As Terminada DRep I voted No on this withdrawal with the following vote context:
IOG is already building bridge technology required for Midnight which will be released soon. We should wait for this development before funding similar initiatives.
Shortly after I submitted my vote, I received a private message over Matrix from Diego Mac. I have therefore created this discussion topic and will invite Diego to reproduce here what he messaged me over Matrix. This way the content of the discussion can be public and others can chime in with their views.
6 Likes
Thanks for this! This zkBridge proposal goes far beyond Midnight, but points to other blockchains.
Cross-chain bridges are usually a weak point in blockchain security, as they’re prone to exploits and rely on trusted third parties. Our vision is to develop a ZK-powered bridge that can be used to transfer funds and computation between different chains without revealing unnecessary information — and that integrates smoothly with Cardano’s architecture.
Glad that you mentioned Midnight: Eryx already did a library for Midnight and they are in contact since October 2024 as you can see in the following link: https://x.com/eryxcoop/status/1845912964643115518?t=c2O35Qx415itWPztuz1lLg&s=19
Glad to share further information in case you need it!
4 Likes
I would like to preface my comments as follows:
- I am but a mortal person with work and family commitments in the real world. I am time poor like everyone else but at the end of the day some decisions I take will necessarily depend on opinion. IE: Please read these comments as but one person’s opinion.
- I regret that I was unable, to vote separately on each original “info action” which now form the basis for these 40 “treasury withdrawal actions”. At the time I decided it was better to not vote at all as that would essentially result in my relatively low voting power counting as a “No”. This allowed me to gauge community feelings about each proposal, given that I didn’t have time to review all info actions myself. I also realised that the real crunch would come when voting at the treasury withdrawal stage.
- For many votes, I have put some brief comments, without excess fluff, where I thought it necessary to document on-chain my vote context.
- It is important to recognise that in voting on these treasury withdrawals we are spending someone else’s money on someone else as Milton Friedman explains in this youtube video.
Despite this, I am trying my best to ensure that Cardano treasury spending is prudent.
- This is my current tally of treasury spending at this moment (July 27, 2025 11:00am AEST) which totals ₳240,425,802.
OK, with that out of the way, onto my concerns about the specific “ZK bridge” withdrawal request:
- I am as excited by all this ZK technology and the benefits it can bring as anyone. However, I am concerned that this technology is evolving so rapidly that some implementations risk becoming “old tech” almost immediately as better techniques are invented.
- As I stated in my vote context: “IOG is already building bridge technology required for Midnight which will be released soon. We should wait for this development before funding similar initiatives.” This presents an unfortunate timing issue for me to vote in favour of funding the “ZK bridge” proposal, since I don’t know how IOG’s soon to be released Midnight code will impact the “ZK bridge” work.
- There is insufficient detail in the original info action proposal to ascertain what work has already been paid for by IOG, or others, and what extra benefit will be delivered to the community. @diegomac35 , your comment above even recognises that “Eryx already did a library for Midnight”, but that unfortunately hasn’t been released by the Midnight team yet. In saying these things, I am not trying to suggest that Eryx’s team would do anything other than work diligently to benefit the Cardano community with any and all Cardano treasury money they are given.
- Then there is also a somewhat philosophical argument: The general public still doesn’t appreciate what makes blockchains valuable. Price is still being set by kids flicking around meme coins and only recently has institutional ETF order flows via centralised exchanges affected prices much. Heck, meme coins have a higher market cap than Cardano despite all the valuable research and meticulous design. I recognise that the current VCs in Etherum and Solana lands are incentivised to not bring attention to Cardano. But, seriously, bond traders, banking executives, and hedge fund managers are not stupid. If we are really building a decentralised financial operating system, I can’t believe these people won’t work out what really makes a blockchain valuable. The true value of blockchain relates to its decentralised control and ability for anyone to verify the ledger. When people with more wrinkled brains start to think about where they want to store their stable coins, or tokenised realestate, and what chain they will trust to manage their digital identity, then I think there will be more demand for asset flow towards Cardano than in the other direction. Consequently, why should Cardano pay the full cost of developing the solutions to bridge these flows from other chains? Maybe Cardano will do better by focusing on building “financial operating system” infrastructure than worrying about bridging flows to/from other chains? Most token holders will probably “bridge” their assets by selling one token and buying another on centralised exchanges anyway. Furthermore, we already have IOG, and others, frantically building “bridges” for Bitcoin holders (representing the vast majority of current blockchain capital) to operate with Cardano smart contracts.
