aiskivi 🐬🔊 - evm/acc

@adamscochran lmao adam - A SHIP ON FIRE (an engine room - that happens every day in every fucking country)

So while the UAE claims to have "intercepted" all the missiles, we've got: -A fire at the port of Jebel Ali -A fire at a Petroleum site in Fujairah -A ship on fire in the Strait near UAE Seems unlikely that they won't retaliate over this...

A fact I feel like almost nobody knows: Ethereum's gas limit will be increased to ~200M after Glamsterdam, a huge increase from the 60M we have today. That’s a 3x+ of L1 execution capacity, with expectation of further doubling soons after that. Assuming no similar increase in demand, fees could stay near zero for years. This is the result of several innovations coming together at the right time: ePBS gives payloads more time, BALs let clients prefetch/parallelize execution work, and gas repricings make higher limits safe.

@jdetychey @d_gusakov @ethereum i'm a newb, but why can't we have a non-aggressive banded dynamic approach? eg min 20% staking ratio; higher issuance to encourage more staking if it drops too low max 25% staking ratio; lower issuance to discourage additional staking once we're comfortably secure.

Actually I want Ethereum to be alive and relevant for the next 50 years and that's why I'm willing to day on the issuance reduction hill. tl;dr: "If we cut @ethereum staking issuance, we will likely kill LSTs." Nop🙅‍♂️ "Without LSTs, DeFi will shrink to the size of a penny. Without DeFi, @ethereum will lose its main value proposition." Nop🙅‍♂️ "Without its value proposition, @ethereum will die." Nop🙅‍♂️ See the chart below, this is DeFi before LST. DeFi is Ethereum’s most proven PMF and will undoubtedly remain widely used with or without LST. Nevertheless, whichever staking reduction direction Ethereum will be taking, I stand deeply convinced that LST will forever remain part of the picture. I do anticipate that the amount of ETH at stake will be lower post reduction than what it is today, but I don’t anticipate LST to be the one losing in “market share”. Furthermore I don’t anticipate the TVL of LST (and by extension the revenue of the corresponding protocols) to be necessarily reduced post issuance recalibration. Scarcity effect has been a core driver of price appreciation for crypto-assets and macroeconomics strongly support money neutrality (ceteris paribus, the value of the asset adjusts upward to a lower emission level). Ethereum and ETH both have a much wider value proposition than staking. Let me state it differently, not reducing the issuance is slowing down Ethereum’s adoption, eventually killing DeFi and more importantly causing a massive threat to Ethereum. For ETH, the issue of our current issuance regime is that we are deliberately eroding the marketability and moneyness of our beloved native asset. The current regime is stifling DeFi competitiveness, it’s not possible to compete with the staking yield for any risk equivalent product. Remember that AAVE in a normal market condition serves 1.5% on ETH, does that reflect the risk of AAVE vs the risk of Staking? Say we have 60% of ETH at Stake, the staking yield will be ~2%, say we have 100%, the yield will be 1.6%. This is not going to change any time soon, the amount ETH at stake are trending upward and will snowball as holders try to avoid dilution. Back in Dec 2020 we had no idea when, if and how we would be able to unstake so we chose a reward curve accordingly. This old decision is now forcing the hand of holders to go at stake, the yield is disconnect to the risk premium which will keep trending lower. ETH slowly dies as the pristine collateral it should always remain, liquidity on CEX and DEX dry up and so does the demand for the asset. In the meantime, LST and DeFi will try (and are already trying) to accommodate with this unhealthy trend through rehypothecation, restaking and multichainess. This is importing unforeseen risks into the system as we very recently experienced. We owe this change in issuance to all the ETH holders, to all the Ethereum users and developpers for it is necessary for the security and credibility of the network. Ethereum’s PoS was designed for an amount of ETH at stake of 20 to 30%. The paramount characteristic of credible neutrality and network security should prevail among any price or subindustry specific consideration. Staking protects Ethereum, but too much staking jeopardizes Ethereum. The credibility of large slashing events is already tumbling. Core devs and protrocol researchers have been warning us about this for years. See: issuance.wtf . Now is the time to act. Why now? The problem is getting harder and harder to tackle as time goes by while Ethereum is gowing through a critical adoption phase, we are: - Relentlessly progressing on missing interoperability features - Scaling the L1 - Catching up on compulsory privacy features for institutions and indiviuals - Sponsoring L2 at the cost of its fees - about to face the competition of a new generation of "ETH killers" We can’t afford to have weak ETH in this phase and by not acting on the issue we are all sandbagging Ethereum. Let’s fix our original staking sin once and for all. By the way, with Quick Slots in Hegota (Slot time <12s, EIP-8198) we will have to tweak the reward curve anyway so let’s kill 2 birds with 1 stone (hello @CarlBeek 👋)

