Crypto isn’t a reactionary movement seeking to return to a time before banks and trust
It’s a preservative movement, seeking to protect us from the negative aspects of increasing monetary digitization due to pursuit of convenience
There will never be a consumer product that takes off purely for political reasons—like “being censorship resistant” or “decentralizing banking”
Think of consumers as lizard brains: they mindlessly tap on rectangles on a screen for basic needs—like making money or finding a date
> VCs say there's a cool new cross-chain bridge
> ask if it's trustless or a committee
> they don't understand
> pull out illustrated diagram explaining what is trustless, and what is a committee
> they laugh and says "it's trustless"
> it's a committee
New article about
@MinaProtocol
🪶
How should the world’s lightest settlement layer solve its DA problem? Find out on c-node’s Medium, the blog everyone is raving about!
One of my older relatives is an expert on financial regulations, with a strong bias against crypto.
A lot of his criticisms come down to complete disbelief that these protocols are actually decentralized and autonomous- he says “surely there MUST be be someone in charge”
The smartest people in crypto are wasting their time on rollups, DA, scaling, privacy, intents, account abstractions when they should be developing GOOD PRODUCTS THAT PEOPLE WANT!
(except that every single one of those things is in service of enhancing UX)
approximately 99% of participants in crypto lie that they stand for something other than launching, pumping, and dumping tokens.
The 1% who don’t are what justifies the existence of the space.
If you’re in the 99%, understand that it’s suicidal for you to discourage the 1%
Chain I dislike: EOS
Chain I think is underrated: Penumbra
Chains I like: Ethereum, Solana, Monero, Zcash, Mina
Chain I love: Celestia
Chain I feel most myself in: Celestia
Chain I dream of building on: Celestia (I’m living the dream)
Chain I still need to try: Aztec
Chain I dislike: Zksync
Chain I think is underrated: Solana with Firedancer
Chain I like: Ethereum, Bitcoin
Chain I love: Solana
Chain I feel most myself in: Solana
Chain I dream of building on: Monad, Berachain
Chain I still need to try: Sei
the L2 design space is extremely underexplored; almost all the existing L2s are running barely-modified EVMs.
and you’re already writing off the entire concept?
this morning i woke up from the bed layer, went downstairs to the kitchen layer, made myself some breakfast layer, got dressed with the clothes layer, went to work at the job layer
Every time you wrap a SNARK in another SNARK, you’re “leveraging up” on cryptography. You’re rehypothecating field elements. Each layer of your IVC increases the risk to the whole system
(this shitpost sponsored by my actual fever dream)
blocked all the usual suspects and my timeline is so much more pleasant.
Sol has a lot of genuine merits- there is no need to be dishonest.
If ETH maxis fade solana and you need someone to defend it, @ me
gonna get hate for this but…
non-technical solana community members trying to dunk on other chains in technical discussion and consistently get it wrong or fail to understand the nuance of the conversation is giving the community a terrible look.
What if we all took a break from building our DeFi protocols, dive into Solana’s open source code, and come up with a way to fix this fucking thing forever
The fact that Solana never saw its capacity fully saturated shows that we're at least an order of magnitude of adoption away from needing anything like fractal scaling
chill with the L5s and L6s
It’s true that many tokens and their protocols are “DINO”, but many are truly freestanding and will run autonomously in perpetuity with nobody in control. This simply does not compute for boomers, it is a foreign concept. The noise created by scammers doesn’t help
Ethereum is not
- implementing "sharding"
- bottle-knecked by, or locked into the single-threaded EVM
- against raising hardware requirements for non-pragmatic reasons
- limited by low DA throughput (eventually)
enough with these outdated arguments!
Binance asked Monero to add an optional transparent transaction feature. Monero told them to go fuck themselves.
Any chain that wouldn't do the same is worthless
A word on anonymity sets:
One of the best arguments against 🌪 is that “users are knowingly mixing their currency with criminals”.
This is misleading, because 🌪 users do not directly transact with any criminals, rather, they only transact with their intended shielded recipient
I’m rooting for solana to fix these problems without adding L2s
“why aren’t you gloating? I thought you were Modular?”
Individual rollups should scale to massive TPS without needing to bridge / shard.
Rollup maxis do not need to concede fragmentation
if you're a weirdo who understands DA sampling, but not ZK proofs... this vid might be for you!
In this recorded talk, I attempt to demystify ZK proofs by comparing them to DA sampling
Another cycle, another year of pretending there’s a tradeoff between scalability and verification cost.
As if ~2 years of new understanding and progress on this discussion was too inconvenient for twitter shills and marketers
L2 devs don’t understand product.
That’s why using an L1 is an easy one-click user experience, whereas L2s require users to install Gentoo, rebuild the kernel, compute elliptic curve pairings using a Ti-84, and wait 21 days in between every button click
Tron is centralized.
It’s not an example of solving a problem with crypto tech, it’s an example of solving a fintech legal problem with regulatory loopholes and shady corporate structuring
USDT’s widespread adoption is not a crypto success story in any way
Manlets arguing that L2s “have no incentive” to build a L1-aligned rollup violates their own narrative:
Thesis states that users should prefer a fully decentralized scaling solution
so you’re arguing that nobody will build the precise thing that users want, obviously wrong.
you want the devs to "please do something"?
