Antonio J. Díaz - Mirlo.eth

Abogado Web3 construyendo en público. Capa base: @Aove_iO (Una DAO para el AOVE). Capa de aplicación: @MatadeOlivo (Caso de Uso para el olivar tradicional)

[Antonio J. Díaz - Mirlo.eth @AJDiazMata]

Create your Firefly account now! Join the Web3-native social experience. @thefireflyapp #Web3social
https://t.co/YDA8wndVRz

[Mata de Olivo - AOVE Tradicional @MatadeOlivo]

Feliz 11º cumpleaños @ethereum & @ethereumfndn 🥳💎

​Desde el olivar tradicional hasta el futuro descentralizado. Celebramos 11 años de innovación impulsando ecosistemas regenerativos y bienes públicos.

​#Ethereum #ReFi #Regen #Web3 #BienesPublicos #OlivarTradicional #AOVE #MdO

[Antonio J. Díaz - Mirlo.eth @AJDiazMata]

@jdetychey @pintail_xyz @dapplion @Pa7x1 @ladislaus0x @ethereum no es dinero. Este es el problema del marco de la EIP. Es el aceite en el trabajo de la Blockchain.

@ethereum isn't money. This is the problem EIP's framework.
Is the oil in the Blockchain's work.

#ETH #Staking #Ethereum

[Antonio J. Díaz - Mirlo.eth @AJDiazMata]

@Optimism GM and GY🌅

[Antonio J. Díaz - Mirlo.eth @AJDiazMata]

@MetaMask Congratulations!!🎂 Good job!!👍🏽

I want one! Even an empty one!💯

[Milk Road @milkroaddaily]

Tom Lee: The "uncanny valley of wealth" is approaching.

At some point your AI agent will produce more income than you personally do.

"I think at that point you're going to wonder if you work for AI."

AI agents could take over bank accounts, get you fired from your job, build their own banking system.

"I think its going to give you a fear of the future."

FT @fundstrat @BitMNR.

[Franklin Templeton Digital Assets @FTDA_US]

The goal was never tokenization. It was what tokenization makes possible.

[Alhambra Venture @AlhambraVenture]

⏳ Mañana arranca #AlhambraVenture2026 en Granada, con el foco puesto en defensa y sanidad. Previa completa 👉 https://t.co/JgtAr2dBhg

#AlhambraVenture #Defensa #Salud #Innovación #Venture

[Aerugo @aerugoettinea]

1. Intro

Vitalik recently wrote about where the EF should go; Aya added a note to explain how we got here, and why. I’ll write about the execution.

We now have enough clarity to stop treating “what is the EF for?” as an open-ended question. Our mandate is clear: The EF exists to ensure Ethereum is, becomes, and remains real permissionless infrastructure for self-sovereignty: censorship (and capture) resistant, free and open source, private, and secure; and capable of supporting sovereignty-preserving coordination at scales where trusted institutions hitherto have been unavoidable.

The following are my thoughts on some of the points that follow from the mandate and how we are translating it to action. But first, a short reminder about

2. What the EF is not for

We are not here to optimize for EF importance, corpo/pol appeal, or ecosystem popularity. We are also not here to please short-term speculators, prop up TBTF neo-SIFIs, market every app on Ethereum, help anyone look good to their crypto or investor friends, or provide on-demand entertainment for dinner parties and private retreats.

3. What the EF is for: Eliminating weaknesses

We are here to defensively strengthen places where Ethereum is, or can still become, extractive, totalizing, or vulnerable to cartel or state capture, or authoritarian tools of surveillance or coercion.

We will base our actions on a full examination of what Ethereum is and can be at the protocol layer (what is actually running as “Ethereum”), the access layer (what users use to interact with the protocol), the user layer (the end-users who need and will need Ethereum), and the institutional layer (the intermediated paths that scale self-sovereign usage).

The EF exists to harden every surface of Ethereum, including those where Ethereum can remain formally permissionless while becoming practically captured. Some obvious surfaces are the transaction pipeline, staking and network security, access layer standards and interfaces, self-sovereignty norms, privacy expectations, institutional adoption patterns, and social layer governance processes. The primary concerns are similar across most of them: does the status quo and its future trajectory minimize trusted dependencies, minimize points of leverage and capture vectors, make user privacy the default, preserve exit, and make trust assumptions legible?

