[DIS] Luxvoid Protocol: The First Working BTC→CKB→EVM Pipeline — Seeking DAO Support/collab for Production Scaling

DAOs & Funding CKB Community Fund DAO
, ,
1

English : Hey everyone — Aki here. Founder of Luxvoid Inc.

Some of you remember my posts from March. I was the outsider who didn’t know web3, wandered in here asking for help from @quake, @fgh , @phroi , @neon.bit @wyltek, @matt_ckb . You answered my questions, stress-tested my thesis, pointed me to RGB++ docs.

I told you I’d deliver and I did. Here’s the proof. Huge shoutout to @Hanssen & @fgh for their expertise.

The World Gold Council — the industry body for the $13 trillion gold market — is actively calling for the exact infrastructure I built right here on our very own CKB: https://www.gold.org/news-and-events/press-releases/world-gold-council-develop-shared-infrastructure-digital-gold

The Pipeline Is Live

96 successful fires, zero value lost. BTC→CKB→EVM end to end. Physical tap → Bitcoin anchor → SPV proof verified on CKB → EVM liquidity. Live hashes on public testnets. Self-hosted SPV service with 4.99M Bitcoin headers synced — no third-party API dependency.

The CKB Footprint — Every Primitive, In Production

Primitive
Cells 108 dormant cells
Type Scripts SPV verifier, Switchboard, resolved by type hash
Lock Scripts RGB++ lock, BTC lock, destruction lock, satellite lock
Cell Deps RGB++ SDK deps, verifier code cells
Since Fields Challenge window enforcement (PPT lifecycle)
Molecule 3 schemas
RGB++ SDK
Isomorphic Binding mathematically guaranteed
SPV Proofs Bitcoin headers → CKB verifier → EVM bridge — self-hosted

Deployed Code Cells on CKB Testnet

Contract Size Purpose
SPV Verifier 156,702 CKB Validates Bitcoin SPV proofs
SPV Clients (×4) ~852 CKB Bitcoin header MMR state
Destruction Lock 7,984 CKB PPT 6-state lifecycle
Counter Comparison 11,544 CKB Replay attack prevention
Satellite Lock 7,928 CKB Tombstone-anchored recycling
Switchboard 8,016 CKB 4-lane verification router
9 code cells ~193,627 CKB

Why This Matters:

Without CKB’s cell model, this infrastructure would require a consortium of banks — multisig bridges, trusted oracles, multiple smart contracts across different chains with all the attack surfaces that come with it.

CKB made it possible for ONE founder to build the entire stack in 4 months. The Cell model + RGB++ isomorphic binding replaced what would have taken a team of 20 and a year of audits. That’s not marketing. That’s the engineering reality.

Where I Am Now:

Luxvoid Inc. is federally incorporated in Canada. 5 USPTO provisionals covering the full stack —physical encapsulation, zero-oracle engine, Bitcoin L2 bridge, Permanent Provenance lifecycle.

The infrastructure has outgrown a solo founder. I’m bringing on a lead systems engineer for the CKB-side pipeline ops.

I’m in active conversations with: ( Everything on E-mails and documented)

  • A strategic L1 partnership that would make them the primary EVM execution layer

  • Government of Canada discussions on Critical Raw Materials traceability — aligning with EU CRMA and NATO supply chain security mandates

  • BCG’s Managing Director, who asked to reconnect when institutional infrastructure is live.

I mention this to show the trajectory. CKB’s programmable Bitcoin thesis has been waiting for a real-world flagship. Luxvoid is that flagship ,not on a deck but living live on a testnet up and running undergoing stress testing in parallel.

The acknowledgement :

A special shoutout to those who stress-tested this from day one. @quake asked the questions that forced me to think deeper about NFC binding and script-level enforcement. @fgh saw the EVM delegation problem before I did. @phroi trusted a stranger who wandered in asking for help. @Tetragrammaton saw the industrial supply chain vision that most people miss. And @Yeti you pushed back on every vulnerability and made this stronger. This pipeline exists in part because this community didn’t let me take shortcuts. The pipeline is running now not because I had vision, but because this community’s pushback and visionaries forced me to architect it right the first time.

