Ace Design 🥇

3.1K posts

Ace Design 🥇 banner
Ace Design 🥇

Ace Design 🥇

@Ace_designer1

Mindset - Design - Motivation

Katılım Ocak 2022
672 Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Manu Sisti
Manu Sisti@Manu_Sisti·
Forget TikTok. Forget YouTube. Forget Instagram. Amazon can pay you $3,000/month to start AI publishing. It’s boring... but if you start today, you could make $3,000 by the end of June. I’ll send you a free training showing exactly how to do it. Just like this post and comment “Send.” (Make sure you follow.)
Manu Sisti tweet media
English
1.2K
164
1.3K
85.8K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Tommi Pedruzzi
Tommi Pedruzzi@TommiPedruzzi·
I’m shocked more people aren’t making $10,000/month with Claude. It’s simple. I recently shared this with a retiree... he’s now making $15K every month. Like and reply 'Claude' and I'll send you my step-by-step guide 100% FREE. (All my personal claude prompts included). Must follow me to get this proven guide in DM. FREE for the next 48 hours only.
Tommi Pedruzzi tweet media
English
2.7K
351
3K
290.8K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Miles Deutscher
Miles Deutscher@milesdeutscher·
If your friends aren't talking about: • Claude • Perplexity Computer • Openclaw • Fitness • Investing • Ownership • Automated workflows It's time to find new friends.
English
1.6K
1K
11.9K
9.9M
Ace Design 🥇
Ace Design 🥇@Ace_designer1·
If you aren’t enjoying the journey then you will never enjoy the destination. What do you think?
English
1
0
2
49
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
FOX TOMB
FOX TOMB@foxtomb232·
Being a reply guy is exhausting. Yet I did it consistently for 14 days. Results: + 4k followers + 100M impressions All from 50+ replies daily. It’s the best growth hack for small accounts.
FOX TOMB tweet media
English
38
2
51
1.5K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
vitalik.eth
vitalik.eth@VitalikButerin·
One important technical item that I forgot to mention is the proposed switch from Casper FFG to Minimmit as the finality gadget. To summarize, Casper FFG provides two-round finality: it requires each attester to sign once to "justify" the block, and then again to "finalize" it. Minimmit only requires one round. In exchange, Minimmit's fault tolerance (in our parametrization) drops to 17%, compared to Casper FFG's 33%. Within Ethereum consensus discussions, I have always been the security assumptions hawk: I've insisted on getting to the theoretical bound of 49% fault tolerance under synchrony, kept pushing for 51% attack recovery gadgets, came up with DAS to make data availability checks dishonest-majority-resistant, etc. But I am fine with Minimmit's properties, in fact even enthusiastic in some respects. In this post, I will explain why. Let's lay out the exact security properties of both 3SF (not the current beacon chain, which is needlessly weak in many ways, but the ideal 3SF) and Minimmit. "Synchronous network" means "network latency less than 1/4 slot or so", "asynchronous network" means "potentially very high latency, even some nodes go offline for hours at a time". The percentages ("attacker has <33%") refer to percentages of active staked ETH. ## Properties of 3SF Synchronous network case: * Attacker has p < 33%: nothing bad happens * 33% < p < 50%: attacker can stop finality (at the cost of losing massive funds via inactivity leak), but the chain keeps progressing normally * 50% < p < 67%: attacker can censor or revert the chain, but cannot revert finality. If an attacker censors, good guys can self-organize, they can stop contributing to a censoring chain, and do a "minority soft fork" * p > 67%: attacker can finalize things at will, much harder for good guys to do minority soft fork Asynchronous network case: * Attacker has p < 33%: cannot revert finality * p > 33%: can revert finality, at the cost of losing massive funds via slashing ## Properties of Minimmit Synchronous network case: * Attacker has p < 17%: nothing bad happens * 17% < p < 50%: attacker can stop finality (at the cost of losing massive funds via inactivity leak), but the chain keeps progressing normally * 50% < p < 83%: attacker can censor or revert the chain, but cannot revert finality. If an attacker censors, good guys can self-organize, they can stop contributing to a censoring chain, and do a "minority soft fork" * p > 83%: attacker can finalize things at will, much harder for good guys to do minority soft fork Asynchronous network case: * Attacker has p < 17%: cannot revert finality * p > 17%: can revert finality, at the cost of losing massive funds via slashing I actually think that the latter is a better tradeoff. Here's my reasoning why: * The worst kind of attack is actually not finality reversion, it's censorship. The reason is that finality reversion creates massive publicly available evidence that can be used to immediately cost the attacker millions of ETH (ie. billions of dollars), whereas censorship requires social coordination to get around * In both of the above, a censorship attack requires 50% * A censorship attack becomes *much harder* to coordinate around when the censoring attacker can unilaterally finalize (ie. >67% in 3SF, >83% in Minimmit). If they can't, then if the good guys counter-coordinate, you get two non-finalizing chains dueling for a few days, and users can pick on. If they can, then there's no natural schelling point to coordinate soft-forking * In the case of a client bug, the worst thing that can happen is finalizing something bugged. In 3SF, you only need 67% of clients to share a bug for it to finalize, in Minimmit, you need 83%. Basicallly, Minimmit maximizes the set of situations that "default to two chains dueling each other", and that is actually a much healthier and much more recoverable outcome than "the wrong thing finalizing". We want finality to mean final. So in situations of uncertainty (whether attacks or software bugs), we should be more okay with having periods of hours or days where the chain does not finalize, and instead progresses based on the fork choice rule. This gives us time to think and make sure which chain is correct. Also, I think the "33% slashed to revert finality" of 3SF is overkill. If there is even eg. 15 million ETH staking, then that's 5M ($10B) slashed to revert the chain once. If you had $10B, and you are willing to commit mayhem of a type that violates many countries' computer hacking laws, there are FAR BETTER ways to spend it than to attack a chain. Even if your goal is breaking Ethereum, there are far better attack vectors. And so if we have the baseline guarantee of >= 17% slashed to revert finality (which Minimmit provides), we should judge the two systems from there based on their other properties - where, for the reasons I described above, I think Minimmit performs better.
vitalik.eth@VitalikButerin

