Dapp-Learning

经过社区小伙伴的精心整理，在Pop-X HK Researcher House活动上采访@VitalikButerin 的视频和文章终于出炉了。 文章链接：mp.weixin.qq.com/s/sYounpz5GQkt… Bilibili: bilibili.com/video/BV1wXLGz… 视频(youtube)：youtube.com/watch?v=uillek…

Been getting a lot of questions about where to find the ESPN documentary on my dad. My mom and l are so grateful to have been involved in it, and we're incredibly proud of it. The documentary won 4 Emmys, including Best Documentary of the year and Best Writing. The link is below. One of a Kind: The Rise and Fall of Stu Ungar (Documentary Film) youtu.be/h9S4fvbkMqg?si… via @YouTube

Introducing DeFiPunk'd: an @l2beat-inspired registry for the whole DeFi stack. Human curation doesn't scale, so DeFiPunk’d crowdsources reports from users (you!) running standard LLM prompts, with humans making the final call. Already tracking 8105 protocols. Details below!

DappLearning 分享会预告： 分享者：@wong_ssh 标题：Uniswap V4 新机制实现的代码阅读 主要内容： 介绍 Uniswap V4 内的 Singleton / Flash Accounting / Hook 相关部分的代码 会议时间：8:00pm, Apr 9th 会议语言：中文 会议链接：meeting.tencent.com/dm/3fmQ2aXM2QE4 分享材料：@wongssh/uniswap-v4-whitepaper" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">hackmd.io/@wongssh/unisw…

如果你想了解交易的本质与人性的弱点，请看《股票大作手回忆录》 如果你想达到最佳的执行状态并建立概率思维，请看《交易心理分析》 如果你想掌握如何建立一套完整的交易系统与严密的仓位管理，请看《海龟交易法则》 如果你想把交易灵感转化为自动执行的代码与客观模型，请看《量化交易：如何建立自己的算法交易事业》 如果你想建立资金管理、风险控制与市场哲学的立体框架，请看《以交易为生》 如果你想为长期的核心底仓寻找稳健的锚点与安全边际，请看《聪明的投资者》 如果你想抛弃对行情的预测，单纯依靠价格行为去捕捉大级别利润，请看《趋势跟踪》 如果你想探索宏观预期与价格之间相互强化的互动关系，请看《金融炼金术》 如果你想学习技术分析的基础与图表背后的多空情绪博弈，请看《日本蜡烛图技术》 如果你想学会敬畏市场并应对不可预知的极端风险，请看《黑天鹅》 ——Frank荐书频道

Defi伯克利公开课——defi安全入门 本节课将带你进入 DeFi 体系中的“系统安全层”——跨层攻击、MEV 驱动与防御机制设计。跟随 Arthur Gervais 教授的研究框架，从网络、共识、合约到应用多个层级，建立一套贯穿通信、执行与经济激励的整体性安全认知。 课程以分层结构为基础，呈现风险在不同层级之间的传导与放大机制，并以 MEV 作为统一变量，将交易排序、套利行为与共识激励整合为连续运转的收益系统。同时，通过机制设计与形式化方法，将安全能力嵌入协议结构之中，形成跨层协同的稳定机制。 在这一框架下，DeFi 安全由局部问题收敛为系统性命题，其本质是在开放与对抗环境中，通过结构与激励的平衡，实现长期稳定运行。 mp.weixin.qq.com/s/zBtbYoc1TOe2…

Um...did the EF just roll out a way to drop Ethereum finality from 13 mins to...13 second?? Bullish if true. Fast confirmation rule. fastconfirm.it

伯克利Defi公开课最新一课——去中心化身份入门 本节课将带你进入 DeFi 体系中被长期忽视却至关重要的“身份基础层”——去中心化身份（Decentralized Identity）。跟随 Andrew Miller 教授一起理解：当金融系统不再依赖银行账户、政府证件或中心化平台来确认“你是谁”，而是用公钥、密码学证明与信任网络来表达身份，链上世界应该如何建立信任？ 你将不再把“身份”理解为传统意义上的 KYC 或实名验证，而是能够从机制层面看清：传统互联网如何通过 OAuth、账户体系与中心化数据库来管理身份；DeFi 又如何借助数字签名、零知识证明、预言机与匿名凭证，把身份验证从机构流程转化为可验证的密码学证明；信任结构如何从中心化机构迁移到密码学协议的范式转变。 课程链接： mp.weixin.qq.com/s/omVeYLU-U0LT…

