lystytsiaverschmitzt

joined 8 months ago
 

!https://anarchist.nexus/c/announcements/p/567879/the-button-season-2-is-now-open

Since I missed season 1, it wasn't really an option in my case, so I went with the underdogs at the time (red)

Green and purple are leading and they already have too much of the pie, purple is also royalty, but we should eat the rich, so you should actually join red or blue instead!

 

Rough translation below, as original is in German:

For years, SUVs have been getting bigger and more luxurious. However, the people who drive these vehicles have not grown with them. To ensure road safety, a child seat requirement for SUV drivers has now been added to the Road Traffic Regulations (StVO). It will apply to numerous car models starting March 1.

“For safety reasons, child seats are now simply a necessity for adults driving SUVs,” explains traffic expert Manfred Salamonik, who was involved in drafting the new regulation. “Firstly, so that the seat belt fits properly and does not constrict the driver's neck in an emergency. Secondly, so that you can actually see over the steering wheel and reach all the controls and the gear stick in a modern SUV.”

All SUV models built in 2018 or later are affected by the child seat requirement. In these vehicles, it can be assumed that the interior is so large that, relatively speaking, the driver is about as small as a child in a conventional car.

The first adult-sized child seats with five-point harnesses approved by TÜV have been available in stores since this week. Extras such as a built-in cup holder or a Velcro fastener for attaching a favorite cuddly toy or teething ring are available at an additional cost.

Drivers who are at least 2.20 meters tall or weigh more than 250 kilograms are exempt from the child seat requirement.

But it's not just adults who have to adapt: children traveling in a new SUV will in future need two child seats – one adult-sized seat that is attached to the seat, and one child-sized seat that is attached to the first child seat.

Many know client diversity is important for a more resilient network, but they don't understand why or just how essential it is. It's not only important — it's critical. If a single client is used by 2/3rds (66%) of validators, there's a very real risk this can result in disrupting the chain and monetary loss for node operators.

It takes 2/3rds of validators to reach finality. If a client with 66%+ of marketshare has a bug and forks to its own chain, it'll be capable of finalizing. Once the fork finalizes, the validators cannot return to the real chain without being slashed. If 66% of the chain gets slashed simultaneously, the penalty is the whole 32 ETH.

So why is >33% marketshare still undesirable? If a client with >33% marketshare forks, it will prevent the chain from finalizing. That's why <33% marketshare is the goal for all clients.

Execution clients are not immune. The risks mentioned above apply to both consensus clients and execution clients equally.

You can further explore these topics here in case you are interested: https://clientdiversity.org/

 

Yesterday, Ethereum had another bug in one of the consensus clients, called Nimbus, which made them lose sync to the head of the chain. Consensus breaking bugs occur quite often. The last big one was a Prysm bug 2 months ago. Nimbus recent incident meant, that everyone using Nimbus could not attest anymore and the node runners lost some income. But for the network it wasn't really a big issue. Thanks to client diversity, the network did not really struggle in any meaningful way. What is more interesting though is that such an incident can give us insights in how many people use a certain client. Before the incident, attestation participation was at around 99.8% after the incident, the attestation participation dropped to 94.5% within 4 epochs (~25 minutes). Or in other words, it looks like that around 5% of all validators are exclusively using nimbus as the consensus client. This fits very well with the numbers on clientdiversity.org, which has nimbus usage at 4.58%. It is great to see that these estimations on clientdiversity.org are pretty accurate as they are used in discussions about client diversity.

The source of the Nimbus bug are still unknown, but I am sure we will hear about it in the coming days. Fixing the issue is also quite simple, just restart your client. The aftermath of the incident was pretty harmless. Within 3 hours participation was back over 99% and after 9 hours after the incident, participation was still slowly increasing as more and more node operators restarted their clients.

Credits to u/haurog for the write up

 

One metaphor for Ethereum is BitTorrent, and how that p2p network combines decentralization and mass scale. Ethereum's goal is to do the same thing but with consensus.

Another metaphor for Ethereum is Linux.