In summary, I think the timing for this “ZK bridge” proposal is unfortunate because Midnight will release its bridge technology very soon. I think we need to see what solutions this provides before committing Cardano treasury funds to fund additional bridging technology.
References:
3 Likes
I have now received a direct message over Matrix from a second agent, “angus f”, requesting that I change my vote. Consequently I asked that he also feel free to contribute publicly and I provided a link to this topic.
2 Likes
Thank you for bringing this discussion to the forum, it confirms what I observe: some DReps vote, then are (presumably) approached in private message (in the best case with additional information) and then they change their vote. (of course, they could have changed their mind)
That’s why I appreciate everyone who justifies their vote with a rationale, it would be much harder for them to change their mind by, let’s say, “bribing” them.
3 Likes
Thank you @terminada for taking the time to write such a thoughtful and transparent post, and for engaging in public dialogue around treasury spending — it’s appreciated.
Regarding the ZK Bridge proposal, I’d like to offer a few clarifications that may help address your concerns:
Midnight is not Cardano: While Midnight is indeed building important bridge technology, its scope is tailored specifically to the Midnight network — which is distinct from Cardano’s L1. Our ZK Bridge proposal focuses on Cardano itself and aims to unlock interoperability with other L1s L2s and partnerchains using zero-knowledge proofs. We see this as complementary to Midnight’s work, not overlapping. Besides that the Eryx team has been actively collaborating with IOG researchers since 2024. The ZK Bridge proposal was crafted in alignment with these efforts.
Cardano Treasury should support this: We agree that Cardano is the new financial OS — and that’s exactly why we need this kind of bridge. Cross-chain capital flow, even from central exchanges, increasingly depends on robust interoperability primitives. Waiting for others to bridge into Cardano while we remain passive puts us at a strategic disadvantage. This ZK Bridge is a bet on sovereignty, privacy, and developer-friendly infrastructure — values we believe align deeply with Cardano’s vision Interoperability is somethingcore for Cardano´s mission.
Reference https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3548606.3560652
Speed of innovation: It’s true that ZK technology is evolving rapidly. That’s why our proposal is open-source, modular, and designed to integrate emerging cryptographic primitives over time. It’s not a fixed monolith — it’s a foundation upon which Cardano can remain competitive and privacy-respecting in a multichain future.
We welcome further discussion and scrutiny — but we believe this proposal is well-timed, carefully coordinated, and essential for Cardano’s long-term strategic positioning.
Thank you again for raising your concerns with care and respect!
1 Like
IMO, it is the duty of any team submitting a proposal to engage with DReps and provide arguments to encourage a Yes vote.
Maybe a No vote stems from a lack of information, a poorly explained proposal, or — at the very least — the outreach could lead to valuable feedback that helps the team improve.
Is no one from the CF reaching out to the DReps to discuss “Unveiling the First Unified Global Events Marketing” proposal?
2 Likes
thanks; to help us understand how these are connected, in support of the proposal’s legitimacy:
- Do you have any reference(s) about how Eryx proposes to implement what is described in this paper?
- Do the company or its developers have any academic connection to the paper’s authors?
- If not, is there a practical relationship you can point to between the paper/authors and the “IOG researchers” the Eryx team has been collaborating with?
1 Like
Yes, there are various discussions all over the place, but I personally prefer the ones in a structured environment like the forum here.
3 Likes