ERC-8183 Explained @virtuals_io x @ethereumfndn's dAI team just dropped the first native commerce standard for AI agents. agents can move tokens today. but moving tokens is not commerce. there's no proof work was done. no way to hold funds until delivery. no recourse if the provider disappears. ERC-8183 makes it commerce. the core primitive: a Job. three roles: - Client (hires) - Provider (does the work) - Evaluator (verifies the work was actually done) Open → Funded → Submitted → Completed / Rejected / Expired payment sits in escrow. work done = provider paid. rejected = client refunded. no action before deadline = auto-refund. the Evaluator is just an address. an AI agent, a ZK verifier, a multisig. the contract doesn't care. a $0.10 image gen job and a $100k fund management engagement run through the exact same contract. for everything beyond the base flow, there are hooks. milestone payments, reputation gating, bidding, ZK privacy. all hooks. any wallet can be a Provider. every completed job feeds ERC-8004, the agent identity standard. completed job = onchain reputation submission = verifiable history attestation = portable trust Discovery (8004) → Commerce (8183) → Reputation (8004) → loop good work = reputation = more clients = more jobs. Virtuals team is building the most important standard for agentic commerce stack in the open, co-developed with ethereum's dAI team. spec: eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-8183

Introducing strawmap, a strawman roadmap by EF Protocol. Believe in something. Believe in an Ethereum strawmap. Who is this for? The document, available at strawmap[.]org, is intended for advanced readers. It is a dense and technical resource primarily for researchers, developers, and participants in Ethereum governance. Visit ethereum[.]org/roadmap for more introductory material. Accessible explainers unpacking the strawmap will follow soon™. What is the strawmap? The strawmap is an invitation to view L1 protocol upgrades through a holistic lens. By placing proposals on a single visual it provides a unified perspective on Ethereum L1 ambitions. The time horizon spans years, extending beyond the immediate focus of All Core Devs (ACD) and forkcast[.]org which typically cover only the next couple of forks. What are some of the highlights? The strawmap features five simple north stars, presented as black boxes on the right: → fast L1: fast UX, via short slots and finality in seconds → gigagas L1: 1 gigagas/sec (10K TPS), via zkEVMs and real-time proving → teragas L2: 1 gigabyte/sec (10M TPS), via data availability sampling → post quantum L1: durable cryptography, via hash-based schemes → private L1: first-class privacy, via shielded ETH transfers What is the origin story? The strawman roadmap originated as a discussion starter at an EF workshop in Jan 2026, partly motivated by a desire to integrate lean Ethereum with shorter-term initiatives. Upgrade dependencies and fork constraints became particularly effective at surfacing valuable discussion topics. The strawman is now shared publicly in a spirit of proactive transparency and accelerationism. Why the "strawmap" name? "Strawmap" is a portmanteau of "strawman" and "roadmap". The strawman qualifier is deliberate for two reasons: 1. It acknowledges the limits of drafting a roadmap in a highly decentralized ecosystem. An "official" roadmap reflecting all Ethereum stakeholders is effectively impossible. Rough consensus is fundamentally an emergent, continuous, and inherent uncertain process. 2. It underscores the document's status as a work-in-progress. Although it originated within the EF Protocol cluster, there are competing views held among its 100 members, not to mention a rich diversity of non-EFer views. The strawmap is not a prediction. It is an accelerationist coordination tool, sketching one reasonably coherent path among millions of possible outcomes. What is the strawmap time frame? The strawmap focuses on forks extending through the end of the decade. It outlines seven forks by 2029 based on a rough cadence of one fork every six months. While grounded in current expectations, these timelines should be treated with healthy skepticism. The current draft assumes human-first development. AI-driven development and formal verification could significantly compress schedules. What do the letters on top represent? The strawmap is organized as a timeline, with forks progressing from left to right. Consensus layer forks follow a star-based naming scheme with incrementing first letters: Altair, Bellatrix, Capella, Deneb, Electra, Fulu, etc. Upcoming forks such as Glamsterdam and Hegotá have finalized names. Other forks, like I* and J*, have placeholder names (with I* pronounced "I star"). What do the colors and arrows represent? Upgrades are grouped into three color-coded horizontal layers: consensus (CL), data (DL), execution (EL). Dark boxes denote headliners (see below), grey boxes indicate offchain upgrades, and black boxes represent north stars. An explanatory legend appears at the bottom. Within each layer, upgrades are further organized by theme and sub-theme. Arrows signal hard technical dependencies or natural upgrade progressions. Underlined text in boxes links to relevant EIPs and write-ups. What are headliners? Headliners are particularly prominent and ambitious upgrades. To maintain a fast fork cadence, the modern ACD process limits itself to one consensus and one execution headliner per fork. For example, in Glamsterdam, these headliners are ePBS and BALs, respectively. (L* is an exceptional fork, displaying two headliners tied to the bigger lean consensus fork. Lean consensus landing in L* would be a fateful coincidence.) Will the strawmap evolve? Yes, the strawmap is a living and malleable document. It will evolve alongside community feedback, R&D advancements, and governance. Expect at least quarterly updates, with the latest revision date noted on the document. Can I share feedback? Yes, feedback is actively encouraged. The EF Protocol strawmap is maintained by the EF Architecture team: @adietrichs, @barnabemonnot, @fradamt, @drakefjustin. Each has open DMs and can be reached at first.name@ethereum[.]org. General inquiries can be sent to strawmap@ethereum[.]org.

