Adoption of ckAssets ecosystem

ckBTC is live, so is ckETH and ckERC20s (starting with ckUSDT and ckUSDC) are in the works.

The fact that those twin tokens work in a bridgeless manner is an awesome feature. I think it could really bring trust and speed up adoption.

But for a nice snowball effect, everything has to be perfect.

Here are some ideas I’d like to discuss:


Why do we say ckBTC and not just BTC on ICP ? Same goes for all other ck assets i.e As an average user, unfamilliar with the ICP ecosystem, the “ck” feels scary; at least that’s what I felt of weeks ago when I decided to take a deeper look at ICP.

I know it would not be technically correct to say “BTC on ICP”, but from a marketing standpoint, I think it would be more appealing.

Learning curve

Are there any plans to have big exchanges integrate ckBTC, ckETH, etc.? That would avoid a slow and costly transaction. If I could buy BTC and withdraw BTC “on the ICP network” (i.e ckBTC behind the scenes) directly to a ckBTC address BTC address in an ICP wallet, that would drastically decrease the learning curve, imho.

Also, having very low transaction cost boosts the usage of a blockchain: when transferring USDT from an exchange to another, I look for the cheapest blockchains supported by both exchanges (SOL, TRX,…). So does 95% of users. If “USDT on ICP” is not an option, we miss out on that.

What do you all think? Is any of this possible/considered?

Thanks for reading!

1 Like

Because they’re not the same. Canisters can hold BTC and ETH on their own. ckBTC and ckETH are BTC/ETH that are held by a different canister that offers different semantics than sending around ‘unwrapped’ BTC/ETH

I don’t have any inside information on that, but I would assume so. CMC just started displaying ckBTC and ckETH so I’d assume exchanges could be a logical next step