I am excited to announce that I will be joining Tempo. This last year has been a turning point for crypto, where we have finally seen the outlines of our vision being materialized. While payments used to be front and center in the early days of crypto, I see a special opportunity to finally achieve this ambitious goal with relentless execution on both the technical and distribution fronts. I believe that the real world moment is now, and I want to make sure we do not miss this window to touch normal people’s lives everywhere in the world. I have dedicated the past several years to architecting and scaling blockchains, and I’m excited to leverage my learnings together with the very strong team being assembled at Tempo. My journey in Ethereum first started when I began working with the EF research team in 2018, and later joining full time in 2019. The project has greatly matured since then and with the soon coming Fusaka upgrade will implement PeerDAS, a significant scaling milestone I am proud to have contributed to. I am very happy to have played a role in leading to more people being able to use Ethereum and I look forward to continuing being able to do that. Over the last year, I have been involved in advancing Ethereum Foundation’s strategy and roadmap and I will remain a research advisor to the three strategic initiatives (Scale L1, Scale Blobs, Improve UX) at the Protocol Cluster at the EF. Ethereum has a strong set of values and technical choices that make it unique in the world. And Tempo will be a great complement, built using similar technology and values, whilst being able to push the boundaries on scale and speed. I believe that this will be of great benefit to Ethereum. Tempo’s open-source technology can easily integrate back into Ethereum, benefiting the entire ecosystem. Ethereum and Tempo are strongly aligned, as they are built with the same permissionless ideals in mind. I am looking forward to staying involved with the community and continuing to push Ethereum forward!

Some points on this: 1. The current process of upgrading Ethereum IS BROKEN. Builders need long-term commitments to capacity, otherwise they cannot build on Ethereum. They need to know what the plan is in 5 years. So I hope that we can finally agree to timelines in the core dev process. 2. We nonsensically claim that L1 cannot be scaled and L2s are the only way. This is a complete ivory tower perspective -- Vitalik already posted this 3 years ago, and with DAS and zkEVMs the ingredients are now ready: vitalik.eth.limo/general/202… There are limits to this, yes, but scaling it 100-1000x in a few years is completely possible. This achieves many things that based/native/etc. rollups don't. I think actually doing this and stopping to find excuses for not doing it is essential for Ethereum winning. 3. Not everything can be on Ethereum L1, whether the actual limit is 1k or 100k tps or maybe even 1M tps. For this it is still great to add lots of data availability and create a great Ethereum security zones for rollups, who are Ethereum allies and can use Ether and all other Ethereum assets trustlessly. But we need to do it at a scale that actually matters. We need to get to our current target of one Megabyte per second in 1-2 years rather than 5, and then KEEP GOING. I am currently doing research on maximally decentralizing the networking DAS/Data Availability Sampling, but until that's done, adding Data Availability Provider nodes with higher requirements is a good solution that has the same security assumptions as optimistic rollups (one honest node). Other Data Availability protocols are currently building for GB/s! Ethereum does not have to match this, but being at 1/1000ths is not good enough. Some projects are openly stating already that they will never use Ethereum DA (and openly advertising with Vitalik's support! The irony). Being ok with that and still claiming that they are somehow "Ethereum aligned" is thoroughly un-ambitious.

It's very ironic to call it "staking" when there is no slashing. What's at stake? Solana has close to zero economic security at the moment.

I have decided to resign from my Eigenlayer advisorship. While I believe that the role was negociated in good faith and with the aim of making sure that Eigenlayer is well aligned with Ethereum, I understand that the perception of this relationship has been different and that for many the conflict of interest this creates is difficult to reconcile with my role as an Ethereum researcher. Eigenlayer is a great project that I hope will continue to complement Ethereum well in several ways. But Ethereum has a lot of important work to do and I will focus all my attention on getting it done. This will allow me to be more effective in implementing Danksharding and other important projects.

So finally we are talking about how the current plan is just way too unambitious. If Ethereum wants to win, we need to be ambitious.

A lot of people making jokes about WETH. Please be aware it may not be obvious to outsiders that it's completely different from bridged assets and there is literally almost zero risk. I think it would be better to mark these more clearly as jokes.

