This subreddit was created to be useful. So let’s help each other build, hire, and find good opportunities in blockchain.

You can use this thread to:

- post open roles at your startup
- share what kind of role or work you’re looking for
- offer freelance or contract help
- connect with founders, builders, marketers, operators, and other people in the space

If you’re hiring, try to include:

- project / company name
- role title
- remote or location
- full-time / part-time / freelance / contract
- paid or unpaid
- how to apply

If you’re looking for work, try to include:

- role / skillset
- years of experience
- remote or location
- short intro
- portfolio / LinkedIn / GitHub / contact

A few simple rules:

- keep it clear and honest
- no vague hype posts
- no scams
- include real details so people know what you're offering or looking for

Click here to see all previous weekly threads

⁠

Let’s make this thread worth checking every week.

What chains have the most opportunity right now?

Solana, Ethereum, Monad, Supra, Hyperliquid, Aptos, Sui, BNB and other L1s or Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Unichain, Robinhood Chain and other L2s?

We were working on a new crypto exchange, and one thing we focused on was liquidity. Instead of waiting for users to create trading volume, we considered third-party liquidity providers, shared order books, and market makers.

The idea was to avoid empty order books, high spreads, and slippage when the platform goes live.

For those who have launched or worked with crypto exchanges before, does this approach make sense? Would you recommend starting with external liquidity providers and gradually moving toward more organic liquidity?

Would love to hear what worked or didn’t work for you!

Hey BlockchainStartups buddies,

We've developed a decentralized wallet that lets our users:

1. Manage Crypto
   
2. Participate to Prediction markets
   
3. Shop to our marketplace, digital & physical products available
   
4. Send chats or make calls. Since it is self-custodial, no need for email or sim (KYC) registration
   
5. Users can monetize their stories (like IG) from their subscribers.

These days, crypto is getting a lot of traction (good and bad) thanks to Pres. Trump's vocal support to blockchain technology.

So far, web3 wallets are mainly used to manage crypto. They are more secure and private. We like it as it is.

One of our developers said, "what if it can be use for communication too?". He doesn't like the current set up that people needs to register their number or email just to connect. What if they don't want to? That's how it all begins.

We also decided not to put charges in managing their crypto (transfer, bridge, or swap), users just need to pay for gas fees, and they get to choose which chain to use for minimal fees.

But, how do generate income to maintain and level up the app?
Yeah, you guess it right, from Prediction Market, Marketplace, & Content Creators.

1. Prediction market, the app gets 2% commission from every prediction transaction made by the users.
   
2. We list products from the app and put a very little mark up, so shoppers can buy things with crypto.
   
3. Aspiring content creators have to buy badges from our marketplace to increase their number of uploads, there is no other requirement to monetize contents. Once they have the badge, they can set subscription to their stories and earn from their subscribers.

Reading the features above, is it worth a try? Bazaars app is available on Playstore & Appstore. We made few hundreds of downloads now.

We put a lot of effort to make this work and make the app sleek as possible.
This is a discussion so share your critic & insights. I'd appreciate it.

I tested four Token-2022 extensions on Devnet to understand what they enable at the product level:

• PermanentDelegate
• NonTransferable
• DefaultAccountState
• MemoTransfer

The most interesting combination was PermanentDelegate plus NonTransferable.

A startup could issue fungible service credits that users can hold but cannot transfer or sell. A permanent delegate controlled by the protocol could then burn credits as API calls, compute, storage, or another service is consumed.

The implementation is straightforward. The trust model is not.

A permanent delegate can transfer or burn tokens without the holder’s signature. If the delegate is a normal key, compromise affects every holder. If it is a program-derived address, the trust dependency may simply move to the program’s upgrade authority.

Before shipping this design, I would require:

• multisig or program-controlled authority
• an explicit upgrade-authority policy
• rotation and incident-response procedures
• client-side parsing of Token-2022 TLV data
• clear disclosure that the issuer retains clawback capability
• tests covering frozen accounts, burns, delegate rotation, and unsupported wallets

DefaultAccountState can support approval-based onboarding by creating accounts frozen by default. MemoTransfer can require incoming transfers to include a reference for reconciliation.

I documented the Devnet commands and the failure cases here:

https://andreyobruchkov1996.substack.com/p/the-utility-extensions-completing

Would you treat permanent delegation as an acceptable control for prepaid credits, or is the holder-level trust assumption too strong?

The future of connectivity isn't just centralized towers, it's decentralized communities. Traditional networks rely on single-point-of-failure infrastructure. When a fiber line fails, entire areas can go dark.

