[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Coinweb.io [@CoinwebOfficial](/creator/twitter/CoinwebOfficial) on x 47.2K followers Created: 2025-06-11 14:09:00 UTC Let’s talk about interoperability - and why bragging about TVL in bridges might actually be a red flag 🚩. In traditional DeFi, TVL is often used as a success metric. The more money a protocol holds, the more traction it supposedly has. BUT... when it comes to interoperability - connecting different blockchains - that logic starts to fall apart. Why? Because the way most interoperability protocols work today is by replicating consensus. They build entirely new systems of validators to “watch” what’s happening on different blockchains, agree on it, and move tokens across. To keep these systems secure, they have to lock up huge amounts of capital - sometimes more than 100x the value of what’s actually being transferred. This means two things: X. They're expensive 💸 Many bridges spend millions of dollars per month just to pay validators to maintain their security models. That’s money going into infrastructure that shouldn’t be needed in the first place. X. They're risky 🥷 The more money you lock up in one place, the more attractive it becomes to hackers. In 2022 alone, bridge hacks accounted for the vast majority of crypto exploits - over $2B stolen. These systems create a single point of failure in an ecosystem that’s supposed to be decentralized. So when a project brags about high TVL in their bridge, what they’re really saying is: “Look how much capital we have at risk just to keep this thing working.” Now imagine a different approach. What if we didn’t need extra consensus layers? What if we could move information and value across chains without locking up funds or paying a validator army to maintain trust? That’s where $CWEB comes in. Coinweb uses deterministic logic instead of trust-based consensus. It doesn’t need to “agree” on what happened - it proves it using data that’s already public and final on the connected blockchains. Instead of copying consensus, Coinweb reacts to what’s already confirmed. No oracles, no bridges, no duplicated validation. This model is cheaper, safer, and far more scalable. So next time someone flexes their TVL in a cross-chain protocol, ask them: “Why does your system need that much capital just to function?” Because in a truly efficient design, security doesn’t have to be expensive. It just has to be smart. Do you agree? P.S. Thank you for watching over us and teaching us these things.  XXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [protocol](/topic/protocol) [money](/topic/money) [coins interoperability](/topic/coins-interoperability) [Post Link](https://x.com/CoinwebOfficial/status/1932802249484337364)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Coinweb.io @CoinwebOfficial on x 47.2K followers
Created: 2025-06-11 14:09:00 UTC
Let’s talk about interoperability - and why bragging about TVL in bridges might actually be a red flag 🚩.
In traditional DeFi, TVL is often used as a success metric. The more money a protocol holds, the more traction it supposedly has.
BUT... when it comes to interoperability - connecting different blockchains - that logic starts to fall apart.
Why?
Because the way most interoperability protocols work today is by replicating consensus. They build entirely new systems of validators to “watch” what’s happening on different blockchains, agree on it, and move tokens across.
To keep these systems secure, they have to lock up huge amounts of capital - sometimes more than 100x the value of what’s actually being transferred.
This means two things:
X. They're expensive 💸 Many bridges spend millions of dollars per month just to pay validators to maintain their security models. That’s money going into infrastructure that shouldn’t be needed in the first place.
X. They're risky 🥷 The more money you lock up in one place, the more attractive it becomes to hackers. In 2022 alone, bridge hacks accounted for the vast majority of crypto exploits - over $2B stolen. These systems create a single point of failure in an ecosystem that’s supposed to be decentralized.
So when a project brags about high TVL in their bridge, what they’re really saying is:
“Look how much capital we have at risk just to keep this thing working.”
Now imagine a different approach.
What if we didn’t need extra consensus layers?
What if we could move information and value across chains without locking up funds or paying a validator army to maintain trust?
That’s where $CWEB comes in.
Coinweb uses deterministic logic instead of trust-based consensus. It doesn’t need to “agree” on what happened - it proves it using data that’s already public and final on the connected blockchains.
Instead of copying consensus, Coinweb reacts to what’s already confirmed. No oracles, no bridges, no duplicated validation.
This model is cheaper, safer, and far more scalable.
So next time someone flexes their TVL in a cross-chain protocol, ask them:
“Why does your system need that much capital just to function?”
Because in a truly efficient design, security doesn’t have to be expensive. It just has to be smart.
Do you agree?
P.S. Thank you for watching over us and teaching us these things.
XXXXX engagements
Related Topics protocol money coins interoperability