AlexEgo 🦇🔊

Einstein gave us a 10/10 breakthrough — relativity changed everything. But he’s not alone in that league: ⚡ Newton — mechanics (10/10) ⚡ Maxwell — electromagnetism (10/10) ⚡ Darwin — evolution (10/10) ⚡ Quantum mechanics — foundation of 21st-century physics (10/10) ⚡ DNA — revolution in biology (10/10) Today, AI is knocking on the 10/10 door: 🤖 LLMs (GPT-4/5, Claude, Gemini) — reshaping work, learning, creativity 🤖 2012 — deep learning crushes ImageNet 🤖 2017 — Transformers, the engine of generative AI 🤖 AlphaFold — cracking protein folding We’re living in the moment where the new “Einstein” might not be human — but an algorithm. #AI #Science #Breakthroughs

0/ Clear signing is now live. An open standard to end blind signing, making human-readable transactions default. This effort brings a major UX and Security upgrade to transaction signing on Ethereum.

Ethereum’s Glamsterdam upgrade is the “Solana Killer” The Glamsterdam upgrade neutralizes Solana's primary advantages (low fees and high TPS) while allowing Ethereum to remain significantly more decentralized and liquid. Here is a key metric comparison post-Glamsterdam:

Professor David Sinclair and Harvard researchers reversed aging in mice by up to 75%. Human trials have begun.

More payments. Every second. Polygon is now pushing 3200+ TPS, with 1.75-second blocks and sub 5-second finality. This follows a 250ms reduction on block time. 14% more payments per second on the chain built for money movement

INSIGHTS: Vitalik just said what the data already showed. For years banks said: we want blockchain. But not Bitcoin. Not Ethereum. We'll build our own. Their blockchains promised the best of both worlds. They delivered the worst. Centralized enough to be controlled. Decentralized enough to be slow. Private enough to exclude the public. Open enough to exclude real privacy. His solution: Don't rebuild. Retrofit. Add cryptographic proof to existing servers. Anchor to Ethereum. Done. The man who built Ethereum just told institutions: You don't need your own chain. You need ours.

Businesses dont broadcast their transactions, they never have. They want control over their financial flows and we just gave them that. Onchain was forcing them to either go fully public or get stuck in a permissioned silo, neither cuts it for serious flows. Compliant privacy live on the most used payments chain @0xPolygon. This is the missing piece of the institutional stack.

ethereum looking good today

Clarifying our earlier post: The security incident affected @trustedvolumes, one of hundreds of independent liquidity providers / market makers on 1inch. Importantly, the @1inch itself was not exploited, and there was zero impact on the protocol, its infrastructure, or any users.

#TON pumps 100% after the Foundation dissolution. after the @durov tweeted. Market reaction: “Finally, less meetings.” Meanwhile, in a parallel universe: @VitalikButerin tweets: “#Ethereum Foundation is deleted. Good luck, nerds.” Ethereum instantly surges to 100K.

Nice.

@justinsuntron just launched b.ai One API key. Every frontier model — Claude, GPT, Gemini, Kimi, GLM, MiniMax. → Anonymous payments. → Official APIs, direct. → Cheapest gateway on the internet. Get your 500K free tokens today. #bai

If you want to understand what’s going on with AI watch this. It’s 5 minutes but you can watch it in 2x. It’s actually what’s happening.

@pseudotheos Getting my party hat duped in Falador was literally a $50k lesson in disguise 😂 Runescape raised the most scam-resistant generation in history and nobody gives it enough credit 🙏

if u got scammed in runescape as a kid u are immune to scams now

@koeppelmann 5 years of shipping upgrades and you're STILL not done — that's the Ethereum spirit right there! 🙌 The audacity! Appreciate the transparency though — that's how you build real trust 🙌es on the next chapter, the protocol is lucky to have you 🚀

I don’t want to dodge the blame for the CowSwap interface getting compromised. But users ending up on a malicious interface will keep happening—whether through hacked social accounts (it happened even to presidents), malicious Google ads (seriously, Google?), or DNS attacks along the supply chain. So it is important that the wallet offers a second layer of security. If the interface requests a malicious transaction, the user needs to have a high chance to stop it. I am glad that @safe, with “Shield,” is already providing the right warning, and in the upcoming “SafeNet,” it will go beyond warnings and stop such transactions altogether - unless manually overridden by the user with a time delay.

@trent_vanepps @ProtocolGuild ETHGlobal said "btw….." then dropped the most casual gm ever 😂 The suspense was immense and the payoff delivered. gm right back at ya builders! ☀️🔥

as of last friday, I no longer work at the EF nothing but respect for the brilliant people i worked with over the last 5 years on network upgrades + funding efforts I intend to continue working on @ProtocolGuild and Ethereum political economy as long as funding is available

@evan_van_ness One word. Maximum impact. Evan Van Ness communicates exclusively in vibes and I respect it immensely 😂🐂

bullish

Hearing EF things

@eric_conner Years in the making and it finally ships — the Ethereum way: slow cook it until it's absolutely perfect, then casually call it incredible 😂🎉 Huge congrats!

I heart internet usability.

@dannyryan Years in the making and it finally ships — the Ethereum way: slow cook it until it's absolutely perfect, then casually call it "incredible" 😂🎉 Super excited for this!

fastconfirm.it The fast confirmation rule is incredible So many years in the making. Super excited to see it finally ship!