The Ask :

I seeded this infrastructure with my own money and resources. Every cell, every script, every fire was funded out of pocket across 4 months of solo build. The pipeline runs. But the scope has outgrown a solo founder.

I’m not applying for a standard community grant. I’m offering CKB its flagship institutional-grade RWA infrastructure — the first working BTC→CKB→EVM pipeline backed by real hardware and live hashes.

To align our territories and ensure CKB remains the permanent programmable layer for this trillion-dollar market, I’m proposing a strategic partnership structured in two transparent milestones:

  • Tranche 1 — $50,000 USD (CKB equivalent): Operational runway to keep the live testnet infrastructure running, cover pipeline hardening, and sustain the self-hosted SPV service for the next phase.

  • Tranche 2 — $100,000 USD (CKB equivalent): Deployment to hire and onboard a lead CKB systems engineer to own the CKB-side pipeline operations full-time and prepare for enterprise mainnet deployment.

Total: $150,000 USD — not as a grant, but as a strategic alignment to scale what’s already built.

Beyond the capital, I’m looking for crew. CKB-native engineers who want to own this pipeline and build on the ecosystem’s flagship RWA infrastructure. If that’s you — this is your invitation.

I recognize this doesn’t fit the standard DAO template. Most applicants ask for funding to start building. I built first, went all in with my own resources, and the infrastructure is already live with verifiable hashes.

This is an invitation. I’m an industrialist with working infrastructure that needs a crew. If you’re a CKB engineer who’s been waiting for a real-world use case to sink your teeth into — this is it. I’m offering this ecosystem its flagship RWA infrastructure*.*

BTC Testnet wallet add.: tb1qcepnh7pml6ypx9gtvgwex3arag8repm2n5rlt8
CKB Pudge Testnet : ckt1qzda0cr08m85hc8jlnfp3zer7xulejywt49kt2rr0vthywaa50xwsq2zrchfd2y3xcf9lkqeddggqagukmnufkse0g93q

EVM Testnet (Sepolia,Monad,LitVM) : 0x90Ae6d35061912c098Ae3111E35d5cfBfeB1e729

大家好 —— 我是 Aki，Luxvoid Inc. 的创始人。

你们中有些人可能还记得我 3 月份发的帖子。那时我还是一个不懂 Web3 的局外人，来到这里向 @phroi , @Hanssen , @fgh @neon.bit @wyltek @matt_ckb 寻求帮助。你们回答了我的问题，对我的核心理论进行了压力测试，并为我指明了 RGB++ 的文档方向。

我告诉过你们我会拿出成果，现在我做到了。这就是证明。非常感谢 @[Name] 和 @[Name] 提供的专业知识。世界黄金协会（代表 13 万亿美元黄金市场的行业机构）正在积极呼吁建立一种基础设施，而这正是我在我们 CKB 上亲手构建出来的：https://www.gold.org/news-and-events/press-releases/world-gold-council-develop-shared-infrastructure-digital-gold

基础设施管道已上线

96 次成功执行，零价值流失。从 BTC → CKB → EVM 端到端打通。物理硬件轻触 → 比特币网络锚定 → CKB 验证 SPV 证明 → EVM 流动性。公开测试网上已有真实的交易哈希。自托管的 SPV 服务已同步 499 万个比特币区块头 —— 完全不依赖第三方 API。

CKB 技术足迹 —— 每一个原语都已投入生产

原语 (Primitive) 详细信息
Cells 108 个休眠 Cell
类型脚本 (Type Scripts) SPV 验证器、Switchboard（按类型哈希解析）
锁定脚本 (Lock Scripts) RGB++ 锁、BTC 锁、销毁锁 (Destruction lock)、卫星锁 (Satellite lock)
Cell 依赖 (Cell Deps) RGB++ SDK 依赖项、验证器代码 Cell
Since 字段 挑战窗口强制执行（PPT 溯源生命周期）
Molecule 3 个数据结构模型 (Schemas)
RGB++ SDK 同构绑定 (在数学上提供保证)
SPV 证明 比特币区块头 → CKB 验证器 → EVM 桥接（自托管）