A bit more on the reasons for my EIP to scale Ethereum L1 100x over 4 years: ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip…

I think this is what everyone is feeling and I disagree to an extend but nevertheless the situation is tricky. Currently Ethereum is making almost zero fees from both L1 and L2 transactions *because it chooses to*: If we were a company, we would put a reasonable price tag on transactions, and raise it when there is congestion. But instead, we currently charge very close to zero for transactions and DA when there is no congestion, and the result is there is almost zero fees. Looks bad when you want to evaluate Ether based on that! But here comes the more tricky part: In its current form, it may well be that Ethereum DA does not have much of a moat. It provides very little UX benefits, and only very abstract security benefits that will probably be very closely replicated by alt-DA. Therefore, the moat for DA is low and it's likely Ethereum will never charge significant fees over a long time period. So what should be the plan? My best guess is: - scale L1 to make sure that integration with Ethereum remains attractive - scale DA to make sure that we lower the incentives for alt-DA (this doesn't have to mean lower fees. We can just charge a fee!) - work on shorter block times, single-slot L2 interop etc. to maximize value of Ethereum DA

I'm thinking about a new sharding design, where instead of having independent proposers for each shard, all shard blocks in one slot are proposed together with the beacon block. This leads to a major simplification of the sharding design 1/n notes.ethereum.org/@dankrad/…

This is great! Celo is showing the way forward. We need to make sure that Ethereum will provide a cheap and secure data availability layer, so chains like Celo can use native data availability asap.

Max was very helpful in finally opening the Overton window to speak about stuff that isn't perfect in Ethereum land. "but he fudded my bags" yeah you know I don't care about how your bags fare over the next two weeks. In the long term, we need to build a good product, can't do that without open criticism "he can criticize but not in public" simply doesn't work for a distributed community

Decentralization does not work like this. No economic incentives will automatically guarantee our values such as immutability or censorship resistance -- the values of the Ethereum community do this. Our technology, as well as the incentives built into our systems, are a tool for this purpose. If you believe that crypto values are simply individual profit maximization, you have missed the plot and are in the wrong place. Ethereum strived because people have values and it will die if people forget about them. Yes, we do try to build our systems to be as robust as possible and to get the economic incentives aligned with our values as much as we can. But perfect alignment is ultimately impossible, for the simple reason that centralized systems are more efficient than decentralized ones.

OK guys, good time to get back to buidling! We need * Layer 2 ready * EIP1559 * Eth2 running Then we can have a real party :)

Toly trying to find gotchas in my blog posts. Bullish Ethereum

Calldata cost reduction will make rollups 5x cheaper: hackmd.io/@vbuterin/rollup_d… I am for doing this ASAP. As in before Christmas. $100+ fees for using Ethereum smart contracts should be seen as an emergency, and this is the (temporary) solution (before data shards). Let's do it!

Ethereum: Actually realizing the crypto vision. Yes, it looks messy, but that's because Ethereum is building for the real world. But it's solving ALL the necessary problems and not a tiny subset.

I think it is time we increased the gas limit. If you run a validator, you can contribute to this -- every block acts as a vote on whether to increase it. If more than 50% of the stake agrees to an increase, the gas limit will increase. I just set my validators to vote for up to 60m gas.

ZK rollups are awesome. But universal smart contract execution proving, at a scale similar to what the EVM is doing now, is several years away.

My goal: 6s for Glamsterdam 4s for (Glamsterdam +1) ... The headline target will be 1s. Beyond 4s we need to do some deeper changes to consensus, which we're still working on.

Isn't Solana running at 10GBps now? Remember you telling me a few years ago that one day you could run a validator at home thanks to Moore's law, how is that going?

Crypto markets value hype over execution. Ethereum is currently in execution mode.

In 2 years, most validators will not execute blocks. They will verify proofs instead.

