TheFutureIsKaspa 𐤊

We’re excited to see this! Great work, @kaspagrowth

60+ Enterprise Markets to Be Disrupted by #Kaspa Tech #33 Food Delivery Apps Food delivery apps connect customers, restaurants and couriers, but the platform sits in the middle of almost every part of the transaction. It receives the order, handles payment, tracks delivery, calculates fees, pays restaurants and couriers, manages disputes and keeps the transaction history. Legacy Platforms & Systems • DoorDash, Uber Eats, Skip and Deliveroo • Centralized restaurant and courier marketplaces • Credit and debit card payment networks • GPS and mapping APIs • Restaurant POS integrations • Proprietary courier matching and dispatch • Platform-controlled ratings and reputation • Scheduled restaurant and courier payouts These platforms provide useful services including discovery, logistics and support. There is still plenty of room to rethink how the order, payment and settlement underneath those services work. What’s Broken / Innovation Gaps ❌ Restaurants and couriers depend on a central platform for settlement ❌ Customer payment, restaurant payment and courier payment are separate processes ❌ Payments can settle long after the food is delivered ❌ Order status and disputes depend on platform-controlled records ❌ Refunds and cancellations require the platform to determine where the money goes ❌ Ratings and work history are trapped inside individual apps ❌ Restaurants have limited control over marketplace customer relationships ❌ More automated commerce will require programmable payment and settlement Where Food Delivery Can Still Innovate and Where Kaspa Tech Could Help ❌ The platform controls the money from checkout to payout ✅ Payment could be locked at checkout with the conditions for spending it established from the beginning. Kaspa Covenants can enforce how a UTXO may be spent and validate its next state. Covenant IDs provide continuity as that state changes. An order could move through accepted, prepared, picked up, delivered, cancelled or refunded states while retaining a verifiable lineage. ❌ Developers have to build that logic close to Kaspa Script ✅ SilverScript now provides a higher-level way to write it. SilverScript v1.0.0 is officially released and compiles to Kaspa Script. Developers can define state and transition policies while the compiler handles much of the lower-level Covenant plumbing, state validation and transaction structure. For a delivery application, that could mean writing rules for when funds remain locked, when an order can advance, which outputs are valid and what conditions allow settlement or refund. ❌ One customer payment eventually has to become several payments ✅ The transaction itself can enforce the agreed outputs. Kaspa’s transaction introspection allows a Covenant to inspect and validate transaction outputs. A delivery contract could require the correct amounts and destinations before allowing locked funds to move. That opens the door to settling the restaurant, courier, taxes and other predefined recipients as part of the completed transaction rather than sending everything through a platform account first. ❌ Delivery confirmation and payment are separate events ✅ Delivery confirmation could become an input to the settlement process. A restaurant scan could verify pickup. A customer QR code, signature or another authenticated action could confirm delivery. The Covenant rules determine what constitutes a valid transition and whether the corresponding payment outputs are allowed. ❌ Restaurants and couriers wait for platform payouts ✅ Settlement could occur as part of the completed order transaction. Once the required conditions are satisfied, Kaspa can settle the valid transaction directly rather than leaving balances inside a platform for later reconciliation. ❌ Cancellations and refunds require someone in the middle to control the funds ✅ Valid refund paths can be written into the contract. A Covenant could allow one transition if an order is cancelled before pickup and another once delivery has been verified. More complicated disputes may still require arbitration or another agreed process. The basic settlement rules do not have to be decided after the fact. ❌ A full delivery marketplace involves more than one contract ✅ This is where Argent becomes interesting. Argent is being developed as an actor-based language and compiler for atomic, multi-contract applications on Kaspa. Argent programs compile to SilverScript and its runtime can construct transactions coordinating multiple actors. A future delivery application could potentially model the customer, restaurant, courier and other participants as separate actors whose contracts participate in one coordinated transaction. Argent is still under active development and needs further auditing and hardening before general production use. ❌ Private customer information should not be exposed publicly ✅ Kaspa’s native ZK verification provides another building block for applications that need to prove something without exposing all of the underlying information. This could eventually be useful for identity, eligibility, delivery or other private verification requirements while keeping unnecessary personal information outside the public transaction history. What could that look like? A customer places an order and the payment is locked according to predefined rules. The restaurant accepts it, the courier verifies pickup, and delivery is confirmed at the door. That final confirmation can trigger a transaction distributing payment to the restaurant, courier, taxes and any other agreed recipients. The delivery app can still handle menus, maps, courier matching, notifications, customer service and logistics. It doesn’t necessarily need to hold the funds and manage settlement between everyone involved. Toccata provides the L1 capabilities. SilverScript gives developers a practical language for writing Covenant logic. Argent is exploring how more complex multi-actor applications can be built above that foundation. Got inspired? Start Building! See links in thread PS - Shout out to @KasperoLabs for demoing their KASDASH app! We're hungry for more!

