Lisa Sanders

[Bitcoin Magazine @BitcoinMagazine]

JUST IN: Bitcoin mining difficulty spiked 15%, the largest increase since 2021 🚀

[Uniswap @Uniswap]

Agents execute on Uniswap

We've released seven new Skills giving structured access to core Uniswap protocol actions

Your starting point for agentic workflows onchain

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

6/6 Institutions care about predictable, scalable deployment.

Capital efficiency is the real competition in mature finance.

DeFi evolves when allocation beats speculation.
Explore Concrete at https://t.co/5c5TVRR6IR

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

1/6 APY is a metric.

Capital efficiency is a system.

Metrics attract attention.

Systems generate durable results.

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

5/6 Instead of passive yield wrappers, Concrete vaults act as portfolio managers.

Continuous automated compounding.
Minimized idle capital.
Structured risk control.

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

5/5 This is how onchain finance grows up.

Less fragility. More resilience. https://t.co/1fKVEpCTIT

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

1/5 Onchain finance is often measured by performance.
APY.

Returns.
Short-term outcomes.

But performance without structure rarely lasts.

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

4/5 Concrete vaults are designed for durability.

They don’t depend on timing.
They don’t require constant adjustment.
They operate as systems.

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

I actually don't think it's complicated.

IMO the future of onchain mechanism design is mostly going to fit into one pattern:

[something that looks like a prediction market] -> [something that looks like a capture-resistant, non-financialized preference-setting gadget]

In other words:

* One layer that is maximally open and maximizes accountability (it's a market, anyone can buy and sell, if you make good decisions you win money if you make bad decisions you lose money)
* One layer that is decentralized and pluralistic, and that maximizes space for intrinsic motivation. This cannot be token-based, because token owners are not pluralistic, and anyone can buy in and get 51% of them. Votes here should be anonymous, ideally MACI'd to reduce risk of collusion.

The prediction market is the correct way to do a "decentralized executive", because the most logical primitive for "accountability" in a permissionless concept is exactly that.

Though sometimes you will want to keep it simple, and do a centralized executive at that layer instead:

[replaceable centralized executive] -> [something that looks like a capture-resistant, non-financialized preference-setting gadget]

Thinking in these two layers explicitly: (i) what is doing your execution, (ii) what is doing your preference-setting and is judging the executor(s), is best.

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

5/5 Compounding only works if capital survives.

Concrete focuses on risk-adjusted yield instead of fragile APYs. One deposit replaces constant management.

This is how Concrete vaults unlock sustainable compounding. https://t.co/pGn0nt6K4A

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

1/5 At first, compounding feels slow 📉

Almost boring.

That’s why many people underestimate it in crypto.

[Lisa Sanders @LisaSander27429]

4/5 Concrete vaults remove these interruptions.

Rewards are reinvested automatically. Capital stays productive. Allocation adapts over time without manual input.

Compounding becomes continuous.

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

The scaling hierarchy in blockchains:

Computation > data > state

Computation is easier to scale than data. You can parallelize it, require the block builder to provide all kinds of "hints" for it, or just replace arbitrary amounts of it with a proof of it.

Data is in the middle. If an availability guarantee on data is required, then that guarantee is required, no way around it. But you _can_ split it up and erasure code it, a la PeerDAS. You can do graceful degradation for it: if a node only has 1/10 the data capacity of the other nodes, it can always produce blocks 1/10 the size.

State is the hardest. To guarantee the ability to verify even one transaction, you need the full state. If you replace the state with a tree and keep the root, you need the full state to be able to update that root. There _are_ ways to split it up, but they involve architecture changes, they are fundamentally not general-purpose.

Hence, if you can replace state with data (without introducing new forms of centralization), by default you should seriously consider it. And if you can replace data with computation (without introducing new forms of centralization), by default you should seriously consider it.