kryptodroid

@Justin_Bons @Unchained_pod If you needed permission to participate from 2/3 of the 1000 supervalidators, would you still insist that it is a centralized chain?

@kryptodroid1 @Unchained_pod He muddied the waters & called ETH & SOL permissioned due to the stake requirements... If a chain is permissioned, then it is centralized. Since participation is gatekept Indeed! However, Canton is by design not censorship-resistant, as it has safeguards & protection built in!

Canton is misleading the public & investors with lies & fake metrics! It is a centralized money printer with a built-in tax, tiered fees, KYC & censorship built in That is not "blockchain"! It is instead a nightmare of centralization worthy of a dystopian cyberpunk novel: 🧵 The definition of permissionless is that we do not need permission to participate in consensus. That is not at all the case for Canton! There is a literal invitation-only application proccess, where the pre-existing validator set decides who is allowed to join, determining consensus! The fact that there even is an application proccess is the perfect litmus test for permissionlessness that Canton clearly fails That makes it a totally permissioned system & by extension, also makes it totally centralized. It can never achieve credible neutrality, despite their claims to the contrary Centralized Money Printer: Canton has an insane net inflation rate of 21.8%! To add insult to injury, centralized designs do not actually need a token... Yet, Canton still does There is no application proccess in any truly decentralized system. Consensus instead relies on incentives, either in the form of a stake or work. That is why a token of value is needed to award participants However, in Canton, these rewards still go to validators who did not put up any stake! Along with a select group of applications chosen by this centralized authority... This makes it essentially "free money," from the perspective of these validators & applications. This helps to explain, to a large extent, the motive behind many of these partnerships A board for a for-profit company has a fiduciary duty to agree to a deal where they are offered millions of dollars to simply run a node & say they have a partnership, which also looks good for their company's evaluation... That does not mean it is not all BS, it only "works" due to the magic of a crypto money-printer scheme, which has a lot in common with a Ponzi scheme This is a playbook we have seen time & time again in crypto; it is nothing new Extractive Economics: Talking about there being nothing new under the sun: Canton has a literal tax system in which holders have a portion of their tokens taken directly from their wallets & burned! There is also a tiered fee system, where a higher fee is paid for smaller users & a lower fee for larger users. Making it an inherently unequal system, another reason why it is more like the old banking system than crypto The centralized authority decides which applications are "featured," significantly increasing their rewards & visibility. This obviously also opens up countless opportunities for favoritism & even corruption! Fake TVL Metrics: Canton claims to have an RWA TVL of over $326 billion! That would put it ahead of all other blockchains by an extremely large margin This claim is entirely false; it is instead an accounting trick that they achieved through their partnerships Certain companies, such as Broadridge, are simply mirroring their balance sheets within their private networks on Canton. This is then counted as "on-chain" TVL... Despite that, nothing would change if the Canton network disappeared tomorrow! That is why some sites report that full amount, but more reputable sites, such as DeFiLama, report a total TVL as $0! That is the very definition of a fake metric. It is all smoke & mirrors Preying On Ignorance: There is a continuous cycle of centralized "crypto" that exploits people's ignorance The main innovation of crypto is decentralization: The ability to do finance in a permissionless, credible neutral, & censorship ressistant manner is the real breakthrough of this technology This requires a major paradigm shift in thinking. Something many people are simply not ready for, especially such large institutions So, in the meantime, we see countless attempts to present them with a more palatable form of "crypto" However, much like the history of the early internet, where large institutions resisted the public internet & pushed for private internets. The public internet won & helped create the brave new world we live in today The history of crypto is surely going to play out in the same way, as the type of centralized authority we see in Canton has become outdated Conclusion: It is a free market & people can build whatever they want. However, we must draw a line once misleading claims are made That is where it went from live & let live to us needing to take action against Canton. Cryptocurrency is special, & we cannot allow anyone to falsely invoke the values & principles we hold so dear. Only to sell a token that is antithetical to that very movement That free market only works if we can self-police against bad actors. Something that has to be done in the free marketplace of ideas. That is why I implore you today to reject Canton & all that it represents Canton is regressive, as it goes against everything crypto stands for. While pretending to have the same attributes of crypto, when nothing could be further from the truth. It is, frankly speaking, significantly worse than the current banking system The crypto movement was born as a protest against such arbitrary centralized power. As the Bitcoin genesis block so clearly stated It would be tragic if crypto ends up birthing a monster that turns out worse than what it was trying to fight. Help us fight this monster by spreading this message far & wide. As crypto deserves better, we deserve better That is why we must push back against all pretenders to the throne, as crypto is meant to be a liberating force. Canton has no business being in that exclusive club As ultimately, crypto is here to make the world a better place through economic freedom, privacy, censorship resistance & individual sovereignty! 🔥

