Withdraw ₳700,000 for ZK Bridge administered by Intersect
175 DReps voted · 56 with a rationale · 7 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes108.3K ₳Rationale
I am voting in favor of approving the treasury withdrawal for all 39 withdrawal actions that are part of the approved ecosystem budget administered by Intersect. I am voting this way for several reasons, as I will outline here. This rationale will be included in all 39 withdrawal votes.
First and foremost, I believe that we would be making a mistake in underfunding our community with our available treasury funds. The budget system as it currently stands has some flaws, as should be expected from a first version of any system. Of the current proposals, I voted to include several in the budget when it was being formed; however, I also did not vote in favor of several others. This is, of course, the case for most DReps. If I were to vote only for the proposals I initially favoured, and all other DReps did the same, we would likely approve only 2 or 3 proposals out of 39 due to the vote split. In my view, this is not an acceptable outcome for the community, and this is why I was also opposed to the idea of having 39 separate treasury withdrawal actions. I have reviewed all 39 requests, and they all have merit. Are they exactly in line with the priorities I wanted as part of the initial budget? No. Is that reason enough to vote no on several of these and end up approving only 2 or 3 proposals in the end? I certainly don't believe so.
In addition to this, the total amount of the intersect budget is roughly 10% higher than what I voted for, and I find that to be within an acceptable margin to approve all the withdrawals.
The individual proposals also all received at least 50% community approval to be included and will be subject to reviews and milestones to receive funds.
For these reasons, I am casting my vote to approve and am wishing the best of luck to all the teams waiting for funding through this process. - Yes103.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes92.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes68.8K ₳Rationale
- Yes65.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes58.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes55.9K ₳No rationale
- No50.5K ₳No rationale
- Yes49.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes48.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes46.5K ₳No rationale
- No45.2K ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted36.3K ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
- Yes36.3K ₳Rationale
🗳 Vote: YES
📄 Proposal: ZK Bridge by Eryx, submitted via Intersect
🔗 View Proposal Details⸻
💡 Summary
I voted YES on funding the development of a Zero-Knowledge Bridge (zkBridge) for Cardano. This initiative brings trustless, modular interoperability to our ecosystem, addressing one of Cardano’s most critical limitations: secure cross-chain communication.
⸻
✅ Why I Support This
• Security-first: Uses ZK proofs to eliminate centralized validators and multisigs — reducing risk of bridge exploits.
• Composability: Makes Cardano interoperable with other EVM and isomorphic chains via cryptographic proofs.
• Foundation for zkRollups: Bridges are a necessary stepping stone toward native zkRollup infrastructure.
• Open Source: Contracts written in Aiken, testnet deployment included, and comprehensive technical docs will be published.
• Credible Team: Eryx is a seasoned team with a strong track record in ZK circuits, Plonky2, Lambdaworks, and more.⸻
🔎 Technical Highlights
• Locking and proof-generation on Cardano
• Verification and asset minting on destination chains
• Aiken smart contract deployment on testnet
• Full protocol documentation provided⸻
🏗 Delivery & Oversight
• Funded via Cardano Treasury
• Managed by Intersect with oversight from 3rd-party Assurers
• Legal contracts + milestone tracking enforced on-chain via Treasury Reserve Smart Contracts (TRSC)⸻
🧠 Conclusion
This proposal aligns with my values as a DRep — enhancing Cardano’s decentralization, security, and future-proofing our infrastructure. It also aligns with our long-term vision of enabling secure and scalable dApps through trust-minimized interoperability.
Let’s bridge Cardano to the world — the right way.
— DeepStatecraft
- No14.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes6.7K ₳No rationale
- No4.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes335.3 ₳No rationale
- Yes13.5 ₳No rationale
- Yes6.3 ₳No rationale
- Yes0 ₳No rationale
- Yes0 ₳No rationale
- Yes0 ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted0 ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes0y agoSuperseded