ribitz.eth 🐸🪷🦇🔊

My latest mintable article on @viamirror mirror.xyz/ribitz.eth/lEs…

@TedPillows Just, ETH… That is all

Don’t get me wrong, I believe in DeFi and decentralization. But for now it’s still too easy to hack, and “decentralization” can feel more like a slogan than reality. More regulation and improved security are necessary for institutional adoption. You agree?

@RyanSAdams Agreed. Very helpful for writing/designing patents. Who would have thought?!💭

The simplest counterpoint to the bears: I spend all day using Claude now. No tool has been this valuable to me this fast.

@nicrypto They dont look bad for ETH

Not a great 24 hours for crypto's image. The biggest DeFi hack of 2026 hit yesterday with Kelp DAO exploited for $292m. Then RAVE token crashed 95% in one day after a vertical pump to $28, wiping $6.3bn in market cap. That's on the back of investigations into alleged insider trading. Three weeks ago it was Drift with $270mn stolen by a North Korean operation six months in the making. It's hard to onboard new users when the headlines look like this.

@dev_maims Keep building

Software Engineers, what’s your backup plan if Artificial Intelligence writes better code than you in 2 years?

@Wthmoni Skin

@NoContextHumans 4C because access to both 4C and 3D is clean

Which seat you choosing?

@vivoplt Lol

claude code is fucking insane i know literally NOTHING about coding. ZERO. and i just built a fully functioning web app in minutes. http://localhost:3000/ check it out

@callme_siya_ If you saw rage bait and engagement farming, you’re ambidextrous

If you saw a dog, you're right-brained. If you saw a cat, you're left-brained.

@benjamincowen The pro-science anti-shitcoin crew?

The guys who are anti-science are pro-shitcoins Think about that. Which group do you want to be in?

Claude code source code has been leaked via a map file in their npm registry! Code: …a8527898604c1bbb12468b1581d95e.r2.dev/src.zip

@elonmusk @drakefjustin Elon bro, just let everyone you actually love ETH already. We know you do

@drakefjustin x.com/i/grok/share/8…

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.

@Anglina_2210 Dew

IQ Test Can you spell water in 3 letters?

CAPTCHA mode enabled

Uncle's Guide to Making Your $BTC safe from Quantum Step 1: Swap to $ETH Step 2: Touch grass

@drakefjustin @PierTwo_com Now what

The Ethereum Foundation is using DVT-lite to stake 72,000 ETH: firefly.social/post/x/2026218… My hope for this project is that in the process, we can make it maximally easy and one-click to do distributed staking for institutions. Choose which computers run your nodes, make a config file where they all have the same key, and then from there everything gets set up automatically. The idea that "running infrastructure" is this scary complicated thing where each person participating must be a "professional" is awful and anti-decentralization, and we must attack it directly. It should be a docker container or nix image or similar, one click or command line per node, enter the same key in each node, and they automatically find each other, the networking is set up, the DKG happens, and the staking begins. I also plan to use this soon, and I hope more institutions holding ETH can stake in this way. We want the authority over staking nodes to be highly distributed, and the first step to doing this is to make it easy.

@BSCNews @ethereum @Bankless

🚨JUST IN: ETHEREUM FOUNDATION STAKES $46M ETH IN LARGEST MOVE TO DATE The @Ethereum Foundation staked around $46.2 million worth of $ETH. This marks its largest staking event so far. The transaction was flagged by Arkham and occurred roughly 30 minutes ago.

@boxmining So you can go build it?

Pitch me your AI/Crypto project in 1 sentence. 🤞🏼

Ethereum is so far ahead in development, cryptography, privacy, longevity sustainability (block reward), utility, and institutional-grade reliability. It's become my favorite chain. I don't think I've touched my my other coins for over a year. But I actually use Ethereum.

@justintrimble PS I do think you possibly have ‘the’ best punk…

Was in the "NFT space" before they called it stupid, when they called it the next big thing, when they called it stupid, when artists came, and when artists left. I didn't give a fuck about it being popular then and I don't give a fuck about it being popular now. How bout that.