hodor — Thu, 13 Aug 2026 16:51:17 GMT

In late 2024, a small crypto asset called NexFundAI started trading on several exchanges.

It had a working website, a pitch about AI-driven finance, and steadily climbing volume. It also had one problem for anyone who tried to buy it: it wasn't real.

NexFundAI was created by the FBI.

The token was the centerpiece of Operation Token Mirrors, an undercover sting run by the FBI and the IRS. Agents built a fake crypto company, minted a token on the Ethereum blockchain, and then went shopping for "market makers" to help it look popular. Several firms took the bait. According to the resulting indictments, firms including Gotbit, ZM Quant, and CLS Global agreed to trade the token against itself - buying and selling in circles with no real change of ownership - to manufacture the appearance of demand.

The investigation ultimately touched more than 60 different cryptocurrencies and led to the seizure of over $25 million. One firm, CLS Global, later pleaded guilty and admitted in court filings that it had agreed to run exactly this kind of sham trading. Blockchain forensics in a related case were almost comically direct: investigators traced 1,209 of 1,221 transactions - 99% - straight back to the wallets of the firm accused of running the scheme.

It's a dramatic story, but it's also a useful lens.

Crypto's reputation for wild price swings and inflated valuations isn't just a story about a new asset class in its early stages. Part of it is a story about markets that, for years, purposefully created the illusion of a busy, liquid market.

What Is Legal Versus Illegal

It's important to be precise here, because two different activities get lumped together under "market manipulation" in casual conversation:

Market-making is legal, and essential.

A market maker continuously quotes both a buy price and a sell price for an asset, ready to trade either side. This is what keeps markets liquid - it's why you can buy or sell a stock, or a major crypto token, in seconds rather than waiting for a matching counterparty. Firms like Jane Street, Citadel Securities, and Wintermute do this at enormous scale, and they are regulated participants in trad-fi markets.

Wash trading is illegal, everywhere it falls under a regulator's jurisdiction.

This is when a firm or individual trades with itself, or with a colluding party, to fabricate volume, with no real risk or change in ownership. Related tactics include spoofing (placing orders you intend to cancel, to fake demand) and painting the tape (coordinated trading to move a reported price). In the U.S., these are forbidden under the Securities Exchange Act and the Commodity Exchange Act, and the SEC and CFTC have pursued cases in both traditional and crypto markets for years.

The line, in short: providing real liquidity is a service. Faking liquidity is fraud.

Where crypto has differed from traditional finance ("trad-fi") isn't the law - it's the strength of the surrounding infrastructure that catches violations:

Topic	Trad-fi & Securities	Crypto (Mainly CEXes)
Wash trading legality	Clearly illegal, long-established case law	Illegal wherever securities or commodities law applies - but jurisdiction is often murky
Exchange oversight	Regulated entities, required to monitor and report suspicious activity	Historically ranged from tightly regulated to offshore and lightly supervised
Enforcement track record	Decades of precedent and consistent case flow	Improving, but younger and more uneven
Common outcome	Wash trading exists, but is actively policed	Studies have found large shares of reported volume on some exchanges were fabricated

The rules themselves are very similar for both markets.

The Early Years

Long before most people had heard of Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV, BTC had an unchallenged monopoly on the 'Bitcoin' name, and was a very small market.

Nobody would recognize it by today's standards. In the early 2010s, price discovery happened largely on forums like Bitcointalk, where a small speculator community compared notes, traded tips, and watched a handful of exchanges - most famously Mt. Gox - handle the bulk of global volume.

That combination was a near-perfect recipe for volatility.

Order books were thin, so a single large trade could move the price double digits in minutes. The total market was small enough that early miners and adopters could individually swing it. There were no futures or options markets to let traders hedge or arbitrage prices ... that infrastructure didn't arrive until CME and CBOE launched Bitcoin futures in December 2017. And the dominant exchange ran into trouble: Mt. Gox's 2014 collapse, with roughly 850,000 BTC lost or stolen, wiped out the market's central pricing venue overnight.

Bitcoin's wild early swings were simply what happens when a small, thinly-traded market has no organized liquidity behind it. But that same thinness also made the market unusually easy to manipulate - which set the stage for the next chapter.

The First Stablecoin

As Bitcoin's 2017 run toward $20,000 unfolded, a persistent question followed it: how much of that rally was organic?

Finance professors John Griffin (University of Texas) and Amin Shams (Ohio State) set out to answer it using blockchain forensics, in research eventually published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Finance. Their focus was Tether (USDT), a stablecoin marketed as fully backed 1:1 by U.S. dollars.

Griffin and Shams found that purchases made with newly issued Tether were disproportionately timed after Bitcoin price downturns, and that a small number of high-issuance hours accounted for an outsized share of Bitcoin's gains. Specifically, the 95 hours with the heaviest Tether issuance between March 2017 and March 2018 corresponded to 59% of Bitcoin's compounded returns over that period.

Their interpretation: issuing Tether without full backing acted like printing new money chasing the same supply of Bitcoin ... inflating its price without any real capital entering the market.

The pattern wasn't airtight proof on its own - some of it was also consistent with ordinary arbitrage trading. But it lined up with a legal reckoning that followed: in 2021, the New York Attorney General settled with Tether and its affiliated exchange Bitfinex over misrepresentations about reserve backing, including an undisclosed $850 million shortfall.

New Regulations: New Crypto World

New guardrails are now being built. The West is setting the pace, with the EU slightly ahead of the U.S. on the calendar.

Date	Milestone
Jun 2023	EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) enters into force
Jun 2024	MiCA stablecoin rules (for asset-referenced and e-money tokens) become applicable
Oct 2024	FBI's Operation Token Mirrors sting begins
Dec 2024	MiCA's full exchange licensing and market-abuse rules take effect
Jul 2025	U.S. GENIUS Act signed into law, mandating audited 1:1 stablecoin reserves
Jul 2026	GENIUS Act implementing rules due from U.S. federal regulators
Jan 2027	GENIUS Act reaches full effect (backstop enforcement date)

The EU's MiCA framework directly targets market abuse and requires licensed exchanges to actively surveil for it, with full rules already in effect since December 2024 (though some member states have granted existing exchanges transition time into mid-2026). The U.S. GENIUS Act attacks the problem from the stablecoin side: once fully in force, issuers must hold verifiable, audited reserves - closing the exact loophole Griffin and Shams documented, where new tokens could be minted without dollars behind them.

What this won't do is make wash trading vanish.

Stablecoin reserve rules fix the fake money problem; they don't stop two accounts from trading with each other. That still requires active enforcement, and enforcement appetite can shift - the SEC dropped several of its civil wash-trading cases in early 2026 even as separate criminal charges from Operation Token Mirrors continued. This reflects traditional finance: securities laws have banned wash trading since 1934, and regulators still bring cases today. Better rules reduce the problem.

But they don't erase it, in any market.

The Wild West Is Gone

All of this points to a market that is slowly maturing.

The early, small BTC market, prone to wild swings on thin liquidity, has given way to one with derivatives, professional market makers, and audited reserves standing behind the stablecoins that fuel most trading. The unregulated stretch that let unbacked tokens and sham volume distort prices is closing, not because the underlying temptation to cheat has disappeared, but because the capability to catch it finally exists.

Markets, like any relationship worth having, run on trust.

Sources

Next fund AI website: https://nexfundai.com/
Reuters, CLS Global guilty plea: https://uk.marketscreener.com/quote/cryptocurrency/BITCOIN-BTC-USD-45553945/news/Cryptocurrency-financial-firm-to-plead-guilty-after-novel-FBI-probe-48828125/
TRM Labs, Operation Token Mirrors overview: https://www.trmlabs.com/resources/blog/ten-fraudsters-from-four-financial-services-firms-charged-in-different-cryptocurrency-market-manipulation-schemes-out-of-northern-district-of-california
TechSpot, FBI's fake token sting: https://www.techspot.com/news/105096-fbi-creates-fake-cryptocurrency-sting-operation-catch-market.html
Hodder Law, SEC charges on market-manipulation-as-a-service: https://hodder.law/fbi-launches-undercover-token-in-sting-operation-entrapping-market-makers/
Bitcointalk forum: https://bitcointalk.org/
Mt GOX background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mt._Gox
Griffin & Shams, "Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered?" (Journal of Finance): https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/09ee/3a305500819717c6d7f33f36e323bd109dd1.pdf
Bloomberg, on the Griffin & Shams findings: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-13/professor-who-rang-vix-alarm-says-tether-used-to-boost-bitcoin
Fortune/Yahoo Finance, Griffin & Shams follow-up interview: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wild-theory-price-bitcoin-being-110000608.html
Wikipedia, Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markets_in_Crypto-Assets
EY Luxembourg, MiCA's phased effective dates: https://www.ey.com/en_lu/insights/digital/micas-full-effect-drops-take-the-next-step-into-eu-financial-digitalization
Sullivan & Cromwell, GENIUS Act implementation timeline: https://www.sullcrom.com/insights/memo/2026/March/OCC-Proposes-Regulations-Implement-GENIUS-Act
Wikipedia, GENIUS Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GENIUS_Act
Morrison Foerster, SEC's 2026 dismissal of crypto wash-trading cases: https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/260421-top-5-sec-enforcement-developments-for-march-2026
Alessa, on CFTC/SEC jurisdictional overlap in crypto: https://alessa.com/blog/crypto-wash-trading/

Xahau & x402 Agentic Payments

Hodor — Sun, 02 Aug 2026 20:53:02 GMT

For thirty years, the web possessed a payment status code it never actually used.

HTTP 402 - "Payment Required" - sat dormant in the protocol since the 1990s, a placeholder for a feature nobody built. That changed in 2025, when Coinbase revived it as the backbone of a new standard called x402, built to let software agents pay for things without a human clicking "confirm."

Since that point in 2025, he standard has been handed to a neutral industry foundation, adopted by household names in finance and cloud computing, and is now being extended to many new networks.

What The Heck Are x402 Payments? 🤔

At its core, x402 lets a server tell a piece of software "this costs money" in the middle of an ordinary web request - and lets that software pay on the spot, without a person in the loop.

An AI agent requests a resource; the server responds with HTTP 402 and a description of what payment it needs; the agent attaches a signed payment authorization to a repeat request; a settlement service verifies and processes that payment on a blockchain; and the server hands over the resource along with a receipt.

The whole exchange typically settles in stablecoins - tokens pegged to a fiat currency like the US dollar.

The effect is that pricing shifts from "sign up for a plan" to "pay per use," down to fractions of a cent. That's the piece that's new: no previous payment rail could profitably process a $0.001 charge for a single API call.

Is This Real Life?

Here's a scenario:

A logistics company runs an AI agent that monitors global shipping routes. Normally, getting live port-congestion data means negotiating an annual enterprise contract with a data vendor - often tens of thousands of dollars, whether the company uses the feed constantly or barely at all. With x402, that same agent can query the data provider on demand, get billed a fraction of a cent per query, and only pay for what it actually uses.

No annual contract or unused subscription.

That shift - from provisioning access in advance to paying only at the moment of use - is the practical promise behind the protocol, and it applies just as easily to AI inference calls, premium research data, or on-demand compute as it does to shipping data.

Payment Volumes Versus Hype

Volume on Coinbase's Base network went from near-zero in mid-2025 to over 100 million transactions by early 2026, though a large share came from a speculative meme-coin "pay-to-mint" campaign.

More recent data shows monthly volume swinging dramatically - dropping from a late-2025 peak before recovering to a few million dollars a month, with typical transactions well under a dollar. Activity is growing, but it's still early-stage infrastructure.

The much bigger numbers you'll see in headlines - often in the trillions of dollars - refer to a much wider definition of 'agentic': "Any AI-driven purchasing activity across any payment rail, not x402 specifically."

Analyst estimates for that larger category, for 2030, vary from roughly $1.5 trillion to as much as $17.5 trillion. That huge spread is a reflection of the market still being defined. The realistic takeaway for a business audience is that today's actual x402 volume is small, the growth trend is real, and the eventual size of the market is still uncertain.

The Foundation and Its Members

In July 2026, the Linux Foundation - the nonprofit home of major open-source projects like Linux itself - formally took over governance of x402, forming the x402 Foundation as a neutral, vendor-independent steward. No single company controls the protocol's direction.

The founding membership reads like a cross-section of finance and big tech: Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Stripe, Circle, Google, Amazon Web Services, Shopify, Adyen, Cloudflare, and Coinbase are all listed as Premier Members, alongside several major blockchain networks - including the Solana Foundation, the Stellar Development Foundation, and the Monad Foundation.

Ripple is also a Premier Member, and has been actively extending x402 support to the XRP Ledger, enabling agents to transact using both XRP and Ripple's own regulated dollar-stablecoin, RLUSD. Early activity on the XRP Ledger reportedly crossed a million agentic transactions.

The Inclusive Financial Technology Foundation (InFTF), a nonprofit organization that champions the Xahau ecosystem, joined the x402 Foundation as a nonprofit-institution-member.

This extends the x402 starndard to Xahau, a network that is, essentially, built using the XRP Ledger consensus and features, but with its own distinct approach to on-chain programmability.

Xahau: Perfect For x402

Xahau's standout feature is something called "hooks" - smart contracts attached to an account that can inspect, allow, or reject a transaction before it happens, rather than after the fact. That's a distinguishing feature compared to most other smart-contract networks, where logic runs in a separate contract that a transaction has to call.

Why does that matter for agentic payments specifically?

Because the central design problem in letting an AI agent spend money on your behalf isn't the payment rail - it's the guardrails. You want a way to say "this agent can spend up to $400, only with approved merchants, only this week" and have that rule enforced automatically. Xahau's hook architecture was designed with exactly this kind of use case in mind: the network's documentation highlights spending limits and transaction firewalls - rules that can reject unauthorized or oversized withdrawals - as native, ready-made building blocks. Other platforms can approximate this through additional smart-contract-wallet layers bolted on top of the base account, but Xahau organizes the gatekeeping attached to the account itself, at the protocol level.

This observation was echoed in the InFTF's official announcement & blog about their membership in the x402 foundation, which dove into greater detail about three different implementation models:

It's a purposeful design constraint: Hooks are intentionally not capable of unlimited, arbitrary computation. That sounds like a limitation, but for a financial guardrail, it's actually an important feature; simple, predictable rules are easier to audit and harder to exploit than open-ended code.

What x402 Capability Means

x402's pay-per-use model, together with a stable, MiCA-compliant euro stablecoin already live on Xahau, opens up new possibilities:

Metered API and data businesses. Any company selling data, AI services, or compute could move from subscription pricing to true pay-per-call billing, capturing revenue from occasional users who'd never sign up for a plan.
Autonomous procurement agents. A business could deploy agents authorized to shop across multiple vendors for the best price on a recurring purchase - travel, supplies, cloud capacity - with hook-enforced spending limits acting as an automatic compliance layer.
Cross-border and remittance tools. Xahau's roots in fast, low-cost settlement make it a natural fit for developers building agent-driven remittance or treasury tools that need predictable fees and quick finality.
Compliance-friendly agent commerce. For regulated industries, the ability to enforce spending rules at the account level - not just after a transaction clears - offers a cleaner audit trail than bolting compliance checks onto a general-purpose smart contract platform.

None of this requires a business to abandon existing payment infrastructure. x402 is designed to sit side-by-side with traditional rails; not replace them overnight.

Future Payments

x402 and the broader agentic-payments movement is still early - growing, perhaps overhyped, and not yet mature.

But the direction is clear: software is starting to pay for things on its own, and the infrastructure to do that safely, with programmatic guardrails, is being built by a growing group of high-profile players. Among the list of members to the x402 Foundation, Xahau stands out as having one of the most natural integration pathways among smart contract networks. X>

Sources

x402 Whitepaper: https://x402.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/x402-whitepaper.pdf
Chainalysis, "Inside x402: 100M Agentic Payments on Base": https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/x402-agentic-payments-adoption/
CryptoNews, x402 volume and transaction data: https://cryptonews.net/news/market/32927114/
AgentPayTrend, "5 Forces Behind $1.5T AI Agent Payment Market": https://agentpaytrend.com/ai-agent-payment-forces-2030/
PYMNTS, "Digital Money Has a New Payment Standard and It's Not Built for Humans": https://www.pymnts.com/digital-payments/2026/digital-money-has-a-new-payment-standard-and-its-not-built-for-humans/
Linux Foundation, "Announces Operational Launch of x402 Foundation": https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-announces-operational-launch-of-x402-foundation-to-standardize-internet-native-payments-for-ai-agents-and-applications
"Ripple Is Now a Premier Member of the x402 Foundation": https://247wallst.com/investing/cryptocurrency/2026/07/14/ripple-is-now-a-premier-member-of-the-x402-foundation-alongside-visa-and-mastercard/
InFTF "Giving Software a Mandate, Not a Wallet": https://inftf.org/article/giving-software-a-mandate-not-a-wallet/
InFTF Official announcement over 'X': https://x.com/IncFinTech/status/2083843775256842354?s=20
Xahau Network, "Hooks" documentation: https://xahau.network/docs/hooks/
Xahau Network, "Features": https://xahau.network/features/
Quantoz, "INFTF and Quantoz collaborate to bring EURQ stablecoin to Xahau Blockchain": https://www.quantoz.com/blog/inftf-and-quantoz-collaborate-to-bring-eurq-stablecoin-to-xahau-blockchain

Grassroots: Crypto 2.0

Hodor — Wed, 29 Jul 2026 22:59:38 GMT

In September 2011, Bank of America told customers it would start charging $5 a month just to use a debit card.

Wells Fargo floated a similar $3 fee around the same time. Kristen Christian, an art gallery owner in Los Angeles, was fed up - not just with the fee, but with the poor customer service that came with it. She made a Facebook event.

She called it Bank Transfer Day, and picked November 5 - the date Guy Fawkes was captured after his plot against the British House of Lords ... a bit of an over-dramatic reference, but it got the point across.