Finally, the block building pipeline. In Glamsterdam, Ethereum is getting ePBS, which lets proposers outsource to a free permissionless market of block builders. This ensures that block builder centralization does not creep into staking centralization, but it leaves the question: what do we do about block builder centralization? And what are the _other_ problems in the block building pipeline that need to be addressed, and how? This has both in-protocol and extra-protocol components. ## FOCIL FOCIL is the first step into in-protocol multi-participant block building. FOCIL lets 16 randomly-selected attesters each choose a few transactions, which *must* be included somewhere in the block (the block gets rejected otherwise). This means that even if 100% of block building is taken over by one hostile actor, they cannot prevent transactions from being included, because the FOCILers will push them in. ## "Big FOCIL" This is more speculative, but has been discussed as a possible next step. The idea is to make the FOCILs bigger, so they can include all of the transactions in the block. We avoid duplication by having the i'th FOCIL'er by default only include (i) txs whose sender address's first hex char is i, and (ii) txs that were around but not included in the previous slot. So at the cost of one slot delay, only censored txs risk duplication. Taking this to its logical conclusion, the builder's role could become reduced to ONLY including "MEV-relevant" transactions (eg. DEX arbitrage), and computing the state transition. ## Encrypted mempools Encrypted mempools are one solution being explored to solve "toxic MEV": attacks such as sandwiching and frontrunning, which are exploitative against users. If a transaction is encrypted until it's included, no one gets the opportunity to "wrap" it in a hostile way. The technical challenge is: how to guarantee validity in a mempool-friendly and inclusion-friendly way that is efficient, and what technique to use to guarantee that the transaction will actually get decrypted once the block is made (and not before). ## The transaction ingress layer One thing often ignored in discussions of MEV, privacy, and other issues is the network layer: what happens in between a user sending out a transaction, and that transaction making it into a block? There are many risks if a hostile actor sees a tx "in the clear" inflight: * If it's a defi trade or otherwise MEV-relevant, they can sandwich it * In many applications, they can prepend some other action which invalidates it, not stealing money, but "griefing" you, causing you to waste time and gas fees * If you are sending a sensitive tx through a privacy protocol, even if it's all private onchain, if you send it through an RPC, the RPC can see what you did, if you send it through the public mempool, any analytics agency that runs many nodes will see what you did There has recently been increasing work on network-layer anonymization for transactions: exploring using Tor for routing transactions, ideas around building a custom ethereum-focused mixnet, non-mixnet designs that are more latency-minimized (but bandwidth-heavier, which is ok for transactions as they are tiny) like Flashnet, etc. This is an open design space, I expect the kohaku initiative @ncsgy will be interested in integrating pluggable support for such protocols, like it is for onchain privacy protocols. There is also room for doing (benign, pro-user) things to transactions before including them onchain; this is very relevant for defi. Basically, we want ideal order-matching, as a passive feature of the network layer without dependence on servers. Of course enabling good uses of this without enabling sandwiching involves cryptography or other security, some important challenges there. ## Long-term distributed block building There is a dream, that we can make Ethereum truly like BitTorrent: able to process far more transactions than any single server needs to ever coalesce locally. The challenge with this vision is that Ethereum has (and indeed a core value proposition is) synchronous shared state, so any tx could in principle depend on any other tx. This centralizes block building. "Big FOCIL" handles this partially, and it could be done extra-protocol too, but you still need one central actor to put everything in order and execute it. We could come up with designs that address this. One idea is to do the same thing that we want to do for state: acknowledge that >95% of Ethereum's activity doesn't really _need_ full globalness, though the 5% that does is often high-value, and create new categories of txs that are less global, and so friendly to fully distributed building, and make them much cheaper, while leaving the current tx types in place but (relatively) more expensive. This is also an open and exciting long-term future design space. firefly.social/post/lens/8144…

