The Role of Modular Blockchains, Decentralized Identity & ZK in Web3 Social Platforms | Web3 Social Day Bangkok
Panel Guests:
- Hongbo Wen, Co-Founder of Nubit
- Brantly Millegan, Creator & Team Lead of Ethereum Follow Protocol (EFP)
- Elias Tazartes, Co-Founder & CEO of Kakarot
Moderator:
- Yisi Liu, Chief Technology Officer of Mask Network
Introduction and Background
Yisi (Mask Network):
Can each of you briefly introduce yourself and the projects you’re working on?
Hongbo (Nubit):
Hello, everyone. Thanks for having me today. I’m Hongbo Wen, co-founder and tech leader at Nubit. I’m also pursuing my PhD at UCSB. As a Bitcoin enthusiast, I’ve dedicated myself to exploring the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Brantly (EFP):
Hi, I’m brantly.eth. I’ve been involved with ENS for many years and ran the core team for a while. I’m still actively involved as a delegate on the DAO and as a member of the security council. I also created Sign-in with Ethereum, an authentication standard for Ethereum accounts. Recently, I launched Ethereum Follow Protocol, a new on-chain social graph protocol for Ethereum that complements ENS.
Elias (Kakarot):
Hey, I’m Elias. I’m part of the founding team of Kakarot, a provable EVM project. Think of us as zk-proof providers in the Ethereum compatibility space.
Benefits of Using Different Protocols for Web3 Social Applications
Yisi (Mask Network):
We have a panel from different backgrounds today. Our discussion will focus on social applications. It’s important to explore how different protocols — like Bitcoin, BitVM, or even provable zk EVMs — can benefit social applications. My first question: If you’re a developer building a social application, why should you use your platform or protocol?
Hongbo (Nubit):
From my perspective, building a decentralized social application on Bitcoin presents a challenge: Bitcoin doesn’t support smart contracts. However, with the BVN protocol, a Turing-complete execution environment, developers can meet their technical requirements for social applications. Nubit helps lower the barrier to using BVN, offering developers easy-to-use tools to build social-specific zk-proof technologies on Bitcoin. That’s the unique advantage we provide.
Yisi (Mask Network):
What about you, Brantly?
Brantly (EFP):
I think EVM is all we need for social applications (laughs). Of course, other protocols exist, but everything successful in social so far has been built on EVM. ENS usernames and profiles, Sign-in with Ethereum, and projects like Farcaster and Lens — these are all EVM-based. EVM has already proven successful for social applications.
But we live in a multi-chain world, and we need to accommodate that. My vision is to continue building success within the EVM ecosystem while finding ways to incorporate other VMs as well.
Elias (Kakarot):
I agree, EVM is all we need for now.
Brantly (EFP):
Don’t worry, we’ll support Bitcoin eventually!
Elias (Kakarot):
What makes everything work, especially in the multi-chain world, is zk. Zk proofs glue everything together. There are so many new protocols being developed, and it’s hard to keep up. ENS has been dominant because it’s been around longer and works, providing a foundation to build a social graph. Zk allows us to make cross-chain social interactions possible, enabling compatibility across different chains and VMs.
Brantly (EFP):
I’m very bullish on zk — obviously, it’s the future.
On-Chain Social Algorithms and EVM’s Limitations
Yisi (Mask Network):
If both of you are so bullish on Ethereum, why can’t we run modern social media algorithms directly on EVM? For example, community discovery algorithms — how would you recommend handling these on-chain? Is it even feasible to run such algorithms directly on the chain?
Brantly (EFP):
On-chain? Well, we don’t need to run everything on-chain. For example, in Ethereum Follow Protocol, we store on-chain the data that’s critical — like who you follow — but we don’t store a list of everyone who follows you. Running global knowledge of everyone’s followers on-chain would be wasteful. Most of the analysis can be done off-chain, but the important bits, like who you follow, are stored on-chain.
I believe the goal with Web3 social platforms is to ensure that all the data needed to reconstruct a social graph is available on-chain, even if some of the computation happens off-chain.