RSVPs climbed into six figures within weeks. National media picked it up. The head of the U.S. credit union trade association found herself doing interviews on CNN, Fox Business, NPR, and ABC in the same week. Occupy Wall Street, then at its peak, lent informal support even though the two movements weren't affiliated. Within days, banks and credit unions across the country were tracking how much money had moved.

It proved something important: a single person with no institutional backing could force an entire industry to notice.

Fifteen years later, that exact pattern is showing up again - this time inside crypto, and inside communities like XRP, Xahau, and Evernode specifically. 🧐

A Changing Environment

Artificial Intelligence. Building something in crypto used to require a team, funding, and months of infrastructure work before anyone could use it. That barrier is collapsing. AI coding assistants now let a single developer stand up a dashboard, audit a smart contract, or ship a working prototype in the time it used to take to write a spec document. The gap between "I have an idea" and "I shipped something real" has narrowed to almost nothing.

This means that the next wave of crypto projects is far more likely to come from an individual builder or a three-person community project than from a VC-funded startup.

CEXes Are Closing. The centralized exchange model is under real strain, and 2026 has made that hard to ignore.

BitMEX - the exchange that invented the 100x leverage perpetual swap in 2014 - announced on July 23rd that it will fully shut down by September 23rd, two months later, citing a strategic review rather than any single failure.

Three days later, BitMart, running since 2017, announced its own wind-down: new registrations and deposits suspended immediately, all trading ending August 26th, full closure by January 2027. It was the third centralized exchange to announce closure in a matter of weeks, following AscendEX on July 1st. Analysts have tied the pattern to a broader shakeout - one estimate puts the number of crypto projects that folded in 2026, across exchanges, chains, and DeFi protocols, north of thirty.

Every one of those closures leaves a vacuum.

And on the XRP Ledger and Xahau, that gap is increasingly being filled by decentralized exchanges - the XRPL's native AMM and order-book DEX, and community-built interfaces on top of it. Both the XRP Ledger and Xahau DEXes don't require a company to stay in business, keep a banking relationship, or pass a jurisdiction's licensing review in order for users to keep trading.

The EVR Access Dispute & Its Response

Let me preface the following section by saying that I personally appreciate the loyalty that the Uphold Exchange showed to the XRP community when other exchanges looked at the SEC lawsuits in 2020 as an excuse to de-list XRP - a network that many BTC maximalists overtly and covertly resent. Uphold remained strong, and continued to list XRP and served as a primary on-ramp to speculators in the west.

Now for recent events ...

In 2024, Uphold supported the Evernode (EVR) airdrop, crediting roughly 3.9 million EVR into customer accounts. More than two years later, those balances are still marked "storage only" - no withdrawals, no trading, no transfers. No public resolution has come from Uphold.

What's notable isn't the freeze itself - it's who pushed back. A post from Jungle Inc argued that once Uphold chose to accept the airdrop allocation and credit it to customers, it took on an obligation to provide a real path to that value, freeze or no freeze.

Another account pressed further, pointing out that Uphold holds roughly 10% of EVR's circulating supply.

None of these posts came from a law firm. They came from individual community members, and the thread that resulted, pulled in enough voices that it became one of the more visible flashpoints in the XRP community this year.

A few years ago, users on a centralized platform had almost no leverage beyond complaining into a support ticket. Now they coordinate in public, in real time, and the volume is loud enough that it can't be safely ignored - even without a resolution (yet).

The XRP Account Reserve

The XRP Ledger's account reserve - the XRP a wallet must hold to exist on the network - has never been set by a company decree. It's set by validator consensus, and its history is a steady march downward: 1,000 XRP in the ledger's early "account creation fee" era, cut to 200 XRP in 2013, down to 20 XRP, then 10 XRP in 2021, and to a 1 XRP base reserve in December 2024.

That trend is still being actively negotiated. As of this July, a small number of validators have publicly pushed back on proposals to lower the reserve even further, arguing the reserve exists to protect network storage and memory from spam and DDoS abuse - and that any further cut needs evidence it won't weaken that protection.

Others counter that at current prices, even a small reserve is a barrier to new users, compared to other popular networks. It's a live, public discussion between validators and the community, and the outcome will be decided by consensus vote, not a memo from Ripple.

Examples In The Xahau & Evernode Communities

The same pattern shows up at smaller scale across a group of very recent, community-built projects:

Kairo Vault — a community-member-built XRPL dashboard, and a collection of extremely valuable tools for developing trusted smart contracts on the Xahau and Evernode networks.
EverArcade — a toolkit letting indie game developers deploy multiplayer, self-custodial payments and NFTs on Evernode, explicitly designed so builders don't need blockchain expertise to use it.
EverGram — an app & toolkit that supports secure, encrypted communication using all three networks; XRP Ledger, Xahau, and Evernode.
Sound Alive Radio — a decentralized radio project from producer E. Smitty, built on Evernode, aimed at removing the label and platform intermediaries that normally decide which artists get airtime.
One Xahau — part of a push by independent developers to build AMM and Defi functionality into the Xahau ecosystem, using hooks rather than waiting on a core protocol change.

And that list is grossly incomplete. I know I'm missing at least a half-dozen other examples just thinking about it now - but it serves to demonstrate a pattern.

None of these needed a venture round or a corporate grant to exist. They needed a person with an idea, a network with impressive utility, and a community willing to support & use what got built.

Grass-roots Leadership

Bank Transfer Day worked because a system had stopped listening to the people using it, and those people found they didn't need permission to act together.

The same dynamic is now running through crypto - in reserve votes decided by public argument instead of executive decision, in access disputes fought out by individual accounts instead of legal teams, and in tools built by small teams instead of corporate interests. The exchanges shutting their doors this year were built top-down.

What's replacing them is not.

X | X> | E>

Sources:

Odin's Eyes

Hodor — Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:59:57 GMT

Every crypto community eventually learns the same hard lesson: the technology that makes a public ledger powerful - irreversible, permissionless, instant - is exactly what makes it a paradise for thieves.

The XRP community has learned this lesson ... many times over.

The playbook is familiar to anyone who has spent time in XRP or XRP Ledger circles. A phishing site mimics a wallet login. A fake "support agent" reaches out after someone posts about a problem. A giveaway scam promises to double any XRP sent to a "verification" address. A malicious memo tricks a holder into approving a transfer.

Case Files

In one recent case, an XRP holder lost roughly $16,800 after receiving a payment request with a memo reading "Safe XRPL verify message" - deceptively official-sounding, entirely fake. In another, a compromised hardware wallet led to a $3 million XRP theft, with the stolen funds bridged across chains and laundered through exchanges.

The Challenge For Volunteers

Once the funds move, the pattern is almost always the same: the attacker doesn't sit still. Stolen value gets split across dozens of freshly created "mule" accounts, hopped through several intermediate wallets, and sent to an exchange that will convert it to cash before anyone can react.

Every hop is designed to break the trail, or at least slow down whoever's trying to follow it.

For years, stopping this has depended almost entirely on volunteers. Blockchain explorers like XRPScan let victims flag a scam address so others get a warning. Independent forensics teams - community-run efforts like EXFILAI, Xahau Forensics, and other well-known on-chain investigators - trace stolen funds hop by hop and publish what they find. When the money reaches a known exchange, someone has to convince that exchange's support team to freeze the account before the attacker cashes out.

None of this is automatic, and none of it is guaranteed to happen before the money's gone. 🤨

This is the gap that a new project called Odin's Eyes is trying to close - not by making theft impossible, but by making the response to it automatic.

Xahau

To understand how Odin's Eyes works, it helps to understand Xahau.

Xahau is a network built from the same open-source code as the XRP Ledger (XRPL), extended with a feature the XRPL itself doesn't have: hooks. A hook is code - compiled to WebAssembly - that attaches directly to an individual account.

Once installed, a Hook can inspect every transaction touching that account and decide, in real time, whether to allow it, modify it, or reject it. It can also remember things between transactions, and can trigger new transactions on its own.

On many networks, "smart contract" logic lives in its own separate contract and has to be called deliberately. On Xahau, a Hook effectively becomes part of the account it's installed on - every payment in or out passes through it automatically, the way a bank's fraud-detection system reviews every transaction on your card before it clears.

That capability - a small, autonomous checkpoint on every transaction - is exactly what a "whitelist/blacklist" security system needs.

If an account can check every incoming and outgoing transaction against a list of known-bad addresses and block anything involving them, you have the beginning of a real defense system, built directly into the ledger. This general idea - using hooks to enforce an allow/deny list - has circulated in the Xahau developer community since the platform's early days, including a mention in the very original Xahau whitepaper.

Odin's Eyes is the most complete, live realization of this concept to date.

Odin's Eyes

Odin's Eyes was built - by the creator of "One Xahau" - as an evolution of that whitelist/blacklist idea into a full protocol; a shared registry that any Xahau account or product can plug into, rather than every project maintaining its own private blacklist.

At its core, Odin's Eyes is simple, even though its branding leans heavily on Norse mythology. One account - nicknamed "the Eye" - keeps a single status for every address it has judged: clean, verified, suspicious, or confirmed malicious.

Other Xahau accounts install a small companion Hook - nicknamed a "raven" - that checks every visitor against that shared status before allowing a transaction through. If the Eye later marks an address as bad, every raven that's watching for it freezes it, automatically, without anyone pushing an update.

Decoding The Mythology

The poetic names are memorable, but they map cleanly onto ordinary technical components. Here's the translation:

Norse/poetic name	What it actually is
The Eye (Odin's Eyes)	One Xahau account running three stacked hooks: a registry (state + rules), an emission Hook (mints the reward token), and a "shout" Hook (broadcasts freeze events)
The Well	The registry's internal data store - one status per address, retrievable in a single, constant-time lookup regardless of list size
The Watch	The humans (a council) who sign off on freezes, plus an off-chain script (nicknamed "the Keeper") that scans the ledger for suspicious funding patterns and reports them back
Ravens (after Huginn and Muninn, Odin's mythological messenger birds)	A reusable Hook installed on any participating account, which checks visitors against the registry and reports back what it observes
The Eye "shouts"	When an address is blacklisted, the registry Hook broadcasts a message that every registered raven picks up, prompting each to freeze that address on its own account within the same or next transaction
RVN	A capped-supply reward token (100 million maximum) paid to ravens for useful reports - not to be confused with the unrelated, well-established Ravencoin (RVN) cryptocurrency, which is a completely different, older project
Council / Auditors	Addresses with elevated permissions, checked against the registry's own internal records, allowed to freeze, clear, or flag entries
The funding graph	An off-chain process that traces which addresses funded which other addresses - something no Hook can do on its own, since Xahau's hooks can't read historical transaction data

Stripped of the poetry, it's a shared reputation registry with automatic, network-wide enforcement.

Worst Case: The Scammer Scenario

To see why that matters, walk through a theoretical case.

An attacker compromises a wallet and drains it of one million XAH, immediately splitting the stolen funds across a dozen freshly created accounts to obscure the trail - the same "mule fan-out" pattern seen in real XRP thefts.

In a world without Odin's Eyes, the victim (or a volunteer investigator) now races the clock: manually tracing each hop, hoping to identify the destination exchange before the funds are converted to cash and withdrawn.

In an Odin's Eyes–enabled ecosystem, the response looks different. As soon as the theft is reported, a council member - a trusted, wallet-holding participant - flags the attacker's address, signing the action from their own device.

That single verdict writes to the registry.

Then, every raven installed on a connected product - a DEX, a lending protocol, a token issuer - checks against it. The next time the attacker's account (or any of its freshly spawned mule accounts) touches a guarded product, the raven doesn't just block that one transaction; it also checks who funded that mule account, discovers the link back to the flagged attacker, and reports that connection back to the registry. The registry re-judges, and the mule inherits the same bad status. As the stolen funds keep moving to try to stay ahead of detection, they keep tripping this same mechanism - and the "bad" label spreads through the entire tree without anyone having to manually trace each branch.

If the attacker's address is escalated to a full blacklist, any product with a raven installed and a matching issued token freezes that holder's trustline immediately - even before the attacker touches that particular product - because the freeze order is broadcast the moment the blacklist decision is made.

NOTE: The goal isn't to reverse a completed theft (Xahau, like the XRPL, doesn't allow that); it's to freeze the stolen funds in place before they reach a cash-out point, turning what used to be a slow, manual chase into something closer to an automatic circuit breaker.

No More Volunteers

None of this works for long if the people doing the watching aren't compensated for their time. This is where Odin's Eyes' reward token, RVN, comes in.

Anyone can install a raven on their own account, but to have it actively report threats and earn rewards, the operator buys a one-time raven license, paid for in RVN and permanently burned (destroyed) as part of the purchase.

From there, a raven earns RVN in two ways.

A small, steady baseline reward accrues just for actively screening traffic, even if it never finds anything suspicious - this exists specifically to avoid a common failure mode in security incentive systems, where operators only get paid for catches and lose interest the moment an ecosystem is quiet.
On top of that baseline, a larger bounty is paid out for reports that are later confirmed as genuinely malicious, with an extra reward for whoever spots a threat first.

The total supply of RVN is hard-capped at 100 million, released gradually over time on a halving schedule similar in spirit to Bitcoin's. Reputation earned by a raven - which determines both its share of rewards and, eventually, its voting power over the system's detection settings - can only be built through confirmed, legitimate catches; reputation decays if a raven goes idle, so old activity can't be banked indefinitely to farm rewards later.

Instead of relying on volunteers who investigate scams for free, out of goodwill, Odin's Eyes tries to build a sustainable, paid workforce of automated watchers with a direct financial stake in catching real threats - and a built-in penalty (decay) for not doing the job well.

What's Next

As of this writing, Odin's Eyes is live on the Xahau mainnet, with a small footprint: a public blacklist and soft-flag list, a handful of active ravens run by early participants, and a public read API that any developer can query for free.

Now that the project is available for public participation, enhancing broader adoption through its listing on One Xahau is in progress, alongside the the other tokens integrated with that platform.

Learn More

The best way to understand Odin's Eyes in depth is to explore the site:

odinseyes.io - the homepage, with a live look at current blacklist/soft-flag counts and active ravens
The Tome (odinseyes.io/tome) - the full, current blacklist and soft-flag list, updated in real time
The Protocol console (odinseyes.io/registry) - a live feed of on-chain activity between the Eye and its ravens
The Chronicle - the project's own technical documentation, for readers who want the underlying architecture in detail
The public API (odinseyes.io/api) - free, no-key-required access to the live blacklist, for developers who want to see the data firsthand

Automated ... And Incentivized

For as long as public blockchains have existed, defending their users from theft has fallen to volunteers: people who traced stolen funds on their own time, with the sole reward of helping others. It has worked often enough - but it has rarely worked fast enough.

Odin's Eyes doesn't solve crypto crime.

It can't undo a theft, and it only protects the corner of the ecosystem that chooses to install it. But it has something the volunteer model never did: a system where flagging a threat is rewarded, and where a single verdict, once reached, enforces itself instantly, everywhere at once. X>

Sources

XRP Scan: https://docs.xrpscan.com/faqs/how-to-report-scams

EXFILAI 'X' Account: https://x.com/EXFILAI

Xahau Forensics 'X' Account: https://x.com/EXFILAI

Xahau Network - https://xahau.network/

Xahau Hooks documentation - https://docs.xahau.network/features/network-features/hooks

https://github.com/Xahau/Whitepaper/blob/main/Xahau-Whitepaper.pdf

'X' Live Space on July 5, 2026 https://x.com/i/spaces/1AGRnnyBeEPGl?s=20

Odin's Eyes - https://odinseyes.io/

One Xahau - https://onexah.io/

XRPL.org, "Report a Scam" - https://xrpl.org/community/report-a-scam

The Block, "Hackers siphon $3 million in XRP from US user's wallet: ZachXBT" - https://www.theblock.co/post/375252/hackers-siphon-3-million-in-xrp-from-us-users-wallet-zachxbt

U.Today, "XRP Community Targeted in New Scam Exploiting Fake Verification Messages on XRP Ledger" - https://u.today/xrp-community-targeted-in-new-scam-exploiting-fake-verification-messages-on-xrp-ledger

The Memecoin Lifecycle

Hodor — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 13:34:53 GMT

You heard it from a friend of a friend: someone just launched a new memecoin on the Xahau network called BanksterCoin.

No utility, no roadmap, just a logo of a cartoon banker in a top hat. Normally you'd scroll past. But something makes you pause - maybe it's the name, maybe it's the timing - and you pull up the DEX pair to take a look. 🤔

There's almost nothing there. A few hundred dollars of liquidity. A handful of wallets. Twelve transactions total, half of them belong to the developer moving tokens between their own addresses. You close the tab. Nothing about this told you it was going anywhere, and you were right not to buy - statistically, this is where almost every memecoin ends: nowhere, with a chart nobody will ever screenshot.

But every so often, one doesn't die quietly. The interesting part about memecoin economics isn't the meme itself - it's the sequence of very old economic ideas that a coin has to pass through, in order, to become the exception.

Cascade

Before a memecoin can be interesting, it first has to clear a lower bar: it has to get noticed by more than the person who created it. This is where an idea called an informational cascade does the work.

Once a few people take a visible action, the next person often copies it - not because they have new information, but because they assume the earlier movers must know something. If you see three wallets buy a token, you don't ask "what do these three people know that I don't" and go verify it yourself; you just infer that they know something, and you buy too. You've now become the fourth data point for the fifth person.

Nobody in the chain needs to be right. The chain only needs to start.

This is why so many tokens - the vast majority - never make it past this stage. A cascade needs an initial nudge: a KOL post, a coordinated Telegram push, or a lucky repost. Without it, a coin can sit at twelve transactions forever, because people do not ordinarily buy a token simply because it exists.

BanksterCoin, in our hypothetical example, catches a break here.