@Justin_Bons @Unchained_pod I saw the interview and he didn't claim that Canton is permissionless. He said that it needs permission from 2/3 of the supervalidators. And it is decentralized. Not much, but it is. I would rather say that it is not resistant to censorship.

@kryptodroid1 The CEO is going around claiming it is permissionless & decentralized now There was a debate on @Unchained_pod about it. Which triggered me to write this Honestly did not care until they started with blatantly false claims It is not even a good product for institutions either!

@DBCrypt0 But what about Tom Lee? He's buying ETH like crazy.

Ethereum will never reclaim 20% dominance Currently sitting at 10.85% It'll drop below 10% before the year ends And it's staying there

@Justin_Bons What about Sui? In my opinion, the best tech in crypto.

SOL & HYPE are winning the crypto game! ETH's leadership wants us to believe that slow & expensive is the future of finance... Giving up on decentralization with L2s is not the answer either Satoshi was right; combining scalability & decentralization is the ultimate solution!

@Justin_Bons Canton is not my chain and I didn't say it was the only one.Solana and others also have a small level of institutional adoption, but only in retail products and not for institutions.These are facts. Instead of trying to discredit the competition,should think about why this is so.

@kryptodroid1 That sounds like a very tunnel-visioned view of reality Truth is that ETH, SOL & CC have institutional adoption Thinking that your chain is the only one strikes me as a dangerously maximalist perspective Something I would advise against in the cryptocurrency world, regardless

Centralization wins when decentralized blockchains do not scale! Base, Ripple & Canton are the dystopian nightmare of centralization that crypto was meant to save us from Presenting unusable chains as the future of finance Only helps to justify centralization & betrays crypto!

@Justin_Bons Hackers exploited the "durable nonces" feature that is specific to Solana. What do you think?

The Drift hack happened because of admin keys! We have to push back as an industry against their use: Make smart contracts unstoppable again! It only took fooling two people through social engineering to sign a fraudulent TX That is not DeFi! Admin keys defeat crypto's purpose

A special @thedailygwei Refuel is ready for your consumption! ⛽ Today's episode only has one topic - what the future of Ethereum layer 2's looks like! Watch 👇 youtu.be/_f81nPn-pGU

