Felipe Kazuto | kazuto.sui (felipekazuto)

GN everyone

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 2 reactions

📊 Data on Claynosaurz and Popkins' stakes 📊 Recently, Guesty (Community Manager at Claynosaurz) made an interesting post with data on Claynosaurz and Popkins' stakes, which gives us interesting information on how the stake distribution is. Let's check each part separately ⬇️ On average, there are these many wallets with Popkins and Claynosaurz: 🔹 2,379 wallets holding one Popkin 🔹 2,350 wallets holding one Claynosaurz 🔹 2,293 wallets that actually have some Claynosaurz or Popkins staked Now let's look at some more in-depth data on Popkins in Sui: 🔹 57.3% of wallets hold 1 Popkin 🔹 21.7% of wallets hold 2 to 3 Popkins 🔹 21% of wallets hold 4 or more Popkins 🔹 33.8% not staked 🔹 66.2% staked (and most are staked for 12 months) Now let's look at some more in-depth data on Claynosaurz in Solana: 🔹 68.6% of wallets hold 1 Claynosaurz 🔹 18.3% of wallets hold 2 to 3 Claynosaurz 🔹 13.1% of wallets hold 4 Claynosaurz or more 🔹 43.5% not staked 🔹 56.5% staked (and most are staked for 12 months) In other words, most Claynosaurz and Popkins are staked and concentrated in very few wallets. Currently, the best cost-benefit ratio for staking is found in Popkins, where if you have just 2 Popkins you will already be ahead of the vast majority. By staking, you will be acquiring a stake in Claynosaurz's intellectual property (according to the team), which will make you eligible for 2 airdrops (Claynosaurz and Heeboo), in addition to other future benefits. Having this data helps us to have a better understanding of how the competition is in the staking market and helps us to make a better decision about where we want to be. I will try to stay on top, so I will be acquiring more Popkins and staking them for 12 months. Image credits below to Guesty

• 0 replies
• 1 recast
• 3 reactions

🖥️ Could Netflix use Walrus? 🖥️ I like the idea that everything being built on Web 3 will be useful in our daily lives, and that most people around the world will utilize the innovations we see. One of the best projects for this technology adoption, in my opinion, is Walrus Protocol. With this in mind, I'll be writing a series of posts analyzing areas and services where Walrus could be used in our daily lives. The first is the world's largest streaming service, Netflix We'll analyze whether Walrus could, technically and economically, replace or complement a streaming infrastructure like Netflix's. ⚙️ Netflix and its current model ⚙️ Netflix isn't just a video company. It's a global streaming infrastructure, with: 🗃️ Thousands of TBs (petabytes) of video. 🌍 Global delivery with minimal latency (regional CDNs, ISP caching). 📈 Support for millions of simultaneous accesses. 🔁 On-demand access in any quality (HD, 4K, HDR, etc.). 💰 Optimized storage and delivery with cutting-edge engineering (Open Connect). Now let's compare this to what Walrus offers. 📦 Raw Storage: Can Walrus Handle It? 📦 ✅ Yes, in terms of pure file storage, Walrus has the theoretical capacity to support tens or hundreds of petabytes because: - It is infinitely scalable horizontally (more nodes = more space). - It uses efficient coding (Red Stuff) with self-healing capabilities. - It already stores over 800 TB even in its initial phase. ⚠️ However, to function as Netflix's main database, it would require: - A massive pool of tens of thousands of nodes. - Economic incentives compatible with large-scale storage and frequent access. 📡 On-Demand Delivery and Streaming: Is Walrus Good for You? 📡 Not Completely... Yet Walrus was designed as a storage network, not a CDN (Content Delivery Network). This means: - Walrus isn't yet optimized enough to handle streaming at Netflix's current demand - Walrus doesn't have region-based caching - It supports real-time downloads, but low latency isn't guaranteed yet - Massive simultaneous data reads are possible with planning and some upgrades Walrus itself recommends using hybrid storage, where: - Videos can be stored on Walrus permanently or as a reliable backup. - Content can be mirrored on CDNs for instant delivery. 💸 Cost: Is it worth it for Netflix? 💸 ✅ Yes, as a backup or cold storage. Walrus can offer a much lower cost than Netflix's current model for: - Storing master versions of movies and series. - Saving localized versions (dubbed/subtitled) that aren't frequently accessed. - Archiving old catalogs. ❌ However, it's not worth it for edge delivery (direct end-user access), where latency and performance are essential. 🚀 Future: Could it become viable? 🚀 Yes, with specific improvements, Walrus could one day compete as a streaming backbone: - Optimized geographic deployments (CDN-aware sliver placement). - Direct asynchronous streaming relay from nearby nodes. - Voluntary caching in ISPs or regions via specific staking. - Integration with players that support progressive buffering directly from the encoded blob. - Partnership with delivery services (such as IPFS gateways or Akash/decentralized CDN). In short, yes, Walrus could currently be used by Netflix or similar services, but for lower-demand functions. To become the primary storage service, it would need much larger storage than currently available (many more nodes/validators) and some upgrades or partnerships to optimize latency and support massive simultaneous streaming. But it's still a huge victory for Walrus to be able to support part (even if small) of the demand for a service as big as Netflix in such a short time, which means it's only a matter of time before it's ready to do great things like supporting giant streaming services.

