KasDIT

I was having a convo with @Chris_Hutch7 and @LevendiPro a few days back, sent them a message saying people/projects are piggybacking everyone they can. These Probifi did the same, they sent me dms and asked for feedback on their platform. They were all nice and friendly and acted like super cool guys. Man, you cannot f trust no one in this space, they’ve rugged (see below) the $kas community worth of 1.5m Kaspa then deleted everything. They even offered me 1 nft two days back to “reward” me for my feedback. I’ve declined like I always do and then he said we will have beers at the Berlin event. This is beyond saddening and lots of people lost their kas. I never minted any NFTs nor did any presale buying. I lost opportunities but also protected my “bag”. This is the second largest scam in our community and sadly not the last one.

🚨 MASSIVE NEWS for the KASPA Ecosystem 🚨 The KaspaFinance V3 DEX AMM has passed audit with a perfect score from @rdauditors , a top-tier cybersecurity firm based in London, UK. 🔐 300+ audits completed 🛡️ Trusted by QuickSwap, DAO Maker & more ⚙️ Battle-tested, bulletproof smart contracts Audit report 👉 t.co/9g1vjsnmQv #Kaspa #KaspaFinance #KaspaEVM #DeFi @Kaspa_KEF @kasplex

I will take this chance to answer your first question with full detail and share my perception and the way I witness Kaspa’s research and development on a day to day basis. There is no dual ego issue here, There is no “leadership” disagreement. There are facts and they go strictly one way. Yonatan Sompolinsky was and is to this day the sole visionary behind all things Kaspa, and in fact I’d argue that he is in the top 3 of the farseeing visionaries in all crypto. The examples are endless and he really does not need me to point them out but I still will: - Pointing out high-bps (“Doing 100 bps on pow, who’s coming?”) as a clear goal for showing Kaspa’s superiority and inherent protocol scalability. This led me to go for the rust rewrite and eventually to crescendo with Yonatan having my back in any question/doubt/hard moment. - Defining the DK research question for me as an advisor “There must be a way to utilize actual low latency since it can be seen in the DAG structure. Let’s find a protocol that does that?” - Realizing fast-bps/multileader can solve MEV in various ways. - Pointing out the importance of the oracle problem as the weak link in DeFi and highlighting high-bps as a possible solution space. - We have a huge L1<>L2 bridge design effort, SC testnets, many infras and builders, etc and they are all screaming “based zk rollups”. Who do you think pointed out based rollups as the exact design point that leverages Kaspa’s throughput, decentralization and speed in the most perfect way? (research.kas.pa/t/atomic-compo…) - L2 fragmentation and the important and bold mission to find ways to support atomic composability (same post). - Grinding with me for several weeks/months on the mathematical proof behind STORM (KIP9). - DK and its implications on elastic throughput (research.kas.pa/t/a-proposal-t…). - Other internal far-reaching research. - Other things I don’t know about or forgot to mention I’m not glorifying. This isn’t just the man who spent 8 years on researching DAG consensus protocols for scaling pow. This is a person who has been living and breathing the broader crypto community for years. And while we are busy constructing the current vision, he is busy thinking out of the box of ways to solve broader and more timely crypto problems. His day to day activity is constantly around research problems that will benefit Kaspa in the short/mid/long term. I personally spent hours and hours almost every day in the last year speaking and discussing every possible aspect of the L1<>L2 design. This for instance isn’t long-term research. It’s simply Kaspa’s most important immediate task in terms of priority and importance, so he’s on it with all his power and will. I’m not downplaying myself and others either. I have an important role in realizing some of it into code (>100K RK code lines). And in research as well. I try to help translate the vision and the high-level compass pointing the direction, into more concrete short-to-mid term steps (see eg my posts here research.kas.pa/c/l1-l2/11). So who is Kaspa core? The current people who are actively researching, building and developing the core technology of Kaspa, and which are clearly led by Yonatan. In terms of coding contribution they can be seen here: github.com/kaspanet/rusty…. In terms of research, research.kas.pa tells some of the story and the KIPs repo is also an indication github.com/kaspanet/kips. The broad and full picture is always hard to get, hence I’m writing this piece as my personal testimony. Now to the elephant in the room. From my perspective, Shai Wyborski isn’t Kaspa core. He is not actively involved in researching and building Kaspa. He has occasionally popped up with suggestions and has helped on several occasions (dust attack immediate response, KIPs 4,6 , attempts to help with STORM proof, basic idea about mempool fee estimations, and possibly more I forgot), but he isn’t actively constructing and building Kaspa. Yes he has the knowledge to participate in some discussions and throw some ideas into the air. But it was never on a committed full-time basis. It was occasional, sporadic, to say the least. “Wait but he was busy communicating Kaspa to the world, no? Obviously he can’t both do that and actively build?” My answer to the above will be long. I know Shai thinks this is unfair, and that he is sidelined and marginalized, but it is what it is. Shai’s role in communicating Kaspa to the world in its first two years is undoubtful. The problem is that things evolve, and as time went on, the drift became more apparent. The sole problem isn’t that he cannot educate about Kaspa, it’s that he cannot educate about Kaspa while still being perceived by many as a current builder. Representing a complicated technology like Kaspa accurately requires being there in front of the whiteboard and in the endless walks. It requires understanding what paths were not taken and why, it requires understanding many many subtleties. Sure, many people can communicate about Kaspa and make errors. But they are not seen as authority. They can be corrected in public. Them glorifying esoteric achievements isn’t harmful. People who build are busy building. And when they find time to communicate they do it carefully and precisely. Builders asked if Kaspa can carry on all of crypto traffic will not answer a resounding “Yes.”. A marketer might think, rightfully, that the impact of a clear yes over a long detailed and nuanced answer is worth the inaccuracy. But then people know he is less authoritative. If he is considered a builder, however, his statement becomes a liability to actual builders. The problem of perception as core vs. not being core goes far beyond technical accuracy. Being “the slayer” to other projects was never my style. Sure, at times, it felt comfortable that he was taking on himself all the heated debates. But eventually I realized the wrongness of this approach by someone perceived as a leading and active Kaspa researcher, as well as the technical drift. Another example is going on to represent Kaspa’s L2 design efforts way before they were clearly understood and communicated by myself and others who were and are actually thinking about this all day long. There are many other examples where I can point out the problem all originating from this perception drift/gap. It took time to call it clearly, but it has to be done now. If there was a way, I would love for Kaspa and Shai to be able to have him as a communicator and evangelizer of Kaspa’s technology, but only if it can be done in a way which clearly communicates the fact that he has not been an active builder for a long time and that his views should be taken for what they are: a brilliant scientist who is great at delivering big ideas with simple words.