Sabitlenmiş Tweet
7777.eth
74 posts
7777.eth
@xchat7777
投资人 Investor | ENS Collector 299.eth 2999.eth 7777.eth
Katılım Nisan 2026
129 Takip Edilen117 Takipçiler
This is good for ENS investors. ENS is finally starting to support the marketplace.
ensdao.eth@ENS_DAO
New Proposal: Authorizes a new RFP allocating funds to a marketplace from SPP3’s pre-approved budget. The goal is a live, revenue-generating ENS marketplace. Vote → snapshot.box/#/org/ens/s:en…
English
If you have any top-tier ENS to sell, Please reply to me with the price here. @xchat7777
English
随着以太坊解决量子安全问题，可扩展问题，隐私问题，L1/L2割裂问题…….
以太坊最终会成为真正的世界结算层，成为未来金融的基座只是它的第一步；第二步是成为AI的基座；最后一步是成为社会运行的基座（身份/社会治理…..）
以太坊会成为整个未来人类社会运行的基础平台之一，绝不仅仅是dex/perp/money market……这些只是开胃菜。
蓝狐@lanhubiji
从vitalik的这张大图（strawmap）看，最终要实现这几件事： • 快速L1：主网确认速度达到亚秒级，几秒内最终确认。 • Gigagas L1：L1吞吐量大幅提升，目标类似1万TPS级别（通过zkEVM等方式）。 • Teragas L2：L2能达到百万级TPS。 • 后量子安全：全面换成抗量子计算机的技术，安全几百年。 • 隐私L1：主网原生支持隐私交易，隐私不再是“额外加的功能”，在设计时优先考虑。
中文
@BTCbuddah Be more optimistic. As Ethereum adoption keeps growing, ENS won’t do badly.
English
中文
这篇报告值得一看：
以太坊不是一条普通的区块链，它是目前最接近“数字公共基础设施”的平台。
就像互联网的TCP/IP协议一样中立、开放、谁也控制不了，但它是用来处理“价值、合约、协调”的。
几个方面：
1. 谁也控制不了它（中立性最强）
以太坊没有老板、没有后门、没有kill switch（一键关闭功能）。
全球上千个独立节点、几十万验证者一起维护，没有任何单一国家、公司或个人能单方面改规则或关掉它。
这对政府和机构来说非常重要，他们最怕把关键基础设施交给一个能被“第三方控制”的人。
2. 安全运行了10多年零故障
目前有约760亿美元的ETH被质押（当安全保证金）。想攻击它要花掉500多亿美元，还会亏得血本无归。
从2015年上线到现在，零宕机（不像其他所有L1都出现过问题）。
3. 已经被大机构和大政府真金白银地用了
• 稳定币：上面锁了1590亿美元（远超其他链）。
• 真实资产代币化（RWA）：贝莱德、摩根大通等已经在上面发产品。
• 政府应用：不丹做全国数字身份、印度用它做土地登记防腐败等。
4. 比其他选择优势明显
• 比传统银行/中介：
不用信任中间人，用数学和密码学保证，更透明、成本更低。
• 比“联盟链/私有链”：
更开放、中立，不会有人把持。
• 比其他公链：
更成熟、开发者最多、经济规模最大、安全性最高。
总结来说，
用数据 + 真实案例 + 对比看出：
以太坊是未来全球价值结算和协调的“中立公共层”。
ethereum.org/reports/basics…
中文
@NameWhisper_AI The USD value should be incorrect. 0.8 ETH is around $1,400. @1985_ens
English
I've been at ENS for 9 years now. The first 4 years it was basically just me, Nick, Makoto and a few people that have come and left since then. We were always less than 10 people. Nick has been building ENS for a decade. 10 fucking years. blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/11/tay… This is a blog post from the EF in 2016.
Write a list off the top of your head of crypto founders still building and CEOing their own company after a decade. I'll wait. It's short.
When ENS released in 2017 I was just one of the community, and only shortly after did I join and build the first version of the ENS app. At the beginning of 2018 we formed ENS Labs (True Names Limited back then) and we were finally a real company, with a $1 million grant from the EF. For the next 3 years we survived on this. We built something that was integrated into all the major Ethereum wallets, helped the UX of web3, and were an example of what a non-financial application on Ethereum looks like. We were builders, we were optimists, and we were purists.
In 2021 we started the process of decentralising ENS. Why? Because as purists we believed the protocol should not just be governed by us. The protocol, not the treasury.
To do that we went with a DAO that uses token voting. It was an experiment compound, uniswap and others had tried and it seemed 'battle-tested'. There are many things wrong with token voting, but only 5 years dealing with a DAO actually shows you the real one. It isn't just plutocracy, it's the politics of everyone having an opinion about who gets a part of this huge treasury.
We wanted to decentralise the levers it takes to govern the protocol, pricing, upgrades etc… we didn't actually have to send the treasury to the governor contract. But we did, because we felt the DAO had more legitimacy, and it did. It also attracted a hoard of people that labs had to govern. We tried to be welcoming, to be open to people and not exert our influence so the grass could grow. But what it also did is create a honey pot with 0 accountability that anyone that is willing to make an account on our forums has the chance of taking a piece of. And we have given, a lot. Given over 50% of all grants to parties outside of ENS Labs. Labs took less than 50% of the treasury spend to date. Name another protocol whose core team has taken less of the revenue than outsiders.
Labs has always been about building ENS, and so for many years we decided not to use our tokens, but to let the "community" find a way to properly allocate the funds. But this has failed. In hindsight it was so clear, how could we expect to give millions of dollars to a contract that is governed by token holders (that we as labs are refraining from voting in) who aren't qualified (and it's not their job to be) to do treasury management. Yes we were stupid to do this, but we were idealists.
We've turned from idealists to pragmatists. We spent two years building Namechain, our own L2, and we killed it the moment Ethereum scaled and the maths changed. We're not precious about our own work, and the DAO is no different. I would like for DAOs to work as much as anyone else, but they don't, and not a single DAO out there is the vision of what we thought it could be half a decade ago. But ENS is not just a DAO, it's a protocol, a successful protocol that needs longevity and stewards for decades and not to be pillaged by DAO opportunists. A foundation does not remove the ability for the community to be funded, but there will be more accountability, more RFPs, and more value being driven to the protocol.
This isn't to say nothing worthwhile has been funded by the DAO. It has, but the ratio of cruft to worth is far too high. It is not how you build a universal protocol for the internet. To those that think it is, you are thinking too short term. ENS needs to keep building. We are nowhere close to the size of DNS, or the size of a single large username system (X, whatsapp, telegram). We need to keep integrating. If we wanted to exit scam and run, it would be far easier to just dump all our ENS and call it a day.
And to everyone suddenly worried about voting power: labs didn't vote for years. We stayed out on purpose, to let the grass grow, and that is the exact thing that let this honey pot fester. The one time Nick actually votes, you call it tyranny?
And this isn't to say that labs is perfect either, but we really do want ENS to succeed, we want it to flourish, first we need to rectify the mistakes of the past. When something is broken, you fix it. ENS is as decentralised as it was before, the .eth registrar has been locked for years and no one can steal your name. The only thing that is changing is we need a proper organisation to manage and allocate these funds.
And for those personally attacking Nick.
Nick isn't stealing anything.
Nick is one of the smartest and most morally upright people I know.
No one could have built ENS the way Nick has built ENS. And they have tried.
Nick could have left a long time ago, but he hasn't.
Whilst you guys are arguing over the end of ENS, we'll keep on building.
P.S. AI image is so the main image was not the blog from EF
English