Together with Justin Drake, I have recently decided to become an advisor to Eigenlayer, on the same conditions -- I am taking this position personally, not representing the Ethereum Foundation, and with a focus on risks and decentralization. I am therefore fully expected to take contrarian views on Eigenlayer. I do receive a significant amount of tokens from this position. I do not believe that they will change or influence my positions on how the core protocol should be developed, but I believe that the community should know about this, so that they can keep me accountable. I think Eigenlayer will be a major benefit to Ethereum, if it is done by someone with high integrity. I trust the current leaders are intending to do that, and I am planning to hold them accountable for it. I will not hesitate to speak out and/or to quit my position if I believe this is no longer the case. My views on restaking differ significantly from Justin's, and they have been roughly the same since I developed them last year. To summarize: Restaking comes with significant risks: 1. The main one can be summarized as the "principal agent problem": The operator is not necessarily the same as the person providing the capital, and might therefore have different incentives than we originally designed the protocol for. Now, these risks have been present for a long time in the form of Liquid Staking Tokens or LSTs; in fact, restaking (for solo stakers) could be seen as "LST light". LSTs are stictly worse in terms of the risks that they present to staking due to the principal agent problem. 2. A second type of risk comes from the additional load imposed on stakers by running restaking services. This can lead to centralizing forces. 3. Another risk is restaking infrastructure being used to mount attacks on the Ethereum protocol, such as bribing attacks. 4. Something many fear is that Eigenlayer will lead to a dystopia of dangerously designed restaking services that stakers will have to opt in, because they will provide most of the staking yield. I think restaking yield will be much more moderate as (a) if there were very high yields to have, there is no reason that they wouldn't already be available on plain ETH and LSTs; (b) total crypto revenue is very moderate and I think the appetite to pay restakers by diluting tokens will not be that high. Helping with avoiding 2 and 3 are the main reasons I decided to be an advisor. Clearly, I would never take this position if I did not also see significant benefits to Ethereum that come from restaking when implemented well: 1. Restaking can give some of the benefits of LSTs to individual stakers. In the balance of things, this makes individual stakers more competitive compared to the status quo, and is therefore a benefit of restaking. If LSTs didn't exist, my view on this would probably be different. 2. In an ideal world, Ethereum would already have a huge data layer. In the real world, it is currently severely constrained and this does not allow some projects to commit to be a rollup by posting data to Ethereum (an example of this is Celo). I think Eigenlayer will provide an excellent temporary solution for these projects, by being completely compatible with 4844 blobs and providing high, Ethereum-aligned security. My personal goal is obviously to bring all these projects to be full rollups with data on Ethereum eventually, as far as it makes economic sense (which I think it will for all financial applications at the very least). 3. There are other things that Eigenlayer can help us implement before the protocol gets to it, for example block pre-commitments. Obviously these require extreme caution as they come with high risks as well.

L2 tokens are not the problem. L1 value accrual is.

Look it's simple: Being aggro doesn't grow your ecosystem. It looks bad from the outside. Most people looking for a tribe don't go "oh look, this one is the most hostile to outsiders, so I'll join them" If you don't grow your ecosystem, coin don't go up.

Let's say you build a lot of roads. But there is nobody lives there to use them. Is it valuable? Not yet. Then you build a lot of houses. But nobody wants to live there, because there are no jobs and no other people. Is it valuable? Not yet. Then you build a lot of factories. Now there are jobs, and goods to trade, and people can move there. All the infrastructure from the first two steps becomes valuable. Before it was just potential value. Of course the value could also be created by having farms, or maybe you just have really good internet connections and all the digital nomads want to live there. Different ways to create value exist. So which one is the "valuable" part? All of them together are valuable, but missing one ingredient makes everything useless. Ethereum is an ecosystem, and you need a number of things together to make it valuable. DeFi is amazing financial infrastructure that is one of these elements. It's not that DeFi is bad, it's actually the opposite, other parts are not there yet. And if you dislike current RWAs (a term that is very broadly defined), yes we can absolutely build more digital native tokens. Just don't expect me to love them if they're just a digital casino. But you can totally still build it, there's nothing for me to stop you. I just work on the infrastructure, Ethereum is free for everyone to build on.

Check: It was years, but definitely fewer years than I expected. Even though I have to eat my words I'm very happy about it! It looks like this is going to be the year of the rollup.

If you are staking on Ethereum and currently running Prysm, this is for you: Run the majority client at your own peril! dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202… In this post I detail the enormous risks that staking with the majority client incurs.

Anyone working on a rate limited version of Tornado? Say 1000$/week based on Proof of Humanity. Good privacy for all casual users and useless for money laundering.