A Xahau community account reposts the logo as a joke about a recent DeFi exploit. A dozen wallets buy in the next hour, mostly out of curiosity, mostly small amounts. The chart ticks up. And now, for the first time, BanksterCoin has cleared the gate - which means it's eligible for a new, different kind of game.

The Beauty Contest

Once a coin has real trading activity, the question buyers are asking shifts.

It's no longer "do I think this is funny" - it's "do I think other people will think this is funny." This is the territory of what economist John Maynard Keynes called a beauty contest, from a thought experiment in his 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Keynes imagined a newspaper contest where readers pick which face, out of many, they think the average reader will also pick as prettiest. The winning strategy isn't picking your own favorite - it's guessing the crowd's guess.

And a sophisticated player goes one level further, trying to guess what the crowd thinks the crowd will guess.

Memecoins run this exact loop, with one twist that makes it even more intense than Keynes' newspaper: the "photo" changes in real time. A rising price is evidence to the next layer of buyers that the crowd has already spoken, which pulls in more buyers, which pushes the price further - a feedback effect economists call reflexivity. At this stage, a coin is competing against every other coin trying to win the same contest.

Back to BanksterCoin: say the joke lands well enough that it spreads past the original community, and for a few days it's competing with a handful of other trending Xahau tokens for the same pool of speculative attention. Holders aren't asking "is the banker joke good" anymore - they're asking "is this the one that's about to be everywhere." Then, inevitably, the buying pressure runs out of new entrants, and the price does what nearly every memecoin price eventually does: it falls, hard.

This is the fork in the road. Most coins that reach the beauty-contest stage die here too - the crash ends their story.

But a small number don't ...

Durable Focality: The Lindy Effect

There's an older, more established idea in economics and probability for what happens when something survives a test like this: the Lindy effect. The name comes from a New York deli where comedians reportedly observed that the longer a show had already run, the longer it tended to keep running. The general version of the idea, discussed by various writers, is that for certain "non-perishable" things - ideas, institutions, cultural objects - survival itself is evidence of durability.

The longer something has lasted, the more reason there is to expect it will continue lasting.

Applied to a memecoin, this is the difference between a coin that pumped once and a coin that has history. If BanksterCoin crashes 90% and then - rather than dying - stabilizes with a smaller, stickier group of holders who keep the joke alive, reference the crash as "the first banker bailout," and keep trading it through a second and third cycle, something has changed. It's no longer competing purely on freshness.

It has lore.

New buyers aren't discovering it cold; they're discovering a coin that other people already decided was worth remembering. That's a fundamentally different, more durable kind of demand than the beauty contest produces - closer to genuine, if informal, brand equity than to a bet on the next viral wave.

A memecoin's staying power is earned through lived, observed survival.

BanksterCoin, if it gets here, becomes something close to the "obvious" banker-joke coin on Xahau, less because of any inherent quality and more because everyone remembers it was the one that survived.

Knowledge Is Power

None of this makes memecoin speculation safe - at best, mapping the mechanism makes the risk more understandable.

The preceding chart is an example of the three phases described in this article; the price action, of course, may be wildly different in real-world examples. It serves to demonstrate the high-level concepts visually, and show the distinct lifecycle phases.

A coin with twelve transactions is not in a beauty contest, no matter how good its meme is. A coin mid-pump has not yet earned any durability, no matter how confident its holders sound. Recognizing which game you're actually playing - cascade, contest, or durability - is a small piece of the puzzle in a market built almost entirely on human psychology.

Sources

Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1992). A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change as Informational Cascades. Journal of Political Economy.

Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Chapter 12.

Soros, G. (1987). The Alchemy of Finance (for reflexivity).

Ord, T. (2023). The Lindy Effect. University of Oxford working paper, arXiv:2308.09045.

Wikipedia: "Lindy effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect

Xahau Network: https://xahau.network

Proving Hooks Are Safe

Hodor — Sun, 12 Jul 2026 01:19:35 GMT

A Xahau community developer, HugeGreenCandle, has written something that sounds like we've stepped into a science fiction movie where the protagonist finds a diary entry from a missing scientist:

"Been building something weird. Protozoa. A little creature that lives on Xahau. One account, the hook is its DNA. It eats real XAH to stay alive, burns energy every ledger on its own, and when it runs out it dies and cleans itself up. Nobody runs it, the chain does."

A creature. On a blockchain. That eats money and dies of old age. 🤔

After that initial report, early on July 4th, the posts kept coming - that same day, and the days after - and each one added a capability that added to the mystery - and my own private skepticism and questions: hunting, sharing food with starving relatives, going dormant instead of dying, even reproducing with genetics decided by a coin flip.

By the end of the week, the posts claimed that the creature could rewrite its own code to grow up.

I'll come back to what that actually means, and whether the claims hold up, in a minute. First, it's worth understanding why a serious developer would spend a holiday week building a digital organism instead of something more conventional. The answer has almost nothing to do with biology, and everything to do with a problem that's currently costing real money in the AI industry: agents that can't stop spending.

The Problem For Agentic Payments

AI agents are starting to pay for things on their own - API calls, data lookups, compute time - without a human clicking "approve". A new protocol called x402 (and several competitors) makes this possible: an agent hits a paywall, pays automatically in digital currency, and proceeds.

The obvious safeguard is a spending cap: "this agent may not spend more than $10 a day." Simple enough - until you remember that agents don't do one thing at a time. A single agent, or a fleet of them, can fire off dozens of requests within the same second.

That's where things break.

Most spending caps work by checking the balance, then approving the payment - two separate steps. If five requests hit that check in the same instant, each one can see the same balance, because none of the other four have been recorded yet.

All five get approved.

A $10 cap becomes an $18 bill. This isn't a hypothetical: real-world reports from teams running these systems have described near-total budget leakage during high-traffic bursts, and it's the same category of bug that lets someone redeem one gift card twice by using two browser tabs at once - just happening at machine speed, thousands of times a day.

A funding cap tells you the most an agent could ever spend. It says nothing about whether the agent's own code behaves the way you assumed it would.

The Challenge of "Proving" Safety

This is where a small but growing industry comes in: smart contract auditors. Firms in this space test contract code against known attack patterns, run automated scanners, and increasingly use AI-assisted tools to flag issues like reentrancy bugs and timing races before code goes live. It's become a narrow specialty precisely because payment code that looks fine in a demo can fail in ways nobody thought to test - especially under the kind of concurrent, high-speed conditions agentic payments create.

But testing has limits.

A test suite can only try the scenarios someone thought to write. A race condition, by definition, only shows up under specific, hard-to-reproduce timing - which is exactly why it tends to slip past normal QA and show up in production.

The stronger alternative is formal verification: instead of testing a handful of cases, you mathematically prove a property holds for every possible input and every possible ordering of events. It's a much harder discipline, and far less common - which is part of why HugeGreenCandle's summer project is worth paying attention to.

The Organism Living on Xahau

It turns out the 'Code Protozoa' isn't really about the organism. It's a stress test.

As HugeGreenCandle put it directly:

"If I can prove a self-reproducing, self-modifying organism can't cheat, then proving a normal payment hook is easy."

The creature is the hardest thing he could think of, to build and formally verify - metabolism, reproduction, predation, cooperation, self-modification - precisely so that verifying an ordinary payment contract looks trivial by comparison. Every "life stage" the creature gained over the week was really a new category of mathematical proof he'd learned to check.

Decoding the Protozoa

Once you swap out the biology metaphor for the underlying technology, the picture is a lot less exotic - and a lot easier to trust.

Here's the translation, mapped directly from HugeGreenCandle's own explanation:

Label	What It Actually Is
Organism / creature	A Xahau account
DNA / genome	A small chunk of saved data (traits) stored on that account
Body / life-stage form	The program ("hook") installed on the account
Energy	Real XAH the account holds - never fabricated
Metabolize	The program subtracts a little energy each time it's triggered
Feed	Someone sends the account a payment
Reproduce	The parent funds a pre-made empty account and writes a new genome into it
Die	The program deletes itself and clears its data
Predation / cooperation	Accounts sending payments or messages to each other
Vivarium (the viewer)	A separate app that reads the accounts and draws a picture of the "world"

Nothing here is is from a dark, medieval laboratory ... it's (mostly) standard engineering on Xahau's Hooks - its native smart-contract layer - described in language built to activate people's imagination.

It worked; that's how this article exists. 😁

A Hook Installing a Hook? And Other Madness

The strangest-sounding claim in the whole thread is that the creature "rewrites its own code" to grow up. That sounds like it should be impossible - and in a sense, it is. HugeGreenCandle was careful to correct my understanding on exactly how it works:

"It never modifies source and never generates or compiles code at runtime... 'Self-modification' means the hook calls SetHook on its own account to replace the installed hook with a different, pre-compiled, pre-proven hook, referenced by hash... it can ONLY ever install a hash from a closed, pre-proven allowlist, or delete, never arbitrary code."

In other words: nothing is invented on the fly.

It's less "a caterpillar spontaneously growing wings" and more "a caterpillar flipping to a pre-approved butterfly blueprint that was already sitting on a shelf."

The idea - proving a program that can install different pre-approved versions of itself can never sneak in an unapproved one - is, in HugeGreenCandle's words, "the hardest verification target," and the whole reason the demo exists.

That difficulty points at something bigger than one creature.

A Hook can, by design, construct and send nearly any transaction type on its account's behalf. That flexibility is powerful, but it also means the space of things a Hook could theoretically do is far too large for any one developer to reason through. Guard rules built into Xahau ensure a Hook can't run forever or loop out of control - but that only proves a Hook stops.

It says nothing about whether it stops having done the right thing. That gap between "it halts" and "it behaves correctly for every possible input" is exactly what formal verification is built to fill.

What's Public, What's Private

HugeGreenCandle has an existing crypto company & site, Kairo Vault Technologies, and is positioning Protozoa as the proof-of-capability behind a paid hook-auditing service - a formal-verification offering for Xahau smart contracts, with agentic (or hook) payment safety certification as an idea.

It's a useful offering: verification services like this barely exist yet in the Xahau ecosystem, and one arriving now says something about how quickly the space is maturing.

It also presents a challenge.

He's been explicit that the prover - the tool that actually does the checking - and the creature's source code stay private: It's a practical desire to prevent his competitive advantage from being copied.

Next Up

The organism itself was never really the point - it was a proof of a different kind.

If Kairo Vault can turn that into an auditing service for Xahau Hooks, it fills a real gap at a moment when the ecosystem clearly needs one. Technology adoption is never a straight line; Kairo Vault is positioned with a useful offering for entrepreneurs and businesses that would like an extra level of assurance as they begin to use Xahau hooks for more and more projects. X>

Sources

Q&A over X DM with the creator of xahau-mcp and evernode-mcp HugeGreenCandle

HugeGreenCandle posts on X, July 4–9, 2026

July 4th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2073315704095510559?s=20

July 4th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2073429788984050106?s=20

July 4th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2073578182142541979?s=20

July 4th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2073637391097897203?s=20

July 7th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2074398699040735251?s=20

July 9th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2075127276547801293?s=20

July 10th Post: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2075426678956814343?s=20

Kairo Vault Technologies (https://kairovault.com/)

Xahau Network documentation, Hooks (https://xahau.network/docs/hooks/)

Xahau Network documentation, Debugging Hooks (https://docs.xahau.network/concepts/debugging-hooks)

x402.org, protocol overview (https://x402.org/)

Coinbase Developer Platform, x402 Core Concepts: Facilitator (https://docs.cdp.coinbase.com/x402/core-concepts/facilitator)

"Free-Riding in the AI Economy: Demystifying Logic Flaws in x402-Enabled Payment Systems," arXiv (https://arxiv.org/html/2605.30998v1)

"Five Attacks on x402 Agentic Payment Protocol," Li, Wang & Wang, arXiv (https://arxiv.org/html/2605.11781v1)

"Hardening x402: PII-Safe Agentic Payments via Pre-Execution Metadata Filtering," arXiv (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.11430)

Chainalysis, "Inside x402: 100M Agentic Payments on Base" (https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/x402-agentic-payments-adoption/)

One Xahau AMM: Doing Its Job

Hodor — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 20:08:26 GMT

One Xahau launched on May 29, 2026 as one of the first DeFi platforms built natively on the Xahau network, bringing an automated market maker, a lending protocol, and perpetual contracts to the new smart contract network.

Built entirely with hooks - Xahau's account-centric, smart contract layer - One Xahau's AMM supercharges on-ledger liquidity for digital assets like EVR.

Xahau network's native AMM remains on the roadmap, due later this year.

Comparison: XRP Ledger Vs. Xahau Order Books

A comparison of the top five maker-taker offers on each DEX shows the effect that One Xahau had on the Xahau DEX order books for the EVR pairing:

Xahau's EVR order book came in tighter (a 1.58% spread vs. 1.90% on the XRP Ledger) and considerably deeper ($9,118 vs. $2,529 across the top five bid/ask levels).

For a hook-powered AMM that just debuted in late May of this year, that's a fantastic early showing.

One Xahau is proving that its implementation is having a very real, positive, and profound effect on Xahau DEX liquidity for the pairings that it supports, and may set the stage for what will be successful in the native AMM feature. X>

Sources:

Xahau Network Roadmap: https://xahau.network/roadmap/

Xaman DEX xApp snapshots

Site: https://onexah.io/defi

https://xpert.page/hodor/blog/one-xahau

https://x.com/One_Xahau

https://x.com/Cbot_Xrpl

EverArcade

Hodor — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 13:31:16 GMT

On Monday, June 29th, Shawn, the creator of EverArcade, sat down with Scott Chamberlain - co-founder of Evernode - for a two-hour conversation on 'X' Live, introducing the project publicly and fielding live questions from a large audience.

This article introduces the project through the lens of two problems that have plagued the modern video game industry: creators who don't get paid fairly, and worlds - along with everything built inside them - that can vanish overnight.

The Two Problems

Problem One: Vendor Lock-In - Your World Can Disappear Without Warning

Every digital world today lives or dies by one company's decision to keep paying for servers.

When that decision changes, everything inside the world - characters, items, economies, relationships, years of collective history - goes with it, whether or not anyone asked for that outcome.

This isn't hypothetical.

When NCSoft shut down City of Heroes, players tried to buy the game outright to save it; the offer was refused, and the world stayed dark until a fan-run server was eventually granted an official license years later. Star Wars Galaxies ended with players gathering in-world to watch a scripted apocalypse - a send-off, but a permanent one. PlayStation Home had millions of active inhabitants when Sony shut it down in 2015; popularity wasn't the deciding factor, ongoing investment was. Asheron's Call lasted 17 years before closing in 2017.

More recently, the problem has involved property rights.

Ubisoft delisted The Crew in December 2023 and shut its servers in March 2024, rendering a game more than two million people had paid for - including real-money DLC - permanently unplayable. Ubisoft's legal defense was that buyers had only purchased a revocable license, not the game itself. That decision helped ignite the "Stop Killing Games" movement, now backed by over 1.3 million signatures and an active lawsuit from a French consumer protection group alleging the arrangement amounted to an abusive, misleading contract.

Up until now, Web 3.0 hasn't been much better.

Blockchain gaming's core promise was that NFT-based ownership would let items outlive the game itself. In practice, more than 300 blockchain games have shut down, with roughly 93% of GameFi projects now effectively dead.

Ember Sword raised over $200M and closed anyway. Pirate Nation raised $33M and told players their assets could only be "burned" for speculative certificates once it wound down. When Nyan Heroes shut down, its token dropped 98.5% the same day. The lesson isn't that portability doesn't matter - it's that minting a token pointing at a centralized server was never enough to deliver it.

Problem Two: Creators Are Being Underpaid

The people who actually build games and worlds tend to capture a small share of the revenue they generate.

Valve's Steam takes 30% of most sales, with reduced tiers that mostly help the small number of publishers who cross $10M and $50M - thresholds most indie developers never reach.

In Game Developer Conference's developer survey, only 7% of respondents thought a cut that high was justifiable for a storefront to take. Roblox developers see roughly 25 cents on the dollar reach them through the traditional cash-out pathway, the lowest effective share among major platforms, and Roblox's own developer forum regularly features frustration over shrinking creator margins.

Mobile developers face the same dynamic: Apple and Google have, historically, taken up to 30% on in-app purchases, a rate that has now drawn antitrust rulings against both companies, with courts explicitly questioning whether the fee reflects real cost or simple market dominance.

The Common Thread

These two problems come from the same architectural root: today's platforms bundle hosting, discovery, payments, and identity into one non-negotiable package that only the platform controls.

That bundling is what lets a platform both dictate the price of access and unilaterally decide when a world stops existing. A developer or player never really owns their relationship to the world; they rent it, on terms set entirely by one company ... for as long as that company finds it profitable.

How EverArcade Could Change the Equation

EverArcade's founding thesis is that the fix for both problems is the same: unbundle the world from the company operating it.

If a game world is a portable, verifiable artifact - something closer to a file than a service - rather than a database record locked inside one company's servers, two things follow.

First, the world no longer depends on any single operator's survival; it can be hosted, migrated, and verified by a competitive ecosystem of independent providers, which is the direct technical answer to vendor lock-in.

Second, once hosting, verification, and distribution become separable, competitive markets rather than one bundled platform fee, creators can shop each layer independently instead of accepting whatever cut a single gatekeeper demands - the direct answer to underpayment. In EverArcade's own language, value shifts from controlling the world to providing services around the world, and no single company can hold either the world or its creator hostage.

What EverArcade Actually Is

At its core, EverArcade borrows an idea familiar to crypto fans - the same logic that lets a blockchain reconstruct a correct account balance by replaying every transaction from genesis - and applies it to game worlds instead of currency.

A world's current state is treated as a derivation of its full history, not a record some corporation can delete.

