Session Recap | 🇮🇩 Jakarta, Indonesia | 23rd Sept Topic: Tokenized Gold, Oracle, ERC-3643 None of it happens without you all 🫶🏻 @laichungying from @D3Labsdotio @rrah622 from @Ondo @ethjkt Wendeerson from @StraitsX 📖 Summary - docs.google.com/document/d/1… 📝 Topic Overview Tokenizing gold does not remove the trust problem, it relocates it. The vault, the auditor and the oracle each become a link someone still has to believe, and the group spent most of the hour pressure-testing where those links are weakest, from jurisdiction-crossing redemptions to who actually holds the power to freeze a token after it is issued. ✍🏻 We discussed two standards that solve different problems - ERC-3643 is a compliance standard, it checks a holder's identity claims before a transfer clears; ERC-4626 is a tokenized vault standard, it governs minting and redemption mechanics. Compliance and vault logic are separate layers, and a gold token needs both. ✍🏻 On oracles: a contract cannot see inside a vault, so it trusts a price feed instead. @chainlink dominates that market and leans on a consensus mechanism among node operators, which raises the obvious question of what backstops the backstop; On freezing: tokenizing an asset does not strip the issuer of the power to freeze it, especially once funds cross back into the physical layer. One name to watch here is ERC-7540, a newer standard built for the settlement delay that physical RWA redemptions actually have. 💡 Cross-border physical movement of the underlying gold stayed an open problem, the current answer is still one regulated entity interfacing with regulators, because the physical layer resists decentralization in a way the token layer does not. Review the past summaries: wprc.club/papers?utm_source=…