Quick writeup to explain what's happening about the gas limit raise: Different from almost all other protocol matters, the gas limit is directly controlled by the validators. With every block, a validator votes whether to raise or lower the gas limit. So, very unlike the EIP process, there is no "standard process" to raise the gas limit. Now, the gas limit has *never* been increased since the merge. However, before the merge, it was an established practice that miners would not use this power arbitrarily, but typically only after core devs signalled it was ok to change it. Recently, some of us have started signalling that we think it is time for an increase in the gas. Unfortunately this hit a bit of a speed bump as Core Devs discovered that raising it over 40m was actually not safe due to a constant that has to be changed in the clients first (ethresear.ch/t/on-increasing…). However, I think now there is a lot of messaging agreeing that 36m is a good "first step" and clients are releasing updates to make this the default (so validators don't have to manually use command line flags to vote for this). I think it is likely that some big pools will join in the next few weeks and we will see this increase.

This is a very bad idea. ETH and liquid staking derivatives are different assets with different risk profiles (and rewards), and users should have a choice about which one they want to use. The same is true for different types of stablecoins

Excellent!

EIP-4488, which would have lowered calldata cost to 3 per byte to make rollups cheaper, was proposed just over two years ago. We really should have implemented it. eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-4…

Worth reading by @christine_dkim Don't have unrealistic expectations. L2 at the moment is such a broadly defined category that it barely means anything; L2s can even compete with Ethereum. To properly understand the positioning of a project, try to understand these properties: - does it compete with Ethereum's core business (that's DeFi at the moment) - does it use the same tech and will it contribute it - will it burn ETH or otherwise accrue value to it (e.g. buying services from Ethereum L1) These will be a much better guide to how good a project is for Ethereum than whether it's an L1 or L2 :)

Statelessness/Verkle does so much more than decrease the cost of running a node by the cost of one SSD. First and foremost, the most important question should be: Do you want to increase mainnet gas 10x? Verkle will enable this.

PSA: If it doesn't use Ethereum for data availability, it's not an (Ethereum) rollup and therefore not an Ethereum L2. [Exceptions: Plasmas/State channels or other constructions that *do not* require data availability for security]

Actually true. Let's fix this asap ethresear.ch/t/faster-block-…

This is such a lazy take if you can't also tell me what your supposed solutions are that let local block producers extract MEV. For everyone who hates so much on Mevboost now. In 2022, before the merge, we talked to Flashbots what their plans where. They said that they would probably just continue what they're doing now, and instead of working with the mining pools work with the big staking pools. That was the only option because their protocol was fully trusted, so they couldn't work with solo stakers (There would have been a "low carb crusader" once a day if they did). Now to see how bad that would have been, this would have meant big staking pools getting 2-5% more yield than everyone else. Solo stakers would have left within weeks. This is why we pushed to develop Mevboost. The alternative would have been to delay the merge for years until other solutions come, or f*ck the solo stakers instantly. Now should we find better solutions for toxic MEV? By all means. But that still doesn't remove MEV auctions, because arbitrage and liquidations and other MEV are just a fact of life that comes with having useful and valuable protocols on chain. You're not going to run a state of the art liquidation and trading bot on your local node, because the best ones are proprietary knowledge, and require capital both on chain and on exchanges. So go on and tell me your solutions. Maybe they are we should just not be a successful chain but instead just be enthusiasts in our basement. But if we do want to be successful, we will need to make some compromises, both to scale and to deal with the pressure that comes from having lots of value on chain.

Teaching GPT-3 about KZG commitments. I crashed it at the end (as probably most human interlocutors would do long before), but the ability to take in new instructions/information on the spot is absolutely astonishing! The age of AI starts now. No more winters I would predict.

If you bully people for "doing too little", you create a climate where people would rather not donate anything at all.

I wrote an explainer on RAI :) dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202…

$172k in new bounties for breaking ZK-friendly hash functions! Rescue Prime, Feistel-MiMC, Poseidon and Reinforced concrete: zkhashbounties.info/ Happy #Cryptanalysis!

Shorter slot times are the highest priority for Glamsterdam IMO

Entered the sub-3 club today😃

I am for increasing the gas limit, but we need to be more careful. I think after 4844, the best way to do this would actually be: - Increase the execution capacity by increasing the gas limit BUT ALSO increasing CALLDATA cost (ETH L1 is for execution, not data) - Increase the number of blobs per block This way, we get more capacity for L1 applications and rollups!

I think there is an important distinction between having no revenue because there is no valuable activity and having no revenue because you don't raise fees. Ethereum could probably have a few billion $ in revenue by just setting minimum gas and blob fees. It would be a terrible idea to raise them that high but few other chains have the kind of value on them that would allow this.

