It was so bad that for a while in the mid-2000s "a kevin" was a common noun to refer to an annoying teenager.
Chłoddy@OfSymbols
Home Alone hit France like an atom bomb.
English
PiRK
10.3K posts
PiRK
@PiR_K
Interested in software, #eCash $XEC, economic freedom, permaculture and plant propagation.
Hammerfest Katılım Eylül 2009
327 Takip Edilen1K Takipçiler
@NothingIsArt Eating meat makes it possible to valorize grass and foliage that grow without fertilizers, without effort, and that humans can’t eat directly.
English
PiRK retweetledi
🚨 BREAKING: Arizona passes SB 1649 supporting crypto and digital assets. The proposal highlights seized crypto reserves including $DGB , $DASH, $EGLD, $ICP, $RVN, $XCH), $XEC, $XMR and More🔥🇺🇸🚀💙
Arizona is positioning itself at the forefront of blockchain innovation. 🇺🇸
English
@caincurrency I didn't know this novel existed, but I'm a big fan of Lars Mytting's "Norwegian Wood" book: larsmytting.com/norwegian-wood
English
Norwegian Wood by Haruki Murakami - Not as good as I remember it being. I'll just leave it at that.
English
Here's a thread on some books I recently reread and what I thought of them 🧵
Cain's Chronicles@caincurrency
What's the last good book you read and what did you like about it?
English
Most underrated dish
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saumagen
But the guy who named it was terrible at marketing: "Stuffed pig stomach". It's like calling any sausage "stuffed pig intestine".
English
PiRK retweetledi
4 meters of snow at 2500m
x.com/i/status/20245…
Météo Centre-Isère@MeteoIsere
❄️📏 Le dernier BERA (Bulletin d'Estimation des Risques d'Avalanches) de @meteofrance pour le massif de #Belledonne fait état d'une épaisseur de neige de 4 mètres au sol dans le massif à 2500 m d'altitude (secteurs hors piste) et 3 mètres à 2000 m. 1/2
English
It do be raining a lot recently.
Nahel Belgherze@WxNB_
For the first time since records began in 1950, France’s multi-week national MSLP has dropped below 1000 hPa. The persistence of this low-pressure pattern across western Europe in recent weeks has been nothing short of historic. Uncharted territory.
English
An interesting book by former Bitcoin Cash developer Shammah Chancellor.
Interesting because it sums up my own conclusions about morality and christianity: morality is not relative, christianity is a good moral framework even if you don't believe in god.
a.co/d/0hjTDn4G
English
@16forbs The meteotron is the tool we need. The elites have been hiding its existence since the early 1960s. ina.fr/ina-eclaire-ac…
English
We must never allow our carbon dioxide levels to fall dangerously low again!
PiRK@PiR_K
@16forbs And oh boy, what a carbon cycle we have youtube.com/watch?v=fF6TTR…
English
@TheGuySwann @jamesob Big blockers think a few thousand of profitable businesses running Bitcoin on a small rack of servers (which is enough for worldwide adoption directly on layer 1) is decentralized enough.
English
@TheGuySwann @jamesob Define "contribute meaningfully to decentralization". Because that's the fuzzy argument that is at the core of the scaling debate.
English
No, because not enough people are using it. The Bitcoin blockchain is roughly 3 times larger than BCH's and the stats are similar for number of outputs & raw transactions.
The blocksize *rule* isn't the centralizing element - its the bandwidth, RAM, and storage costs increasing without reasonable bound under growing adoption. So without enough bandwidth (use) the block limit isn't even relevant.
(however there are vastly fewer nodes in BCH, despite the lower cost)
The better comparison would be ETH (or similar) which has a significantly higher cost to run a *true* node (ignoring that its earliest history has been erased anyway). ETH being dominated by "light" nodes with a tiny fraction of archival nodes, should suggest the assumption of a bigger chain causing centralization is accurate... but it ought to be pretty self evident anyway.
Martha Bueno@BuenoForMiami
Honest question. Has the larger block size of BCH caused node centralization?
English
PSA: DO NOT put nitrogen on anything!
There is no such thing as nitrogen deficiency.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION IN THIS MATTER.
chooch skookum@ChoochSkookum
Lets check in on choochs 40 tons of woodchip compost. Dig 3" down and its fully engulfed in mycelium. Great success! Remember to put nitrogen fertilizer on your woodchips because the C:N ratio is 400:1 and it will suck all the N out of your soil when applied if you dont
English
PiRK retweetledi
L1 can scale.
@eCash proved it. Small-cap scaled L1.
x.com/i/status/19516…
vitalik.eth@VitalikButerin
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.
English