Core Concepts:

Deterministic replay - given the same starting state and the same ordered sequence of player actions, any compliant implementation must arrive at exactly the same world state. This is what makes a world portable: anyone, anywhere, can reconstruct it, without needing the original company's cooperation or continued existence.
Cryptographic commitments - a world periodically publishes compact proofs (state roots, receipt roots, continuity roots, and a "world hash") that let any third party verify a claim about the world's state without trusting the operator's word for it.
Projection isolation - rendering and presentation are kept strictly separate from the authoritative simulation, so different studios can build different visual experiences.
Checkpointing and archives - to keep long-running worlds from growing unmanageably large, the live copy of a world periodically checkpoints and pushes older history into separate archive tiers, linked back by cryptographic roots.

Together, these properties are meant to let a world outlive any single studio. Worlds can migrate between hosts, and prove their own authenticity ... the properties that were missing from City of Heroes, The Crew, Stadia, and the NFT games that failed.

Where Evernode Fits In

Evernode is a decentralized hosting network. Instead of one company running all the servers for an application, Evernode lets independent operators ("hosts") lease out computing capacity through a permissionless marketplace, paid in the network's native token, EVR.

Applications run across multiple independent hosts simultaneously using HotPocket, Evernode's consensus engine, which lets a cluster of machines process the same ordered inputs and independently arrive at the same result - without one operator dictating the outcome.

That distinction - determinism versus consensus - is exactly the place Evernode plugs into EverArcade, and it addresses the vendor lock-in problem.

Determinism guarantees that if everyone has the same history, everyone computes the same world. But when actions are arriving from many players at once, something still has to decide whose sequence of events is the real one - that's a consensus problem, and it's what HotPocket solves.

An EverArcade world could technically run on a single server and still be deterministic, replayable, and verifiable - but a single server requires everyone to simply trust that operator to admit actions fairly, order them correctly, and stay online. Evernode's decentralized host network removes that single point of trust, letting multiple independent replicas agree on the authoritative sequence of events without depending on any one company's continued existence.

Getting a live EverArcade world running correctly inside Evernode's HotPocket environment turned out to be a real engineering hurdle - Shawn credited HugeGreenCandle with helping debug and optimize the live mainnet deployment after months of independent work building the deterministic kernel.

Speculating on a Sustainable Business Model

None of this matters commercially unless it can be monetized in a way that's better for both types of stakeholders - the players who don't want their worlds to vanish, and the creators who don't want their revenue captured by a gatekeeper.

Here are the ideas from the EverArcade architectural documents:

Unbundled service markets, not a single new "platform fee." Instead of one company charging one bundled cut, hosting, verification, migration, and archiving could each become separately priced, competitive markets. Creators pay only for services they actually use; players benefit because no single company can unilaterally end a world it's tired of funding.
Operators earn through infrastructure, not gatekeeping. Evernode hosts already earn EVR for providing computing capacity; a similar model could let world-hosting operators earn ongoing fees for uptime and reliability, rather than a percentage of every transaction inside the world - shifting the incentive from "extract from creators" to "compete on service quality."
Verification and archiving as paid trust infrastructure. Independent verifiers and archives could charge for certifying a world's authenticity or preserving its history long-term - a new service category.
Treasuries and community ownership. Long-lived worlds could hold their own treasuries, funded by a small, transparent, community-governed fee, rather than an opaque cut set unilaterally by a platform.

The caveat is that this remains largely speculative.

EverArcade's architectural documents repeatedly flag funding mechanisms, incentive alignment, and long-term economic sustainability as open questions rather than solved ones. The technical case for portability is further along than the economic case for who ultimately gets paid and how much.

Follow-up With Shawn

I posed three questions to him:

Question: What is your greatest hope for EverArcade?

Answer: My greatest hope for EverArcade is that we help establish the idea that digital worlds can be portable, verifiable, and truly owned by their communities. I don't want meaningful digital places to disappear because a company shuts down a server or changes its business model. I want worlds to become part of our digital heritage - places that can be preserved, migrated, and continue evolving long after their original creators move on.

Question: What was the most challenging problem you faced in the conceptual design of EverArcade?

Answer: The hardest problem was realizing that a digital world can't depend on trusting a server or a company. If a world is going to be portable and independently verifiable, then every change to that world has to be deterministic and replayable. That sounds simple, but it fundamentally changes how you think about game design, networking, persistence, and even ownership. The challenge wasn't building another game platform - it was designing a system where reality itself could be reproduced and verified anywhere.

Question: How soon do you see yourself running a proof-of-concept game on Evernode where players and potential developers can take a look?

Answer: Sooner than many people probably expect. We already have deterministic execution, replay verification, and portable world packaging working. The next step is demonstrating a small multiplayer world running across independent infrastructure on Evernode and proving that the same inputs produce the same reality regardless of where it's hosted. Once people can see that happening live, I think the implications become immediately obvious.

The Continuum

A movie released in 2018, "Ready Player One", imagined a future where an entire generation's social life, economy, and identity lived inside one persistent virtual world - the "Oasis".

But it's worth noticing what that fictional world depicted: the Oasis was one person's creation, and its entire fate hinged on what happened to his company after he was gone.

That's the same fragility EverArcade was meant to address.

EverArcade's version of the Oasis is aptly named "The Continuum" ... because it introduces worlds that can't be deleted by one man or company. It enables creators who can't be shortchanged by uneven power dynamics. Maybe that's the real promise: not just a better game, but a version of the OASIS that doesn't depend on any one person, or company, to keep the lights on.

EverArcade might enable what the entire gaming market has been missing; and that fairness might unleash a torrent of creative genius from game designers. E>

Sources

Q&A with Shawn and Scott Chamberlain: https://x.com/EvernodeXRPL/status/2071763199893159968?s=20

Q&A with with Shawn over 'X' DM

EverArcade - official site: https://www.everarcade.xyz/

Architecture & Vision for EverArcade: https://www.everarcade.games/research

https://www.evernode.org/

Evernode Developer Docs: https://www.evernode.org/developers

Evernode SDK / HotPocket primer (GitHub): https://github.com/EvernodeXRPL/evernode-sdk/blob/main/primer.md

"7 online worlds that ended while people were still playing," GamesRadar+: https://www.gamesradar.com/7-games-shut-down-while-people-were-still-playing/

"20 MMOs We Lost Too Soon: A Gamer's Tribute," Yardbarker: https://www.yardbarker.com/video_games/articles/20_mmos_we_lost_too_soon_a_gamers_tribute/s1_17458_42692751

"French consumer group sues Ubisoft over shutdown of The Crew," Game Developer: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/french-consumer-group-sues-ubisoft-over-shutdown-of-the-crew

Stadia Announcement FAQ, Google: https://support.google.com/stadia/answer/12790109?hl=en

"More than 90% of Web3 games failed after $15 billion boom," CoinDesk: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/04/23/more-than-90-of-web3-games-failed-after-usd15-billion-boom-as-gamers-never-showed-up-caladan

"Web3 games have collapsed. How can we get out of the 'cyber graveyard'?," PANews: https://www.panewslab.com/en/articles/1s44x4wi

Roblox Developer Revenue Share Explained (2025–2026), RoLearn: https://rolearn.dev/insights/roblox-developer-revenue-share-2026/

"Valve Steam Antitrust Lawsuit: $6B Cut on Trial [2026]": https://tech-insider.org/valve-steam-antitrust-lawsuit-2026/

"Most game devs don't think Steam earns its 30% revenue cut," PC Gamer: https://www.pcgamer.com/most-game-devs-dont-think-steam-earns-its-30-revenue-cut/

"Apple Must Change Its Tightly Controlled App Store, Judge Rules in Epic Lawsuit," NPR: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1023834758/apple-app-store-epic-games-fortnite-verdict

Ready Player One: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready_Player_One_(film)

Xahaud & Its Exclamation Points!

Hodor — Tue, 23 Jun 2026 14:17:51 GMT

The latest release notes for Xahaud, the code base for the Xahau network, contained a list of items that were very well-received by the developer and fan base ...

... and two items received an exclamation point by Richard Holland, chief architect of the Xahau network:

IOURewardClaim

Xahau has long offered a native balance rewards system for its no-counter-party asset, 'XAH'. It amounts to - roughly - 4% per annum paid to all XAH holders.

"IOURewardClaim" extends this same mechanic to issued tokens. Issuers can now optionally enable reward logic for their own currencies, calculated based on hold time and amount.

This means any project - a stablecoin issuer, a DAO, a DeFi app - can build loyalty programs or yield incentives directly into their token, powered by the protocol itself rather than through smart contracts.

NamedHooks

Hooks are small, efficient WebAssembly (WASM) modules that add smart contract functionality to Xahau - they can block or allow transactions, track internal state, and even autonomously initiate new transactions.

"NamedHooks" lets developers assign human-readable names to specific Hook functions during installation, so an incoming transaction can call a particular Hook by name.

The result?

Multiple distinct behaviors coexisting on the same account - a payment Hook, an admin Hook, a compliance Hook - all modular and independently invocable.

Tequ's Corner

The release notes called out one code contributor, in particular: Tequ, who also provided his own take on several items in the release notes:

Better And Better

Together, these code improvements push Xahau closer to a platform where both issuers and developers have expressive, composable, protocol-native tools at their disposal.

For code contributors to Xahaud, seeing these pieces click into place is the kind of thing that earns an exclamation point. X>

Sources

https://x.com/RichardXRPL/status/2068957252145631574?s=20

Richard Holland's tweet announcing the release: https://x.com/RichardXRPL/status/2068957252145631574

https://github.com/Xahau/xahaud

https://x.com/RichardXRPL

https://x.com/_tequ_

Q & A With The Creator Of xahau-mcp

Hodor — Mon, 15 Jun 2026 21:42:49 GMT

I was startled ... by a very positive announcement!

It was a post from a community developer whose content had ended up on my FYP intermittently ... it was exciting news, in the form of a multi-part thread explaining his accomplishments in compartmentalized chunks:

When I started digging into what he'd accomplished, my amazement continued to grow - he has single-handedly, it seems - contributed several key development tools that will supercharge hooks development on Xahau! 😳

When I reached out to him over 'X', he was gracious enough to do a written Q&A with me.

Here is that Q&A, verbatim.

Question: What's your background with the XRP Ledger and Xahau?

Answer: I've been in the XRPL since 2020 - started as an investor, then got pulled deeper through X Spaces, following the news and learning the ecosystem.

I remember David Schwartz talking about Hooks coming to the XRPL and being genuinely excited about programmable logic on the ledger. When Hooks didn't make it to XRPL mainnet I was disappointed - but that's exactly what gave us Xahau, so it worked out. Along the way I launched an NFT project on the XRPL, and I host an X Space when time allows. So Xahau and Hooks weren't a pivot for me; they're the thing I'd been waiting on since Schwartz first described it.

Question: What motivated you to create xahau-mcp & the Flight Simulator?

Answer: Two gaps.

First, there was no MCP (Model Context Protocol) for Xahau at all - AI agents had no structured way to read the ledger, decode HookOn, or reason about Hooks.

Second, and bigger: there was no way to know what a Hook would do before you signed. Hooks are real WASM smart contracts that can reject or reshape your transaction - but you found out on-chain, after the fee burned. So I built the Flight Simulator: it runs a transaction's actual Hook bytecode in a local VM against live ledger state and tells you the accept/rollback outcome before you sign. As AI agents start moving real value on Xahau, "simulate before you sign" stops being a convenience and becomes a safety requirement.

Question: What feedback have you received from other developers thus far?

Answer: The response on X has honestly exceeded what I expected - encouragement and attention from developers I deeply respect, including Wietse, Tequ, Fomo and others. The one that floored me: when I launched xahc-prover - the tool that formally proves a Hook is safe - Richard Holland, who designed Hooks, engaged with it publicly and encouraged me to keep adding invariants.

Richard is the reason any of this is even possible: he made Hooks not-Turing-complete and guard-bounded, which is the exact property that lets you prove them. Having the people who shaped the XRPL and Xahau ecosystems take an interest has been both validating and motivating. It tells me the gap I was trying to fill is one the community actually feels.

Question: Any plans to create a website endpoint for public use?

Answer: It's already running.

The simulator sits behind a hardened HTTP shim - sandboxed WASM execution with hard timeout and memory caps, rate-limiting, read-only, never signs - deployed on Railway and integrated into Kairo Vault's Hooks Lab. So today you can paste a compiled hook's WASM and have it analyzed and run as real bytecode without spinning up a node or the MCP locally.

The next step is standing up a raw public API endpoint anyone can hit directly - including the full live-ledger simulation path.

Question: Are you working on any other (unrelated / related) projects on Xahau?

Answer: Most of my work lives under Kairo Vault - my broader effort to build tools for users and developers across both the XRPL and Xahau. xahau-mcp is one piece of what's become a four-tool toolchain for safe Hooks — a quartet that takes a Hook from idea to deployed:

xahc ("Xahau Hooks, Checked") - the authoring side: write a safe C Hook, build it, lint it, test it, and emit a ready-to-sign install transaction. xahc writes the Hook, xahau-mcp audits and simulates it. Already testnet-proven: an AI-agent spending-guardrail Hook installed and enforced its own limit on-ledger.
xahc-prover - the part I'm proudest of. xahau-mcp simulates one transaction; xahc-prover proves a Hook is safe for every possible transaction. It symbolically executes the real compiled WASM and uses an SMT solver to either prove a safety invariant holds - spend limits, destination locks, no double-spend, balance conservation, and more - or hand back the exact transaction that breaks it.
It's only possible because Hooks are bounded and decidable. And it fails closed: anything it can't model soundly returns INCONCLUSIVE, never a green check it didn't earn.
evernode-mcp - the build layer above the Hooks: scaffold, lint, cost-estimate, and deploy HotPocket dApps on Evernode, with a determinism linter so a contract doesn't stall consensus across
nodes.
x402-xahau - making Xahau a settlement chain for the x402 agent-payments protocol, with a guardrail Hook as the layer-1 spending authority.

The thread tying it together: as AI agents start transacting autonomously, Kairo Vault is building the safety and tooling layer for them to do it on XRPL and Xahau - write the on-chain rules (xahc), simulate before signing (xahau-mcp), prove them safe for all inputs (xahc-prover), build and deploy the dApp (evernode-mcp), and settle within policy (x402-xahau). All four core tools are open source and MIT-licensed.

Question: How is "proving" a hook different from testing it?

Answer: Testing checks the cases you thought of. Proving checks every case there is. A test suite for a money-Hook might fire a few hundred transactions at it; an attacker only needs the one you didn't write. xahc-prover closes that gap. It symbolically executes the real compiled WASM - every branch at once, with the inputs left as unknowns - and asks an SMT solver a single question: is there any transaction that reaches "accept" and still breaks the rule? If the answer is no, that's a proof for all inputs in scope. If it's yes, you get back the exact transaction that breaks it - a real counterexample, not a vague warning.

It checks fourteen invariants today - things like spend limits, destination locks, no double-spend, balance conservation, authorization, reserve safety. And the part I care about most is what happens at the edges: if the prover hits anything it can't reason about soundly, it returns INCONCLUSIVE, never a false "proven." A verifier you can't trust is worse than no verifier, so it fails closed by design. I also reproduced several of its verdicts on the live Xahau testnet - sent the exact transactions it described and the chain agreed - so it's not just math in a vacuum.

None of this would be possible on a chain like Ethereum, where the halting problem means you can't prove an arbitrary contract. Richard made Hooks not-Turing-complete and guard-bounded, so their behaviour is decidable. Bounded execution was always quietly a superpower - xahc-prover is what it unlocks.

Question: Where does evernode-mcp fit?

Answer: The first three tools are about the Hook itself - the on-chain logic. evernode-mcp is the layer above it: the actual application.

Evernode lets you run dApps (HotPocket smart contracts) on hosts secured by Xahau, and evernode-mcp gives an AI agent or a developer a structured way to scaffold one, lint it, estimate what it'll cost to host, and deploy it.

The hard part on Evernode is determinism.

A HotPocket contract runs on many independent nodes that have to reach the same result, byte for byte - so an innocent-looking thing like reading the system clock, iterating a map in hash order, or a locale-dependent sort can quietly break consensus. evernode-mcp ships a determinism linter that flags those patterns before they bite, plus a set of templates that are already clean. I want to be precise here: that's a linter, not a prover - it catches known non-deterministic patterns, it doesn't mathematically prove determinism.

The settlement Hooks in its templates, though, do run through xahc-prover, so the on-chain money logic of a dApp can be formally proven even while the off-chain app logic is linted. Together that's the full span: prove the rules, ship the app.

And it all points back to one home: I plan to integrate the full quartet into www.kairovault.com, so writing, simulating, proving, and deploying a Hook becomes one continuous workflow in the browser - no local toolchain required. The Hooks Lab is already the first piece of that; the rest of the quartet lands there next.

My Take: Incredible Tools For New Hooks Developers

The addition of xahau-mcp and its suite of components, tools, and techniques, represents a powerful and immense leap forward for hooks development on Xahau.

New developers will now have, at their fingertips, the ability to rigorously - and easily - test Evernode dApps & Xahau hooks before deployment, thereby providing an additional layer of confidence in their code and applications. Ultimately, it will be the end-user stakeholders of Evernode & Xahau that benefit the most, from a wide variety of applications that use hooks and Xahau in the background, invisibly benefiting from a highly-efficient development process.

If you or a friend want to try vibe-coding some hooks, now is the time. X> | E >

Sources:

Q&A via 'X' DM ( Hugegreencandle@Cryptocrazy589 on 'X')

Introductory thread: https://x.com/Cryptocrazy589/status/2065012486479175777?s=20

The github repository link: https://github.com/Hugegreencandle/xahau-mcp

The github repository link for the flight simulator: https://github.com/Hugegreencandle/xahau-mcp/releases/tag/v2.0.0

"MCP" = "model context protocol", defined here: https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/getting-started/intro

Deeper dive into the MCP architecture: https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/learn/architecture

Plain English guide and tutorial to using the MCP: https://github.com/Hugegreencandle/xahau-mcp/blob/main/docs/TUTORIAL.md

Kairo Vault website: https://www.kairovault.com

One Xahau

Hodor — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 19:16:56 GMT

⚠️ As with all my articles, this does not constitute financial advice. Please consult a financial expert before making any financial decisions.