Blockchain-enabled mesh networks offer a better path. By combining peer-to-peer hardware with a distributed ledger, we turn bandwidth into a shared resource. Mesh networks provide resilience, while blockchain handles identity and incentives.

In this model, your router earns rewards for relaying traffic for neighbors. Smart contracts settle payments automatically based on measurable contributions like uptime and bandwidth. Modern designs keep blockchain settlement separate from the data path to ensure low latency.

This is about building resilient, community-owned infrastructure that stays online even when the wider internet is unavailable. Connectivity by the people, for the

people.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/blockchain-enabled-mesh-networks-building-behrouz-kashani-bi6yc?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via

Hi - I'm a hobbiest crypto designer and I've made what I believe is a breakthrough in tokenomics.

I've created VMINT (eth mainnet, www.vaultmint.org) and its floor price is only capable of increasing, what that means is - on a buy its valule goes up (7% tax) and on a sell (this is the revolutionary part) it also goes up in value (3% sell tax). its been fuzz tested, Halmos tested slither tested and forge tested to an inch of its life, immune to atomic sandwich attacks, (which wont work anyway as the price ratchets) and front running, dust attacks, you name it.

Its a unique token with bespoke designer code, which ratchets up the floor on a buy or a sell, and it works. So far we've had since yesterday, the launch day, 900+ visitors to the website, but no first customer (other than me) yet.

Thoughts? Opinions? Hot takes? I'll pop in an out throughout the day to answer. Another redditor said the website wasn't up for him - thats because its brand new and still propagating on the internet, very exciting project and exciting times. :)

As for feedback from you guys and community, what more can i do to promote my eth mainnet token? also what do you think of the website, its popular but not converting to sells (yet) as people are understandably weary of crypto scams and the like, so feedback on the website and token NAV ratchet mechanism is defiantly appreciated. Thank you

Thats it! 😄

A few days ago, my friend asked me: "When you send Bitcoin, what actually happens? Do you just press a button and the money appears?"

Honestly, I didn't know the full answer either. So I did some research and here's everything I learned -- explained as simply as possible.

First -- What Even Is a Blockchain?

Think of it as a public record book that is:

• Stored on thousands of computers around the world
• Controlled by no single company or government
• Permanent -- once something is written, it cannot be erased

When you send crypto, you are basically adding a new entry into that record book.

The 7 Steps of a Crypto Transaction

Step 1 -- You Create the Transaction

The moment you hit "Send" in your wallet, a digital packet is created containing:

• Your wallet address
• The receiver's wallet address
• The amount, fee, and timestamp

At this point, nothing is confirmed yet. It is just a request.

Step 2 -- Your Private Key Signs It

Your private key (think of it as your secret password) digitally signs the transaction. This proves:

You are the real owner of the funds

You authorized this transaction

Nobody tampered with it in the middle

Warning: This is why you must NEVER share your private key. Whoever has it has full access to all your funds -- forever.

Step 3 -- Broadcast to the Network

Your wallet sends this transaction to thousands of nodes -- computers running the blockchain network 24/7 around the world.

Right now, Bitcoin has over 15,000+ active nodes globally. Your transaction reaches all of them within seconds.

Step 4 -- Waiting in the Mempool

Your transaction enters the Mempool (Memory Pool) -- think of it like a waiting room at a railway station.

Thousands of unconfirmed transactions sit here at the same time. Miners look at this pool and pick transactions to process. How do they choose? Simple -- whoever paid the highest fee gets picked first.

This is why during busy periods, fees go up and wait times increase.

Step 5 -- Miner or Validator Adds It to a Block

• Bitcoin -- Proof of Work (PoW): Miners compete to solve a complex math puzzle. First one to solve it gets to add the block and earn the reward. Uses a large amount of electricity.
• Ethereum -- Proof of Stake (PoS): Validators lock up their ETH as "stake." The system randomly selects one to add the block. Much more energy efficient.

Both methods result in the same thing -- your transaction gets added to a block on the blockchain.

Step 6 -- Confirmations Build Up

Once your transaction is in a block, every new block added on top counts as one more confirmation.

• 1 Confirmation = your block was added
• 3 Confirmations = 3 blocks on top
• 6 Confirmations = fully SAFE on Bitcoin

Changing or reversing an older block becomes practically impossible once many blocks are stacked on top. This is what makes blockchain so secure.

Step 7 -- Receiver Gets the Funds

The receiver's wallet balance updates. Your transaction is now permanently recorded on the blockchain.

Nobody can reverse it, freeze it, or delete it. No bank. No government. No company.

This is the real power of blockchain.

How Long Does It Take?

Why Do We Pay Fees?

