Withdraw ₳96,817,080 for 2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal
This treasury withdrawal funds **2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal** which will provide the following services: - Automatic Formal Verification (Plutus High Assurance) - Property Based Testing Tool (Plutus High Assurance) - Static Analyzer (Plutus High Assurance) - Ouroboros Leios Implementation - Cardano Node Architecture Refresh (Acropolis) - Hydra Development - Minotaur AVS - Mithril Development - KES Agent - Ledger-HD - Log-Structured Merge (LSM) including UTXO-HD - Revised Stake Pool Incentive Scheme - Nested Transactions (Babel Fees) - Plutus Core Roadmap - Tiered Pricing Models (Plutus High Assurance) - Transaction Monitoring System (Plutus High Assurance) - Maintenance and Support - Audit & Security Assurance This Treasury Withdrawal is submitted by Intersect on behalf of the vendor. The following sections; Abstract, Motivation, Rationale and Vendor Profile have been sourced from the approved proposal submitted by the Vendor as part of the Intersect budget process. This treasury withdrawal funds one of 39 proposals to give effect to the approved budget info action for ₳275,269,340, administered by Intersect via gov_action1u9x73kwufaxa70lfy59g4ynwyrcsaxdcd0gxzzmh67s9fxq4j8hqqk2phgh. The information provided herein is intended to fulfill the spirit of the constitutional requirement for a treasury withdrawal info action by also providing the details of the proposed solution, alignment to the budget, and amount to be withdrawn from the Cardano Treasury.
Reasoning
Written after the vote was cast
What this asks for, and from whom
96,817,080 ADA for the 2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal, covering formal verification tooling, Ouroboros Leios, node architecture refresh, Hydra, Mithril, UTXO-HD and related core engineering.
What would have to be true for this to be a good use of treasury funds
This is the core engineering of the chain itself. Leios, node architecture, formal verification and the storage layer are the deepest work in the ecosystem, and none of it has a commercial funding path.
What specifically concerns me
This was part of the 2025 Intersect budget slate, which I voted as a slate. I am saying that plainly rather than pretending each line got its own week of deliberation. The slate came through a community budget process with a support threshold before it ever reached the chain, and my judgment was that the process outcome deserved backing in Cardano's first real treasury cycle. This is the single largest treasury item I have ever voted on, and I want to be honest about the tension: nearly 97 million ADA to one organization is a concentration risk for a chain that talks constantly about decentralization. I voted yes because the work is genuinely load-bearing and because refusing to fund core engineering would not decentralize anything, it would just stop the chain improving. But the size is exactly why alternative implementations matter so much to me.
What I am asking of the proposer if this passes
It was enacted. Publish delivery against each named workstream, and actively support the alternative node teams so this expertise stops living in one building. Funding the incumbent and funding independence are not opposites, and this ecosystem needs both.