Gasyard

Gasyard didn't start as "let's build a cross-chain protocol." It started as frustration.

While building infra at PlayAI (decentralized compute, licensing, attestations, L2 experimentation, AVS POC work), interoperability kept showing up as the recurring pain: different settlement assumptions, different token availability, different finality behaviors.

PlayAI Work (Background)

Some of that PlayAI work is visible publicly and reflects the type of infrastructure I was shipping at the time:

Gasyard became my way of attacking interoperability from the execution angle.

---

V1: Flow Protocol

Idealistic, broke on liquidity realities

We launched early routes, got traction, and then hit the issues most cross-chain systems hit fast: liquidity distribution, withdrawal timing, unstable yield, and "gas token only" limitations.

---

V2: Intent-Based Solver Model

Clean architecture, painful economics

We moved into intent-based flows and solver execution. It worked, but solver economics were heavy: multiple actions, higher cost, one fee event. Decentralization created overhead the user didn't care about.

---

V3: Settlement Layer Thinking

Practical rebuild

V3 was where it became real. We rebuilt around settlement coordination and clearing assumptions, unified flows across environments (EVM, Movement, Solana), added stablecoin focus, and expanded routes (including TRON support due to real stablecoin usage patterns).

---

V3.5: UX + Execution

Swap+bridge, action execution, fallback liquidity

V3.5 is where the system stopped being "a bridge" and started behaving like an execution engine: swap+bridge combined, cross-chain actions, deterministic deposit patterns, gas abstraction, and fallback routing through partners (ex: Stargate).

The most important thing Gasyard taught me: innovation doesn't automatically attract liquidity. Distribution and partnerships do.

That lesson directly shaped the Stableyard direction.