.

Would you feel comfortable making a tweet saying "LA LA LA LA LA I AM A CAT 😺😺" with no context right this moment?

1 TB monthly ~= 400 kB/sec, or 4.8 MB per slot. Enough for proto-danksharding, but not for the scaling endgame. We do still need full danksharding with data availability sampling to make node running viable in the long term.

One of my minor gripes with many mainstream media publications is how unwilling they are to link directly to primary sources. Often I have to go through many different articles and search keywords to find the original document. Linking to the primary source should be the norm!

Withdrawals from ZK-EVMs can sometimes be done with lower latency than proof generation, because you can prove specific claims: * past state X is valid * no txs from account A after X, therefore * you can still withdraw coins you had in state X Fascinating work by @taikoxyz!

The more complicated stuff (you had 10 ETH in state X, txdata shows you spent only 9 ETH after that, therefore...) seems tricky; it's not very account abstraction friendly. But the simple "you can withdraw immediately if you made NO txs for a while" idea is still really powerful!

Updated roadmap diagram!

Big changes: * The Verge✅ is not just about "verkle trees", it's about "verification". Endgame: fully SNARKed ethereum * The Scourge🧟(new): ensure reliable and fair credibly neutral transaction inclusion, solve MEV issues * Single slot finality as stage 2 Merge🐼 milestone

* More concrete milestones in every category * More explicit role for quantum-proofness as a necessary component of the "endgame" protocol Big thanks to @drakefjustin and others for the help!

How well this works depends on exactly how much due diligence is done to make sure blue checks are who they say they are. "Pay $8/month and call yourself whatever" would damage the blue check's anti-scam role. But if there's more actual verification, the result is very different.

I don't get this critique that charging $8/month creates an economic hierarchy. The current blue check system is *far* more exclusive than even the $20/month level from yesterday. Ideally, though, verification would be charged at-cost and separate from other premium services.

Should I publicly blab my opinions about crypto regulation more? Feels unfair to let other people get attacked by CT but never actually poke my own head out.

Regs on defi frontends that *could* be more helpful may include: (i) limits on leverage (ii) requiring transparency about what audits, FV or other security checks were done on contract code (iii) usage gated by knowledge-based tests instead of plutocratic net-worth minimum rules

Also, I would love to see rules written in such a way that requirements can be satisfied by zero knowledge proofs as much as possible. ZKPs offer lots of new opportunities to satisfy reg policy goals and preserve privacy at the same time, and we should take advantage of this!

I generally don't like subtweeting; it's impolite to people who do not have context. When I tweet a generality instead of just talking about a particular situation directly, I typically have at least two examples in mind. (And yes, this applies self-referentially)

Beware the impulse to preach that "we must make sacrifices for the sake of peace" but suggest only sacrifices where other people are the ones sacrificing while you give up nothing.