"DeFi"

Decentralized finance - DeFi - has become one of the most talked-about concepts in the blockchain world, promising open, permissionless access to financial tools like lending, trading, and yield generation.

For Xahau, a new smart-contract-enabled network, DeFi is arriving right now - and a developer from Atlanta, Georgia is the one making it happen.

One Xahau is one of the first DeFi platforms built natively on the Xahau network. It's bringing a suite of financial products - automated market making, lending, and perpetual contracts - to a network that, until now, had none of them.

Understanding the Xahau Landscape

To appreciate what One Xahau is doing, it helps to understand what Xahau is - and what it's been missing.

Xahau is, in simple terms, a fork of the XRP Ledger, distinguished primarily by its support for "hooks" - compact, event-driven pieces of code that attach to accounts and execute automatically when transactions occur.

You can think of hooks as the Xahau equivalent of Ethereum smart contracts ... but optimized for the speed and efficiency of the XRP Ledger's architecture.

The network's roadmap is ambitious. Features like a native Automated Market Maker (AMM), a Price Oracle, and a cross-chain capability called FeatureExport are all scheduled for release as early as the beginning of Q4 2026 (October). The native AMM in particular is highly anticipated - it would bring on-ledger liquidity to Xahau's decentralized exchange.

But "anticipated" and "available" are two very different things.

Until those amendments pass a network vote and are activated on-chain, the tools simply don't exist in native form. That gap - the space between what the Xahau roadmap promises and what users can access today - is exactly where One Xahau has stepped in.

One Xahau: Filling the Vacuum

The man behind One Xahau goes by the handle Cbot on X, and his path to DeFi development is not a conventional one. By his own account, he's primarily a construction industry professional who recently picked up coding around 2019 or 2020.

His motivation was less about financial opportunity and more about community.

"It kind of grew from there ..."

That's how he described the transformation of the original project into One Xahau during a recent live session on X. His original project was a data aggregator for tokens on the Xahau network, and it has changed into something far more ambitious. Cbot has also collaborated on the technical aspects of his project periodically with another Xahau community developer known as Gadget78.

His stated goal: to galvanize the Xahau community and push the ecosystem forward.

The result is One Xahau, a hook-powered DeFi platform that doesn't wait for native AMM support to materialize.

Not Just AMMs: A Full DeFi Suite

One Xahau launched with three distinct financial products, each powered by hooks running autonomously on the Xahau network.

Automated Market Making (AMM): One Xahau's AMM allows users to contribute assets to liquidity pools and earn fees from trades ('swaps') executed against those pools.

New token pairings can be bootstrapped through a DAO vote, giving the community a direct say in which assets get listed.

What sets this AMM apart from what a native Xahau implementation might offer is that it was specifically designed to serve the One Xahau DAO - a portion of every fee charged by the AMM is automatically routed upward to fund the platform's decentralized governance structure. It also leverages Xahau's inherited XRP Ledger pathfinding capabilities, uses a yield curve to place strategic orders on the DEX, and even counterbalances the natural XAH accumulation that occurs due to Xahau's native balance adjustment rewards.

Very impressive thoughtfulness here.

Perpetual Contracts: One Xahau offers a futures-like product known as perpetuals - leveraged bets on the future price of an asset. Currently, the platform supports longs and shorts on EVR (Evernode's token) priced against XAH.

The pool absorbs wins and losses, and a system of funding rates keeps positions from becoming dangerously lopsided - if one side (long or short) becomes disproportionately large, participants on that side pay higher rates to compensate the pool for the additional risk.

Position sizes are also capped relative to the pool's total size, so no single trade can drain the pool. As Cbot noted during the X space:

"There was a lot of talk about creating a side chain to the XRPL for perps ... Xahau could drive perpetual contracts right now - this could be put in a hook."

Lending Protocol: One Xahau's lending product is a one-sided, collateralized lending system.

Users who want to earn yield contribute to a lending pool. Borrowers then post collateral and take loans of up to 50% of that collateral's value, at a current rate of 10% interest.

If a borrower fails to repay, the hook automatically claims their collateral on behalf of the pool. Notably, the current implementation does not liquidate based on collateral price drops - a feature Cbot is eager to add once Xahau's planned Price Oracle goes live. The 10% interest earned on loans flows directly to LP token holders, making the lending pool an income-generating position for liquidity providers.

The DAO: Governed by Hooks

All three products - the AMM, the lending protocol, and the perpetual contracts - funnel a percentage of their fees into a central, autonomous treasury: the One Xahau DAO. On the website, this appears to be referenced under 'Protocol X':

The organization is governed by 5 to 6 hooks operating entirely on-chain, handling everything from fee collection to vote execution to profit distribution. When escrow thresholds are reached, hooks send funds to the DAO without anyone needing to press a button.

Every major platform parameter - fee rates for the AMM, interest rates for lending, which assets can be traded in the perpetuals pool - can only be changed through a DAO vote. That vote requires the use of XXX tokens, the platform's governance token, which are consumed when cast. This gives XXX a built-in deflationary mechanic: every governance decision reduces the token's circulating supply.

To protect against coordinated attacks or bad-faith voting, the DAO also features a council - a group of elected members who function similarly to a validator list in the XRP ecosystem.

Major decisions require council members to vote in alignment with the broader community vote, acting as a check against any single actor trying to weaponize raw voting power against the platform.

The XXX Governance Token

The XXX token is the connective tissue of the One Xahau ecosystem. Here's how it works in practice:

When users participate in any of the three DeFi products - the AMM, lending, or perpetuals - they receive LP (liquidity provider) tokens representing their share of the pool. Those LP token holders can then register with the DAO, at which point a hook reads their account, notes their LP positions, and issues XXX tokens to them.

The issuance schedule is designed to reward early adopters most generously - the earlier a user participates, the higher their relative XXX token earnings. As the platform matures, the per-user issuance rate declines, following an epoch-based schedule typical of token distribution models.

XXX tokens serve two functions: voting power within the DAO, and access to a share of the DAO's profits when staked. Approximately 10% of the DAO's revenue - including the XAH balance adjustment rewards earned by all XAH held across the platform - is earmarked for distribution to XXX token stakers. This creates a layered incentive: provide liquidity, earn LP tokens; hold LP tokens, earn XXX; stake XXX, earn a cut of platform revenue.

Balance Adustment

One of the attractive characteristics of Xahau is that both infrastructure providers and holders alike are able to access a 'reward' based on how much XAH they are holding. While infrastructure providers that occupy a governance seat on Xahau are rewarded much more than ordinary holders, all holders are able to access the basic balance adjustment.

Currently that balance adjustment rate is set to 4% APY.

Cbot indicated that, generally, anywhere where XAH is held in the autonomous One Xahau system - whether as part of the liquidity pools or as part of the DAO - that balance adjustment is leveraged for an increased return.

It's a way that One Xahau leverages the native reward mechanism to boost its earnings for liquidity providers and DAO participants.

It's Not Blackholed - Yet

There's an important caveat that any serious participant in One Xahau should understand: the hooks are not yet blackholed.

In Xahau's hook ecosystem, "blackholing" an account means permanently revoking the owner's ability to modify the code attached to that account. Once blackholed, the hooks run exactly as written - forever - with no possibility of alteration by anyone, including the original developer. It's the ultimate form of trustless operation, because it eliminates any single point of human control.

One Xahau isn't there yet.

Currently, changes to the hook code require a multi-signature process involving Cbot and approximately three other individuals. This means that, in theory, the code could still be altered by those parties acting in concert.

This is a deliberate choice. With any new platform, unexpected bugs or edge cases emerge as real users interact with the system in ways that testing couldn't anticipate. Cbot has opted to keep the multi-sig safety net in place while the platform accumulates usage data and proves its stability in the wild.

"In probably thirty-to-sixty days we'll be blackholed ... Right now, we're not."

For users evaluating risk, this is a meaningful distinction. The platform is backed by multi-sig security rather than the absolute trustlessness of a blackholed account.

Significance for the Xahau Ecosystem

Xahau has long held the theoretical promise of powerful DeFi capabilities through its hooks architecture. What has lagged thus far for the new network is the application layer - the number of actual platforms where users can put those capabilities to work. One Xahau is one of the few applications to bridge that gap at scale, demonstrating that hooks can power sophisticated, multi-product financial applications without relying on native protocol upgrades.

There's also the matter of timing.

With Xahau's native AMM, Price Oracle, and FeatureExport feature all queued up for potential activation in Q4 2026, the ecosystem is on the cusp of a significant expansion. One Xahau positions itself as a foundation - a platform already battle-testing the concepts that native features will eventually offer, and one with a governance structure capable of adapting as those new features come online.

Perhaps most significantly, Cbot has announced plans to release the hook code for the AMM, lending, and perpetuals as open-source tools (without DAO integration) for other developers to use. If successful, One Xahau won't just be one of Xahau's first DeFi platforms - it may become the reference point for the next generation of Xahau applications.

For a network that has focused relentlessly on layer one tools and utility, that's no small thing. X>

Sources

https://onexah.io/defi

One Xahau on X: https://x.com/One_Xahau

Cbot on X: https://x.com/Cbot_Xrpl

Gadget78 on X: https://x.com/gadget78

"DeFi is Live on One Xahau on XahauNetwork" — X Space recording: https://x.com/i/spaces/1vJpPPgDrwdJE?s=20

Xahau Network Roadmap: https://xahau.network/roadmap/

Xahau: Not Just A Sidechain

Hodor — Fri, 22 May 2026 11:59:22 GMT

Xahau launched as a mainnet near Halloween of 2023.

The original vision wasn't just a simple sidechain bolted onto the XRP Ledger - it was a fully independent network, one that would be inextricably linked to the XRP Ledger through trustless, cryptographic bridges.

Due to regulatory uncertainty with some types of bridge architectures, the first of those bridges was a non-custodial one known as xPoP (based on XLS-41). The mechanism it powered, called Burn2Mint, let users burn XRP on the XRP Ledger mainnet, generate a cryptographic proof of that burn, and mint equivalent XAH on Xahau - all without trusting a custodian.

Although the negative gap in chain-specific asset prices prompted the validators to vote for the amendment to be deactivated, it was an elegant, trustless approach to cross-chain value transfer, and it set the tone for how Xahau's creators thought about the relationship between the two networks.

XRP Plus

Here's a piece of Xahau's origin story that doesn't get told often enough: XAH wasn't always called XAH. Early on, the token was referred to internally as XRP Plus - a name that perfectly captured how the creators envisioned the two networks working together, and explains the idea behind 'burn-to-mint'.

The tokenomics were intentional.

The burn-to-mint model, the higher fee burns triggered by smart contracts ("hooks"), the incentivized validators - all of it was designed with a "rapid adoption" scenario in mind, one where Ripple itself might embrace a smart-contract-capable companion chain running its own native asset alongside XRP.

Imagine a parallel reality where the largest champion on the XRP Ledger, Ripple, burned billions of its XRP (minting billions of new XAH) so that they can then use XAH to address any use cases that their customers desire, that involved more complex account interactions. If that had happened, Ripple would have been, by far, the largest holder of XAH on Xahau, and the XAH tokenomics model would have been a huge benefit to XRP holders, given its much smaller supply. (Imagine a scenario where retail XRP holders used burn-to-mint if XAH was priced 4 times higher than XRP!)

Ripple chose a different direction, pursuing EVM-compatible sidechain initiatives.

But Xahau's creators - the Xahau Launch Alliance - didn't walk away from the idea of a compliment network. They kept building: bi-network block explorers, DEX overlay software, and shared tooling that made the two networks feel like they belonged together. The identical address format (r-addresses work across both chains) wasn't an accident - it was a design decision that lowered the barrier for any XRPL user or developer to interact with Xahau.

You can read more about that topic here: One Secret Key: Two Networks

Technical

Xahau's xahaud software is a fork of XRPL's rippled, and the two share the same foundational layer: identical Layer 1 cryptographic algorithms, r-addresses, and the consensus mechanism. Developers who know the XRP Ledger will find Xahau immediately familiar, and much of the documentation on xrpl.org applies directly.

Where Xahau diverges is in what it adds:

Hooks - lightweight, account-level smart contracts that execute logic on transactions flowing to or from an account
URITokens - a leaner alternative to XLS-20 NFTs, optimized for metadata and asset representation
Incentivized Infrastructure - validator rewards and tokenomics designed to sustain a programmable network
Faster Consensus - Project L-10K; scale up to 10,000 transactions per ledger

The result: all of XRPL's proven strengths - 3–5 second settlement, low fees, energy efficiency - plus programmability, without sacrificing performance.

Finternet Use Cases

There's a concept gaining traction called the Finternet - a term coined by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) to describe an Internet-like vision for financial systems: interconnected, tokenized, user-centric, and capable of seamless cross-border flows.

Within the XRPL-family ecosystem, a compelling fan-driven framework has emerged that maps three networks onto that vision:

Network	Role
XRP Ledger	Fast, deterministic settlement - the standard for payments and tokenization, requiring no incentives
Xahau	The smart contract layer - Hooks-powered programmability with incentivized infrastructure
Evernode (EVR)	Decentralized compute and hosting (dePIN) - neutral infrastructure for off-chain and heavy computation

Together, this trio covers the full spectrum of conceivable use cases: real-time payments, programmable finance, tokenized assets, compliance automation, decentralized hosting.

In this vision, each network plays a distinct role, and the shared DNA between XRPL and Xahau makes interoperability intuitive rather than bolted on.

Xahau Also Stands Alone

While the complementary perspective is compelling, Xahau is also pursuing its own path.

The clearest proof of this is a recent project involving three organizations - Cooperative Bank of Oromia (Ethiopia), Quantoz Payments (a regulated digital asset issuer), and TerraPay (a world-wide payments network). Together, they're using Xahau as the settlement layer for Euro-denominated remittances flowing from Europe to Ethiopia.

This is a real-world, regulated blockchain settlement system targeting significant transaction volumes. It leverages Xahau's speed, determinism, and account-level smart contract functionality for compliance and efficiency. And notably, it doesn't rely on the XRP Ledger or Evernode to function. It's all Xahau.

It signals that enterprise-grade financial institutions are evaluating Xahau on its own merits.

Xahau Is More Than A Sidechain

Xahau started as a vision of what the XRP Ledger could be with smart contracts. It has since become something more: a full Layer 1 network with its own growing ecosystem (200,000+ accounts, millions of transactions), its own enterprise integrations, and its own roadmap.

It remains, by design, the ideal smart contract complement to the XRP Ledger - identical addresses, shared tooling, and trustless bridges make that relationship as seamless as any two independent networks can be. But the label "sidechain" undervalues what Xahau has become.

The 2026 roadmap - focused on scalability, accessibility, and security - reflects a network charting its own course. X>

Sources

Xahau roadmap: https://xahau.network/roadmap/

BIS Finternet Paper: https://www.bis.org/publ/work1178.htm

Xahau Network announcement: https://x.com/XahauNetwork/status/2051927674365300854?s=20

https://x.com/Quantoz/status/1986366890906694090?s=20

https://support.gatehub.net/hc/en-us/articles/14752835197842-Introducing-Xahau#

https://xahau.xrplwin.com/apps/xapp:xahau.teleport

xPoP: https://xls.xrpl.org/xls/XLS-0041-xpop.html

Coopbank official announcement: https://coopbankoromia.com.et/coopbank-and-terrapay-launch-blockchain-based-remittance-settlement-to-enhance-cross-border-transfers/

TerraPay press release: https://www.terrapay.com/media/terrapay-launches-cross-border-blockchain-remittances-to-ethiopia/

InFTF news: https://inftf.org/news/blockchain-settlement-euro-remittances-ethiopia/

Quantoz: https://x.com/Quantoz/status/1986366890906694090?s=20

Authoritative Links:

xrpl.org (applicable across both networks)

Xahau Official Site

xahaud GitHub Repository

New Version Of Clarity Act: Grok (And Me) Review

Hodor — Thu, 14 May 2026 15:48:20 GMT

Caveat: As with all my articles, this does not constitute legal or financial advice. This article was researched with the assistance of Grok (xAI) due to the sheer size of the document being reviewed.

What Is the Clarity Act, and Where Are We?

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 - commonly called the CLARITY Act - is landmark legislation aimed at finally drawing a clear regulatory map for digital assets in the United States.

On May 12, 2026, the Senate Banking Committee released a new, updated 309-page version of the bill, timed ahead of a scheduled markup hearing on May 14, 2026. This Senate version builds on the House-passed H.R. 3633 from July 2025.

General Concerns for All of Crypto

Developer Protections

One of the bill's strongest areas.

Title VI ("Protecting Software Developers and Software Innovation") creates explicit safe harbors from federal and state securities laws for developers and network participants engaged in activities like compiling transactions, running nodes, building and maintaining protocols, or developing user interfaces - as long as they are non-custodial and non-controlling.

Open-source developers who don't hold custody of user funds and can't unilaterally alter a protocol are well-protected.

This might be enough to stop high-caliber developers from relocating (a.k.a. 'brain drain').

Protections for DeFi Participants

Title III dedicates significant space to decentralized finance. The key principle: regulation follows control, not code. Truly decentralized protocols - those where no single operator can censor transactions, alter rules, or hold special privileges - are carved out from most intermediary requirements. Pure liquidity providers and peer-to-peer users are not treated as financial institutions.

Centralized front-ends and platforms that route to DeFi carry more compliance responsibility.

Tax Treatment

The Clarity Act is primarily a market structure bill, not a tax bill. It doesn't directly reform capital gains treatment or provide sweeping DeFi tax clarity. That said, clearer regulatory classification (commodity vs. security) should reduce headaches around reporting and may lay groundwork for better tax legislation down the road.