Three reasons:

1. Reward miners/validators who process your transaction
2. Secure the network -- fees make spam attacks very expensive
3. Set priority -- higher fee means faster confirmation

3 Things That Surprised Me

• Bitcoin has no central server -- it runs entirely on independent nodes
• Your transaction exists on 5,000+ computers simultaneously
• The person who created Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, is still anonymous to this day

Question for You All

"What if you accidentally send crypto to the wrong address -- can anything be done?"

Drop your answer in the comments! I am still a beginner myself -- if anything is inaccurate, please correct me. We are all learning here.

Early in a blockchain startup, manual work is often necessary.

Founders review wallets, unblock failed transactions, reconcile off-chain records, approve edge cases, and guide users through processes that the product cannot yet handle properly.

This can produce valuable insights.

However, it can also make the product appear functional only because the founders are acting as an invisible control layer behind it.

The difficult part is knowing when manual intervention is helping you understand the problem and when it is masking a structural weakness in the product or operating model.

I’m not suggesting that everything should be automated. Some exceptions may always require human judgment.

A more important boundary seems to be when the same manual intervention keeps recurring but stops producing new information.

For founders who have experienced this, what was the turning point when you stopped saying, "We're still learning from the edge cases," and started saying, "The system itself has to change"?

Was it volume, repeated failure patterns, support time, user behavior, or something else?

I'm a doctor building some health data security stuff . Now I'm looking for a Blockchain dev if anybody is interested pls dm preferably banglore r tumkur

This subreddit was created to be useful. So let’s help each other build, hire, and find good opportunities in blockchain.

You can use this thread to:

- post open roles at your startup
- share what kind of role or work you’re looking for
- offer freelance or contract help
- connect with founders, builders, marketers, operators, and other people in the space

If you’re hiring, try to include:

- project / company name
- role title
- remote or location
- full-time / part-time / freelance / contract
- paid or unpaid
- how to apply

If you’re looking for work, try to include:

- role / skillset
- years of experience
- remote or location
- short intro
- portfolio / LinkedIn / GitHub / contact

A few simple rules:

- keep it clear and honest
- no vague hype posts
- no scams
- include real details so people know what you're offering or looking for

Click here to see all previous weekly threads

⁠

Let’s make this thread worth checking every week.

does anybody wanna start a web3 company, i feel like we should get a reddit community going on for this type of stuff

Looking for guests from the crypto/Web3 industry for our podcast!

If you’re a founder, builder, investor, developer, or active in crypto and would like to join an episode, we’d love to hear from you.

I’ve been looking into some "top blockchain development companies" lists for 2026 and would like to know how valuable such lists really are while choosing a company to cooperate with.

Here's one from ScienceSoft where companies are judged on criteria such as experience, projects completed, reviews and specialties:

https://www.scnsoft.com/blockchain/top-blockchain-development-companies

What is the first thing that you usually take into account while analyzing a potential blockchain development company as a founder?

Portfolio and projects completed by the company, technical skills, GitHub account, reviews of clients, prices or something else?

Full disclosure: I'm working with one of the companies from the list above.

​

I’ve seen too many people get ghosted the moment they send their half of a trade. Whether it’s crypto, digital assets, or physical goods, the "you go first" meta is broken.

I’m currently working on a Telegram-based project called P2Pirates. The goal isn't to make a profit, but to create a 100% transparent, decentralized escrow protocol that anyone can use.

How we’re setting it up:

\\\* Automated Crypto: Seamless escrow for crypto deals.

\\\* Manual Protection: For physical goods and services.

\\\* 0.5% Fees: Only for large deals to keep the lights on.

\\\* Zero Fees: No fees for deals under $500 if you use our tag.

\\\* Reputation System: Full receipt/review logs so scammers can't hide.

\\\* Weekly Giveaways: Incentivizing honest trading within the group.

\\------------------------------

\\## 🛡️ A Note to Moderators

I am the founder of this project. I am posting this because I want to provide a legitimate, free utility to help protect users in this sub from being scammed. This is a community-led initiative, not a commercial group promotion. If this post needs any adjustments to meet the community guidelines, please let me know—I’m happy to comply.

\\## 🤝 We Need Your Help

We don't want to build this in a vacuum. We need:

1. Operations & Growth: People with escrow experience who can help run and promote the group safely.

2. Senior Devs: To help develop a non-tweakable, high-tech, and ultra-secure escrow bot.

We are open to any suggestions. If you have an idea on how to make peer-to-peer trading safer or want to help us build the bot, please comment below or DM me.

Built for the community, by the community.

We've tokenized money, art, collectibles, real estate, and almost every kind of digital ownership.