There have recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of L2s in the Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts: * L2s' progress to stage 2 (and, secondarily, on interop) has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected * L1 itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gaslimits are projected to increase greatly in 2026 Both of these facts, for their own separate reasons, mean that the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path. First, let us recap the original vision. Ethereum needs to scale. The definition of "Ethereum scaling" is the existence of large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum - that is, block space where, if you do things (including with ETH) inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched, as long as Ethereum itself functions. If you create a 10000 TPS EVM where its connection to L1 is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum. This vision no longer makes sense. L1 does not need L2s to be "branded shards", because L1 is itself scaling. And L2s are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true "branded shard" would require. I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage 1, not just for technical reasons around ZK-EVM safety, but also because their customers' regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control. This may be doing the right thing for your customers. But it should be obvious that if you are doing this, then you are not "scaling Ethereum" in the sense meant by the rollup-centric roadmap. But that's fine! it's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on L1, with large planned increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead. We should stop thinking about L2s as literally being "branded shards" of Ethereum, with the social status and responsibilities that this entails. Instead, we can think of L2s as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties (eg. not just EVM), as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum, that each person (or bot) is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs. What would I do today if I were an L2? * Identify a value add other than "scaling". Examples: (i) non-EVM specialized features/VMs around privacy, (ii) efficiency specialized around a particular application, (iii) truly extreme levels of scaling that even a greatly expanded L1 will not do, (iv) a totally different design for non-financial applications, eg. social, identity, AI, (v) ultra-low-latency and other sequencing properties, (vi) maybe built-in oracles or decentralized dispute resolution or other "non-computationally-verifiable" features * Be stage 1 at the minimum (otherwise you really are just a separate L1 with a bridge, and you should just call yourself that) if you're doing things with ETH or other ethereum-issued assets * Support maximum interoperability with Ethereum, though this will differ for each one (eg. what if you're not EVM, or even not financial?) From Ethereum's side, over the past few months I've become more convinced of the value of the native rollup precompile, particuarly once we have enshrined ZK-EVM proofs that we need anyway to scale L1. This is a precompile that verifies a ZK-EVM proof, and it's "part of Ethereum", so (i) it auto-upgrades along with Ethereum, and (ii) if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard-fork to fix the bug. The native rollup precompile would make full, security-council-free, EVM verification accessible. We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your L2 is "EVM plus other stuff", then the native rollup precompile would verify the EVM, and you only have to bring your own prover for the "other stuff" (eg. Stylus). This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and outputs, and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table (that you would prove separately). This would make it easy to have safe, strong, trustless interoperability with Ethereum. It also enables synchronous composability (see: ethresear.ch/t/combining-pr… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-… ). And from there, it's each L2's choice exactly what they want to build. Don't just "extend L1", figure out something new to add. This of course means that some will add things that are trust-dependent, or backdoored, or otherwise insecure; this is unavoidable in a permissionless ecosystem where developers have freedom. Our job should make to make it clear to users what guarantees they have, and to build up the strongest Ethereum that we can.

@mattlefun @solanamobile nice

Seeker Airdrop is Live! We’re thrilled to announce a special airdrop for @solanamobile users. All Seeker wallets are eligible to claim up to 2,000 $MATTLE + 300,000 Mattle Points. Drop your .skr wallet below and follow the simple steps 👇

Discovered my Gas ID via ETHGas - turning my gas spend into rewards 🫘 As a Teen Jack, I've spent 0.2756 ETH on gas but earned 120 Beans back. Get your Gas ID and Beans here: ethgas.com/community/gas-…

Discovered my Gas ID via ETHGas - turning my gas spend into rewards 🫘 As a Teen Jack, I've spent 0.2756 ETH on gas but earned 120 Beans back. Get your Gas ID and Beans here: ethgas.com/community/gas-…

I’m trading future events on BNB’s newest prediction market. Get 10% off your trading fees when you join me on @Predictdotfun. predict.fun/?ref=B2877

I’m exploring #RWAfi on Plume Network. Check out my profile and sign up to earn Plume Points 🪶🪶🪶 https://portal.plume.org/?referrer=Amar…

@Justin_Bons Solana only allows validator operation in data centers, and even then it seems that this is not economically sustainable given the ever-decreasing number of validators.