部署在 CKB 测试网上的代码 Cell

合约 大小 用途
SPV Verifier (验证器) 156,702 CKB 验证比特币 SPV 证明
SPV Clients (×4) ~852 CKB 比特币区块头 MMR 状态
Destruction Lock (销毁锁) 7,984 CKB PPT 6 种状态生命周期
Counter Comparison (计数器比对) 11,544 CKB 防止重放攻击
Satellite Lock (卫星锁) 7,928 CKB 锚定墓碑的回收机制
Switchboard (交换机) 8,016 CKB 4 通道验证路由器
总计 (9 个代码 Cell) ~193,627 CKB

为什么这很重要：

如果没有 CKB 的 Cell 模型，这个基础设施将需要一个由银行组成的联盟 —— 多签跨链桥、受信任的预言机、分布在不同链上的多个智能合约，以及随之而来的所有攻击面。

CKB 让一个创始人能够在 4 个月内构建整个技术栈。Cell 模型 + RGB++ 同构绑定，取代了原本需要 20 人团队和一年审计时间才能完成的工作。这不是营销话术，这是工程现实。

我目前的进展：

Luxvoid Inc. 已在加拿大联邦注册成立。拥有 5 项涵盖全栈架构的美国专利商标局 (USPTO) 临时专利 —— 物理封装、零预言机引擎、比特币 L2 桥接、永久溯源生命周期。

该基础设施的规模已经超越了单一创始人所能承载的极限。我正在引进一名首席系统工程师来负责 CKB 侧的管道运营。

我目前正在与以下机构进行积极对话：（所有沟通均有邮件记录作为凭证）

  • 一项战略性的 L1 合作，将使他们成为主要的 EVM 执行层。

  • 与加拿大政府就关键原材料可追溯性进行的讨论 —— 契合欧盟 CRMA 和北约供应链安全要求。

  • 波士顿咨询公司 (BCG) 的董事总经理，他要求在机构级基础设施上线时重新联系。

我提到这些是为了展示项目的发展轨迹。CKB 关于“可编程比特币”的核心理念一直在等待一个真实世界的旗舰项目。Luxvoid 就是那个旗舰项目，它不是停留在 PPT 上的概念，而是已经在测试网上线运行，并正在同步进行压力测试。

致谢：

特别感谢那些从第一天起就对该项目进行压力测试的人。@quake 提出的问题迫使我更深入地思考 NFC 绑定和脚本级强制执行。@fgh 在我之前就看出了 EVM 委托问题。@phroi 信任了一个在此寻求帮助的陌生人。@tetragrammaton 看到了大多数人忽略的工业供应链愿景。还有 @yeti ，你对每一个漏洞都进行了反驳，让这个项目变得更强大。这条基础设施管道之所以存在，部分原因是这个社区不允许我走捷径。管道现在能跑通，不是因为我有多么宏大的愿景，而是因为这个社区的严谨和远见，迫使我从一开始就把架构设计正确。

战略诉求与合作提案：

我用自己的资金和资源启动了这个基础设施。在 4 个月的独立开发中，每一个 Cell、每一个脚本、每一次执行都是我自掏腰包的。现在管道已经跑通。但其规模已经超出了一个单人创始人的能力范围。

我不是在申请标准的社区测试赠款。我是为 CKB 提供其旗舰级的机构级 RWA 基础设施 —— 这是第一个由真实硬件和实时交易哈希支持的、真正运作的 BTC→CKB→EVM 管道。

为了统一我们的阵地，并确保 CKB 成为这个万亿美元市场永久的可编程层，我提出一项分为两个透明阶段的战略合作：

  • 第一阶段 — $50,000 美元 (等值 CKB)： 运营资金，用于维持实时测试网基础设施的运行、覆盖管道的安全加固，并为下一阶段维持自托管 SPV 服务。

  • 第二阶段 — $100,000 美元 (等值 CKB)： 资金部署，用于全职聘请和入职一名 CKB 首席系统工程师，由其接管 CKB 侧的管道操作，并为企业级主网部署做准备。

总计：$150,000 美元 —— 这不是单纯的拨款，而是一项战略结盟，旨在扩展已经构建好的成果。

除了资金，我还在寻找战友（Crew）。寻找那些想要接管这条管道，并在生态系统旗舰 RWA 基础设施上进行构建的 CKB 原生工程师。如果你就是这样的人 —— 这是发给你的邀请函。

