Introducing Push Chain: A Shared State L1 for Universal Apps (CLOSED, MOVING TO VOTE)

Autonomous messaging and on-chain transactions feel like a natural fit here.

This opens up a clear path for AI agents to directly engage with decentralized communication systems —can’t wait to start experimenting. :thought_balloon:

3 Likes

Agree. @harshrajat Can we please do a community call around this? This is a pivotal moment for PUSH protocol and it would be hugely helpful to do a call and clarify a number of things. Thank you.

1 Like

@harshrajat can you please clarify what proportional ownership means in detail? Same % I would assume since it would be the only fair way? Thanks.

1 Like

How will this affect the end user? I have to admit that right now I dont really use Push that much. Not nearly as much as I thought I would use it in 2024/2025 back when I first got involved with the project (EPNS 3 years ago). Then I’d imagined many wallets would’ve integrated the protocol to push notifications to wallet users when on chain events happened.

If i use rabby wallet and someone sends me an NFT on base, i could be notified. If a wallet I followed bought an NFT on Optimism, I could get a notification. If i have a position on Aave that was reaching dangerous levels, a notification.

Instead we have a second app we need to install and connect to another wallet - if i want to connect multiple wallets i dont really find an user-friendly easy way of doing so. If i nudge my friends to check out the project they dont know how to easily onboard with the app.

How will the Push Chain change this? The focus should be onboarding user’s without them even knowing they’ve onboarded! They should be able to receive and interact with notifications directly from the wallet they already use. Integrate in so a user can easily up their PUSH balance when it gets low from group and private chats or other actions they take which require PUSH (future, I know).

Anyway, I know i’ve digressed pretty far from the topic of Push Chain, but these are all hurdles i’ve seen for Push Protocol for 3 years and have watched as none of them appear to even be attempted to hurdle. Now we have set a giant goal in front which, at first glance, doesnt appear to solve any of the issues facing Push Protocol.

Push chain will not make it easier for users to onboard to the system, it will not include users who dont even know what they’re missing. It sets a new barrier of entry, requiring users to find a way to include themselves in yet another network. account abstraction (yay) means yet another wallet/account. I am really concerned that the focus is not geared toward wrecking barriers of entry to onboard new users, working with wallet providers to integrate the protocol natively, and instead looks to throw up giant new barriers and an entirely different direction for the project; which may be related and help, but is not directly necessary or required.

If you’re saying by building your own layer 1 network, something dozens and dozens of projects have done, and many have failed, in order to accomplish the goal Push Protocol set out to accomplish, then perhaps we can have more details on that.

Sorry for the text wall!

2 Likes

Solving the problem of seamless interoperability, which greatly affects both end-users of apps and creators, was a need. Without a doubt, consumer-centric apps are redefining engagement, and Push Chain is now redefining web3.

Super excited about this proposal. Also, I’m curious to learn more about the types of nodes and the hardware requirements, going deeper into the whitepaper.

3 Likes

:bell: Community members should delegate their $PUSH tokens here:
https://app.push.org/govern

3 Likes

All very valid points. The truth is that the number of notifications sent out on PUSH does vastly overstate the current low engagement levels due to just bad UX. Unless this is fixed as you pointed out, it will be extremely difficult to gain traction and we’ll be in the same place again down the road.

As mentioned, we split governance of tech vs tokenomics was to give people enough time to absorb, reflect and answer questions. We will be sticking to tech in this proposal as tokenomics and token comes later. We put in the tokenomics note for two reasons. The first was to ensure the community that tokenomics will come later and no one should attempt to scam them. The second is to ensure that the $PUSH community knows that there will be a token migration and that they will receive ownership in the new chain.

The details of the proposed migration are not yet finalized. If the community approves the idea for Push Chain through governance, then the tokenomics will be sent to the community for review and comments.

2 Likes

How will this affect the end user? … The focus should be onboarding user’s without them even knowing they’ve onboarded!

This is where wallet abstraction really ties in, attaching a quick demo that I recorded showing how users are onboarded without knowing they are onboarded. You can connect from Ethereum and send tx. You can connect from Solana and send tx. You can login via email.

Wallet abstraction means that web3 users don’t leave their ecosystem to come to another chain and this is also the reason why Push is not another L1. Push Chain wallet abstraction fits and expands Push Notifications reach as well.

They should be able to receive and interact with notifications directly from the wallet they already use. Integrate in so a user can easily up their PUSH balance when it gets low from group and private chats or other actions they take which require PUSH (future, I know).

This is a future that PC fits into as well. You know how we introduced gated group chat which is used by Unstoppable but has limited gating functionality, what solves that, having shared state and universal smart contracts - you create the group and you define what user of what blockchain has access.

Same goes for notifications, user no matter of any blockchain can set their price for targetted actions or ads. On top of that, these notifications and messages are done as txs, accruing the value of the projects and integrations.

Push chain will not make it easier for users to onboard to the system, it will not include users who dont even know what they’re missing. It sets a new barrier of entry, requiring users to find a way to include themselves in yet another network. account abstraction (yay) means yet another wallet/account.

No, Push Chain doesn’t require the user to create another wallet as can be seen in the video but best experienced at https://simulate.push.org. The idea was to create a chain that unifies other chains so user experience can be improved, you have the option to create a Push Wallet which makes it a signless experience or when you want to connect multiple wallet but you can experience PC from any other wallet of your choice.

