🔥Why I chose @anoma ????? As a researcher in the market, specializing in DeFi, I clearly see the issue of fragmented liquidity across chains. Simply put: @Uniswap has many faces on many chains, these are copies of Uniswap, and they operate separately. And the liquidity pool of $ETH / $USDC on Uniswap on each chain is different. But essentially, they are still the pair $ETH / $USDC, why can't they be combined into one? That is the question I have always sought to answer? As you can see, does the pair $ETH / $USDC on CEX distinguish which chain it is on? Definitely not!!!! And thanks to that, no matter which chain you are a user of, you can trade the same pair $ETH / $USDC on CEX (for example, @binance), so liquidity is concentrated > the better the liquidity, the less slippage in trading. And the Intent Machine that @anoma introduced can do something similar to the previous example on CEX: Specifically: I create an AMM Pool for the pair $ETH / $USDC on @anoma, then at this point, $ETH and $USDC from any chain can be sent to that Pool. - User A sends 1 $ETH from the @ethereum network to the Pool, then @anoma sees that as an intent, and the Solver will create a transaction for that order recorded on @ethereum. - Similarly, User B sends 100 $USDC from the @monad network to the Pool, the Solver will create a transaction for that order recorded on @monad. - User C sends 2 $ETH from the @megaeth_labs network to the Pool, the Solver will create a transaction for that order recorded on @megaeth_labs. - User D sends 200 $USDC from the @FogoChain network to the Pool, the Solver will create a transaction for that order recorded on @FogoChain. At that time, @anoma will record the AMM Pool as having 3 $ETH / 300 $USDC. Meanwhile: - @ethereum records the AMM Pool as having 1 $ETH - @monad records the AMM Pool as having 100 $USDC - @megaeth_labs records the AMM Pool as having 2 $ETH - @FogoChain records the AMM Pool as having 200 $USDC > Therefore, users of @anoma will benefit from the best prices thanks to liquidity being pooled from both @ethereum, @monad, @megaeth_labs, and @FogoChain. This is what is called solving the problem of fragmented liquidity across multiple chains or non-fragmented liquidity. > That is also the meaning of the phrase "@anoma is all chains, not just one chain". > That is just one application and the capability of the Intent Machine of @anoma. In addition to the product that solves the limitations of the multi-chain market, I have 3 more reasons: - Team: The team has the capability and experience in building key products of @cosmos. - Backer: Raised 60 million USD, although it has been a while and some of the money may have been spent, the project still maintains its appeal to VCs over the years. Some tier 1 funds participating show that they also value the team's capabilities and the product's potential. - Build community: Currently, it seems that @anoma is the most fomo and the project has the strongest community. Although learning from the build direction of @SuccinctLabs, this is probably the project with the smartest build strategy. 👉But to be honest, until now, I still do not fully understand the techniques or how the project operates. With the documents that the project provides, I find them quite macro and hard to understand. Either I am weak or the project writes too complicated to understand. If a person with some experience and knowledge like me cannot fully understand the project, how can many newcomers out there understand it? I hope that @anoma has a docs version for users that provides enough knowledge, detail, and simplicity so that anyone can grasp all the information about @anoma. @thekerukeion @intrenche1 @anomafoundation @heliaxdev @hellomonty_ @anomafoundation @chimpfone2047 @MauriceWbr @awasunyin @Chri5H0lt @adrianbrink @thespacecatjr