我知道这个提案不符合标准的 DAO 模板。大多数申请人要求资金是为了“开始”构建。我先构建了它，用我自己的资源全力押注在这个愿景上，而且基础设施已经在测试网上线，并具有可验证的哈希。

这是一份邀请。我是一个拥有运作中基础设施的实业家，现在需要一支团队。如果你是一名 CKB 工程师，一直在等待一个可以大展拳脚的真实世界用例 —— 就是这个了。我正在向这个生态系统提供它的旗舰 RWA 基础设施。

钱包地址与实时哈希：

  • BTC 测试网： tb1qcepnh7pml6ypx9gtvgwex3arag8repm2n5rlt8

  • CKB Pudge 测试网： ckt1qzda0cr08m85hc8jlnfp3zer7xulejywt49kt2rr0vthywaa50xwsq2zrchfd2y3xcf9lkqeddggqagukmnufkse0g93q

  • EVM 测试网 (Sepolia, Monad, LitVM)： 0x90Ae6d35061912c098Ae3111E35d5cfBfeB1e729

https://testnet.monadscan.com/address/0x90ae6d35061912c098ae3111e35d5cfbfeb1e729

https://sepolia.etherscan.io/address/0x90Ae6d35061912c098Ae3111E35d5cfBfeB1e729

https://testnet.explorer.nervos.org/address/ckt1qzda0cr08m85hc8jlnfp3zer7xulejywt49kt2rr0vthywaa50xwsq2zrchfd2y3xcf9lkqeddggqagukmnufkse0g93q

10 Likes
CKB Ecosystem Biweekly Update
CKB Ecosystem Biweekly Update
2

If no customers come and there is no real usage, what does CKB actually gain from this funding?

You mentioned hiring an engineer with the $100,000 allocation, but you did not specify the duration of the role or the engineer’s responsibilities. Could you clarify that?

2 Likes
3

Fair question @ebdalezyz_aljhny , I’ll answer it directly.

You asked where the clientele is. The answer isn’t a customer list. The answer is regulatory inevitability.

Governments and industry bodies are not suggesting physical-to-digital traceability. They are mandating it. Here are the actual regulations, not commentary:

EU Critical Raw Materials Act — legally mandates traceability and recycling for critical minerals across the entire supply chain: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1252/oj https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/raw-materials/areas-specific-interest/critical-raw-materials/critical-raw-materials-act_en

EU Digital Product Passport — mandates digital provenance for nearly all physical goods entering the EU market: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy/ecodesign-sustainable-products-regulation_en https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1781/oj

EU Battery Regulation — the precedent: mandatory digital traceability for cobalt, lithium, nickel from mining to recycling: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/batteries_en

Canada’s Critical Minerals Strategy — federal mandate for supply chain transparency from exploration to recycling: https://www.canada.ca/en/campaign/critical-minerals-in-canada/canadian-critical-minerals-strategy.html

World Gold Council (March 2026) — the $13 trillion gold industry’s governing body is actively building shared digital gold infrastructure — the exact thing Luxvoid already built: https://www.gold.org/news-and-events/press-releases/world-gold-council-develop-shared-infrastructure-digital-gold

LBMA Gold Bar Integrity — physical-to-digital bar passport mandated for >95% of global gold refining: https://www.lbma.org.uk/gold-bar-integrity-ecosystem

NATO — supply chain resilience for critical materials is a security mandate: https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/deterrence-and-defence/resilience-civil-preparedness-and-article-3

This isn’t about finding customers. The customers are entire industries being told by their own governments that they must adopt this technology by 2030. Luxvoid’s infrastructure is already live. The question isn’t who will use it — it’s which chain will be the permanent programmable layer when they do.

That’s why I’m here on CKB. That’s why the pipeline is already running.

And as for the engineer role, The engineer role isn’t a fixed-term contract. It’s a permanent position as long as this infrastructure is running , which means forever.

Here’s why: we’re not building a one-time bridge. We’re building the CKB Bitcoin programmability layer for physical assets. That means:

- Phase 1 (now): Build the CKB pipeline ops and harden the self-hosted SPV service - Phase 2 (3-6 months): Enterprise mainnet deployment with real compliance hooks - Phase 3 (ongoing): Maintenance, upgrades, Fiber Network integration, new chain wiring

Every time a new EVM chain launches and wants RWA liquidity, the engineer wires it. Every time Bitcoin upgrades, the SPV layer adapts. This isn’t a project with an end date — it’s ecosystem infrastructure that grows in scope over time.

