On Cuve/Uniswap vs PropAMMs. 1. fully permissionless solutions like Curve and Uniswap are crucial infrastructure and i have deep respect for what they built. that said, they are not sufficient to compete with Solana or with TradFi on execution quality. they are particularly valuable in crisis conditions, when professional market makers stop pricing assets and withdraw, passive AMMs keep running. but there is something worth naming honestly: a significant portion of capital sitting in Curve and Uniswap comes from uninformed LPs who don't fully understand the adverse selection they are absorbing. in normal markets they are effectively subsidizing sophisticated traders. that is not a criticism of the protocol. it is a description of who bears the cost. 2. on capital efficiency and earning power, i think you are agreeing with me on the numbers while disagreeing on the conclusion. yes, PropAMMs will have better capital efficiency. yes, competition will compress yields. that is how capitalism and markets work and the user wins. that is not a counterargument... the second order effect is worth naming too. PropAMMs on Ethereum will compress yields for Curve and Uniswap LPs, not just for each other. better informed market makers will take flow away from passive pools. over time, LPs who cannot compete on information will exit. believing that a single mathematical formula can optimally price any asset at any moment, regardless of market conditions, is not a conservative assumption. professional market makers update quotes continuously based on order flow, inventory, volatility, and context. passive AMMs do none of this. locking capital into a static invariant and calling it market structure is, in the end, almost anti capitalistic. it assumes away the information problem that markets exist to solve.