  • Linux is free and open source software, and does not compromise on this
  • Linux is quietly depended on by billions of people and enterprises worldwide. Governments regularly use it.
  • There are many operating systems based on Linux that pursue mass adoption
  • There are Linux distributions (eg. Arch) that are highly purist, minimalistic and technologically beautiful, and focus on making the user feel powerful, not comfortable

(Actually, BitTorrent is depended on by enterprises too: many businesses and even governments (!!) use it to distribute large files to their users https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/8-legal-uses-for-bittorrent-youd-be-surprised )

We must make sure that Ethereum L1 works as the financial (and ultimately identity, social, governance...) home for individuals and organizations who want the higher level of autonomy, and give them access to the full power of the network without dependence on intermediaries. At the same time, what Linux shows is that this is fully compatible with providing value to very large numbers of people, and even being loved and trusted by enterprises worldwide. Many enterprises in fact desperately want to build on an open and resilient ecosystem - what we call trustlessness, they call prudent counterparty risk minimization.

This is the gwei.

Source and credits to OP: https://firefly.social/post/lens/381w29wcnv2ps0s8r7x

 

There have recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of L2s in the Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts:

  • L2s' progress to stage 2 (and, secondarily, on interop) has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected
  • L1 itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gaslimits are projected to increase greatly in 2026

Both of these facts, for their own separate reasons, mean that the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path.

First, let us recap the original vision. Ethereum needs to scale. The definition of "Ethereum scaling" is the existence of large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum - that is, block space where, if you do things (including with ETH) inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched, as long as Ethereum itself functions. If you create a 10000 TPS EVM where its connection to L1 is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum.

This vision no longer makes sense. L1 does not need L2s to be "branded shards", because L1 is itself scaling. And L2s are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true "branded shard" would require. I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage 1, not just for technical reasons around ZK-EVM safety, but also because their customers' regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control. This may be doing the right thing for your customers. But it should be obvious that if you are doing this, then you are not "scaling Ethereum" in the sense meant by the rollup-centric roadmap. But that's fine! it's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on L1, with large planned increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead.

We should stop thinking about L2s as literally being "branded shards" of Ethereum, with the social status and responsibilities that this entails. Instead, we can think of L2s as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties (eg. not just EVM), as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum, that each person (or bot) is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs.

What would I do today if I were an L2?

  • Identify a value add other than "scaling". Examples: (i) non-EVM specialized features/VMs around privacy, (ii) efficiency specialized around a particular application, (iii) truly extreme levels of scaling that even a greatly expanded L1 will not do, (iv) a totally different design for non-financial applications, eg. social, identity, AI, (v) ultra-low-latency and other sequencing properties, (vi) maybe built-in oracles or decentralized dispute resolution or other "non-computationally-verifiable" features
  • Be stage 1 at the minimum (otherwise you really are just a separate L1 with a bridge, and you should just call yourself that) if you're doing things with ETH or other ethereum-issued assets
  • Support maximum interoperability with Ethereum, though this will differ for each one (eg. what if you're not EVM, or even not financial?)

From Ethereum's side, over the past few months I've become more convinced of the value of the native rollup precompile, particuarly once we have enshrined ZK-EVM proofs that we need anyway to scale L1. This is a precompile that verifies a ZK-EVM proof, and it's "part of Ethereum", so (i) it auto-upgrades along with Ethereum, and (ii) if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard-fork to fix the bug.

The native rollup precompile would make full, security-council-free, EVM verification accessible. We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your L2 is "EVM plus other stuff", then the native rollup precompile would verify the EVM, and you only have to bring your own prover for the "other stuff" (eg. Stylus). This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and outputs, and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table (that you would prove separately).

This would make it easy to have safe, strong, trustless interoperability with Ethereum. It also enables synchronous composability (see: https://ethresear.ch/t/combining-preconfirmations-with-based-rollups-for-synchronous-composability/23863 and https://ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-composability-between-rollups-via-realtime-proving/23998 ). And from there, it's each L2's choice exactly what they want to build. Don't just "extend L1", figure out something new to add.

This of course means that some will add things that are trust-dependent, or backdoored, or otherwise insecure; this is unavoidable in a permissionless ecosystem where developers have freedom. Our job should make to make it clear to users what guarantees they have, and to build up the strongest Ethereum that we can.

Source and credits to OP: https://firefly.social/post/lens/2qyrfkkt3q3693rc3qn

 

Comment ta ville change-t-elle?

 

C'est toujours agréable de voir plus de verdure autour

 

Some people were worried about quantum computers, so here in this video is a little bit on how we'll be dealing with it

🔐 Post-Quantum Ethereum is coming, and here's how it works.