What, you don't mean to say that you invested in an asset with an expectation of profits derived from the efforts of others, do you?
on-chain governance is an absurd idea that must have been conceived by someone who thought "anything on-chain is more decentralized because it's on-chain"
I'm sick 🤮 but let me try and write a thread about bridging with a shared DA layer, vs bridging without a shared DA layer.
Without a shared DA layer e.g with IBC, it's often said that "the interchain is only as strong as the chain with the weakest security" what does this mean:
the one problem I have with the ETH scaling roadmap is the attitude that L1 is premium security, and L2 is a cheaper, less-secure option for the plebs
that's bs. make them fully secure as L1, then we can talk about booting people to L2s
Ethereum execution layer has been in a weird middle ground imo, should prob either:
- Commit to making it better, increasing gas, more client optimization work, statelessness, etc, or
- Yeet everyone off the L1, low gas, extend 30 second block times, etc, Celestia-style
this ones for all the "fragmented liquidity on L2s is a problem" bros
there is:
$18B of liquidity on Arbitrum
$7B of liquidity on Optimism
$4B of liquidity on BASE
$2.5B of liquidity on Blast
HOW MUCH LIQUIDITY DO YOU NEED BRO?
if youre trying to move 9 or 10 figs around on…
People on here are incentivized to create complexity and confusion
learn how systems work, think about how they can break, try thinking of ways to improve them, you will learn terminology along the way
I see no reason why leading l2s wouldn’t eventually become l1s. they’d be valued by the market an order of magnitude higher. and they’d realize what ive realized by being in the trenches: that dapp builders r pragmatic and couldn’t care less about eth-alignment
Not a bad precedent at all.
If you put your funds into an upgradeable contract, then this could happen to you, period.
If you’re worried about it, then simply avoid upgradeable contracts.
let's unpack why this common sentiment is so wrong:
"less trust than centralized options" is one of the ONLY things we can actually offer anyone. It's one of the only pitches we can give that actually comes remotely close to justifying the existence of our scam-filled space.
L2s don’t make sense for any chains besides ethereum, who’s value-proposition largely comes from background compatibility, battle-testedness, and slow, careful improvement
The best tech from the current temporary era of L2 experimentation will someday be enshrined
This is dumb.
Rollups are not a cheaper tier of security for plebs to compromise on
They’re gonna be just as secure as the L1, while being cheaper. No reason why we can’t make them that way. Modular is not a compromise.
Solana is Cryptoeconomic Socialism
Most people still don't understand that the fundamental question of scaling isn't technical, it's philosophical.
Monolithic chains want to give the same amount of cryptoeconomic security to a $1 transaction as they do a $1 million…
This is one you don't want to miss! 👂🏻
Our Head of Product
@zk_sjp
will join a Space with
@dferrersan
and
@colludingnode
from Celestia and
@AndrijaNovakov6
from Geometry to discuss the Celestia & Mina integration!
Tune in tomorrow at 4PM GMT / 9AM PST.
Can’t help but feel like we’d be better off discussing things that users actually care about than trying to figure where abstract “value” accrual happens
I don’t get why people say “intents are just another word for limit orders”
A blockchain is not just an exchange. Intents generalize the concept of a limit order to request the desired state of any generic state machine, not just “placing orders” on exchanges
Hello I just decided to take the plunge into web3 after a long career at Goldman Sachs and the NSA!
In this thread I will explain why the market doesn’t want decentralization or privacy, and why we need KYC:
You can’t say “my chain scales and yours doesn’t” until it has working trust-minimized light clients.
It’s like saying “my car goes faster than yours” when neither car can even start.
A blockchain doesn’t serve its purpose if it’s users are trusting intermediaries to use it.
backend developers: how will my system scale to 1 billion requests?
blockchain developers: how will my system survive being banned by all nation states?
If you think ethereum is a dogmatic decel academic research circle-jerk disconnected from users… then you’ve clearly never met ethereum devs. That could not be further from the reality.
If end-user verification takes off, it will be through trust-minimized light clients, not constrained full nodes.
Raise the blocksize
Blow up the gas limit
Send the contract size to the moon
Nobody runs nodes anyway, and that won’t change until it becomes effortless.
TendermintX was a huge unlock for so many apps. We have not even begun to scratch the surface of its infra use-cases
and my current ZK project is going shockingly smoothly thanks to SP1, the zkVM is the proving itself to be a huge unlock as well.
1/ We're excited to announce we've raised $55M led by
@Paradigm
to make zero knowledge proofs accessible to any developer.
Succinct’s Prover Network & SP1 make general-purpose ZK performant and easily deployable w/o complex infra.
Let’s build towards an era of truth, not trust.
My strongest non-Move view in the crypto space is that
The utility of a smart contract platform is proportional to the amount of interesting shared state a program running on that platform can access atomically.
I don't think this is particularly deep or controversial.…
I wish rollup builders never started with sequencers, and went straight to based.
Now we are stuck with a mostly unproductive and confusing conversation around “sequencer decentralization”.