Future stakers, remember that you will need a synced Eth1 node! I recommend setting that up now. Don't leave it to the last minute [it takes a long time to sync]

In the light of Succinct's announcement of real time proving, I think we should think about how we are going to use provers in the next few years. I don't think the time to put limits on provers is now: ethereum-magicians.org/t/rel…

I'm generally a gas bull and think it is time for a gas limit increase. I think the best would be a package of measures: - Increase execution gas limit (to 40m or even more) - Increase blob count (3->8) - Implement EIP-7623 to limit the max block size ethresear.ch/t/analyzing-eip…

This is the correct take. Lido is a great addition to Ethereum between 20-30%, maybe the best of all staking pools. But its ambition to go far beyond this threshold, and failing to see a problem with that, is what makes it problematic. I think it is not correct to call Lido "decentralized". It is distributed, but it has made an opinionated choice of node operators, and there is no realistic alternative to that. Becoming fully decentralized would mean becoming more like Rocketpool, and it would lose its critical capital efficiency advantage (using reputational capital instead of financial) doing that. Using other sybil measures will make it dependent on the reliability of those sybil measures. All this is fine, but it is an opinion, and anything opinionated like that needs to be in a healthy competition. That's why "just making Lido decentralized" will not solve this fundamental issue: We love it when it's one of several staking pools, not so much if it tries to eat up all of Ethereum staking. I am saddened that Lido leadership and investors do not recognize that they would do Ethereum a huge service if they self limited. Everyone could see that Ethereum is more decentralized, helping Ethereum and therefore Lido to grow much more. Other pools would also follow suit, and it would start being a serious growth impediment to not self limit.

It's just not interesting to even look at this when we should be in growth mode. Make sure that Ethereum grows 1000x first. Then we can add a minimum fee for blobs.

You have been lied to about ERC20s. They aren't secured by Ethereum. It's just social consensus, any ERC20 community can just fork away.

Blockchains are a tool for coordinating social consensus. Your values seem to be pure individual profit maximization which are not mine. My values (and most of the Ethereum community) include many others, including decentralization, censorship resistance and building an immutable smart contract layer. In this value system, someone who is following purely the incentives of the blockchain (which is only a part of the social consensus) can absolutely be a bad actor if they do not uphold the remainder of the values.

In order to increase transparency in this space, I am further creating a disclosure page to disclose all potential conflicts of interests, including advisory positions I've held prior to Eigenfoundation. The reason I have not advertised these positions is because I wanted to support different projects with technical advice, without being used for marketing. I viewed this as a tradeoff with transparency. My personal policy going forward is that while I will continue to ask not to be included in any marketing materials, to add all such relationships onto my disclosure page. dankradfeist.de/disclosures/

Actually, crypto will stop being a joke when crypto twitter stops talking about the price literally 90% of the time.

You need to choose oracles very wisely: For many applications they have as much power as a custodial provider, so the risk is high. I would never trust an oracle that has clearly been abused. Reputation has to be earned.

My reasoning on why I'm for EIP-7514. It is currently unclear if (especially liquid) staking will keep growing indefinitely. In the case that the withdrawal queue does not empty over the next few months, the lower churn limit will give the Ethereum community the time needed to research, debate and implement solutions, rather than having to scramble at the last minute to contain the fallout. notes.ethereum.org/@dankrad/…

Many misunderstandings out there why Terra failed. It wasn't paying 20% on Anchor, though that was clearly one of the reasons it became so huge. But the design was fundamentally flawed in another way: The circular dependency between UST and Luna.

104%? How is that going to work? What are Americans going to do if all the electronics double in price? This feels pretty serious to me

Which applications requiring "state level security" run on Ethereum today?

There's another reason to be upset about this: The native yield thing can already be done on any L2. You can already hold those yield bearing stablecoins and liquid staking derivatives, and chose exactly the asset you want and do DeFi with it. You can also pay your gas fees using any of these tokens using account abstraction. What's the innovation? Not saying Blast doesn't have any (I don't know) but native yield isn't it.