Elias (Kakarot):
It took us a while to realize that EVM alone can’t solve all of it. While EVM is sufficient to build something, the cost of transactions and confirmation times — like paying 10 euros per transaction — weren’t sustainable. We needed a user experience similar to Web2: free transactions and instant confirmations. This is where zk and roll-ups like Arbitrum and Base come in. They offer scalability and low fees.
Brantly (EFP):
Just to clarify, EVM itself isn’t responsible for block times or transaction fees. It’s the layer one infrastructure that matters there.
Elias (Kakarot):
Exactly. It’s not the VM but the overall blockchain infrastructure.
Brantly (EFP):
Right, EVM doesn’t dictate transaction speed or cost, just how the logic is executed.
Bitcoin’s Role and zk Integration
Yisi (Mask Network):
Hongbo, why do you think the Bitcoin community should be separated from the Ethereum ecosystem? Why not integrate Bitcoin with other ecosystems like Ethereum?
Hongbo (Nubit):
In Bitcoin, the community is much more decentralized compared to Ethereum. Ethereum has clear leaders like Vitalik and the Ethereum Foundation, which direct its roadmap. Bitcoin’s decentralized nature means there’s less centralization in decision-making, and that’s a key aspect of its community.
That said, there are significant social needs within the Bitcoin ecosystem. We can analyze social behaviors on-chain in Bitcoin, but we also need privacy. For instance, I might prove I own one BTC but not reveal how much I have. That’s where zk can come in to preserve privacy while still verifying ownership.
Yisi (Mask Network):
Can zk be used to solve that?
Elias (Kakarot):
Exactly! When we say EVM is all we need, we mean that EVM offers the abstraction layer for most use cases. That’s why we see more than 80 Bitcoin sidechains now, many of them based on EVM. These sidechains bring the expressiveness of EVM to Bitcoin’s security. However, the Bitcoin ecosystem isn’t as mature when it comes to zk security for roll-ups yet. Fortunately, there’s significant research being done to secure Bitcoin-based zk roll-ups, and the Bitcoin community has many talented individuals working on this.
Brantly (EFP):
It’s true that Bitcoin’s ecosystem is a bit behind on zk roll-up security, but I’m confident they’ll catch up. In the meantime, EVM-based solutions continue to drive the Web3 social experience.
Yisi (Mask Network):
It’s clear that different ecosystems have unique strengths, but zk and EVM seem to be the connective tissue making Web3 social platforms possible across chains. As we continue to see new developments in zk technology, it’s exciting to think about how they’ll enhance scalability, privacy, and integration in a multi-chain world.
Privacy in Web3 Social
Yisi (Mask Network): Privacy has been a key focus for Mask, and we’re very interested in how privacy is positioned in Web3 social. With everything being on-chain and public, how do we maintain privacy in this space? Is it still important? And if so, how and where should we implement it? If not, why not?
Hongbo (Nubit): Privacy is still important. Analyzing blockchain behavior, especially of large holders, shows that control over personal data is crucial. My activities and data should be in my control.
Brantly (EFP): Privacy has always been a challenge in blockchain, with some progress through zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs). While these have the potential to solve privacy, I think the more important point is that we can still build with everything being public. Privacy can evolve over time, but we need to act now and address it later.
Elias (Kakarot): From a user perspective, privacy must come at little to no cost. ZKPs are expensive, and users don’t want to wait for long processing times. People don’t care much about privacy, especially when it adds friction, like consent forms or loading times. The same challenge applies to Web2 — no one reads the fine print or cares about data privacy.
Brantly (EFP): I agree. Historically, even simple cryptography like PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) had limited adoption because of its difficulty. But with blockchain and public key cryptography, we’ve given millions of people private keys, and the economic incentives are what drive adoption now. We need to continue to find ways to make privacy attractive through these incentives.
Data on-chain vs. Off-chain
Yisi (Mask Network): For Web3 social, how much data needs to be on-chain? ENS and EFP only store minimal data, like following relationships. Do we need to go fully on-chain, or is it better to store some data off-chain to lower costs and rely on external computation platforms?