If we cut @ethereum staking issuance, we will likely kill LSTs. Without LSTs, DeFi will shrink to the size of a penny. Without DeFi, @ethereum will lose its main value proposition. Without its value proposition, @ethereum will die. Do we really want to kill @ethereum?

@donnoh_eth @Ledger i wouldn't post this with my 'name' and a ref my fren - you're confirming stuff (deleted the ref-pic oops)

@TedPillows r u retarded

$ETH doesn't like FOMC meetings. Since October 2025, Ethereum has dropped 17% or more after each FOMC meeting. Will this happen again?

Confidence in DeFi is at an all time low right now. We need to go back to basics. No reason somebody looking to deposit eth to borrow usdc should be vulnerable to contagion from a bridge for liquid restaked rsKxyzstETH. Return to pristine collateral.

@LefterisJP even one min would be insane, gj

Christ is risen ☦️ And I fucking killed it at Hannover marathon. I am so happy. Bib time 03:20:26. Photos coming later. Very grateful to Lukasz Wolejko-Wolejszo ✌️😎 , my coach for helping me prepare for finally breaking 03:30. Kind of overshot it though 😂 Also big thanks to my Braves crew Tavar, Niels Struckmeyer, Paddy Hayes, Mikko K and Simon for preparing this amazing trip to Hannover!

@LefterisJP wtf

ETHBTC is severely undervalued, based solely on the threat posed by quantum computing Ethereum has a history of successfully upgrading the network while maintaining uptime, and will develop and implement a very high-consensus approach to deal with quantum-related issues before a critical threat emerges but Bitcoin will spend months and probably years trying to deal with the quantum issue, debating soft vs hard fork, and any potential solution will then be piled onto by any number of special interests to make other changes to the protocol which will be objectionable to many Bitcoin will likely enter a civil war over quantum Ethereum has already spent months and years preparing for it

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.

Not sure I have ever been as productive in my life as in the last ~10 weeks: An extremely challenging yet worthwhile goal. The crazy progress of AI coding and heavy use of it. A very small team, world-class skills, and now the ability to multiply output thanks to AI. The result is @etheconomiczone — with a live devnet already: eez.dev. What is this? It will be: a) A new rollup that is fully composable with Ethereum. This means you can do either cheap transactions on this chain that only interact with contracts on this rollup, or more expensive transactions (similar to L1 costs) that can interact in a fully composable way between L1 and L2. So, for example, if you trade on this rollup, the routing can dynamically decide to use only L2 liquidity for a small trade, or for a larger trade — where the extra gas costs are worth it — to use both L2 and L1 liquidity. b) A whole framework that will allow new rollups, as well as existing L2s and sidechains (yes @gnosischain!!) to integrate into this “(Ethereum) economic zone.” Imagine: one could make a trade today simultaneously using Ethereum liquidity, but also Arbitrum, Base, or all the other L2s. This is what EEZ will allow. Now, let’s talk about the tech: Essentially, there are two core concepts that make all of this possible: 1) Proxy contracts 2) Real-time proving 1) Proxy contracts are basically a way to overcome the challenge that ~99% of all contracts are written in a way that only deals with addresses from a single chain. For example, a token or an NFT can be sent to an address, but not to an address on a specific other chain. Proxy contracts fix this. An address “A” on chain “n” will get a deterministic proxy representation, “A*”, on all other chains. So now, if, for example, A is a DAO on Ethereum and it should control, say, a fee switch in contract D (a DEX) on another chain, this can easily be done by setting A* as the owner of D. A (the DAO), on the other hand, can now call D* (the proxy representation of the DEX contract D) on Ethereum. All the cross-chain message passing in between is abstracted away — the contracts just call another contract and do not realize it is actually on another chain. 2) Real-time proving The proxy design already addresses the problem that there is no widely supported cross-chain message-passing standard in EVM land. So it alone would already be helpful for asynchronous calls, or better, calls that do not expect or require a return value. However, this would still not quite bring us to “synchronous composability.” Imagine a DEX trade: you do the first part of the trade on L1 and the second part on L2. You want to know the result of the second part — and if it did not get you the expected amount, you want to be able to revert the first part. This requires the call that triggers the DEX trade on L2 to have a return value. This was long assumed to be impossible - but with real-time proving, it no longer is. Basically, because Ethereum blocks are only produced every 12 seconds (and this would still work with, say, 6 seconds), that is now long enough to build and prove the L2 block that contains, for example, this L1→L2 DEX trade. If you want to learn more, don’t miss the talk by @tw_tter and @jbaylina on Tuesday at @EthCC! Let’s make Ethereum ONE again!