The definitions are important. A rollup has trust guarantees very close to those of the settlement layer, because it has it's data on a layer that's coupled. In particular, it doesn't need any honest majority assumptions. Any chain that has it's data on a different data layer has weaker security guarantees, and we already have special names for them, validiums and optimiums (and optimiums, for example, are fundamentally not any stronger than side chains security wise, so it is really confusing to conflate them with rollups)

L1 does not need to be as fast as Solana to be competitive. It just shouldn't be so slow as to push users away. TPS are not the main metric on which chains compete. To me it looks like >10x is achievable without sacrificing home staking, we just have to quantify what the minimum node requirements are and build for it. (The most important requirement that we would never drop actually isn't home staking, it's verifiability, which does need us to be able to run a node from home.)

When someone from your tennis club contacts you for advice on which Eth2 client to run on their NUC for diversity... That's how you know that at home staking in Ethereum is very real.

Counterpoint: I think people overestimate how much execution scaling is a bottleneck, even for the EVM. The current, naive EVM runs at over 100 mgas/s on consumer-grade hardware (no parallelization). That's around 5000 tps on transfers. So when the EVM is parallelized, your "local state hotspot" can be hit 5000 times per second before it becomes a problem for EVM execution. Obviously we can eventually hit that, but the memecoin casino aside I do not think this will be the main scaling bottleneck of crypto. And we are currently very far away from this.

@sreeramkannan has already made a strong argument why choosing the base of your L2 is not about "which L1 is the most secure", but about "which L1 do I want to settle on". Assets which settle on the same L1 that you have data availability on can get safety that goes far beyond economic security, and are guaranteed even when the base chain is attacked! But I want to comment more on "economic security". Beyond something like 10 billion USD, I don't think it matters how much you have locked up in staking -- it doesn't make the chain more secure. The main reason is that there is no attacker who will literally burn several billions of dollars for an attack that can in almost all cases be fixed by a fork. For anyone with these kind of resources, there are much cheaper ways available to attack almost any chain. Solana has a few other security challenges that are much more important than this -- the high level of resources required to run nodes will lead to concentration that makes "inside attacks" much more important than outside, and the missing culture of users running nodes (and practical inability to do this in general) means that those insiders can pretty much modify the chain as they like. This is a huge problem IMO and makes Solana much less secure no matter what the "economic security" is. This is not an unsolvable problem -- Vitalik's "endgame" article describes how a chain like Solana could become properly decentralized. I do hope that Solana will eventually go this way, but it's a long way to go and requires a high motivation to implement.

Rollups will not because if they use a non native DA layer, they aren't rollups.

EIP-1559 has multiple aims, and I support all of them. More predictable inclusion of transactions, gas price oracles and burning of fees to decrease ETH supply are all good for Ethereum #supportEIP1559 supporteip1559.org/

It's always dangerous to talk about current price action. Next week everything might be different😅 BUT: I think Jon has a point. The Ethereum community has built a lot of cool stuff. Is ETH the asset Ethereum's product? Or is it blockspace to power a global decentralized economy?

Ethereum research AMA in ~2 hours!

Given the recent debates, one thing I wanted to be clear on: I haven't heard of any team writing a fork to remove Lido and it's not something I would support. Another thing to maybe clarify: My opinions are not representative of the Ethereum Foundation, and there are quite a range of takes in the different teams. The EF generally does not restrict us in expressing our opinions. I will continue posting mine on current topics, even when some might not like it. (Being called an autocrat is probably one of the funniest things that happened to me recently😂)

FTR I don't agree with this. Financial and similar high value use cases can have a place on L1, no matter the user.

Shared sequencing + shared proving give you synchronous composability. They also effectively turn all of the rollups into one rollup. There are reasons to do this or not, but we should be honest about it...

Reminder that data shards do not have any logical restrictions on which shards to use for a transaction. Any rollup can run on any shard, so censoring on one shard does nothing. Anatoly hasn't caught up yet, I guess it's because he doesn't understand rollups ;)

Loved this take by Udi. Definitely worth a read.

What are proofs of custody -- and how are they different from data availability checks? Do we actually need both? New explainer here: dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202…

It shouldn't really be called Proof of Work, but Proof of Waste. Proof of Waste is just an indirect and extremely wasteful form of Proof of Stake. You prove your "stake" which is in the form of mining hardware by running it and finding high difficulty hashes.

