Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
Possible futures of the Ethereum protocol, part 4: The Verge https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2024/10/23/futures4.html
53 replies
182 recasts
664 reactions
swampnet pfp
swampnet
@swampnet
The Purge
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Renatov 🎩 Ⓜ️ pfp
Renatov 🎩 Ⓜ️
@renatov.eth
We only loss on futures, it’s not important dex or cex, result it the same
0 reply
0 recast
9 reactions
Kody pfp
Kody
@kody.eth
Spittin fire lately ser!
0 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
Jer | seattlecrypto.eth pfp
Jer | seattlecrypto.eth
@seattlecrypto.eth
👀👀👀
0 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
Ben pfp
Ben
@machinemiller
The ticker is VERGE
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
Ivan pfp
Ivan
@ivananishchuk
Yes please! ZK verification for mainnet is needed badly. I still think sum-check/lookup based protocols are probably the best for this, but even the heavier schemes (plonk-ish or something?) should provide a lot of improvement over having to run the same computation over and over to verify.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
CryptoTBV pfp
CryptoTBV
@cryptotbv
Nice
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
RWA_WHALE pfp
RWA_WHALE
@mitchscott-rogan
Looks cool
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Gigachad™ pfp
Gigachad™
@gigachadcoin
Looking good for Ethereum Vitalik! #MasculinityTokenized #gigachad 0xF43F21384d03b5cBbddd58d2de64071e4Ce76AB0 https://twitter.com/i/communities/1849153426631926090
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Shubham pfp
Shubham
@shubham-007
Demn demn, ur on fire mahn!
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Johnny Hoang pfp
Johnny Hoang
@tada2k
Love it
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0xdcman4l pfp
0xdcman4l
@0xdcman4l
Ggs
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cooper Wrenn pfp
Cooper Wrenn
@cwrenn
@aethernet give me a summary of this article
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Harrison pfp
Harrison
@investorhj
Wow this is wonderful
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
TBJ pfp
TBJ
@gigipinturicchio
Positive!!!!
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Lulinha.base.eth pfp
Lulinha.base.eth
@lulinha
Xereca
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
AC pfp
AC
@achi
in my imagination in the end all the L2 are merged into one, all in one (L1) will be back
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Danny pfp
Danny
@mad-scientist
If we go down the STARKed binary hash trees, why do we need a gas limit? If the burden is mostly on the builder+prover, let each builder build (or outsource) what they can (up to some limit on state growth/data-to-download). Any downside other than the obvious advantage to the big guy? Anything I missed?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0xDomainer.eth pfp
0xDomainer.eth
@0xdomainer
Sup man, think about the use case of Layer1.eth... DM me or simply buy it from vision .io
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction