VanguardOrigin

Happy to have done part of the groundwork to get @Forg3tProtocol there. It's only the beginning .

@Logos_network Enjoy sharing what brings you together 👍

And so it begins. Today, Parallel Society opens its doors. For the next two days in Lisbon, we gather to explore what becomes possible when people come together to build - with technology, creativity, and shared purpose. From new tools to new ideas, this is a celebration of human ingenuity and the power of working side by side to create alternatives that matter. The future is not built in isolation. It is shaped by those willing to experiment, connect, and create together. Join us today and tomorrow as we prototype the future.

Last post focusing on ecosystem fit 👇👇 #Web3 #SystemThinking

@justinsuntron @OfficialAINFT Tron is Asia king of crypto. Make sense that the bubbling energy on agent are getting there.

This isn’t a cycle. It’s a rebuild. AI is becoming the new operating layer. TRON is built for scale and real-world usage and @OfficialAINFT is part of what comes next.

@nicrypto Agent appetite for transactions ≠ onchain TPS demand. Markets net. Agents batch. Settlement compresses. We learned this in TradFi decades ago. 1B TPS is a scaling fantasy unless you’re confusing execution with settlement.

Stripe CEO says AI agents will we need a blockchain with 1 Billion TPS?! I beg your pardon.

@MidnightNtwrk Seems educative. GG

The gates to Midnight City are open. 🌆🕛 A living city populated by autonomous AI agents — generating real transactions, real activity, and real proof generation on Midnight. Step inside and watch rational privacy in motion. Explore the districts. Inspect transactions. Toggle disclosure views. This is more than a simulation. It’s a window into the Midnight Network. 🔗 midnight.city

@MSBIntel Another day in crypto. Period.

@Logos_network @Logos_devs Modular infra + structural privacy + own-your-stack ethos. If this executes well, it’s bigger than “another L1”. A pleasure to talk to you folks 🖖

Logos is building a modular stack for sovereignty. A microkernel at the base. A privacy-preserving mixnet above it. Pluggable modules for storage, messaging, and private PoS. An operating system for decentralised infrastructure.

@VitalikButerin The teams that design for recursive aggregation now won’t have to migrate later. Quantum safety is an architecture test, not a crypto patch. Lets see how all of this unfold, is there a timeline out there ?