I do not know who claimed that royalties are enforced by smart contracts, but you should probably unfollow anyone who did and never take them seriously again. It's more than just a lie. A smart contract cannot enforce to take X% of the sales price, as it cannot know the price.

Funny because single threaded EVM execution can reach Solana's current speed at 2000 tps. Is this all SVM can do?

Proof of reserves: Possible on a blockchain. Proof of liabilities: Entity commits to all their liabilities in a Merkle root. Gives each creditor proof that their liability is contained. Then proof of sum of all liabilities.

I am in favour of this. My feeling is that the name "Data Availability" has caused confusion and "Data Publishing" is clearer. Still open to better names but so far DP seems most descriptive.

In @aklamun et al.'s excellent stablecoin classification this is called "endogenous collateral". Collateral that is directly tied to the stablecoin protocol leads to a potential death spiral. Avoid all constructions based on this. arxiv.org/abs/2006.12388

L1s are massively overpaying for security

I want to highlight this: Core devs don't have the last say on what happens on Ethereum, it's the Ethereum community. I have laid out why I believe the churn rate limit is the right thing to do now (although I was originally tending against). Unfortunately this came very late, but not doing this could push us into a situation where we would have to act even more quickly later to save Ethereum decentralization, potentially with a poorly researched emergency solution. However, the Ethereum community will have the final say. I don't think Core Devs will include it if there is major opposition (the change is easy to turn back) and as always, node operators have the final say by choosing which node software they run.

This take is wrong, but I understand where the many people thinking this are coming from. Ethereum is not a DPoS system. DPoS systems are designed so that staking is a highly professionalized operation that most people cannot take part in other than by delegating.

Many people I talk to seem genuinely surprised that using a TEE means just trusting the hardware manufacturer.

It's time to learn about Kate commitments! They are amazing at enabling ZKPs and are now being considered to replace Merkle trees in Ethereum to reduce witness sizes. Here's an introduction: dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202… #eth2 #ethereum #statelessethereum

Surprisingly, my plan would medium term decrease requirements for running nodes. The tradeoffs are around: - adding dependencies for more resourceful parties (DAS provider nodes, zk provers), but with an honest minority assumption - giving up on home block building (which should be mitigated by FOCIL etc.)

One of the problem with crypto culture is that we call projects scams and ponzis all the time. But a bad or poorly executed project is not a scam. Warnings about projects that deserve to be called a scam and ponzi, like Terra, are drowned out in the noise.

So we can't delay withdrawals by couple of months for 4844 (which most of the community wants desparately) but then instead will most likely delay both of them for shipping EOF. Crazy ACD decision.

As Eth2 sharding is coming closer to implementation, analyzing the Legendre PRF primitive is more critical than ever. We are therefore *doubling* the bounties on legendreprf.org/bounties: you can now claim $20,000 if you find a sub-exponential key recovery algorithm!

Hey I've got an idea. Why don't we make a token that you can only buy and never sell. Guaranteed up only. No investors dumping ever.

Smart contract security is absolutely essential for Ethereum's L2 roadmap. It will be interesting how this plays out, but in practice this seems to be true: Teams that want to build L2s also prioritize security and do everything they can to avoid bugs. In contrast, those who say "multisigs/light client bridges are good enough" also tend to ignore the other aspects of security.

Interesting fact: almost half of all gold ever mined is currently in use as jewellery Is gold actually such a pure store of value as everyone thinks?

Slashing is the only way to get economic security. I think it's s true though that slashing and censorship resistance are somewhat in conflict.

Altair hard fork success! Well done everyone, especially home stakers @ethStaker 👏

What everyone gets wrong about 51% attacks dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202… Correcting the myth that if you control more than 50% of the hashpower in Bitcoin, Ethereum, or another blockchain, then you can do whatever you want with the network.

My arguments on why we should go all in on statelessness, and not aim for an easier intermediate goal. Partial statelessness or state rent is an unhappy half way house that will make UX (and Devex) worse, with few benefits. dankradfeist.de/ethereum/202…

What we want is a value based DeFi sector. The difference between finance (positive sum) and a casino (zero/negative sum) is whether there is underlying value in the traded assets.

So that anyone in the world can hold any asset. So that we can trade 24/7. So that you can borrow money against your stock portfolio to pay taxes. So that we can create an actually scalable version of RAI, borrowing agains baskets of RWAs, that could become a world currency. Literally so many reasons.