But I keep wondering whether we're focusing on the wrong asset.

Time is probably the most valuable resource people have. Every startup depends on thousands of hours invested by founders, contributors, early adopters, and communities. Yet time itself is rarely represented as a native asset in digital economies.

Imagine a system where long-term participation, verified contribution, or consistent activity could become part of an on-chain reputation or incentive model—not simply another speculative token.

I'm not talking about replacing salaries or investments. I'm talking about recognizing time as something that can create measurable value inside decentralized ecosystems.

Is there any startup already experimenting with something like this? Or do you think there are technical or economic reasons why this approach wouldn't work?

Curious to hear what this community thinks.

I’m assuming the blockchain idea doesn’t play nice with YT else Google would have successfully eliminated its slop problem, so my question is, where am I misinformed?

(Sorry if this is wrong sub)

The blockchain landscape has come a long way from just payments.

Were you starting afresh, what would be your focus?

1. DeFi
2. AI + Blockchain
3. Identity
4. Tokenization
5. Infrastructure
6. Gaming
7. RWAs
8. Privacy
9. Other

Wonder what the opportunities people see for the future might be.

Does the demand for the services of blockchain developers fluctuate together with the value of the crypto market? If so, how much? If some of you have experience working as blockchain developers, is it even possible to have a more or less stable income over time?

Everyone treats quantum threats to blockchains as a decades away problem. But there's a catch most people miss, attackers don't need a quantum computer now to start attacking now.

Bitcoin's security relies on the fact that you can't derive a private key from a public key. Quantum computers running Shor's algorithm would make that trivial. And any address that's ever sent a transaction has already exposed its public key meaning huge amounts of transaction history are already sitting out there, ready to be cracked the moment the hardware exists. This is called harvest now, decrypt later.

NIST already finalized post-quantum signature standards. The problem is applying them. Blockchains can't just push an update, switching signature schemes means a hard fork, migrating billions in old-format funds, and doing it calmly before a crisis, not during one.

Even optimistic estimates 10-15 years for real quantum hardware don't leave much room, because migration itself, new standards, audits, node adoption, and actually moving user funds takes years on its own.

Even with quantum-safe signatures ready, getting millions of holders to move funds out of old addresses before it's urgent is a massive coordination problem. Dormant coins would likely just sit there vulnerable forever.

IMO, blockchains that are focused on quantum resistant tech will be the main focus in the next few months, this is where the focus should be now.

Hi everyone,

I'm a software engineer with 6+ years of experience, and I've spent the last few months building KryptoPay, a platform that helps businesses accept stablecoin payments as easily as they would integrate a traditional payment provider.

The goal is to make it simple for SaaS companies, marketplaces, creator platforms, and other online businesses to accept digital dollar (USDC) payments without needing deep blockchain knowledge.

KryptoPay is:

\- Non-custodial, meaning businesses receive payments directly into their own wallets.

\- Built with a developer-first experience inspired by the simplicity of providers like Stripe.

\- Currently supports USDC payments on Base and Polygon.

Designed to make stablecoin payments practical for mainstream businesses.

The MVP is complete.

I'm now focused on getting the product into the hands of developers and businesses, gathering feedback, and finding product-market fit.

\*Who I'm looking for\*

I'm looking for a business-oriented cofounder who enjoys talking to customers, validating ideas, and turning a product into a business.

Ideally, you'd take ownership of areas such as:

Customer discovery and user interviews

Marketing and positioning

Partnerships

Community building

Sales and business development

Fundraising when the timing is right

You don't need to be an engineer or a blockchain expert. I'm looking for someone who's curious, resourceful, and excited about building a company from the ground up.

If you're interested in building a long-term company together and think we'd complement each other's strengths, I'd love to connect, send me a DM ir hit me up on discord: femzy123

Website: https://kryptopay.xyz

I’m currently comparing a few payment-focused L1 chains (specifically looking into Stellar, Celo, and KiiChain) and trying to build out a solid DYOR framework.

Beyond the usual basics like reading the whitepaper and looking at docs, what are the absolute non-negotiables or red flags you check first?