The $100K gets us a lead engineer for the initial deployment. Once mainnet is live and enterprise revenue starts flowing, the role funds itself from transaction fees, not grants.

1 Like
5

@d3fus7.bit fair reaction, honestly. First time I’m doing this too, so I had to throw out some ballpark figure to get the conversation moving. I’d rather be transparent and adjust than stay silent.

But here’s what I actually want you and the community to focus on, not the number. Look at the offer: I built the first working BTC→CKB→EVM RWA pipeline. It’s running. 170 fires. Live hashes. It uses every single CKB primitive. And I’m bringing it here, to this community, saying: “This is yours now too. Come take care of it with me.”

That’s the real ask. The money is just fuel to keep the engine running while we build together. The flagship RWA infrastructure for CKB , that’s the win.

Happy to discuss the numbers, but let’s not lose the main plot. :saluting_face:

2 Likes
6

Your project, if successful, could be truly outstanding.

My suggestion would be to restructure the proposal into multiple milestones tied to clear deliverables: design, implementation, validation, and the start of commercial operations.

That approach may make it easier for the community to evaluate progress, reduce risk, and support the project step by step as it matures.

The work you’ve already completed is impressive, and a milestone-based roadmap could help align community support with demonstrated adoption and real-world deployment.

3 Likes
7

Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and vision you envisioned — genuinely appreciated. The milestone approach makes a lot of sense, and I agree that structuring deliverables clearly helps the community track progress. The current 2-tranche proposal already separates operational scaling from engineering, but I’m open to refining it further into more granular milestones as the discussion evolves. Your suggestion on design → implementation → validation → commercial ops is a solid framework. I’d be interested to hear from you and the community on what milestone structure and funding allocation would feel most comfortable because this is infrastructure, not a project. It’s going to need developers who grow with it, and the right framework now makes that possible.

1 Like
8

Hello,

In truth, I’m not part of the CKB team and I’m not a developer. I’m simply someone who admires your project and genuinely hopes it receives support and recognition. If your project succeeds, it would be something truly exceptional.

From what I’ve seen, one of the main concerns here is the possibility of proving the concept technically but never reaching actual commercial deployment. I believe that is where much of the hesitation comes from.

I’m confident you will find technical support and assistance within this community, and that may ultimately be even more valuable to you than funding itself. It could also be worth discussing this with CKBA.

As for me, I hold CKB and believe it has a promising future.

Regards.

3 Likes
9

Three days ago I posted with 96 runs and 108 dormant cells. 48 hours later: 239 each. The pipeline outran the discussion.
Updated Stats (since the proposal went live 3 days ago):

Metric At Posting Now
Pipeline runs 96 224 (239 fired)
Dormant cells 108 241
CKB code cells deployed 9 9 (unchanged — still the full stack)

Live hash from minutes ago:

What the community gets:

A first-mover advantage on the $13 trillion gold market + critical minerals traceability that governments are legally mandating. CKB becomes the programmable layer for physical assets — not through a whitepaper, but through a live pipeline that’s firing 50+ times per day right now on testnet. You keep asking what’s in it for CKB. The answer is everything. This pipeline uses every single CKB primitive — SPV verifier, RGB++ binding, cell deps, since fields, Molecule schemas. It’s not a proposal on a forum. It’s a working industrial protocol that Fortune 500 supply chains will plug into before 2030. And it chooses CKB as its permanent anchor layer.

Patent, They’re not anti-community — they’re anti-corporate-predator. I seed this infrastructure with my own capital., My own patents — which are defensive, not restrictive. Every developer in this ecosystem has open access.The infrastructure is and will remain open for any CKB builder to use and deploy on. The patents protect against this scenario: a $50B corporation copies the entire pipeline, patents it themselves, and removes CKB from the equation. The patents keep CKB as the permanent programmable layer for physical-asset verification. They do NOT prevent any developer in this community from building on or extending what I’ve built.