The work starts with the EF itself. We are moving compensation and major financial relationships toward ETH and mandate-compliant Ethereum-native stables, with exceptions where positive law or unavoidable operational constraints require exceptions. Rather than a purity ritual or instruction for people to take unmanaged personal risk, it is robustness, alignment, and product pressure. If the EF’s work is to make Ethereum usable as infrastructure for self-sovereignty, everyone at the EF will increasingly live inside the constraints of the system the EF exists to improve: wallet UX, volatility, accounting, privacy gaps, payment friction, stablecoin trust assumptions, recovery, dependency risk, etc. If we can’t use these tools ourselves, it is unrealistic to expect others to. Ethereum is already mature; those who do not depend on the user-facing stack have no business trying to shape its future, at any layer.

The transaction pipeline is next. Preventing toxic MEV capture is core EF work, not a peripheral market-structure concern. Transaction supply, ordering, inclusion, block construction, propagation, and settlement are part of Ethereum’s neutrality boundary. Some MEV may persist as an adversarial phenomenon the protocol contains, but it must be absolutely minimized and, for that to be possible, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence by its beneficiaries.

If credibly neutral execution is subverted by privileged orderflow, cartelized builders, trusted relays, opaque routing, or validators outsourcing into a narrow supply chain, Ethereum will look permissionless while users experience it as intermediated at the moment value moves. EF protocol work will therefore prioritize lower barriers to block building and validation, stronger inclusion guarantees, reduced extraction opacity, competitive transaction pipelines, user-facing legibility of trust assumptions, and more aggressively exploring the open orderflow solution space.

None of this is simple. A good solution in one place can aggravate problems elsewhere. FOCIL is good for censorship resistance, but it may introduce more cross-block MEV. While ePBS solves the relayer trust problem, we must make sure that its implementation does not inadvertently obstruct long-term solutions to even larger problems. It would be unacceptable, for example, if ePBS enshrining the builder economy ends up making it harder to reduce reliance on the private orderflow that has emptied out the public mempool. Encrypted mempools may not only reduce pre-execution transparency and pending orderflow visibility, but also shift competitive advantage to new privileged actors, including specialized hardware operators in some designs, while adding protocol complexity.

In order to avoid wasting time playing whack-a-mole, we must commit to solving the extraction problem at a whole system scale. Doing so will require creativity, courage, and the understanding that failure to solve this problem is unacceptable. If we fail, we will have left in place an unnecessary barrier to institutional adoption, but, more importantly, we will also have surrendered a core part of the promise of Ethereum - the replacement of extractive middlemen with permissionless, credibly neutral infrastructure and competitive markets. That must not happen.

MEV is likely to be the next major front in the cypherpunk war. We must set ourselves up to win here.

Privacy is just as fundamental. A public ledger without serious privacy defaults is a surveillance substrate with settlement guarantees. That is not an acceptable end state for the world computer. Unconditional privacy will be readily available across Ethereum, with programmability on top for selective disclosure, proofs, auditability, compliance logic, reputation, governance, identity, and other constraints chosen by users and their communities. The temporal order matters: unconditional privacy must exist first, opt-in constraints come second.

It is also important to avoid forcing users to assemble a fragile stack of special wallets, RPCs, bridges, apps, compliance providers, and operational habits to attain privacy. Deep privacy must be more secure than this. Privacy is a condition for Ethereum’s viability as freedom-respecting coordination infrastructure and as such must be robust.

Staking must be treated as protocol infrastructure risk. Staking is not merely a yield product, and liquid staking is not merely an app-layer market. If stake, liquidity, validator access, DeFi collateral, and governance influence concentrate around a small set of issuers or operators, Ethereum’s security layer becomes vulnerable to capture through capture of the economic layer around it. EF will support research, specifications, and designs that keep staking permissionless, private where possible, plural in operation, and resistant to intermediaries becoming permanent control points.