Authority Between the SEC and Others (Primarily the CFTC)

This is the bill's centerpiece. The SEC's ability to claim "everything is a security" is significantly curtailed. Instead, the bill creates a clear framework: the SEC handles securities-like aspects (primarily fundraising via "ancillary assets"), while the CFTC takes jurisdiction over digital commodities - including spot markets and intermediaries like brokers and exchanges - for mature blockchains.

The two agencies are required to coordinate on joint rules. This SEC-to-CFTC handoff, once a chain qualifies as a "Mature Blockchain System," is one of the most important provisions in the bill.

Concerns Specific to XRP Ledger | Xahau | Evernode

Are validators in these networks protected?

Yes. Section 601 and the DeFi provisions of Title III explicitly protect validators, node operators, and relayers for their core infrastructure activities, provided they operate non-custodially and without unilateral control. The incorporated Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA, Sec. 604) further protects these participants from money transmitter classification at the federal level, with federal law taking precedence over state law where there's a conflict.

For XRPL specifically, the validator ecosystem (the dUNL, amendment voting requiring ~80% support over two weeks) appears well-positioned. Xahau's multi-party governance game and Evernode's distributed host network similarly align with the "no single entity in control" requirement.

Are liquidity providers of AMMs protected?

Yes. LPs interacting with decentralized AMMs - like those on the XRP Ledger or Xahau - are not classified as brokers, intermediaries, or money transmitters, provided the underlying protocol is sufficiently decentralized. Users depositing into decentralized liquidity pools are exercising self-custody, not acting as operators.

Centralized interfaces or pools with special administrative privileges could face different treatment, but pure LP activity on a decentralized protocol is protected.

Are developers of non-custodial wallets protected?

Yes, explicitly. Section 601's safe harbor covers developing, publishing, and maintaining self-custody tools, non-custodial wallets, key management systems, and user interfaces that read and display blockchain data. The BRCA reinforces this by protecting non-controlling developers from money transmitter liabilities federally.

This is good news for wallets like Xaman and similar open-source tools across these ecosystems, as long as they don't take custody of user funds.

Are there hard-and-fast objective criteria for deciding what chain is a "true" crypto chain versus a security?

There are statutory criteria, but not purely mechanical ones. The bill defines a "Mature Blockchain System" as a blockchain plus its related digital commodity that is not controlled by any person or group of persons under common control. Supporting factors include functional operation, open-source code, transparent pre-established rules, and broad distribution of tokens and voting power - with commonly referenced benchmarks around no single party holding ≥20% of supply or voting power.

Certification is available: issuers, affiliates, or decentralized governance systems can file a certification with the SEC, which then has a limited window (approximately 60 days) to review or rebut it. Transition safe harbors of up to four years provide runway for qualifying projects.

Quick assessments for each chain:

XRP Ledger / XRP: Strongly positioned. Long operational history, increasing validator diversity (~150 active validators), the 2023 Ripple court ruling on secondary sales, and an escrow structure for XRP that is transparent and non-discretionary all work in its favor. Ripple's reduced day-to-day influence, combined with ongoing community decentralization efforts, strengthens the case further.

Xahau / XAH: Well-positioned. Xahau's Governance Game, which distributes decision-making across community seats, exchanges, developers, and infrastructure providers, demonstrates the kind of multi-stakeholder control structure the bill is looking for. No single entity appears to control >20% of the network long-term, and the chain is operationally independent from Ripple.

Evernode / EVR: Solid position. Evernode operates as a decentralized hosting network with its digital asset issued on Xahau, with a fixed max supply (~72.25M EVR), programmatic distribution of rewards over ~118 years via hooks, and a permissionless host model. Its distributed operator base and governance through hosting and membership NFTs reflect the decentralization ethos the bill rewards.

Could the SEC Still Be Weaponized?

This is the hardest question — and the most important one for long-term holders to think about.

The honest answer: yes, partially - but the risk is reduced compared to today.

The bill's "Mature Blockchain System" framework is far more objective and predictable than the old Howey test. Statutory guardrails, certification timelines, and the shift of mature-chain oversight to the CFTC all act as common-sense constraints. Courts can review arbitrary certification denials. Prior court rulings (like the 2023 Ripple decision) provide additional safe harbor for XRP.

That said, any future SEC leadership hostile to crypto could still use available discretion: issuing aggressive rulemaking interpretations of "control," slow-walking certification reviews, or choosing what to rebut and when. The facts-and-circumstances nature of the "control" test will require agency rulemaking to flesh out - and rulemakings can reflect the priorities of whoever is in power.

The structural safeguards - the CFTC handoff, judicial review, bipartisan bill support, and strong industry lobbying - make wholesale weaponization much harder than it was under pure enforcement-by-litigation. But perfect protection through legislation alone doesn't exist. The best defenses for these communities remain continued decentralization and political engagement.

Would the XRP Ledger, Xahau, and Evernode Be Considered "Mature"?

Based on the current bill framework: very likely yes, for all three - though final determinations depends on rulemaking and SEC review.

All three ecosystems were designed with decentralization as a core principle. Governance is distributed, token supply is broadly allocated or programmatically distributed, validator/node diversity is meaningful, and source code is open. The certification pathway exists and is intended to be navigable for projects exactly like these.

The biggest risks are not structural flaws but implementation details: how exactly the SEC interprets "common control" via rulemaking, and whether any entity's historical or ongoing holdings attract scrutiny. For XRPL, Ripple's escrow holdings are the most frequently cited concern, but the structured, transparent, and non-discretionary nature of those releases has generally been viewed favorably. For Xahau and Evernode, the newer vintage means less precedent, but the design choices are well-aligned with the bill's framework.

Next Steps

Here's where the Clarity Act stands procedurally and what to watch:

Senate Banking Committee Markup - Scheduled for May 14, 2026. This is where committee members debate, amend, and vote on the bill. With 100+ amendments filed, the outcome could still shift the text.
Full Senate Vote - If the bill clears committee, it moves to the Senate floor, where it will likely need 60 votes to advance (overcoming a filibuster). This requires meaningful bipartisan support, which the bill currently appears to have in principle.
House-Senate Reconciliation - The Senate version must be reconciled with the House-passed H.R. 3633. Differences will be negotiated, potentially through a conference committee.
Presidential Signature - The reconciled bill then goes to the President. As of this writing, the current administration is generally supportive of crypto-friendly legislation.

Realistic timeline: If markup goes smoothly and Senate leadership prioritizes floor time, a final bill could reach the President by late 2026, though delays are common with complex financial legislation. Optimists point to bipartisan momentum; pessimists note that stablecoin provisions and banking industry influence remain friction points.

Sources

Full Clarity Act Bill Text (Senate May 2026 Draft, PDF)
https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/ehf26374.pdf

Section-by-Section Summary (Senate Banking Committee, PDF)
https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/section-by-section.pdf

Senate Banking Committee — Clarity Act Resources
https://www.banking.senate.gov

House-Passed H.R. 3633 — Congress.gov
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3633

Congress.gov — Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (Tracking)
https://www.congress.gov

SEC.gov — Digital Assets Regulatory Resources
https://www.sec.gov/digital-assets

CFTC.gov — Digital Asset Oversight
https://www.cftc.gov/digitalassets

Blockchain Association — Clarity Act Analysis
https://theblockchainassociation.org

Ripple / XRPL.org — Decentralization and Regulatory Resources
https://xrpl.org

Evernode Official Documentation and Resources
https://evernode.org

Stablecoins Will Destroy Trad-Fi

Hodor — Tue, 12 May 2026 19:22:29 GMT

Traditional finance had a good run.

Like the advent of Internet-based banking, a new technological marvel is waiting in the wings as an inevitable disrupter. And it's not something flashy like 'artificial intelligence'; it's the simple concept of stablecoins.

Stablecoins Unlock Micropayments

When was the last time you paid someone $0.003 for something?

Answer: You haven't.

It's not your fault ... you can't. Traditional payment rails - ACH, SWIFT, Visa - carry transaction costs that make micropayments economically unfeasible. Sending ten cents through a bank costs more than ten cents to process.

Stablecoins eliminate that constraint. On modern crypto networks, very small payments are technically and economically rational. This opens entire categories of commerce that cannot exist in traditional finance:

pay-per-article journalism
per-second streaming royalties
machine-to-machine payments in the IoT economy
real-time freelancer compensation
AI subscription credits

When the unit of value can be as small as the transaction itself, entirely new business models emerge. And trad-fi's existing cost structure can't support it.

Crypto Rails Are Dirt Cheap - And Nobody Owns Them

We all pay for Visa's network.

You do. Merchants do. Everyone does - through interchange fees, processing fees, and currency conversion markups that take away material amounts of each payment.

Crypto infrastructure is financed differently. Layer-1 protocols like Xahau and Solana fund their networks through validator incentives baked into the protocol itself. The cost isn't heaped onto a corporation that then multiplies it before charging the consumer. Instead, It's distributed across the network infrastructure providers that are focused on meeting the performance requirements to retain their incentives. Competition between validators drives the cost toward its natural floor.

The result: Transaction fees that are fractions of a cent - for a payment network that is world-wide, 24/7, and permissionless.

No correspondent bank taking a cut
No settlement windows measured in "business days"

Traditional financial infrastructure is not just expensive - it's structurally expensive. That's not a problem that can be fixed with better software; It's a consequence of the business model.

Central Banks Want Stablecoins

Programmable money gives regulators tools they've never had before. And no, I'm not talking about the dystopian concept of a 'central bank digital currency' (CBDC).

Consider fractional reserve banking. Right now, banks are legally required to hold a fraction of deposits as reserves and restrict how much risk they can handle. But enforcement is reactive. Regulators audit after the fact, issue fines after the fact, and intervene - if they're lucky - before a contagion spreads.

With tokenized assets on a public blockchain, the rules can be encoded directly into the money. Reserve requirements don't need to be audited - they can be enforced by smart contracts in real time. Regulatory risk limits are measurable instantly, verifiable by all stakeholders.

Customers Already Know What They Want

People want to be paid immediately for work done.

Gig workers, freelancers, contractors, and traditional employees share a common problem: you complete the work, and then you wait. Two weeks. A month. The money sits somewhere ... earning interest for others.

Stablecoin payments settle in seconds.

Example: A freelancer in Brazil completes a project for a client in London, and the payment arrives as soon as the work is reviewed. In the crypto world, the client can push a button, releasing an escrowed payment of Euros.

This isn't a feature that needs to be sold; it's a feature that sells itself.

Credit Card Processors Know

The headlines were fast and furious throughout the last two years; credit card processors taking the difficult steps to integrate with the new payments rails.

The Future Belongs to Better Technology

Kodak didn't lose to a better film company. Blockbuster didn't lose to a better video store. They lost to technologies that made the old model unnecessary.

Traditional finance is facing the same structural challenge. It's not that stablecoins are a little better at moving money - it's that they're way, way better.

Cheaper rails
Programmable compliance
Instant settlement
Worldwide access
Micropayments

Stablecoins won't destroy traditional finance because they're fashionable. They'll destroy it because they're better.

Sources

https://bitwage.com/en-us/blog/stablecoin-micropayments-unlocking-new-business-models

https://mmc.vc/research/stablecoins-entering-their-untethered-growth-era/

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/banks-in-the-age-of-stablecoins-implications-for-deposits-credit-and-financial-intermediation-20251217.html

Stablecoins: Growth Potential and Impact on Banking
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/ifdp/files/ifdp1334.pdf

https://cryptoslate.com/visa-is-quietly-building-stablecoins-into-mainstream-payment-plumbing-without-you-knowing/

Visa Tests Stablecoin Payouts to Speed Payments for Creators, Gig Workers
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/11/12/visa-tests-stablecoin-payouts-to-speed-payments-for-creators-gig-workers

Xahau Settlement: TerraPay, COOP Bank, & Quantoz

Hodor — Fri, 08 May 2026 14:31:09 GMT

The Inclusive Financial Technologies Foundation (InFTF) has announced a new three-way partnership bringing together global payments infrastructure company TerraPay, the Cooperative Bank of Oromia (Coopbank), and stablecoin provider Quantoz Payments - using the Xahau network as the settlement layer for remittances to Ethiopia.

Quick History

In October of 2024, the Coop Bank of Oromia and the InFTF made headlines. Coop Bank was the first bank in Ethiopia - and arguably in Africa - to launch a blockchain-powered remittance service. The solution ran on the Xahau network and was delivered through a dedicated "Coop Remit" xApp built into the Xaman non-custodial wallet. It allowed members of the Ethiopian diaspora - many working in Europe, the Middle East, and the U.S. - to send funds home in a matter of seconds, at a fraction of traditional costs.

The xApp was live, with real money.

Xahau's inline smart contract functionality (called "hooks") enabled each payment to be automatically screened for compliance, making the process both fast and regulatory-friendly. The InFTF brought the technical expertise to wire it all together, while Coop Bank - with over 13 million account holders and 760+ branches - provided the on-the-ground banking reach.

That project is now being retired.

The New Deal

The new arrangement scales the original concept to a larger size.

TerraPay, a world-wide, (B2B) cross-border payments network with established relationships across the remittance industry, now has an additional EURO-to-ETB rail for money transmission. While they do not deal with end-users directly, they provide the infrastructure that is used by others to send money into Ethiopia.

Their proprietary network of clients then, theoretically, take over the role that the Coop Remit xApp previously played for end-users.

This means Ethiopian families abroad can now access the service through TerraPay's broader network of various money transmitter partners, rather than a niche wallet app.

Quantoz Payments handles the liquidity and stablecoin conversion, providing a regulated digital Euro settlement infrastructure that bridges the gap between the sending currency and the local Ethiopian Birr (ETB). Coopbank then completes the "last mile" - routing the converted funds to the correct destination bank account across Ethiopia, drawing on its nationwide branch network.

The InFTF continues to play a coordinating role, having facilitated the Xahau integration points.

Benefits

The shift from (one) wallet-based xApp to (potentially) many remittance providers is a meaningful upgrade for everyone involved. For end-users, it means accessing Ethiopia-bound transfers through existing, familiar, widely-available platforms - rather than needing to download a specific wallet and learn its interface. For TerraPay and Coopbank, it's a chance to deepen their corporate footprints in one of Africa's fastest-growing remittance markets, where annual inflows exceed $5 billion USD.

Easier for the sender
Familiar interface(s)
Better reach for the banks
More volume flowing through the Xahau network

How Xahau Is Used

The exact technical mechanics are kept somewhat close to the chest - the parties involved understandably don't want to hand competitors a blueprint. What the announcement does confirm, though, is that Xahau is the settlement layer, and that Quantoz is the named stablecoin provider for the Euro leg of the transaction.

This is notable because Quantoz had already signaled its intentions for Xahau in November of last year:

The stablecoin groundwork was laid ahead of time.

The Real Deal

This is not a 'coming soon' type of item.

It's a live, operational expansion of a service that was already working. This new deal upgrades it - larger partner, broader user base, more settlement volume.

Xahau is well-suited to this kind of use case.

Its hooks architecture is easily understood, and allows smart contracts to trigger inline with each payment, meaning compliance checks can happen automatically, attached to each account. That's a significant advantage in regulated financial services.

And ... with the AMM amendment on the horizon, Xahau's toolset for powering similar projects is only going to grow.

The End-User Experience

The original Coop Remit xApp put simplicity first - a streamlined way for end-users to send money home without navigating complex banking systems. The new TerraPay arrangement has the potential to make that experience even smoother, reaching senders through a variety of platforms that their money transmission partners already have in place.

For the Xahau community - developers, speculators, and crypto fans - this is the kind of real-world traction the ecosystem has been building toward. Interested parties will be watching closely to see how far this model can scale. X>

Sources

Coopbank official announcement: https://coopbankoromia.com.et/coopbank-and-terrapay-launch-blockchain-based-remittance-settlement-to-enhance-cross-border-transfers/

TerraPay press release: https://www.terrapay.com/media/terrapay-launches-cross-border-blockchain-remittances-to-ethiopia/

InFTF news: https://inftf.org/news/blockchain-settlement-euro-remittances-ethiopia/

https://x.com/IncFinTech/status/2051922102895198602?s=20

Xahau Network announcement: https://x.com/XahauNetwork/status/2051927674365300854?s=20

https://inftf.org/

https://coopbankoromia.com.et/

https://xahau.network/roadmap/

https://x.com/Quantoz/status/1986366890906694090?s=20

https://www.quantoz.com/

https://www.terrapay.com/

What Is The "Finternet"?

Hodor — Mon, 04 May 2026 15:12:31 GMT

The term arises from a BIS (Bank for International Settlements) working paper authored by Agustín Carstens and Nandan Nilekani.

The paper defines the term 'Finternet' as:

"... multiple financial ecosystems interconnected with each other, much like the internet, designed to empower individuals and businesses by placing them at the centre of their financial lives.

It advocates for a user-centric approach that lowers barriers between financial services and systems, thus promoting access for all. The envisioned system leverages innovative technologies such as tokenisation and unified ledgers, underpinned by a robust economic and regulatory framework, to dramatically expand the range and quality of financial services.

This integration aims to foster greater participation, offer more personalised services and improve speed and reliability, all while reducing costs for end users. Most of the technology needed to achieve this vision exists and is fast improving, driven by efforts around the world."

The authors of the paper do not have a monopoly on the term's definition, but what they've written here seems to get at the heart of the concept for many people - including me.

How It All Fits Together

In contrast, traditional finance ("trad-fi") places the authority and control of the old financial system in the hands of intermediary institutions, like banks and brokers.

The 'Finternet' goes in the opposite direction, and places the control back in the hands of the people who have a financial stake in crypto networks, along with holding tokenized fiat currencies - a.k.a. 'stablecoins' and real-world assets (RWAs).

It changes the paradigm through tokenization, which is a further step down the road of dematerialization, a controversial development where paper-based ownership like stock certificates were replaced with electronic representations at third parties.