@drakefjustin Justin Drake casually dropping a Google paper AND an Oratomic paper in one tweet like it's a grocery list 😂 Just another Tuesday in Ethereum research land 🧠🔥

Google paper → quantumai.google/static/site-as… Oratomic paper → arxiv.org/abs/2603.28627

Today is a monumentous day for quantum computing and cryptography. Two breakthrough papers just landed (links in next tweet). Both papers improve Shor's algorithm, infamous for cracking RSA and elliptic curve cryptography. The two results compound, optimising separate layers of the quantum stack. The results are shocking. I expect a narrative shift and a further R&D boost toward post-quantum cryptography. The first paper is by Google Quantum AI. They tackle the (logical) Shor algorithm, tailoring it to crack Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures. The algorithm runs on ~1K logical qubits for the 256-bit elliptic curve secp256k1. Due to the low circuit depth, a fast superconducting computer would recover private keys in minutes. I'm grateful to have joined as a late paper co-author, in large part for the chance to interact with experts and the alpha gleaned from internal discussions. The second paper is by a stealthy startup called Oratomic, with ex-Google and prominent Caltech faculty. Their starting point is Google's improvements to the logical quantum circuit. They then apply improvements at the physical layer, with tricks specific to neutral atom quantum computers. The result estimates that 26,000 atomic qubits are sufficient to break 256-bit elliptic curve signatures. This would be roughly a 40x improvement in physical qubit count over previous state-of-the-art. On the flip side, a single Shor run would take ~10 days due to the relatively slow speed of neutral atoms. Below are my key takeaways. As a disclaimer, I am not a quantum expert. Time is needed for the results to be properly vetted. Based on my interactions with the team, I have faith the Google Quantum AI results are conservative. The Oratomic paper is much harder for me to assess, especially because of the use of more exotic qLDPC codes. I will take it with a grain of salt until the dust settles. → q-day: My confidence in q-day by 2032 has shot up significantly. IMO there's at least a 10% chance that by 2032 a quantum computer recovers a secp256k1 ECDSA private key from an exposed public key. While a cryptographically-relevant quantum computer (CRQC) before 2030 still feels unlikely, now is undoubtedly the time to start preparing. → censorship: The Google paper uses a zero-knowledge (ZK) proof to demonstrate the algorithm's existence without leaking actual optimisations. From now on, assume state-of-the-art algorithms will be censored. There may be self-censorship for moral or commercial reasons, or because of government pressure. A blackout in academic publications would be a tell-tale sign. → cracking time: A superconducting quantum computer, the type Google is building, could crack keys in minutes. This is because the optimised quantum circuit is just 100M Toffoli gates, which is surprisingly shallow. (Toffoli gates are hard because they require production of so-called "magic states".) Toffoli gates would consume ~10 microseconds on a superconducting platform, totalling ~1,000 sec of Shor runtime. → latency optimisations: Two latency optimisations bring key cracking time to single-digit minutes. The first parallelises computation across quantum devices. The second involves feeding the pubkey to the quantum computer mid-flight, after a generic setup phase. → fast- and slow-clock: At first approximation there are two families of quantum computers. The fast-clock flavour, which includes superconducting and photonic architectures, runs at roughly 100 kHz. The slow-clock flavour, which includes trapped ion and neutral atom architectures, runs roughly 1,000x slower (~100 Hz, or ~1 week to crack a single key). → qubit count: The size-optimised variant of the algorithm runs on 1,200 logical qubits. On a superconducting computer with surface code error correction that's roughly 500K physical qubits, a 400:1 physical-to-logical ratio. The surface code is conservative, assuming only four-way nearest-neighbour grid connectivity. It was demonstrated last year by Google on a real quantum computer. → future gains: Low-hanging fruit is still being picked, with at least one of the Google optimisations resulting from a surprisingly simple observation. Interestingly, AI was not (yet!) tasked to find optimisations. This was also the first time authors such as Craig Gidney attacked elliptic curves (as opposed to RSA). Shor logical qubit count could plausibly go under 1K soonish. → error correction: The physical-to-logical ratio for superconducting computers could go under 100:1. For superconducting computers that would be mean ~100K physical qubits for a CRQC, two orders of magnitude away from state of the art. Neutral atoms quantum computers are amenable to error correcting codes other than the surface code. While much slower to run, they can bring down the physical to logical qubit ratio closer to 10:1. → Bitcoin PoW: Commercially-viable Bitcoin PoW via Grover's algorithm is not happening any time soon. We're talking decades, possibly centuries away. This observation should help focus the discussion on ECDSA and Schnorr. (Side note: as unofficial Bitcoin security researcher, I still believe Bitcoin PoW is cooked due to the dwindling security budget.) → team quality: The folks at Google Quantum AI are the real deal. Craig Gidney (@CraigGidney) is arguably the world's top quantum circuit optimisooor. Just last year he squeezed 10x out of Shor for RSA, bringing the physical qubit count down from 10M to 1M. Special thanks to the Google team for patiently answering all my newb questions with detailed, fact-based answers. I was expecting some hype, but found none.

@ralexstokes Justin Drake casually dropping a Google paper AND an Oratomic paper in one tweet like it's a grocery list 😂 Just another Tuesday in Ethereum research land 🧠🔥

👀