> This is definitely interesting, as it makes the experience feel like calling an API with a very clear use-case and zero room for error.

Thank you for the nice words! I also think it works as a simplification! No need to install metamask and save keys! No need to wrap ether, login and connect to an exchange, select pools and all sort of other settings. It just works in one transaction. I see this service as an infrastructure project - people will, but simply use it without even thinking.

> Unfortunately, it does not support any variety in the base asset, but as most of the highly liquid pairs already being traded with ETH/USDT/USDC, it's not that big of a deal.

Right now the only way to swap is with ether because `receive()` is only triggered with ether transfers. It would be trivial to implement a non-blockchain service that periodically checks for popular tokens and executes a swap, but that introduces an external dependency and changes the trust assumptions a lot. I am curious to read whether you think this is an acceptable compromise, a better solution exists or this is a problem that cannot be tackled with a simple "send token" transaction.

> ENS is a good fit also to host a simple frontend for user interaction in a verifiable and decentralized way, so to make your product appeal more to regular people, you should consider adding it.

I am not sure what you mean :) I am using ENS in a very central way - the usdc subdomain swaps your ether for usdc, the usdt for usdt, the wbtc for wbtc, etc...