We just delivered a self-study sharing session of leanMultisig - the breakthrough tech that will protect Ethereum's consensus layer in the quantum era.

Learn how leanMultisig will quantum-proof Ethereum, enabling post-quantum signature aggregation, the core mechanism enabling thousands of validators to vote together, through proving and verifying signatures with purpose-built zkVMs! 🤯

The Quantum Challenge:

Why Ethereum needs post-quantum signatures  
How leanSig replaces BLS signatures  
The role of zkVMs in aggregation  

Technical Deep-Dives:

Lean ISA's minimalist design (only 4 instructions!)  
Execution traces → polynomial transformations  
Proof generation and verification with WHIR  
Reducing 1000 signatures (3MB) to just 380KB  

Perfect for ZK enthusiasts and anyone curious about Ethereum's post-quantum future. A great starting point to explore the concepts before diving deeper into the official specs.

Source: https://xcancel.com/ReamLabs/status/2016202675105460568
YT link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A812DZvOLI

 

Quelques conseils pour rouler à vélo dans la neige, en sécurité :

▶️ Dégonflez un peu vos pneus.

▶️ Baissez la hauteur de votre selle.

▶️ Modérez votre vitesse.

▶️ Freinez doucement et privilégiez le frein arrière !

▶️ Et si vous n'êtes pas à l'aise, laissez votre vélo pour aujourd'hui

source: https://piaille.fr/@parisenselle/115848079715186560

 

The New York Stock Exchange is building a venue using blockchain technology to allow for trading tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds around the clock.

NYSE, which is owned by Intercontinental Exchange Inc., plans to use its existing technology that matches buyers and sellers, combined with private blockchain networks, to facilitate the trading of tokenized securities in real-time, according to executives. The company is looking to launch the new digital trading platform later this year, pending regulatory approval.

“This reflects an evolution of NYSE’s trading capabilities which went from trading floor, to electronic order-book, to blockchain,” Michael Blaugrund, vice president of strategic initiatives at ICE, said in an interview. “It allows for new types of investor accessibility, and will create new opportunities for retail to participate in the stablecoin-funded markets that have attracted their attention.”

The firm is in active dialogue with the US Securities and Exchange Commission as it seeks permission to operate the new platform, he said. Part of the digital infrastructure would allow for trades to be funded, and settled in real time, as opposed to the one-day delay that now exists in today’s equity markets.

“We think it aligns with the retail investor’s emerging desire to be able to trade something at 5:04 p.m. on a Saturday and then use that money to buy something else at 5:05 p.m. on a Saturday,” Blaugrund said. “This would facilitate that trade in a way that traditional equity infrastructure cannot.”

NYSE’s plans are addressing some of the foundational elements of how stocks are defined, issued and settled — questions that could decide whether tokenization becomes embedded in the plumbing of Wall Street. The New York Stock Exchange is the largest equities exchange operator in the US by volume.

A tokenized security is a digital representation of a security that can be traded on a blockchain network, rather than in a brokerage account. They have been touted as a way to deepen liquidity, support fractional ownership and widen access of the US stock markets because they can be traded at all hours of the day.

Blaugrund said the new venue is just one of several digital strategies that ICE is exploring. The company is also looking at new clearing infrastructure that would support trading 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. ICE is working with banks to support tokenized deposits, eventually looking to move money and manage funding requirements for trading outside of traditional banking hours.

“This is just the first step in a broader re-platforming, in a longer journey for ICE and for the industry,” Blaugrund said.

Round-the-Clock Access
NYSE’s main competitor in the US, Nasdaq, asked regulators in September to let investors trade tokenized versions of stocks on its public exchange. The company proposed that tokenized securities should trade under the same rules of execution and documentation as the underlying security, and that tokenized assets should be clearly labeled as such.

Supporters of tokenization say the move could be a step toward round-the-clock access to certain assets. NSYE already outlined its path to extend trading hours on its Arca equities venue, with plans to offer trading 22 hours on weekdays. That separate proposal got initial approval from the SEC in February, pending updates to the market’s data feed which is a necessary step for exchanges to offer extended trading hours.

NYSE’s new digital venue could be another push toward non-stop trading, and help bridge the gap between traditional markets and digital finance. Skeptics counter that the digital technology may be new, but the underlying risks in lending and borrowing remain unchanged — and that winning over regulators and major investors will be essential before such trades become routine.

