Community ops | @bosscryptocom |
Onchain
Joined August 2020
- Tweets3K
- Following905
- Followers795
- Likes6.2K
mrboss retweeted
Idk why there's so much hate towards Binance just because it's a CEX.
Most of the hate seems to come from people who entered crypto during the Hyperliquid era. There was a time when crypto was considered taboo, and Binance was almost single handedly carrying the industry.
I'll say it louder: Binance has done more for the crypto ecosystem than Hyperliquid.
I have immense respect for @cz_binance and what he built at Binance during a time when nobody wanted to touch crypto.
In my early days, @crypto_pinapple encouraged us to read @BinanceResearch and @BinanceAcademy to get a deeper understanding of crypto as complete noobs. That's how many of us learned the basics.
My intention isn't to whitewash CEXs or defend everything they do. But let's give credit where it's due. CEXs are the ones onboarding millions of ordinary people into crypto. For most people, the journey onchain starts with Binance or another CEX.
You can support DeFi without dismissing the role CEXs played in building this industry.
Just saying.
Also, @elonmusk, you picked the wrong time to shoot your shot.
mrboss retweeted
Crypto space really has a choice - grow the f up or get sidelined with random regulations.
Saying we can not do anything when we are programming decentralized system is just untrue.
Banks run AI for fraud detection but are inherently centralized and require KYC. At the same time KYC doesn't solve any of real problems as we know.
We have better data and talent to create systems that don't require KYC and actually deter criminals while giving full freedom to real users.
By working together we can totally weed out crypto of criminal activity. Criminal TAM is way smaller than all of economy moving onchain we are targeting.
Decentralization != disorganization
6,000 hackers. One squad.
Who’s coming with me? 👾
teapawt.org/CypherSquadZec/status/…
90% of you will lose money trading leverage this cycle.
you will def over leverage, get greedy, and get flushed out by a 10% wick.
btcjr is literally made to save you from yourself.
- leverage that doesn't expire.
- positions that don't get liquidated.
just take the 1.33x multiplier and go touch some grass.
link.fragments.org/43BWC5
i've been posting quite a lot about why traditional leverage is broken.
@FragmentsOrg is literally going to reward people for explaining it to the tl.
— Write about bitcoin junior on x, and @RallyOnChain will use genlayer smart contracts to evaluate if your thesis actually makes sense. the campaign isn't live yet, but the waitlist just opened.
good posts earn points. climb up. earn. simple.
- if you know the difference between volatility decay and perpetual tranching, get in line before the masses 🔻
waitlist.rally.fun/fragments
we all are genius in a bull market. but when liquidity dries up:
— fixed supply assets crash violently.
— pegged stables break and cause bank runs.
— elastic supply adapts.
survive the extremes. Study Elastic money. Study $AMPL 🔺
Market extremes expose monetary design.
In euphoric phases, $AMPL tends to trade above its purchasing power target.
The protocol responds with positive rebases, expanding supply into demand. Instead of forcing price to absorb all upside pressure, AMPL distributes part of that pressure into balances.
Volatility still exists, but it is reorganized across supply rather than concentrated purely in price.
In panic phases, AMPL often trades below the target.
The response is negative rebases, contracting supply as demand collapses. While frequently misunderstood as “loss,” it is actually the system expressing monetary policy: when demand falls, units contract so the discount can compress over time.
There is no peg defense, no collateral liquidation, and no discretionary intervention. The response is mechanical.
Across extremes, AMPL does not attempt to suppress volatility. It routes volatility through supply adjustments.
Fixed-supply assets force all shocks into price. Pegged assets externalize shocks into collateral and liquidations. AMPL internalizes them through rebasing.
The tradeoff is psychological, not structural: balances change visibly. The benefit is policy consistency.
Overall, AMPL behaves less like an equity and more like a monetary system with supply as its control surface.
just minted a limited edition Lunar New Year background for my @sns domain! 🐎
Get yours now before time runs out!
sns.id/mint-bg
mrboss retweeted
gm champs 🤍
The market reminds us why we're really here..
It was brutal. many of us took real losses. I've personally been hit too. But remember, you may have lost some figures, not yourself, not your core, not your spark.
Take the weekend. Recharge. Monday we build again 🫡
Connection Alert:I'm officially conn3cted
I've applied to @conn3ctprotocol as a creator. teapawt.org/Conn3ctprotocol/status…
We are officially live and hiring.
We are looking for creators, marketing & community managers, moderators and Web3 professionals to join our agency.
Our mission is to bring Web3 builders together.
Built to Conn3ct.
Creator and Project Applications: Conn3ctprotocol.com
we were told L1 couldn’t scale back then.
result??
- billions of vc money injected into building "fancy L2s” which literally do the same thing.
now the narrative suddenly flips:
"actually, L1 is scaling fine! fees are low! we don’t need shards anymore."
- people literally spent half a decade building complex workaround infra that L1 updates might render useless by 2027.
we just circled back boyss.
L1 wins.
Generic L2s lose.
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-pre… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-c… ). 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.