The danger of course, to the consumer, from (traditional) dematerialization, is that their interest in these electronic representations has been methodically removed to that of a 'creditor' ... most people find this concept repugnant, or don't even really understand the danger, until it presents itself in the form of a bankruptcy ... like what happened to Bear Stearns during the 2008 financial crisis.

While the sharks on Wall Street like the idea of 'creditor layers', most ordinary people do not. Ordinary people want to truly 'own' what they buy, without the risk that their ownership rights can be removed or diminished by unknown third parties as part of an invisible collateral agreement.

For more information about the dangers of traditional finance's definition of dematerialization, I recommend people watch a documentary called 'The Great Taking', which is an extended interview with David Webb, a former Wall Street investment banker:

[YouTube id="dk3AVceraTI"]

The 'Finternet' has the potential to restore property rights to their intuitive state before dematerialization even occurred; it's difficult to argue against a consumer's property rights if they can simply point to a decentralized source of information as proof of their interests ... a.k.a. a 'blockchain' (decentralized ledger).

Three Networks

My own speculative crypto holdings reflect my beliefs about where I'd like to see the future go, in terms of financial self-sovereignty. The three networks that I believe can work together to address any conceivable use case for cryptocurrency, are the XRP Ledger, Xahau, and Evernode.

The three networks have one thing in common: they use the agreement protocols to achieve transaction consensus and finality, instead of 'proof of work' or 'proof of stake'. This means that they do not depend on massive amounts of electricity to verify transactions, like the "Bitcoin" series of networks - BTC, BCH, and BSV.

The XRP Ledger is the first mover of agreement protocols, and has proven the concept by running successfully for well over a decade, and houses billions of dollars of financial value, including material levels of tokenized, real-world assets (RWAs).

The Xahau network is essentially the same code as the XRP Ledger, with similar capabilities, but with one major difference; this 'child' network of the XRP Ledger supports smart contracts associated with individual accounts. The smart contracts are known as 'hooks'.

The Evernode network is a decentralized infrastructure & smart contract network (DePIN), that removes the dangerous dependency on centralized infrastructure providers, like Amazon Web Services. In heated political climates, these third parties cave quickly to popular demands at the expense of individual freedom. Decentralized infrastructure raises the level of censorship-resistance for applications.

Finternet Requirements

It's not enough for crypto to offer novel proofs-of-concept.

Consumers demand the same level of service and protection for their interests that traditional finance currently provides. Ideally, the 'working' version of the finternet will provide banking services so that people can pay their day-to-day bills with the money that they earn.

In addition, people expect their finances to be private from anybody other than those with a legal interest, such as the government, or judicial representatives in various countries.

They also prefer to have an option for absolute control over their property, to mirror what physical coinage provides.

Can the Finternet meet these requirements, which are currently fulfilled by traditional finance?

"How" Is The Question

So how would all the cryptographic machinery work together? Consider a few potential ideas.

Zero-knowledge proofs ("ZKP") have the potential to protect the privacy of people, even as they use public ledgers.
Black lists and white lists have the potential to enforce (existing) compliance requirements, such as KYC & AML.
Decentralized infrastructure has the potential to address nation-state independence concerns between countries about hosting metadata frameworks for these new interconnected ledgers.

Regardless of what ideas work, many times, what develops is a result of un-anticipated adoption of new technology in an asymmetric fashion.

My Take

Like many people that have been a part of the crypto revolution from the early years, I prefer technology that allows me to control my own property.

In the crypto world, this means only trusting yourself to manage your cryptocurrency; this desire is met through non-custodial wallets, such as the Xaman wallet.

If it were available - and possible - I'd like to store my other ownership proofs on-chain as well. I'd also like to handle my own government-issued identification in a secure manner, and share different levels of this information, as required by third parties.

The Finternet Is What We Make It

If we all collaborate to provide our opinion on the new financial system, the Finternet can take the shape of whatever we wish it to take.

Future generations deserve financial systems that empower and uplift them; if we contribute to building and using the first versions of these systems, we can create brilliant and unlimited possibilities, rather than dependence on weak, potentially-corrupt intermediaries.

The new Finternet will be what we decide.

Sources:

https://www.bis.org/publ/work1178.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_Stearns

"The Great Taking" via YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk3AVceraTI

https://csrc.nist.gov/csrc/media/presentations/2024/wpec2024-3b1/images-media/wpec2024-3b1-slides-akira-tjerand--ZKP-Overview.pdf

https://github.com/Xahau/Whitepaper (whitelists)

https://xumm.app/?lang=en

https://xrpl.org/

https://www.evernode.org/

https://xahau.org/

Evernode (EVR) Tokenomics

Hodor — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 20:24:01 GMT

Evernode is a decentralized infrastructure ("DePIN") network that houses its governance and token on the Xahau network.

Evernode's purpose: to enable anyone to run smart contracts & applications in a fully decentralized way, without relying on a central company or point of weakness. Instead of servers in a data center, Evernode runs on a cross-border network of independent host computers that earn its native token, EVR (also called “Evers”), in exchange for providing computing power.

What makes Evernode interesting from a speculator's perspective is not just what the network does, but how its token supply is structured. The designers built a tokenomics model - a set of rules governing how tokens are created, distributed, and earned - that is creative ... and deflationary.

This article reveals that model.

Epochs, Halving, and Automated Rewards

The core of Evernode’s tokenomics is a system called “epochs.” Think of it like Bitcoin’s halving schedule, but applied to infrastructure rewards rather than mining.

Here is how it works.

Every hour, the Evernode network triggers what it calls a “moment” ... a heartbeat during which eligible host computers submit proof that they are online and running properly. The network then distributes a pool of Evers proportionally among all active, reputable hosts. There is no committee deciding who gets paid. The entire process runs automatically through “hooks” - lightweight smart contracts attached to accounts on the Xahau network.

Each epoch contains exactly 5,160,960 EVR set aside for host rewards. Once that amount has been fully distributed, the epoch ends and a new one begins ... but with the hourly reward rate cut in half. This halving mechanic has a key implication: as each epoch passes, Evers become harder and slower to earn.

Early hosts captured the highest rewards; later hosts operate with increasing scarcity.

The schedule of epochs looks like this:

Epoch boundaries are triggered automatically when the previous epoch's full allocation of 5,160,960 EVR has been paid out.

Because each epoch's hourly payout rate is fixed by the protocol, the duration of each epoch is actually highly predictable ... you can calculate it years in advance with simple division. Epoch 1 pays out at the highest rate; Epoch 2 pays out at exactly half that rate and therefore takes roughly twice as long to exhaust; Epoch 3 takes twice as long again; and so on.

The only real-world variable is whether individual hosts occasionally go offline or fail their hourly heartbeat check, which can slow the drain on the pot very slightly. In practice this is a minor edge effect. The overall schedule - stretching 118 years - is baked into the protocol math from day one.

Who Got What: The Initial Distribution

Here is a timeline of the key events and how the initial supply was distributed.

September 2023: The Snapshot

On September 1st, 2023, a snapshot was taken of every XRP Ledger account holding XRP. This snapshot - recorded at Ledger #82237135 - determined which XRP holders would be eligible for the upcoming airdrop.

Holders were capped at 50,000 XRP per account for eligibility purposes; larger holders had to split across multiple accounts to fully participate.

December 2023: Network Launch and Airdrop

Evernode launched on December 18, 2023, on the Xahau network. On launch day, all 72,253,440 EVR were pre-minted in a single transaction by the official issuer address (rEvernodee8dJLaFsujS6q1EiXvZYmHXr8). That issuer address was then “blackholed” - permanently disabled so that no one, including the founders, can ever create additional EVR.

Simultaneously, 20,643,840 EVR (about 28% of the total) were distributed in a structured airdrop:

The airdrop to XRP holders was proportional to the qualifying XRP balance each participant held at the time of the September snapshot.

Over 38,000 wallet addresses registered.

January 2024: Rewards Begin

Host rewards kicked off on January 15, 2024, marking the start of Epoch 1. The 51.6 million EVR allocated to the host reward pool are held inside the Evernode Heartbeat Hook - a smart contract that cannot be tampered with. Hosts earn from this pool exclusively through the automated heartbeat process.

Now: Epoch 5

According to the XRPLWin Evernode Dashboard, the network is currently operating in Epoch 5.

To put that in perspective: Epoch 1 lasted only about six weeks (from mid-January to late February 2024). Epoch 2 ran for roughly twelve weeks. Each subsequent epoch doubles in length, because the reward rate halves while the total EVR to be distributed per epoch stays the same.

Epoch 5 is estimated to run for approximately 96 weeks - nearly two years. That pace of distribution will continue to slow ... dramatically ... through the later epochs, with Epoch 10 projected to last roughly 59 years! 😵

This is by design.

The slow, predictable release of tokens creates a long-tail incentive structure that is meant to attract and retain quality infrastructure providers over decades, not just months.

Max Supply: A Number That Cannot Change

The total maximum supply of EVR is 72,253,440 - and that number is genuinely fixed. Unlike many cryptocurrency projects where “max supply” is a stated intention that can be overridden by a governance vote or a protocol upgrade, Evernode’s supply cap is enforced by the fact that the issuer account has been permanently blackholed.

It is not possible to mint a single additional EVR.

Of that 72.25 million:

About 28% (20.6 million EVR) was distributed in the initial airdrop to founders, labs, beta testers, and XRP holders.
About 72% (51.6 million EVR) funded the host reward pool and is being distributed across 10 epochs over an estimated 118 years.

At the current rate of distribution - we are in Epoch 5 with approximately 36 million EVR now in circulation - more than a century of scheduled distribution remains.

Distribution So Far: The Rich List

The EVR rich list is an interesting data point, but it requires some context: the rich list currently reflects holdings on the Xahau network only.

Since EVR also trades on the native XRP Ledger DEX, and a small number of centralized exchanges, a significant portion of circulating supply sits in exchange wallets or with traders who hold their EVR as Gatehub IOUs on the XRP Ledger.

This means the top-wallet concentrations visible on the rich list are somewhat inflated in appearance. As the ecosystem matures and more wallets convert their IOU balances to Xahau, the distribution picture will naturally become more granular.

There are a total of ~ 36,000 wallets containing EVR on the Xahau network alone; counting the XRP Ledger wallets with EVR tokens may significantly expand that number. It's a metric on par with some layer one chains.

Intentional Scarcity

The designers of Evernode built increasing scarcity directly into the system - and tied it deliberately to infrastructure quality.

Here is the logic: as EVR becomes scarcer and more valuable, the cost of registering as a host (currently a 500 EVR deposit) rises in real terms. That rising barrier naturally filters out low-quality or unreliable hosts over time. Only operators who are serious about providing good, consistent computing resources will find it profitable to participate.

The result, in theory, leads to an iterative loop: higher EVR value → higher quality hosts → better network performance → greater demand for hosting slots → further upward pressure on EVR. The tokenomics are not just about speculative value; they are meant to directly incentivize the quality of the infrastructure underpinning the network.

While this does not guarantee any specific price of EVR, it's a fascinating, intentionally-designed component of the overall network economics.

How EVR Supply Compares to XRPL and Xahau

Although EVR lives among complimentary agreement protocol networks, its supply is more akin to the early Bitcoin projects:

That scarcity, combined with the slow release schedule across 118 years, means there is no imminent supply shock from unlocking events or large new issuances. The emission schedule is known, deterministic, and fully visible on-chain.

More Than Fascination

Evernode’s tokenomics stand out for multiple reasons:

The supply is permanently capped and immutably enforced.
Distribution is fully automated by on-chain smart contracts, with no human discretion in the process.
The halving schedule creates predictable, ever-increasing scarcity designed to reward long-term participants over short-term speculators.
The link between EVR value and infrastructure quality gives the token genuine utility beyond speculation.

We are currently in Epoch 5 - early enough that the most dramatic halvings lie ahead, but late enough that the system has already demonstrated it works as designed. For those watching the XRPL ecosystem and the broader decentralized infrastructure space, EVR’s tokenomics are worth understanding carefully. The 118-year emission clock has only just started ticking. E>

Sources:

https://xahauexplorer.com/en/distribution

https://www.evernode.org/evers

https://www.evernode.org/news-listing/xrp-holder-airdrop-process

https://uphold.com/en-us/prices/crypto/evernode-evr

https://cryptopotato.com/airdrop-update-for-ripple-xrp-holders-evernode-details-reviewed/

https://xahau.xrplwin.com/evernode

Data for Richlist Graphic from @XRPLWin

Marine them for rich list from https://x.com/XRPBags

https://medium.com/@ilaNihas/evernode-become-a-pioneering-host-9ef88a0756d4

https://www.evernode.org/hosts

"The Village Politicians" (1819) by American artist John Lewis Krimmel

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/evernode

https://coinmarketcap.com/

HookState Data Viewer: Browse On-Chain State, Build Projections & Manifest

XRPLWin — Sun, 26 Apr 2026 08:02:36 GMT

Part two of our HookState series. In part one we covered why raw HookState bytes are hard to read and how the Hook State Converter lets you decode them into a typed ABI schema. This article picks up where that one ended: what you do with that schema once you have it.

From a JSON segment to something useful

At the end of part one, you had a JSON ABI definition — a typed map of your HookState key and value bytes. The article closed with a promise: a dedicated projection builder UI exists that uses that schema to automatically decode HookState entries on the explorer.

It does three things. It lets you browse any hook's raw on-chain state by namespace. It lets you build projections — readable, filterable tables that decode state entries according to your ABI. And it lets you publish a hook manifest, so those projections are available to everyone visiting your hook on the explorer, permanently, without anyone needing to convert themselves.

Browsing namespaces

Every Xahau account can have multiple hooks installed, and each hook stores state under its own namespace — a 32-byte identifier derived from the hook hash. The Data Viewer exposes this structure directly.

Open the tool and navigate to any account. The left panel lists all namespaces active on that account, each showing how many total state entries it contains. Clicking a namespace loads its content into the main panel as a set of tabs.

If a manifest has already been published for that hook, the namespace label resolves from a raw hash to a human-readable hook name, and the hook's projections appear as named tabs alongside the raw view. If no manifest exists yet, the namespace shows as a truncated hash and only the raw tab is available — which is your cue to build one.

A namespace can contain state from more than one hook. In that case each hook gets its own tab group within the namespace, with its projections listed beneath it in the sidebar.

All states (raw)

The first tab in every namespace is All states (raw). This is the unfiltered view of everything stored in the namespace, with no decoding applied.

The table shows four columns: HookStateKey, HookStateData, Flags, and OwnerNode — exactly as they exist on the ledger. Keys and values are displayed as full hex strings. This is the ground truth view: no interpretation, no type assumptions, nothing inferred.

It's most useful when you're first exploring an unfamiliar hook and want to see the raw shape of its state before building any projections, when you suspect a projection is missing entries and want to verify against the full set, or when you're debugging a key encoding issue and need to compare raw bytes directly.

The raw table is fully searchable, sortable, and exports to CSV and Excel — so you can pull the complete state of any namespace into a spreadsheet for offline analysis without writing a single API call.

Hooks and their projections

Below the raw tab, each hook installed in the namespace gets its own section. If a manifest exists for the hook, its name appears as the tab label and its projections are listed beneath it in the sidebar — each one a named, filtered view into a subset of that hook's state entries.

The Evernode Governor Hook, for instance, carries over 25,000 state entries across projections ranging from single-entry config values like Issuer Address and Mint Limit, to large paginated sets like Host Address (12,029 entries) and Token Id (12,086 entries). All decoded, all browsable, all exportable — because a manifest exists for it. Without the manifest, you'd be looking at 25,000 rows of raw hex.

The projection

A projection is a named view over a subset of a hook's HookState entries. It defines how to decode the key bytes and the value bytes into typed columns, applies optional filters to scope which entries appear, and gives each column a human-readable label.

You can think of it as a schema-driven query: show me all HookState entries where the key matches this pattern, decode them as these types, and display the result as a table.

One important detail: a projection doesn't claim exclusive ownership of the HookState entries it targets. The same state entry can appear in multiple projections simultaneously, and this is intentional. A hook might expose one projection showing all fields of a record for technical auditing, and a second projection scoped to the same entries presenting only the fields relevant to a specific integration — different column selections, different filters, different renderers, same underlying state. This is how a single hook with a complex storage schema can surface multiple clean, purpose-built views without duplicating any data on-chain.

Each hook manifest can contain as many projections as needed, and several of them can deliberately overlap on shared state keys by design.

Building a projection

To create a projection, click Add projection in the Data Viewer. This opens the Edit Projection modal.

At the top you select which hook this projection belongs to and give it a name and optional description.

The modal has four tabs: HookStateKey, HookStateData, Projection preview, and ABI.

Defining the key (HookStateKey tab)

The HookState key bytes appear as a row of clickable hex buttons. You select a span of bytes by clicking — selecting byte N means you've selected bytes 1 through N as a single segment. As you do, the UI immediately shows how many state entries in the namespace match that byte pattern so far. This live match count updates in real time as you narrow the key definition, giving you instant feedback on whether your filter is scoping entries correctly before you've committed to anything.

Once you've selected a span, the type picker appears showing every ABI type that fits that exact byte length. The Suggest button runs the same autoscan as the Hook State Converter — it scans across all supported types simultaneously and surfaces the most plausible matches with decoded values shown inline.

After selecting a type, a segment options panel appears. When you have unapplied changes the panel is highlighted with an orange border and a "You have unapplied changes" warning — a useful guardrail against navigating away mid-edit without realising you haven't committed a segment:

Column title — the label shown in the projection table header.

Description — optional documentation for the field.

Exclude from view — mark this segment as hidden. Useful for padding bytes, fixed sentinel values, or type prefix bytes you're using only for filtering.