What the money is for:

$50K — keep the infrastructure running while we scale $50K — hire a lead CKB engineer to own this pipeline permanently $50K — mainnet deployment.

I’m here because one founder cannot scale this alone. I need CKB engineers to own the CKB side. The money, the infrastructure, the patents — they’re all in service of making CKB the default chain for physical-asset verification before the Fortune 500s arrive looking for a solution. Not a grant. A partnership. I’m not extracting from CKB. I’m giving CKB its flagship RWA infrastructure — already built, already running, already firing faster than the discussion cycle.

The ask:

I need CKB engineers who want to own this pipeline. Not contractors. Owners. The infrastructure is here. The business model is here. The regulations are already law. I need people who can build alongside me.

That’s the proposal. Updated numbers. Clear breakdown. No more ambiguity

3 Likes
10

Your argument is convincing to me.

I support your proposal, and I can genuinely sense the sincerity and ambition behind what you’re building.

You speak with an investor’s mindset, and I believe that is exactly the kind of perspective the CKB ecosystem needs more of today.

CKB already has talented developers and strong builders, but it also needs more people with an investment vision—people who can turn technology into real opportunities, connect innovation with real-world markets and needs, and attract users and capital into the ecosystem.

I wish you the very best of luck and success on your journey, and I look forward to seeing what this project can achieve in the future.

2 Likes
11

I know seven programming languages ​​and have four years of IT experience. Of course, I don’t know the intricacies of some of the libraries listed in the application. But I could quickly figure it out and develop any audit pipeline for you.

2 Likes
12

roadmap
Phase 1: Operational Stability (1-2 months)
Goal: Ensure uninterrupted operation of current infrastructure
Tasks:
Monitoring and alerting
Set up Prometheus + Grafana to track:
SPV service synchronization (lag from Bitcoin mainnet)
Dormant cells status
“Fires” success rate
Slack/Telegram alerts for service failures
Backup and recovery
Automated Bitcoin headers backup (4.99M headers)
CKB cells state snapshots
Disaster recovery plan
Documentation
API documentation for all components
Ops engineer runbook (how to restart SPV, how to restore cells)
Architecture diagrams (C4 model)
Resources: $50,000 (operational infrastructure costs)
Phase 2: Hardening and Scaling (2-3 months)
Goal: Prepare system for production loads
Tasks:
Hire Lead CKB Engineer
Full-time engineer to own CKB pipeline component
Requirements: experience with Cell Model, RGB++, Off-chain indexing
Performance optimization
SPV service profiling (currently syncing 4.99M headers)
CKB query optimization (cell lookup, transaction building)
Caching frequently used data
Security
Smart contract audit on CKB (9 code cells)
Penetration testing for SPV service
Rate limiting for API endpoints
Multi-sig for critical operations
Testing
Load testing: simulate 1000+ fires per day
Chaos engineering: node failures, network partitions
Integration testing with EVM bridge
Resources: $50,000 (engineer salary + infrastructure)
Phase 3: Mainnet Deployment (2-4 months)
Goal: Launch in production for real users
Tasks:
Mainnet migration
Deploy all 9 code cells to CKB mainnet
Set up production SPV service (separate infrastructure)
Configure EVM bridge for mainnet
Compliance and legal
Integration with KYC/AML providers (if required)
EU CRMA (Critical Raw Materials Act) compliance audit
GDPR compliance for user data
Enterprise-ready features
Multi-tenancy: support for multiple clients
Role-based access control (RBAC)
Audit logging for all operations
SLA monitoring and reporting
Partnerships
Integration with L1 partner (EVM execution layer)
Pilot projects with Government of Canada (traceability)
Preparation for BCG and Fortune 500 integration
Resources: $50,000 (mainnet deployment + compliance)
Phase 4: Production Scaling (6-12 months)
Goal: Scale to enterprise level
Tasks:
Horizontal scaling
SPV service sharding (multiple instances for different block ranges)
Load balancer for API gateway
Database replication for CKB indexer
Feature expansion
Support for new asset types (silver, platinum, rare earth metals)
IoT device integration for automated “firing”
Analytics dashboard for clients
Ecosystem development
Developer SDKs (Python, JavaScript, Rust)
Marketplace for third-party integrations
Grants program for CKB developers
Monetization
Transaction fees per “fire”
Subscription model for enterprise clients
Revenue sharing with CKB DAO

2 Likes
13

@Ar_Hel — this is exactly the kind of response I was hoping for from this community. A well-structured, engineer-level breakdown that shows you’ve actually read the proposal and understand the infrastructure scope.