2 Likes

Aside the critical and deeply concerning points raised by @grasponcrypto (which I fully agree with). The response given to @nyhobo is bad; it doesn’t even qualify as an actual response.

Separating tech from tokenomics in this case doesn’t seem like a fair plan. Why would the Push team take on such a major project while leaving one of its most critical aspects to be addressed “later”? This is deeply concerning.

Once the team proceeds with this project, $PUSH holders are placed at a disadvantage since changes to the tokenomics must happen — holders have no choice.

Additionally, the Push DAO has not yet reached a level of maturity that engages even a small fraction of its 5,000+ holders to participate in voting. A quick glance at the PUSH Snapshot space shows that most proposals struggle to gather even 10 votes.

This is a significant decision that, under DAO rules, will likely move to a vote quickly and potentially get approved without proper consideration of the critical tokenomics aspect.

Launching something as impactful as a new chain requires much more discussion, including community calls, and should focus on raising awareness to encourage broader participation from voters.

2 Likes

@harshrajat @Ruteeko Harsh we need to pin down and agree on tokenomics before we approve Push Chain. How are we reserving the most important factor for all community members after the approval process? The idea of Push Chain very heavily depends on tokenomics no matter how great Push chain sounds. It’s like trying to get a big acquisition done but saying let’s approve the acquisition first, then we’ll talk price. Just doesn’t make sense.

The community deserves a call to discuss all aspects of this. We can’t start putting things to vote without having full details. The answer of “The second is to ensure that the $PUSH community knows that there will be a token migration and that they will receive ownership in the new chain.” doesn’t say anything meaningful and this is very significant for all token holders many of whom had to bear the pain of PUSH token going down 98%. I am all for Push chain if that means PUSH token holders will retain the same ownership % in the new Push chain token but anything otherwise makes no sense and would be considered a nice way to simply punt the original PUSH vision. If resources including all the money raised under EPNS and most significantly yours and RIcha’s time are now devoted to PUSH chain, how does it make any sense to do anything otherwise? I know that it will be up for discussion with the community but I am asking for YOUR INPUT on what you think should be done. Does this make sense? Hopefully it does. Thank you.

2 Likes

@harshrajat 100% agree. That said, I do think Harsh meant that PUSH holders retain the same percentage when he wrote that the PUSH token holders will be able to migrate to the Push Chain token for a “proportional ownership”. Just need to clarify since this is on every PUSH holder’s minds who have held an illiquid token through a 98% drop. Let’s clarify and make sure we are understanding correctly.

1 Like

Agree 100%.
The Push Chain proposal should not move forward unless at least the point mentioned by @nyhobo is included in the proposal. This should be a non-negotiable part of the proposal.

3 Likes

WOW! This proposal is everything we need to take Push to the next level. :raised_hands:
Building Push Chain feels like a natural evolution

The idea of migrating $PUSH tokens to a native token for proportional ownership is so thoughtful. It shows how much the team values inclusivity and the community’s trust. No one gets left behind, and that’s what makes Push so special. :purple_heart:

And let’s talk about the tech—devnet running on Proof of Stake validators, Simulate Tx with wallet abstraction, and a clear path to incentivized testnet. It’s innovative but grounded, and I can already see the potential for this to become the SocialFi Chain of Web3. :hammer_and_wrench:

Massive kudos to the Push team for putting this together. I can’t wait to see how this unfolds—this is BIG! LFG! :rocket:

3 Likes

@NooberBoy I have asked @harshrajat a clarification question on whether proportional ownership actually means that PUSH holders retain the same % in the new chain which is the only way that makes sense. If not and there will be dilution, then it doesn’t make any sense for long term holders. So I probably won’t be so quick with the comments until we have clarity. We need to make sure we fully understand and back the tokenomics before voting on this.

2 Likes

I strongly support the Push Chain proposal. By introducing a shared-state Layer 1 with features like wallet abstraction, fee abstraction, and interoperability across EVM and non-EVM chains, Push Chain sets the foundation for scalable, universal dApps. Its sharding, fast finality, and transaction payload capacity also make it ideal for on-chain AI use cases. The seamless integration of Push’s notification and chat protocols into this ecosystem further enhances web3 adoption. This is a transformative step for both developers and end users.

In the world of Blockchain and the current state this provides a better solution for what we want to see, a shared state chain is the game changer, trust me this is gonna be wow. So my support for this is all in one place. Can’t wait to see this happen.

3 Likes

I completely agree with @nyhobo. It’s important to clarify the percentage amount before proceeding. This will provide transparency for all token holders and help new participants gain a clear understanding, fostering trust and inclusivity within the community.

4 Likes

I support this initiative 100%. Creating a seamless experience for crosschain interactions and wallet abstraction will simplify the onchain user experience. This is the type of infrastructure we need to create in order to bring more people into the space, to experience cryptography beyond DeFi use cases. Push Chain will empower all types of creators, and easily show them the benefits of decentralized applications in a practical way, that’s easy and enjoyable to use.

3 Likes

Push Chain sounds quite exciting to me and the way it will simplify the UX users once executed. Probably the next big thing to keep your eyes glued to in 2025.

4 Likes