Now there’s a valuable post. We’ll done, @kaspaunchained Intern.

Kaspa gaining attention from bigger and bigger channels. Couldn’t have asked for a better interviewee than @@KaspaSilver ! Go team Silver! @Gemini

We all love when devs say Kaspa tech is, "neat" and "sexy." But they see through hyper-geek coloured lenses. We still see and hear "bit, bee-boop, buzzz, whirrrrr....0101010111010101000101010010" :) So what does it mean to Commoners and non-tech users? We'll see if we can slice into this one and get to core of its potential. In Michael Sutton's recent post, he pointed out one of the pieces he likes in the current KCC-20 draft: a simple hash-chain idea that can be used with Borrowed Receive. nitter.gq/michaelsuttonil/status… @IzioDev posted with some helpful context around where KCC-20 fits. The first three Kaspa Calls for Conventions are now published as drafts, and together they start to give covenant applications a common language for state, authority and fungible tokens. KCC-20 is the first concrete token standard built on that foundation. Borrowed Receive allows an existing compatible token UTXO to be reused when receiving more of that token, rather than creating another token UTXO that also needs enough KAS to satisfy Kaspa’s storage-mass rules. The owner, KAS value and extended state stay unchanged while the token amount increases. The owner has to opt in and choose how those receives can be authorized. One option is the hash chain Michael highlighted. In a follow-up DM, Izio gave us a much better way to picture it: an onion🧅 (Thanks Chef Izio!) The owner starts with a secret seed and builds layers on top of it. The layers can only be revealed from the outside in, one at a time. The outer layer can be shared with someone else and used once. Kaspa verifies it against the next layer, then that revealed value becomes the new outer edge of the chain. It works a bit like a one-time password. You can temporarily share a one-time permission tied to your UTXO so another party can increase your token amount, without leaving that UTXO open indefinitely and without requiring you to create a fresh signature every time. Izio commented that today something like this could even be shared manually through copy and paste, while wallets could eventually build much smoother UX around it. He also put the onion technique into perspective. It is only one small piece that happens to be easy to create with a covenant, one of many possible techniques. What makes it interesting is how something this simple can still be useful. He mentioned that the hash-chain approach appears to be PQ (post-quantum) resistant. In practical terms, a quantum computer still could not realistically guess or crack the next unrevealed value, or “layer,” in the hash chain. KCC-20 itself is specifically about fungible tokens, but KCC-1 and KCC-2 are laying broader groundwork by giving wallets, indexers and applications common ways to understand covenant state and authority. That means every new application does not have to invent its own format for the same basic ideas. For regular users, that could lead to fewer repeated approvals and smoother application flows while the permissions they set are still enforced by the covenant. Exactly what that experience looks like will depend on what developers build on top of these conventions. For Kaspa, common conventions like these could make L1 applications easier to build and easier for different tools to understand. If that eventually leads to sustained real-world use, it also creates more reasons for people and applications to transact directly on Kaspa, which could add L1 activity and contribute to the fee market over time. All three KCCs are still drafts, so they are open for discussion, testing and refinement. Want to dig into them or join the discussion? See links in thread ▼