Slashhd (evm/acc)

Milady
Research & data
tg: @Slashheth

[Slashhd (evm/acc) @Slashheth]

@Jiurn happy new year 2022

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

Tangent will launch with 12 markets.

The following stablecoins, powered by top-tier DeFi protocols, will be included as collateral via @CurveFinance LPs:

- $crvUSD & $scrvUSD from @CurveFinance
- $frxUSD from @fraxfinance
- $fxUSD from @protocol_fx
- $reUSD from @ResupplyFi
- $sUSDS from @SkyEcosystem
- $OUSD from @OriginProtocol
- $eUSD from @reserveprotocol
- $sDOLA from @InverseFinance
- $BOLD from @LiquityProtocol
- $USDC from @circle
- $USDT from @tether
- $PYUSD from @PayPal
- $RLUSD from @Ripple

@pendle_fi markets will be added shortly after launch, expanding collateral options and yield opportunities.

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

Both $USG pools are now live on @beefyfinance.

These high-yield autocompounding vaults are built atop the OnlyBoost infrastructure from @StakeDAOHQ.

Tangent 🤝 Stake DAO 🤝 Beefy

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

The USG/frxUSD pool has now surpassed $2M TVL on @CurveFinance.

Beyond the strong APRs on @StakeDAOHQ and @ConvexFinance, depositors are also securing their $TAN allocation and farming points simultaneously.

Full details & link in the quoted post below 👇

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

Public Pre-Deposit access is live.

Deposit $USDC or $frxUSD to secure your future $TAN allocation, score points, and earn yield.

Link and details below.

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

Tangent’s public Pre-Deposit campaign: Monday, May 18th.

Provide liquidity with $USDC or ethereum:0xcacd6fd266af91b8aed52accc382b4e165586e29, hold your position, earn yield, and secure your share of $TAN tokens.

Details below 👇

[Dune @Dune]

Most onchain research workflows: open Dune → write SQL → wait → export → paste chart into a doc → repeat.

Here's what it looks like with the Dune MCP

Prompt sent to @claudeai:

"Give me a 30-day summary of Aave's TVL, active borrower count, and liquidation events across Ethereum and Arbitrum. Flag any anomalies."

And get results like this 👇

[Slashhd (evm/acc) @Slashheth]

@valtitudexyz @Polymarket Altitudio

[Altitude @valtitudexyz]

HIP-4 is around the corner.

The execution layer is unified, now the UI has to match.

Introducing Horizon: our HIP-4 x @Polymarket module, inside Altitude.

One interface, no switching.
Live soon.

[Slashhd (evm/acc) @Slashheth]

@Tangent_fi @CurveFinance @StakeDAOHQ @ConvexFinance Da cooker 🧑‍🍳

[Tangent @Tangent_fi]

Tangent relies heavily on @CurveFinance and its surrounding protocols, such as @StakeDAOHQ and @ConvexFinance.

From deepening liquidity to increasing revenue, synergies are deep and multi-layered.

Read the full post for details 👇

[Ethereum Daily @ETH_Daily]

https://t.co/ploZDE9qI9

[Autism Capital 🧩 @AutismCapital]

Holding Crypto

[niko @saintniko]

defi is and always will be the greatest crypto use case

[Crypto Bitlord @crypto_bitlord7]

I’m losing hope in $ETH by the day

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

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: https://t.co/9jy6v1X6Fw and https://t.co/gZmu3YjebM ). 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.

[Slashhd (evm/acc) @Slashheth]

@VitalikButerin Makes sense to split accountability (market) from preferences (non-token votes).

But how do you keep the preference layer truly pluralistic without some form of token creep over time?

[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.

[Stani @StaniKulechov]

2025 was a year of big numbers for Aave.

2026 is going to be even bigger for Aave.