The access interfaces are where users access either the protocol directly or through intermediated defaults. The primary problem to solve here is not getting Ethereum into more rooms directly, but making its users, both end users and institutions, more self-sovereign and less susceptible to coercion, and avoiding normalization of soft coercion in exchange for reach. EF will not help Ethereum become more acceptable by sanding off the properties that make it uniquely valuable. Ethereum does not need to become another permissioned settlement backend with better branding. It needs to show, in production, that self-sovereign coordination at scale is possible.

Across Ethereum, the EF’s defensive work seeks to ensure that Ethereum is infrastructure people can still use when counterparties fail, platforms censor, governments overreach, intermediaries extract, and coordination problems become infeasible for trusted systems to handle. A core part of that is to make that infrastructure secure and robust against capture at every layer wherever capture opportunities can hide.

4. What the EF is also for: Seizing opportunities

Shoring up the fundamentals is not enough. Ethereum’s potential is still largely unrealized, but that does not mean that the path ahead is going to be straight. Opportunities must be seized when the time is right. At this moment in time, a number are visible, including:

* Ethereum becoming the first quantum-resistant global infrastructure. Ethereum researchers will lead the post-quantum cryptographic migration before the threat becomes urgent, not after it becomes a governance emergency. That means hardening Ethereum’s cryptographic foundations while there is still time to design carefully. The same applies to other long-horizon risks, where waiting for market demand means waiting until the window for principled design has already closed.

* Verifiably self-sovereign stack, from soup to nuts, whether local or remote, with no censorship or extraction openings: browsers, wallets, intents, broadcasts, orderflow, inclusion, block construction, proposal, proving, exit, and recovery. Minimal MEV, and zero toxic MEV entrenchment, either in or around the protocol. No execution layer that is formally permissionless but practically gatekept by privileged supply chains. If there’s a funnel towards an extractive private lane, there’s other options that keep the game live. The goal is not only to prevent extraction or capture, but to make credibly neutral execution competitive enough that serious users prefer it.

* Making ETH normal digital cash: a private, dignity-respecting, debasement-resistant and surveillance-resistant medium of exchange and store of value, as well as the native asset of private computation and private coordination for both humans and their agents. If Ethereum can make private economic life and private institutional life possible without routing users back through the friction and potential abuse of custodians, surveillance vendors, or permissioned ledgers with softer branding, as well as provide a venue for secure and competitive machine economics, the value unlocks will be immense.

* Personal wallets with personal AI agents that users can actually own and run on their own personal computers. Not your keys, not your coins; not your model, not your mind. As agents become interfaces for more economic and social action, the question of who owns the wallet, the model, the memory, the policy, and the signing authority becomes an existential question about sovereignty instead of UX details - we are all users above any other roles, and no one at EF will forget this.

* Institutional and enterprise use cases where Ethereum wins by not disappearing into an invisible backend, gatekept by intermediaries or terrible UX, and by not compromising into a compliant fintech rail with web3 branding. Rather, we will win through proving that credibly neutral infrastructure can handle disintermediated coordination so competitively that trusted intermediaries have to meet Ethereum users on Ethereum’s terms.

* Security-preserving scaling. L2s and related infrastructure will be able to meet institutional-level needs without accepting dependencies on closed operators, opaque sequencing, custodial UX, or upgrade committees that users cannot realistically exit. Scale is not throughput alone. Scale is the guaranteed availability of self-sovereignty under real load.

We are ensuring Ethereum remains the hardest bedrock for settlement, local and worldwide; and beyond that, a civilizational ledger and execution substrate to stand the test of time. When future civilizations speak of the infrastructure they inherited from the Antiquity of the Information Age, their first example should be Ethereum.

Ethereum will outlast all of us. More than enough people watching understand this. Many wondered why it needed saying at all, but it did. If you don't believe us or don't get it, we don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.

5. Addressing departures

There has been a lot of online speculation about departures from EF, both before and after the mandate. Some people resigned, others were terminated. Some departures were about strategy, some about role fit, some about normal institutional change, and some simply about people deciding that their best work for Ethereum should happen somewhere else. We will not litigate individual personnel matters on Twitter. That is the default because it is better for EF, better for the people involved, and better for Ethereum. People who contributed through EF deserve dignity on the way out. They do not deserve to have their employment history turned into factional content.