Solana is Bitcoin 3.0 SOL is more decentralized, more scalable, more programmable, more private, more secure & more scarce All based on measurable objective metrics! So, if you care about cypherpunk values, stop playing pretend with a pet rock & join the crypto revolution: 🧵 There is narrative & then there is reality. SOL deserves to be the top chain based on the facts. Let me explain: More decentralized: Decentralization is a spectrum defined by multiple metrics. We will compare the major ones here now Nakamoto Cooificient is the measure of how many entities it would take to attack the network: BTC has an NC of 3 & SOL has an NC of 21! Validator count represents the number of block producers. In the case of BTC, we therefore count the number of pools & solo miners: BTC has 92 validators & SOL has 827! Governance determines who & how the rules are decided upon: BTC has centralized authoritarian governance (Core) & SOL has decentralized stakeholder governance! More scalable: SOL has 2857x more capacity & is 1538x faster than BTC! The difference is beyond ridiculous at this point. That is what makes BTC unusable for any significant use cases Even if only current active users tried to do one TX, the network would collapse in on itself, creating a bank-run-like scenario, as the queue would be months long While the queue would be decades long if everyone in the world tried to do one TX, that is a disaster waiting to happen. Meanwhile, SOL has enough capacity to actually support the future of money & finance right now! More programmable: BTC is not programmable as it lacks a Turing-complete virtual machine. That is also why real DeFi is impossible over BTC A significant problem is that decentralized money requires good decentralized finance to support it; otherwise, most people will end up putting their BTC into centralized custodians to access financial services that way. Defeating the whole point of crypto in the first place SOL has the SVM, making it programmable, enabling it to support all manner of DeFi applications! More private: By combining scalability & programmability, SOL can support privacy at scale by leveraging third-party smart contracts. Applications such as Privacy Cash are a good example of this. Allowing users to obscure balances & transfers! BTC is utterly incapable of supporting privacy at scale, both due to its lack of scalability & programmability More secure: We can calculate the security budget of a blockchain based on the cost to attack BTC: 16.42B (inflation) + 0.14B (fees) = 16.56B x 0.51 (attack threshold) = $8.44B SOL: 74B (market cap) x 0.67 (stake partipication rate) = 49.58B + 1.42B (fees) + 7.7B (MEV) + 5.26B (inflation) = 63.96B x 0.33 (attack threshold) = $21.1B Therefore, SOL is more than twice as secure as BTC at only a fraction of BTC's market cap. Demonstrating how much more secure PoS really is! Another interesting observation is that, as a percentage of market cap, BTC's security budget is 0.47%, while SOL's relative security is 28%! More scarce: The truth is that BTC's security model is not sustainable, as it has dropped over the last five years. I project it will continue to drop over the next decade until 51% attacks become profitable to carry out At which point the Core developers will be forced to increase BTC's inflation rate, something Core devs such as Peter Todd are already preparing for by proposing a 1% inflation rate for when the security crisis inevitably comes SOL has a low long-term tail inflation (1.5%) + fee-burn design. The idea behind this design is that if fees continue to grow that the burn rate would exceed the inflation rate, allowing for a shrinking supply! Granted, this last point is more speculative at this stage, but so is BTC's long-term inflation rate! As SOL's burn would only need to exceed 0.5% to beat BTC in this metric in a decade from now. That is why I consider SOL to have a more scarce & therefore more sound economic design Conclusion: It is only a matter of time before the rest of the market figures out the truth: BTC cannot sustain itself on lies forever Rhetoric & narrative can only take BTC so far, when the facts & figures so clearly put SOL in the lead today in every single way imaginable So, if you care about Bitcoin's original vision, cypherpunk values & the crypto ethos, abandon BTC & support SOL instead. That is iteration, that is technological evolution, that is progress Staying behind on BTC is not loyalty to the cause; it is blind tribalism destroying the cypherpunk dream Thank you so much, Solana, for giving us a third chance to get the crypto revolution right! ❤️

💥 BIG NEWS: @ConfidentialLyr becomes the FIRST bridge linking Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Base, BNB, TON to #privacy chains! Like a LayerZero or a Wormhole but PRIVACY-focused. The bridge did over $27M in volume since its launch. Partnerships and integrations within wallets like Bitcoin(.)com, bringing tens of millions of users to the solution with one-click 'add privacy' solutions. Partnership with the $FUSD (privacy stable coin), as a main bridge to $ETH. Privacy is a trend! Great to see the growth. #partner