D'accord et toutes mes excuses

 

Qui sabote la lutte pour le climat en France ? Comment s'organisent ceux qui nient l'évidence scientifique ?

Enquête cartographique ici:
https://deni-climatique.fr/wp-content/carto.html

[–] lystytsiaverschmitzt@anarchist.nexus 65 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Did they have too many quotable anti-fascist moments?

Does anyone know if there are any teams working on PBAC (Policy-Based Access Control) or RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) as questioned by the post from u/LogrisTheBard below?:

Social recovery wallets and timelocks: wallets that don't make you lose all your money if you misplace your seedphrase, or if an online or offline attacker extracts your seedphrase, and also don't make all your money backdoored by Google.

I'd really like to see a competent execution of policy based smart contract wallets. So not just timelocks but different signature thresholds for extracting larger sums of money, different roles for signers that are expected to do different things or interact with different applications, and governance extensibility through administration wallets that may not be part of the admin controls of the managed smart contracts. In addition to doing this on chain I'd like to see this implemented at the wallet level so my wallet can detect and reject malicious transactions before it has a chance of being signed.

Last year BitWise lost over $1B in ETH because they didn't have something as simple as an ATM withdrawal limit on the cold wallet.

Privacy UX: make private payments from your wallet, with the same user experience as making public payments.

Is this using the FHE (Fully Homomorphic Encryption) /Zama route or the Aztec/Railgun route to privacy? I think we need a clearer explainer of how privacy is achieved on chain with some of the different approaches being developed and the tradeoffs of those approaches.

Application UIs: use more dapps from an onchain UI with IPFS, without relying on trusted servers that would lock you our of practical recovery of your assets if they went offline, and would give you a hijacked UI that steals your funds if they get hacked for even a millisecond.

Get this built into the Rabby wallet browser. Also get an ERC standard where a smart contract can refer to an IPFS url where users should go to interact with it.

[–] lystytsiaverschmitzt@anarchist.nexus 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Echoing another relevant comment shared by u/LogrisTheBard :

I recently watched "A post-American, enshittification-resistant internet" by Cory Doctorow. He's an EFF activist and has been fighting for our rights for like 20 something years.

So much of this talk is on sovereignty. Whether it's national sovereignty such as national defense, corporate sovereignty such as jailbreaking devices, or personal sovereignty such as right to repair electronics he comes across as passionate about creating more resilient, economical, and equitable societal outcomes. So much of the ethos of web3 is present in his philosophy but the only reference to cryptocurrency in the whole talk was "stocks, shitcoins, and casinos but I repeat myself".

There were points where I just wanted to scream at the screen that we can help with that. By virtues, this guy should be ally of ours but he's probably only ever been exposed to the scammers that swarm the periphery of our ecosystem which is all too common a situation. We seriously needed something like Etherealize 4 years sooner, to treat public perception of Ethereum as more of a public good and less as the full time job of people like Sassal or Hoffman.

I'm talking to DeAI founders regularly and the common message is to lean into words like control, ownership, and resilience more and to avoid the word blockchain entirely. It's really a sad state of affairs that we can utilize blockchain solutions to improve things like resilience but we can't openly talk about utilizing blockchain solutions in any business or customer interaction. Anything web3 has to be abstracted as much as possible away behind a web2 interface before it can become palatable.

Neobanks this year will be offering Defi access through web2 frontends while avoiding any mention of blockchain as hard as they can. They'll use terms like "fully regulatory compliant backend financial systems" because if you say Ethereum almost the best thing that will happen is people won't have heard of it. DeAI systems will be using terms like "proof of control" to market even when that proof is using mechanisms like tokenization for model ownership.

It's frustrating.

[–] lystytsiaverschmitzt@anarchist.nexus 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The narrative against Ethereum was that it had high fees and no one could use it, but now gas fees have been low and cheaper transactions can be made again

[–] lystytsiaverschmitzt@anarchist.nexus 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I think we could use a combination of zero knowledge proofs (zkp), fully homomorphic encryption (FHE), trusted execution environment (TEE) if done very carefully, and/or secure multi-party computation (MPC)

I'm probably forgetting other techniques that could be used to keep inputs, outputs and computation privacy preserving while still being unable to abuse it or deanonymize the dataset

Unfortunately cattle farmers have a very strong lobby on their economy and I wouldn't be surprised if they get what they want permanently.

view more: next ›