@LefterisJP @BerlinBraves congratsionii

Made a new half marathon PB. Bib time was: 01:33:09 Run went well despite the last minute injury and shoe change. My heart is full. The @BerlinBraves cheering point was such a huge hit. Tried to do a negative split which sort of worked with a small bump. So happy. So full.

@LefterisJP @kassandraETH arrrghh - DOGS ALWAYS THE DOGS

@aiskivi @kassandraETH Already got one 😢

So this Sunday I am running the Berlin half again. Let's see how it goes. Stepping stone for the Hannover marathon in 2 weeks.

@LefterisJP @kassandraETH goal d finish without injury

@kassandraETH Goal A: 01:30 Goal B: 01:32 Goal C: 01:33-01:35

@LefterisJP jail pic?

@CryptoGucci HAY U

Hey everyone, I’ve taken a break recently to spend more time with my family. I’m going to take a break through the holidays so I can really focus on my kids & make more memories with them. I’ll be back, just taking the time to be present with my family. Appreciate all of you!

@AdrianoFeria retards join retards this is fine

Saying "Ethereum is dead" is either completely disingenuous or incredibly stupid. The fact that soybros keep repeatedly saying this is reflective of their "culture". I gave Solana's community the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but it has become crystal clear they are not serious, and I'm done sugar-coating. Solana represents the worst of crypto. Send this shit to zero with haste.

Fair warning. This post is bullish on Ethereum. Yesterday, the Ethereum Foundation Enterprise team ran the Institutional Ethereum Forum in New York City. Broad Adoption Activated. Invitation only. 100's of Banks, asset managers, and infrastructure providers representing around $250 trillion in assets under management. feedback so far "Absolute banger tbh." "People won't stop talking and networking and the content has all been great." "Your institutional team did an amazing job. I was there. Kudos." BlackRock. Western Union. Robinhood. Moody's. Baillie Gifford. Securitize. All on panels. Not as guests. As participants building on Ethereum. This is what adoption actually looks like. EF also presents its post-quantum security strategy and launches pq.ethereum.org. EF also presented its post-quantum security strategy and launched pq.ethereum.org. This is not just leading blockchain. No major technology platform has a published, open-source post-quantum migration roadmap at this level of detail. Ethereum is doing it before it is required, not after. Proud of the Enterprise team for putting this together. Choose Ethereum.

@peter_szilagyi gymnastics is good for your health

PSA: I've deleted all my tweets of the last 24 hours regarding #Ethereum. I care not to be dragged into playing mental gymnastics with statistics and word games. Good luck to everyone who still has their integrity, may you all prevail. 🫡

@peter_szilagyi péter plz enlighten, cuz it may be shit (it is), stats are factual here think pumpfun shit is likely more the reason “everyone hates crypto”