• 0 replies
• 2 recasts
• 3 reactions

🖥️ Could Netflix use Walrus? 🖥️ I like the idea that everything being built on Web 3 will be useful in our daily lives, and that most people around the world will utilize the innovations we see. One of the best projects for this technology adoption, in my opinion, is Walrus Protocol. With this in mind, I'll be writing a series of posts analyzing areas and services where Walrus could be used in our daily lives. The first is the world's largest streaming service, Netflix We'll analyze whether Walrus could, technically and economically, replace or complement a streaming infrastructure like Netflix's. ⚙️ Netflix and its current model ⚙️ Netflix isn't just a video company. It's a global streaming infrastructure, with: 🗃️ Thousands of TBs (petabytes) of video. 🌍 Global delivery with minimal latency (regional CDNs, ISP caching). 📈 Support for millions of simultaneous accesses. 🔁 On-demand access in any quality (HD, 4K, HDR, etc.). 💰 Optimized storage and delivery with cutting-edge engineering (Open Connect). Now let's compare this to what Walrus offers. 📦 Raw Storage: Can Walrus Handle It? 📦 ✅ Yes, in terms of pure file storage, Walrus has the theoretical capacity to support tens or hundreds of petabytes because: - It is infinitely scalable horizontally (more nodes = more space). - It uses efficient coding (Red Stuff) with self-healing capabilities. - It already stores over 800 TB even in its initial phase. ⚠️ However, to function as Netflix's main database, it would require: - A massive pool of tens of thousands of nodes. - Economic incentives compatible with large-scale storage and frequent access. 📡 On-Demand Delivery and Streaming: Is Walrus Good for You? 📡 Not Completely... Yet Walrus was designed as a storage network, not a CDN (Content Delivery Network). This means: - Walrus isn't yet optimized enough to handle streaming at Netflix's current demand - Walrus doesn't have region-based caching - It supports real-time downloads, but low latency isn't guaranteed yet - Massive simultaneous data reads are possible with planning and some upgrades Walrus itself recommends using hybrid storage, where: - Videos can be stored on Walrus permanently or as a reliable backup. - Content can be mirrored on CDNs for instant delivery. 💸 Cost: Is it worth it for Netflix? 💸 ✅ Yes, as a backup or cold storage. Walrus can offer a much lower cost than Netflix's current model for: - Storing master versions of movies and series. - Saving localized versions (dubbed/subtitled) that aren't frequently accessed. - Archiving old catalogs. ❌ However, it's not worth it for edge delivery (direct end-user access), where latency and performance are essential. 🚀 Future: Could it become viable? 🚀 Yes, with specific improvements, Walrus could one day compete as a streaming backbone: - Optimized geographic deployments (CDN-aware sliver placement). - Direct asynchronous streaming relay from nearby nodes. - Voluntary caching in ISPs or regions via specific staking. - Integration with players that support progressive buffering directly from the encoded blob. - Partnership with delivery services (such as IPFS gateways or Akash/decentralized CDN). In short, yes, Walrus could currently be used by Netflix or similar services, but for lower-demand functions. To become the primary storage service, it would need much larger storage than currently available (many more nodes/validators) and some upgrades or partnerships to optimize latency and support massive simultaneous streaming. But it's still a huge victory for Walrus to be able to support part (even if small) of the demand for a service as big as Netflix in such a short time, which means it's only a matter of time before it's ready to do great things like supporting giant streaming services.

• 0 replies
• 2 recasts
• 3 reactions

⚠️ Common MPC ⚠️ Imagine that you want to open the safe, but the key is divided into several pieces, and each piece is held by a different person (or a node in the network). These people need to talk to each other to put their parts of the key together and open the safe together, without any of them knowing the complete key alone. It's slower because many people need to talk at the same time. If someone leaves in the middle of the process, it can ruin everything. It works well, but everyone is part of the same "collective key".

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 2 reactions

🚨 Understand Ika's 2PC-MPC 🚨 Many people tell me that they don't understand Ika 2PC-MPC, so I decided to use our friend David as an example and explain it in a way that even a child can understand. Let's go! ⬇️

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 2 reactions

📊 Data on Claynosaurz and Popkins' stakes 📊 Recently, Guesty (Community Manager at Claynosaurz) made an interesting post with data on Claynosaurz and Popkins' stakes, which gives us interesting information on how the stake distribution is. Let's check each part separately ⬇️ On average, there are these many wallets with Popkins and Claynosaurz: 🔹 2,379 wallets holding one Popkin 🔹 2,350 wallets holding one Claynosaurz 🔹 2,293 wallets that actually have some Claynosaurz or Popkins staked Now let's look at some more in-depth data on Popkins in Sui: 🔹 57.3% of wallets hold 1 Popkin 🔹 21.7% of wallets hold 2 to 3 Popkins 🔹 21% of wallets hold 4 or more Popkins 🔹 33.8% not staked 🔹 66.2% staked (and most are staked for 12 months) Now let's look at some more in-depth data on Claynosaurz in Solana: 🔹 68.6% of wallets hold 1 Claynosaurz 🔹 18.3% of wallets hold 2 to 3 Claynosaurz 🔹 13.1% of wallets hold 4 Claynosaurz or more 🔹 43.5% not staked 🔹 56.5% staked (and most are staked for 12 months) In other words, most Claynosaurz and Popkins are staked and concentrated in very few wallets. Currently, the best cost-benefit ratio for staking is found in Popkins, where if you have just 2 Popkins you will already be ahead of the vast majority. By staking, you will be acquiring a stake in Claynosaurz's intellectual property (according to the team), which will make you eligible for 2 airdrops (Claynosaurz and Heeboo), in addition to other future benefits. Having this data helps us to have a better understanding of how the competition is in the staking market and helps us to make a better decision about where we want to be. I will try to stay on top, so I will be acquiring more Popkins and staking them for 12 months. Image credits below to Guesty

• 0 replies
• 1 recast
• 3 reactions