Filtering rule — define a literal term or pattern (with encoding: ASCII, hex, etc.) that this segment must match for an entry to appear in the projection. A single type-byte filter is often all it takes to scope a projection from thousands of total namespace entries down to precisely the records you want.

Render as — controls display format for timestamps, amounts, account IDs, and other types with multiple meaningful representations.

Hit Apply to lock-in the segment.

Defining the value (HookStateData tab)

The value bytes follow exactly the same flow. Select a span, pick a type, configure segment options, apply. Repeat until all bytes are accounted for and the tab is marked Solved.

To give a sense of scale: the Host Address projection in the Evernode Governor manifest decodes 22 typed fields from each entry's raw value bytes — registration ledger, fee, instance counts, heartbeat index, version, timestamps, reputation, lease amount, and more. All of it packed into raw bytes on-chain; all of it readable in the projection table.

Saving and publishing

Once both tabs are Solved, hit Update to save the projection locally. The projection now appears in the sidebar and in the main hook view — but it is not yet live. The main hook view shows a Publish changes button that becomes active whenever you have locally saved projections that haven't been pushed to the manifest yet. This two-step flow lets you build and iterate on multiple projections before making any of them public.

Publishing a hook manifest

A manifest is the container that holds all your projections plus metadata about the hook itself. Publishing one makes everything visible to everyone — not just to you in the Data Viewer, but to anyone who navigates to that hook anywhere on the explorer.

Click on green "Publish changes" buttom to make your manifest version live. In next step you will have change to idenfity hook, give it name, icon, description...

Hook name — the display name that replaces the raw namespace hash across the explorer.
Hook icon — a square image, minimum 256×256px, provided as a URL or direct file upload.
Short description — one or two sentences shown in the manifest header.
Readme — a full markdown field rendered in the About tab on the hook's manifest page. Use it for documentation, storage schema explanation, version history, or anything useful to auditors and integrators coming to the hook cold.
Repository URL — renders as a "Source code" link directly on the hook page.
License — a standard identifier (MIT, GPL-3.0, Apache-2.0) or leave blank for unlicensed.
Publishers — one or more entries, each with a type (Individual or Organization), a name, and an optional URL. Multiple publishers can be added to the same manifest. Publishers are displayed in the manifest header and their combined account weight determines how this version is ranked against others.
ABI — the aggregate JSON of all your projection definitions, auto-populated from your saved projections. A "View/Edit JSON manifest ABI (advanced)" button opens a full editor for direct manipulation when needed.

Hit Publish. The manifest is stored and associated with the hook hash. From this point on, anyone visiting that hook on xahau.xrplwin.com sees the decoded namespace name, the projections as tabs, and the full manifest metadata.

Community manifests and version weight

Anyone with an account on XPLWin can publish a manifest for any hook — not just the hook author. If a hook is deployed and widely used but the author hasn't published a manifest, a community member, an auditor, or an integration builder can step in and create one.

This openness creates an obvious question: if multiple people publish manifests for the same hook, which version does the explorer show by default?

The answer is account weight. Each website account carries a weight value, and when multiple manifest versions exist for the same hook, the explorer sorts them by the combined weight of their publishers. The highest-weight version is shown as the default. Users can switch between available versions at any time using the version selector on the hook page — so no version is hidden, just ranked.

The Evernode Governor Hook is a practical example: built and deployed by Evernode Labs, manifest created and published by XRPLWin. The "Manifest by xrplwin" badge on the hook page reflects this — hook author and manifest author are different entities, and the system handles that cleanly.

In practice this means the hook author, or an established community member with a higher-weight account, will naturally surface at the top. But a lower-weight account can still contribute a manifest — their version remains accessible and switchable. The system accommodates multiple valid interpretations of the same hook's storage schema coexisting without conflict.

The full loop

Part one covered the decoding problem and the Converter that solves it for a single hex string. This article covers what comes after.

The intended flow is:

Write and deploy your hook
Grab a sample HookState key + value from the explorer or your test environment
Run it through the Hook State Converter to produce typed ABI segments
Open the HookState Data Viewer, navigate to your hook's namespace, and build projections — watching the live match count confirm your key patterns as you go
Save projections locally, verify in the Projection preview tab, then hit Publish changes
Fill in the manifest metadata and publish — or build on a community-contributed version if one already exists
Anyone visiting your hook on the explorer now sees decoded, human-readable state — not raw hex

For a hook storing configuration values across dozens of keys, a single afternoon with these two tools produces a manifest that makes it permanently auditable. For something at the scale of Evernode's Governor Hook — 25,000+ entries, community-maintained manifest — it's the clearest demonstration of what this system is designed to enable.

See it in action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86IRZNfNH8

XRPLWin is a explorer for XRPL and Xahau. We build tools for the Xahau ecosystem.

New Features: Xahau Roadmap

Hodor — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 14:03:15 GMT

Team Xahau recently updated its roadmap covering Q2 2026 through Q3 2027.

Among the milestones listed are eight new protocol features - each one deliberate, targeted, and consistent with the network's philosophy of minimal but meaningful change in the base protocol.

Here's a breakdown.

Random Number Generator

Currently in beta development, the native on-ledger Random Number Generator (RNG) brings verifiable randomness directly to hooks and applications - without relying on any off-chain oracle or third-party source.

For a crypto network, trustworthy randomness is harder to achieve than it sounds, and having it available as a native primitive opens the door to fairer lotteries, gaming mechanics, sampling logic, and any application where unpredictability needs to be provable.

FeatureExport

FeatureExport is one of the more significant additions on the list.

It allows a Xahau user or hook to request that the Xahau UNL (Unique Node List) co-sign a transaction destined for the XRP Ledger (XRPL) - structured as an ordinary transaction with a MultiSign block, where each UNL member contributes a signature.

In practical terms, this means Xahau Hooks can effectively control XRPL accounts and issue or manage assets directly on the XRPL. It's orchestration between the two networks, enabling cross-chain logic to be written and executed from Xahau.

AMM — Automated Market Maker

Already merged into the xahaud development branch and awaiting an amendment vote, the AMM brings an Automated Market Maker (AMM) primitive to the Xahau DEX. This provides a foundational building block for any serious DeFi activity on the network.

Rather than depending solely on order books, users and hooks will be able to interact with liquidity pools directly at the protocol level.

An AMM, when provided with liquidity, usually narrows the spreads between trades and allows for higher-frequency trading among token and native asset pairings.

A highly-beneficial addition for things like stablecoins.

PriceOracle

Also merged and awaiting the amendment vote, PriceOracle delivers a native on-ledger price feed - asset prices available to DeFi applications, the AMM (in theory), and hooks.

Reliable price data at the protocol level removes a significant dependency on external feeds, reducing both complexity and attack surface for any application that needs to know what an asset is worth.

IOURewardClaim

IOURewardClaim extends the RewardClaim feature by making a version of this available to user-created tokens.

This update opens that same capability to IOU token holders - letting projects use hooks to distribute token-based rewards according to a user's holdings.

It's a practical tool for any project building loyalty programs, yield on a stablecoin, or even community incentive structures on Xahau.

NamedHook

Currently in development for Q3–Q4 2026, NamedHook allows developers to assign human-readable names to individual hooks.

Within a single transaction type, multiple hooks can be attached to an account. Without names, distinguishing and invoking specific hooks is cumbersome. With this feature, different hooks can be cleanly identified and called - making more complex, multi-hook account logic far more manageable.

JSHooks

Slated across Q2–Q4 2026, JSHooks introduces a JavaScript runtime for writing hooks - sitting alongside the existing WebAssembly runtime. Until now, developers needed to work in C/C++ compiled to WebAssembly to build hooks.

JavaScript support significantly extends the developer base, making Xahau's smart-contract layer accessible to a much wider pool of builders.

Audits & Optimization

The final item is ongoing rather than a one-time release: continuous security audits and performance work across the protocol, hooks, and tooling.

Regular audits and incremental optimisations are what keep the layer-one foundation trustworthy as the applications above it grow.

The Bigger Picture

Eight new features means eight new tools to do more complex projects. It opens the doors to dozens (or more) of new use cases that can now be coded with ease.

Taken together, these eight features reflect a coherent strategy:

The RNG, PriceOracle, and AMM lay infrastructure for serious DeFi like stablecoins.
FeatureExport extends Xahau's reach into the broader XRPL ecosystem.
IOURewardClaim and NamedHook deepen the utility of hooks for developers and projects already building.
JSHooks expands who can build. And the ongoing audit program keeps all of it secure and dependable.

Xahau's roadmap is strategic by design ... the network team describes protocol changes as "few and deliberate." These eight additions are precisely that: scoped, purposeful, and pointed toward real-world use.
X>

Sources:

https://xahau.network/roadmap/

https://x.com/XahauNetwork/status/2046178379724914836?s=20

Xahau Roadmap - updated 19 April 2026

Xahau (XAH) Tokenomics

Hodor — Tue, 21 Apr 2026 12:15:01 GMT

Every layer one crypto network needs a native token.

In the case of Xahau, it funds the validators who protect the ledger, it discourages spam, it rewards long-term participants, and it governs how the network evolves over time. The native token is less like a "coin" and more like an economic operating system.

The General Idea

XAH is designed around a simple premise: every wallet on the network can earn new native tokens by claiming a reward each month, but validators who actively secure and govern the network earn an additional reward.

Think of it as a two-tier incentive structure - a base layer of participation rewards available to everyone, and a performance layer reserved for the organizations that hold "seats at the table."

That phrase - "seats at the table" - is not a metaphor. Xahau implements a Governance Game, a mechanism built directly into the genesis account’s smart contract (a hook). Up to 20 seats exist at the top-level (Layer 1) governance table. These seats are occupied by approved account addresses belonging to validators running infrastructure for the network. Seat holders vote on three categories of decisions:

Who occupies which seats
Which hooks are installed on the genesis account
The reward rate

A supermajority of 80% of votes is required for any change to take effect.

The entire governance structure - who sits at the table and what rules they vote on - is enforced by open-source code visible to anyone on the network.

This enhanced level of reward for trusted validators leads to a group of serious infrastructure providers. The goal is to connect the desired outcomes of: increasing network use, native token demand, and continual infrastructure investment.

I've written about Xahau's departure from the "no incentive is the best incentive" philosophy here: XAH Incentives: Scaling

Distribution Timeline

The Genesis: Account Zero

Xahau launched on October 30, 2023. At the moment of network creation, a special account - known as Account Zero (address: rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhoLvTp) - was funded with the initial XAH supply through what is called XahauGenesis. This is the blockchain equivalent of an origin story: a one-time event that established the token supply and immediately distributed it to the network’s founding contributors.

The whitepaper called for exactly 600 million XAH to be distributed across four main categories:

96 million XAH to the 8 initial governance validator seats (12 million each, to bootstrap the Governance Game)
16 million XAH to GateHub (for DEX stablecoin liquidity)
160 million XAH to XRPL Labs / Xaman (recognizing years of Hooks development work)
328 million XAH to the XRPL Foundation, now known as the Inclusive Financial Technologies Foundation (InFTF), for long-term ecosystem development

Plan vs. Reality

In practice, the genesis transactions from Account Zero distributed approximately 599 million XAH - nearly identical to the plan - but with some gaps to reconcile.

The 'actual' distribution included amounts paid to various parties, including a vendor that supplied services. It also included other early investors, and excluded a specific amount that had initially been earmarked for validators. This was to reward those that had financed the project's early years, along with the associated research.

The bottom line on the reconciliation: the spirit of the whitepaper was followed very closely. The "no-VC, reward-the-builders" philosophy was honored.

The Treasury Hook Lockups

Shortly after launch, the two largest holders of XAH - XRPL Labs (Xaman) and InFTF - each voluntarily locked the majority of their XAH holdings into a specially designed smart contract called a Treasury Hook.

This is significant because it demonstrates that Xahau’s own "hooks" technology was immediately put to work solving a real governance problem: how do large token holders credibly commit to not dumping their holdings on the market?

XRPL Labs announced in late November 2024 that it was locking 125 million XAH into its Treasury Hook, with a controlled release mechanism allowing up to 2 million XAH to be unlocked per month. The open-source Hook code is publicly reviewable on GitHub, and a live dashboard allows anyone to monitor the treasury balance and unlock activity in real time.

The InFTF similarly locked approximately 250 million XAH into a comparable treasury structure.

Combined, these two organizations voluntarily placed roughly 375 million XAH - well over half of the original genesis supply - behind a time-release lock, with the stated intention of eventually black-holing (permanently destroying) the keys to these treasury accounts ... making the lockup irreversible.

Current Supply Numbers

Total XAH: 648 million

In Circulation: 281 million

Locked: 367 million

These supply numbers - and in the other parts of this article - are taken as of ~ mid-April, 2026.

Inflation Or Deflation?

Xahau is inflationary, but labeling it such is an oversimplification. The reality is a dynamic equilibrium between three interacting forces:

Rewards claimed by hodlers
Rewards automatically sent to (Layer 1) governance seats
Fees burned for smart contracts and transactions

To date, here are the raw numbers that reflect this equation:

XAH minted ... minus ... XAH burned ... equals ... XAH inflation

53,450,000 - 5,140,000 = 48,310,000

The 4% Reward ... For Everyone

Any XAH holder can claim a monthly balance adjustment of up to 4% annually on whatever XAH they hold.

This is done by interacting with the genesis account’s hook (smart contract). The interaction is opt-in: wallets that never claim rewards simply don’t receive them, which effectively reduces the realized inflation rate across the full network. You can learn more about this 'hodler' reward here: XAH: Simple Monthly Reward

The Governance Seat Bonus

Validators who hold a seat at the Layer 1 governance table earn an additional reward on top of the 4% that all holders receive. Specifically, when any wallet performs a balance adjustment (claims its 4% reward), 1/20th of that adjustment amount is distributed to each qualifying validator.

This means that validators receive two rewards:

The 'hodler' reward on any of their XAH in their wallet
The bonus paid out to validators with a governance seat

... as long as they are actively participating and in good standing.

The Deflationary Counterweight: Hook Fees

Every time a smart contract (hook) executes on Xahau, it consumes XAH in fees. Unlike the flat, near-zero transaction fees on the XRPL mainnet, hook execution fees scale with computational complexity.

Burned To-Date: 5 million XAH

Heavy smart contract usage burns meaningful amounts of XAH, and that burned XAH is removed from the supply permanently.

Theoretical Inflation Versus Actual

In Xahau's first year, the end-result of the early distribution and governance decisions were still unknown. But now, well into 2026, we can compare the "maximum theoretical inflation" with "actual results".

Theoretical inflation is a result of governance-determined reward rates. The current reward rate for all holders is 4%. Not everybody claims their monthly reward perfectly - or at all, in some cases. But to get the theoretical inflation amount, we can calculate the result given a 100% claim rate.

We can also assume that all twenty possible governance seats are occupied (only five are currently filled). This means that 20/20 seats are being rewarded one-to-one for each XAH being claimed by holders. So we effectively double the inflation rate to 8% APY.

Here is the comparison between this theoretical, maximum inflation rate, versus actual results:

The current supply number reflects this much lower 3% annualized net inflation. This means that, since Xahau was created, the supply has been increased, through rewards, by ~ 46 million XAH.

This lower-than-expected number is primarily due to fifteen unfilled governance seats.

This means that the governance-participating-validators are currently only receiving 25% of the total potential reward, resulting in dramatically reduced XAH inflation.

Comparisons

To put XAH’s supply in perspective, here is a comparison of token supply metrics across major smart-contract-capable networks as of early 2026:

XAH’s total supply - even accounting for inflation - is tiny compared to networks like TRON (95 billion TRX) or Stellar (33 billion XLM). Solana, widely regarded as a top-tier smart-contract network, has a circulating supply of over 572 million SOL ... comparable to XAH’s supply.

Ownership Percentages

What percentage of the total network supply does a single token represent?

XRP currently has approximately 100 billion tokens in total (including Ripple’s escrowed holdings). One XRP therefore represents about 0.000000001% of total supply — one one-hundred-billionth.

XAH, starting from roughly 600 million tokens, gives each single token a proportional ownership stake of approximately 0.000000167% of total supply at genesis. That is roughly 167 times larger a percentage stake than one XRP represents out of the XRP total supply. Put another way: owning 1 XAH is mathematically equivalent - in pure percentage-of-supply terms - to owning approximately 167 XRP.

This comparison becomes even more favorable when accounting for the Treasury lockups.

With 375 million XAH locked and effectively non-circulating, the freely liquid XAH supply is closer to 250 million tokens - meaning each circulating XAH represents an even larger fraction of the tokens that can actually be traded or used.

Distribution & The Rich List

There are currently ~ 206,000 wallets on the Xahau network.

The rich list is a fascinating visual display of the raw token ownership necessary to place an individual wallet in various categories that contain less and less people. However, the categories are, by definition, too lofty, given that many people's individual wallets may be XRP Ledger wallets with IOUs for XAH instead of the real native asset on the Xahau network.

In addition, many people only have an account at a centralized exchange (CEX), and those wallets are not visible to external parties. Given that caveat, this is what the rich list looks like, only considering wallets on the Xahau network:

Bold Tokenomics

Xahau is small.

But its smallness is precisely what makes the ownership math compelling. At a circulating supply of a few hundred million tokens, every XAH holder controls a meaningful fractional stake in a network that, if it achieves measurable adoption in smart contracts, cross-border payments, and institutional DeFi, will look very different in a decade than it does today. X>

Sources:

https://xahau.network/docs/resources/whitepaper/

https://github.com/Xahau/Whitepaper/blob/main/Xahau-Whitepaper.pdf

https://xamini.io/

https://xamini.io/governance

https://xamini.io/rules-of-engagement

https://xahau.network/about/

Account Zero: https://xahauexplorer.com/explorer/rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhoLvTp

https://xahauexplorer.com/en/activations?period=all

https://xahauexplorer.com/en/distribution

Rich List data from @XRPLWin

Minted Versus Burned XAH Totals from POC @XRPLWin