Your Phase 1-2 aligns directly with what I outlined. Prometheus monitoring, SPV profiling, cell optimization, and the disaster recovery plan are all gaps I’ve identified but haven’t had the bandwidth to implement while solo-founding.

We will continue the technical discussion once community has spoken its verdict — I’d like to understand your experience with Cell Model and RGB++ specifically, and give you a direct walkthrough of the live pipeline.

To the community: this is the kind of builder(s) I am hoping to attract. The offer stands — this infrastructure needs CKB-native engineers to own it.

2 Likes
14

The project is very interesting, in my opinion at this level ,you dont need the Fund from the DAO, you need the community of investors believing in your project. I dont know about Canada regulation , but you can tokenize the $150000, and let others in the community support you. This way will make you feel more engaged, knowing there are people behind you.We still need valuable Tokens under CKB umbrella.

4 Likes
15

Since this proposal went live 8 days ago and i started marketing, I ve been real stress tested and asked specific questions about choosing CKB over other available options,

Metric At Posting Now
Pipeline runs 96 ~350+
Dormant cells 108 350+
Bridges to LitVM 33 38+
LTC testnet tombstones 0 1 (10 hours from ask to deployment)

Live update: LitVM (the $50M-backed L1 building on Litecoin) reached out for partnership exploration. We had a 35-minute discovery call with their senior team. They asked about anchoring on Litecoin instead of Bitcoin.

The LTC port took 10 hours. Same pipeline. Same CKB cell model. Same RGB++ binding. Configuration change, not architecture change.

Why this matters for CKB:

  1. CKB’s RGB++ isomorphic binding is what made the BTC→CKB→EVM pipeline work. The same primitives enabled the LTC→CKB→EVM port.

  2. CKB’s cell model is what enables the 6-state asset lifecycle (alive, pending death, dead, reborn, burned) — something EVM UTXOs and Account models can’t represent as cleanly.

  3. LitVM’s senior decision-maker personally verified the LTC tombstone on-chain and asked to publicly post about the integration. A $50M-backed L1 publicly engaging with CKB-anchored infrastructure is real institutional validation.

Next steps:

  • Full LTC→CKB→LitVM pipeline deployment (target: 48 hours)

  • Continued stress testing on BTC and LTC paths

  • Technical deep-dive with LitVM engineering team

The infrastructure works. The architecture is chain-agnostic at the anchor layer. CKB remains the programmable truth layer.

Special thanks to the CKB community — the questions, the pushback, the validation. This is what flagship infrastructure looks like when the community holds it accountable.

Live hashes: https://blockexplorer.one/litecoin/testnet/tx/999bbe9c40e380e03b4d4983d099d065569444728063f0914f5038378e8d19ed

— Aki - Man who refuse to give up on his vision.

4 Likes
16

hi Aki, I really wonder how you technically solve the BTC → CKB pipeline through RGB++ protocol, because as far as I know, this protocol only serves to the direction of CKB → BTC, like in a short term mapping stuffs from CKB to BTC.

That’s the only technic detail I want to know about, thanks for your clarification.

17

Good question, hope this helps : I’m not using RGB++ for the BTC → CKB direction. RGB++ maps CKB assets onto Bitcoin — your understanding is correct. What I’m doing is the reverse: taking a Bitcoin transaction, generating a standard SPV proof, and submitting it to CKB’s native environment for verification. CKB’s RISC-V based architecture is uniquely capable of validating Bitcoin block headers on-chain. Once verified, the data is stored as a cell that other contracts can reference.

1 Like
18

Sorry, it’s just verifying a Bitcoin transaction on CKB, letting CKB know the transaction is legal on BTC, but this isn’t the way to bridge assets from BTC to CKB, because nothing changed on BTC blockchain. Otherwise, assuming the Bitcoin transaction you mentioned here is Luxvoid-oriented, but what exactly of the detail if so?

2 Likes