Brantly (EFP): It’s essential to put critical data on-chain for robustness and user control, like ENS names or profile data. While not all operations need to be on-chain, the key data should be. This ensures that even if the system goes down, you can rebuild from the on-chain data.
Hongbo (Nubit): I agree. Keeping social data on-chain ensures that the user has total control. Without on-chain data, the risk of centralized service providers taking over would increase. It’s important for decentralization and user sovereignty.
Elias (Kakarot): From a cost perspective, decentralization needs to be affordable. If decentralized protocols are more expensive than centralized alternatives, they risk failing. So we should put the minimal amount of data on-chain and use ZKPs to ensure privacy when necessary. The challenge is to find the right balance.
Yisi (Mask Network): There’s been a back-and-forth between storing everything on-chain and then realizing the costs are too high. With ZKPs, off-chain storage could be feasible, but again, cost and user experience are factors. How do we attract users to Web3 social platforms, especially if they don’t care about developer costs?
Hongbo (Nubit): DAOs will reduce the costs of storing data on-chain, which will make decentralized social data more accessible and affordable. Users are becoming more aware of the data issues in Web2, especially regarding fake function calls and data leasing by Web2 providers. This will push users to Web3 social networks.
Brantly (EFP): I think trying to directly compete with Twitter clones is a mistake. Twitter already excels in certain areas, like Twitter Space. Instead, we should focus on leveraging the social graph in Web3. For example, EFP can help identify Ethereum accounts through community relationships, which is a more powerful use case for Web3 social.
Web3 Social: Attracting Users
Yisi (Mask Network): How do you convince users to switch from Web2 social platforms like Twitter to Web3 social? What’s the incentive for them to join?
Brantly (EFP): I believe the idea of creating direct competitors to Twitter is flawed. Instead, we should focus on offering unique benefits. EFP is less about creating a social feed and more about building identity and relationships in the Ethereum community. Web3 social will attract people by providing control, privacy, and verifiable relationships rather than just mimicking Web2 platforms.
Elias (Kakarot): Web2 apps do a good job of personalizing content based on intimate user data, which Web3 currently lacks. But Web3’s advantage is in composability — using ZKPs, we can create digital clubs where entry is based on various credentials, like being an ENS user or owning certain assets. This is an area where Web3 has a distinct edge.
Managing Web3 Identity and Security
Yisi (Mask Network): None of the projects we’re discussing seem to address managing personal properties in Web3. Do you think this is a major hurdle for mass adoption?
Elias (Kakarot): The problem of managing private keys is increasingly being solved with account abstraction wallets and recovery options like Passkey and Face ID. The tech is there, but distribution is still a challenge. Most people still use MetaMask, but better alternatives are emerging.
Brantly (EFP): The incentive for solving key management now is much stronger than it was before. A multi-billion dollar industry is focused on improving this, and while it’s still not perfect, progress is significant and will continue.
Hongbo (Nubit): Key management is crucial in Web3. Even today, many users still mishandle their private keys, which remains a major challenge. Educating users on best practices will be essential for Web3’s future success.
The Vision for Web3 Projects
Yisi (Mask Network): As we wrap up, can you share your vision behind the projects you’re building, not just in Web3 social, but more broadly?
Hongbo (Nubit): For us, it’s about making Bitcoin more accessible and imaginative, beyond just a store of value, and bringing new ideas into the space.
Brantly (EFP): I’m focused on building the Ethereum identity stack — basic primitives like ENS for names, EFP for the social graph, and Sign-In with Ethereum for authentication. The key is modularity — each element can be improved or replaced without affecting others, which makes the system more decentralized and flexible.
Elias (Kakarot): My focus is on the zk stack, which uses ZKPs to scale crypto and provide security and integrity. Ethereum and Bitcoin are the best settlement layers, and by using ZKPs, we can scale Web3 to trillions of transactions annually, securely and in a composable way.