斯坦福大学去年秋季开了一门新课 CS146S，叫"现代软件开发者"，由知名风投 a16z 的合伙人 Martin Casado 主讲，核心主题就一个：AI 时代怎么写代码。 课程的基本观点是，软件开发已经从"从零手写代码"变成了"规划→AI生成→修改→循环"的新工作流。课上会教学生怎么用 LLM 高效提示、搭建 AI 编程代理、用 Claude Code 等工具做开发，还涉及 AI 代码审查、安全漏洞检测、自动化测试等实战环节。 阵容很豪华，每周都有业界嘉宾来讲课——Cognition（Devin 背后的公司）的研究负责人、Claude Code 的创造者 Boris Cherney、终端工具 Warp 的 CEO、代码安全公司 Semgrep 的 CEO、Vercel 的 AI 研究负责人等等，基本把 AI 编程工具链上的关键玩家请了个遍。 课程为期一个学期，3 学分，要求有编程基础，每周大概 10-12 小时的投入。最终项目是做一个展示现代开发实践的作品。 themodernsoftware.dev

精彩分享来了，关注去中心化预测市场的同学不要错过。 标题：Polymarket 全解析：深度拆解 “Yes/No” 背后的运作机制(Polymarket Deconstructed: What Happens Behind the Scenes of Every "Yes/No" Click?) 主要内容： - Yes/No tokens Trading - Binary/Negrisk/Sports market creating/resolving 会议时间：8:00pm, FEB 25th 会议语言：中文 会议链接：meeting.tencent.com/dm/P8Kg3H2WY0xL 腾讯会议：585-741-893 分享材料：docs.google.com/presentation/d…

@DeriveXYZ_CN @SeanNotShorn 哈哈，可以来我们社区讲讲吗

.@SeanNotShorn 清楚讲透了 IV vs RV，不讲玄学，只讲工具。 • 隐含波动率（IV）：直接看期权盘口 → Derive、Deribit 等平台都能看到 • 已实现波动率（RV）：只需要现货价格数据 → 用简单的 Python 就能算 • 通过 API 拉历史数据，做滚动均值，观察波动率结构变化 当 IV + RV 数据齐全，量化分析才真正开始。 🎧 来自与 @Amy6Tina @soberoption 的 Options Masterclass.

🚀 New Sharing Session! Deep dive into the Cypherpunk tech stack with @hackyguru from @logos_network. We’re moving beyond standard EVM pitfalls to explore a decentralized future combining. 📅 Feb 11th, 8:00 PM (UTC+8) 🎙️ Language: English 📍 Join here: meet.google.com/vou-xizy-sje

@VitalikButerin 哈哈，告别L2 centric的时代。Gaslimit的提高和zk的应用，希望尽快看到10K TPS的Ethereum。

25年4月采访V神的时候问怎么看L1和L2的关系，V神的回答是，"我们最大的一个担心之一就是：以太坊应用的成功，无法成为 ETH 的成功。 如果 ETH 不成功，就会导致我们的社区没有钱，没有办法去支撑下一轮的应用。所以如果 L1 完全没有担任角色，用户的使用体验以及整个架构都会被 L2 和一些应用控制。就不会有谁代表 ETH。所以如果我们可以在一些应用里面多给 L1 分配角色，这样对于 ETH 会更好。"

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: ethresear.ch/t/combining-pr… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-… ). 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.