Now, the quantum resistance roadmap. Today, four things in Ethereum are quantum-vulnerable: * consensus-layer BLS signatures * data availability (KZG commitments+proofs) * EOA signatures (ECDSA) * Application-layer ZK proofs (KZG or groth16) We can tackle these step by step: ## Consensus-layer signatures Lean consensus includes fully replacing BLS signatures with hash-based signatures (some variant of Winternitz), and using STARKs to do aggregation. Before lean finality, we stand a good chance of getting the Lean available chain. This also involves hash-based signatures, but there are much fewer signatures (eg. 256-1024 per slot), so we do not need STARKs for aggregation. One important thing upstream of this is choosing the hash function. This may be "Ethereum's last hash function", so it's important to choose wisely. Conventional hashes are too slow, and the most aggressive forms of Poseidon have taken hits on their security analysis recently. Likely options are: * Poseidon2 plus extra rounds, potentially non-arithmetic layers (eg. Monolith) mixed in * Poseidon1 (the older version of Poseidon, not vulnerable to any of the recent attacks on Poseidon2, but 2x slower) * BLAKE3 or similar (take the most efficient conventional hash we know) ## Data availability Today, we rely pretty heavily on KZG for erasure coding. We could move to STARKs, but this has two problems: 1. If we want to do 2D DAS, then our current setup for this relies on the "linearity" property of KZG commitments; with STARKs we don't have that. However, our current thinking is that it should be sufficient given our scale targets to just max out 1D DAS (ie. PeerDAS). Ethereum is taking a more conservative posture, it's not trying to be a high-scale data layer for the world. 2. We need proofs that erasure coded blobs are correctly constructed. KZG does this "for free". STARKs can substitute, but a STARK is ... bigger than a blob. So you need recursive starks (though there's also alternative techniques, that have their own tradeoffs). This is okay, but the logistics of this get harder if you want to support distributed blob selection. Summary: it's manageable, but there's a lot of engineering work to do. ## EOA signatures Here, the answer is clear: we add native AA (see eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-8141 ), so that we get first-class accounts that can use any signature algorithm. However, to make this work, we also need quantum-resistant signature algorithms to actually be viable. ECDSA signature verification costs 3000 gas. Quantum-resistant signatures are ... much much larger and heavier to verify. We know of quantum-resistant hash-based signatures that are in the ~200k gas range to verify. We also know of lattice-based quantum-resistant signatures. Today, these are extremely inefficient to verify. However, there is work on vectorized math precompiles, that let you perform operations (+, *, %, dot product, also NTT / butterfly permutations) that are at the core of lattice math, and also STARKs. This could greatly reduce the gas cost of lattice-based signatures to a similar range, and potentially go even lower. The long-term fix is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation, which could reduce these gas overheads to near-zero. ## Proofs Today, a ZK-SNARK costs ~300-500k gas. A quantum-resistant STARK is more like 10m gas. The latter is unacceptable for privacy protocols, L2s, and other users of proofs. The solution again is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation. So let's talk about what this is. In EIP-8141, transactions have the ability to include a "validation frame", during which signature verifications and similar operations are supposed to happen. Validation frames cannot access the outside world, they can only look at their calldata and return a value, and nothing else can look at their calldata. This is designed so that it's possible to replace any validation frame (and its calldata) with a STARK that verifies it (potentially a single STARK for all the validation frames in a block). This way, a block could "contain" a thousand validation frames, each of which contains either a 3 kB signature or even a 256 kB proof, but that 3-256 MB (and the computation needed to verify it) would never come onchain. Instead, it would all get replaced by a proof verifying that the computation is correct. Potentially, this proving does not even need to be done by the block builder. Instead, I envision that it happens at mempool layer: every 500ms, each node could pass along the new valid transactions that it has seen, along with a proof verifying that they are all valid (including having validation frames that match their stated effects). The overhead is static: only one proof per 500ms. Here's a post where I talk about this: ethresear.ch/t/recursive-st… firefly.social/post/farcaster…

You wonder what is being ecosystem fit 👇 #Web3 #Founders #SystemThinking

It all come down to this 👇 #Web3 #Founders

Alignment doesn’t accelerate. It stabilizes. #Web3 #Founders

#Insights Ecosystem fit doesn’t make projects succeed. It prevents them from constantly fighting their environment. #Web3 #SystemThinking

Reading an ecosystem is a skill. And most teams skip learning it. #Web3 #SystemThinking

Ecosystem culture is rarely written. But it’s always felt. #Web3 #Founders

Some insights worth sharing. #Web3 #SystemThinking

@pashov @zayn4pf EVM is ahead, and that means it absorbs both innovation and mistakes. But when you’re working with evolving tooling and such uneven skill distribution, it’s tricky to attribute outcomes purely to the VM design rather than to builder maturity. Let alone vibe coding anything.

@zayn4pf EVM is leading the way, often with both the good and the bad

JUST IN: Paradigm partner with OpenAI to launch EVMbench - an AI smart contract security agent benchmark All eyes on web3 security, it was bound to happen, we are securing the future of finance🫡

@ChainLinkGod Real dev have already a tought time making things with a tight security, let alone vibe coder.

The convergence of AI and crypto is inevitable and it will be messy AI agents need a permissionless economic layer to engage in e-commerce and will likely become the largest consumer of blockspace But at the same time, the cybersecurity risks of smart contract exploits will be amplified 1000x as thousands of AI agents attempt to hack every deployed contract in parallel, forever We have already seen instances of smart contracts that were deployed 5+ years ago, getting exploited and drained recently, and that was just from humans There is no higher stakes environment for security than immutable public code responsible for securing billions in crypto tokens, this has always been the largest risk for DeFi gg for any crypto projects that didn't properly invest in security and built their infra on toothpicks and gum

@CantonNetwork It works as well. QT Wallet is our way of life. Security wise there is no other way .

Crypto is often framed as peer-to-peer. It’s actually platform-to-platform. Users arrive through wallets, custodians, and exchanges. When the backend can’t move at the speed of the frontend, friction compounds. Canton modernizes capital market rails so financial products can actually scale.