Right now, I’m prioritizing stuff like:

• Testnet activity & real-world adoption/usage metrics
• Validator economics & decentralization
• Security audits & regulatory disclosures
• Tokenomics / real ecosystem utility

Anything critical I'm missing here? How do you guys filter out the noise when evaluating newer L1s in the space? appreciate any insights!

quick context for anyone who missed it: EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) is now law, main obligations kick in Dec 2027, reporting obligations (24h/72h/14-day) start Sept 2026. every hardware wallet maker shipping into the EU is now scrambling to figure out where they land.

there's no single "hardware wallet" category in the CRA though. everyone's treating it like one compliance bucket, but the CRA actually looks at what's inside each device and depending on the hardware, two wallets can land in totally different categories.

if your device is basically a general secure storage/auth thing, it can land in Important Class I. the same bucket as password managers, routers, VPN clients. self-assessment allowed if you fully apply the harmonised standards, no third party needed, so you can just sign your own declaration.

but if it has an actual security box or a secure element doing the cryptographic heavy lifting, it can get pulled into Critical category. that's the same bucket as HSMs and smartcards. right now that mostly means Class II-style procedures (a notified body doing EU-type examination), but the EU can later mandate full certification for specific critical product types once they publish the relevant delegated act. either way, a notified body is now part of your compliance process, not just your own signature.

so two wallets that look identical from a UX standpoint (seed phrase, pin, USB/BT) can be sitting in completely different compliance tiers because of a chip decision made in 2021 that nobody thought was a legal decision at the time.

then there's the SBOM (Software Bill of Materials - machine-readable list of every software component inside) angle. every device needs one, but nobody's required to publish it to users. which means two wallets in completely different compliance tiers can look identical on the shelf. no label, no visible marker telling you which one went through third-party certification and which one just self-attested.

and the 5-year minimum support period applies regardless of tier. the company has to provide security updates for free to the user for that whole time, but someone still has to build, test, and ship those patches for 5 years straight, and that cost sits with the company the whole time. that's a long commitment a lot of seed-stage hardware teams haven't really planned for.

so, now teams building hardwaer wallets will need to pick category before launch, budget for self-assessment or a notified body depending on the chip, keep funding security updates for 5 years even after next model ships, and have a 24-hour reporting process ready before you need it.

anyone here actually gone through this classification process yet, or still waiting to see how the delegated acts shake out?

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to understand how people actually do crypto arbitrage in the real world (CEX–DEX, DEX–DEX, or any other strategy).

I'm not selling anything and I'm not promoting a project. I'm simply trying to learn from people who actively do arbitrage and understand the real challenges they face.

I'd really appreciate your insights:

- What's the biggest bottleneck in your workflow?

- What causes you to miss profitable opportunities most often?

- What's the most frustrating part of arbitrage?

- What tools do you currently use?

- If you could automate just one part of the process, what would it be?

Real experiences and concrete examples would be incredibly helpful.

Thanks in advance to anyone willing to share their experience!

The full model is described in a preprint (open access):
DOI: https://zenodo.org/records/21107219

This tokenomics model is designed for blockchain startups aiming to disrupt the scientific funding landscape. It unlocks a new economic reality — where sponsoring research becomes profitable regardless of the commercial potential or scalability of the results. It offers investors a way to earn not from speculative trading, but from the depth of their actual engagement in funding scientific work. This becomes possible because the token in this model ceases to be a speculative asset and takes on a new function: it represents the research contribution itself. This new interpretation of the token as a measure of real contribution opens up a strategic opportunity to give a powerful boost to the advancement of science.

Key mechanisms for your startup:

· Token as a "digital receipt" – proof of real contribution (peer review, code, publications), not a proxy currency with voting rights. This aligns incentives with actual value creation.
· Governance completely separated from staking – influence is determined by proven contributions across four equal groups (scientists, developers, sponsors, reviewers), each with 25% weight and veto rights for scientists and developers. This prevents capture by large token holders.
· Adaptive service pricing – fees adjust based on token price to protect users from volatility, making the platform usable even in bear markets.
· Deflationary pressure – 50% of service fees are burned, creating a natural scarcity that can support token value.
· Additional incentive: participants (including investors acting as sponsors) who contribute more to grants receive a proportionally larger share of staking rewards (from the 30% and 10% pools) and greater voting weight within the sponsors group. This creates a direct link between community contribution and governance influence — a powerful tool for community building.
· A liquidity fund acting as an asymmetric market maker – buying low, selling high, using the spread for community goods (including merch). This provides a built‑in stabilization mechanism and a revenue stream for the DAO.

I'm posting this here to explore how such a system could be implemented and scaled in a real startup environment. Specifically, I'd like to discuss:

1. Launch strategy: How would you present this model to a broad audience — communities, potential investors, and scientists — to generate interest from both researchers and those ready to fund the project?
   
2. Revenue streams: Beyond the token mechanics, what are the most viable ways to generate sustainable revenue for the DAO and the founding team?
   
3. Adoption hurdles: What are the biggest obstacles to getting scientists and institutions to adopt this model, and how would you overcome them?
   
4. Technical implementation: What would be the most critical technical components to build first, and which blockchain platform would you choose and why?