English
239
166
860
270.1K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Thefitdoc
Thefitdoc@Siddurp2·
Stop wishing your life was better. Be better. Eat better. Do better.
Thefitdoc tweet media
English
6
1
22
1K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Jaber
Jaber@Akashi203·
every agent framework out there is just a chatbot, you type something and it responds. thats not an agent thats a conversation! i built hands in @openfangg because i wanted agents that actually do things without me sitting there prompting them. a researcher hand that wakes up, digs through sources, cross-references them, and delivers a cited report before i even open my laptop. a lead gen hand that runs daily, finds prospects, scores them, deduplicates against your db, and drops qualified leads in your inbox. a collector hand that monitors any target 24/7 and alerts you when something changes 7 hands ship with openfang.sh today, each one has a full operational playbook, domain expertise, and guardrails all compiled into a single 32mb rust binary. one command to activate, one command to pause without losing state. next step is fanghub, a marketplace where anyone can build and publish their own hands. compliance monitoring, patent tracking, social listening, whatever you need, just define a HAND.toml and publish it we at openfang building agents that work for you page: openfang.sh repo: github.com/RightNow-AI/op…
Jaber tweet media
English
23
13
76
7.5K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Pavel Vasilev
Pavel Vasilev@vasilevbrand·
Don’t drown in supplements. Don’t ignore lifestyle. Fix sleep, diet, stress.
English
9
1
14
187
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
NX
NX@nx_stuntz·
The greatest skill you can develop is the ability to figure it out.
English
7
11
204
16.7K
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
School Of Great Men
School Of Great Men@SchoolOfGr8Men·
Non-Negotiables for Peak Masculinity: -Train like a beast. -Sleep like a baby. -Eat like a king. -Focus like a sniper. -Dress like a gentleman. -Speak like a leader. -Walk like you own the room. -Avoid junk food and junk people. -Build discipline and drop excuses. -Protect your testosterone at all costs. -Masculinity isn’t dead—it’s just rare. Which one hits hardest?
English
4
43
358
14.8K
Ace Design 🥇
Ace Design 🥇@Ace_designer1·
Skills create income. Ownership creates net worth.
English
0
0
2
15
Ace Design 🥇
Ace Design 🥇@Ace_designer1·
It doesn't always happen what you think,you have to make it happen.
English
0
0
1
13
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Pavel Vasilev
Pavel Vasilev@vasilevbrand·
You’re not hard gaining. You’re soft committing.
English
9
1
12
147
Ace Design 🥇 retweetledi
Pakbel
Pakbel@thepakbel·
5 years from now you'll either say: "I'm glad I started building online" or "I wish I started sooner" Both timelines start today. Your move.
English
19
2
32
976
Ace Design 🥇
Ace Design 🥇@Ace_designer1·
Careers are dead. Jobs are dying. Opportunities arising.
English
0
0
1
15
NX
NX@nx_stuntz·
The key to growth is blaming yourself for everything.
English
18
9
200
16.7K