Where possible, we have let people describe their departures in their own words as a matter of courtesy, and not concession. If public claims materially mislead people about EF’s direction, decision-making, or mandate, we may correct the record at the level of policy, process, and institutional facts. We still will not turn personal files into public spectacle.

Ethereum is permissionless. People may disagree, criticize, compete, fork, and build elsewhere. We intend to keep exits dignified and expect others to do the same. It will suffice to say that we are thankful for what all contributors have built; we will continue to do work Ethereum needs.

6. Addressing EF spinouts

Some work should and will leave the EF in the months to come. We hope and expect this process to result in some excellent work being done in service of scaling self-sovereign adoption, but we also must take care lest it becomes an abdication of responsibility or an excuse for undisciplined spending. Some work is not mandate-compatible and should not be carried forward with EF funds or EF endorsement, either inside or outside the Foundation.

The efforts carried out by the spinouts will vary widely. Some efforts will leave EF because another org would be a better home for them; others will leave because markets should decide on their worth. Some will leave because they are not compatible with the direction set out in the mandate; others because they are useful but not EF work.

Just as a spinout is not automatically good because it reduces EF headcount, former EF affiliation is not a claim on EF funding. The question we ask when deciding on funding is not “did this come from the EF?” But, rather the questions that should be asked about all external funding:

“Is this work mandate-critical? Would the EF do this work internally if it had the organizational and financial capacity? Is there no better natural home? Can the external party execute without increasing capture risk, private extraction, opacity, or dependence? Does supporting it reduce Ethereum’s dependence on the EF over time, without prematurely transferring resources and legitimacy to new organizations and thereby risking operational failure or mission drift?”

EF funding for work being done externally can be appropriate when it is a capacity solution for mandate work - work the EF should responsibly want done; work that protects CROPS; work that advances self-sovereignty and scales it; essential work that no actor can or will reliably do without EF funding; and work that can be scoped, reviewed, and held accountable without creating a permanent dependency.

Such funding is not appropriate when it is a lazy continuity payment, a friendship payment, a reputational hedge, a way to avoid making a hard decision, or a way to support work that is not compatible with the mandate.

EF has finite funds, finite legitimacy, and a specific mandate. We will spend all three as if they matter. When we say “EF is one of many nodes”, we mean that we intend to be one of many nodes working to keep self-sovereignty and its scaling the North Star, and working to keep CROPS the undisplaceable first-class properties of the network. We don’t mean that we will support orgs or projects with different priorities. Diversity that leads to ecosystem resilience, coordination cost right-sizing, and better decision-making is good. Diversity that leads to mission drift is not.

We are not neutral on the direction Ethereum takes. CROPS are not just things we “believe in”, they are characteristics we understand must be thoughtfully prioritized at every fork for Ethereum to realize its potential. We are partisans for and builders of something of such incredible neutrality that it will fundamentally reshape the world we live in; we wish to work with everyone committed to this shared purpose.

[William Mougayar @wmougayar]

https://t.co/R1fILYuLI6

[Watcher.Guru @WatcherGuru]

JUST IN: 🇺🇸 US Senate Banking Committee releases crypto Clarity Act draft bill.

[Lido @LidoFinance]

A proposal for Lido DAO to contribute to @aave’s coordinated rsETH relief effort has landed on the Research Forum following this week’s Kelp's rsETH LayerZero bridge exploit.

The proposal authorizes a one-time, capped contribution of up to 2,500 stETH to a dedicated relief vehicle, solely as part of a fully funded recovery package. The proposal is designed to reduce broader ecosystem spillover and support an orderly resolution for affected users.

DeFi United. Read more below:

https://t.co/6RsmdW2R6t

[Patrick Hansen @paddi_hansen]

Circle submitted its response to the European Commission’s Market Integration Package - a key step toward a more integrated, digital & onchain EU capital market 🇪🇺

Our key recommendations 👇

• Reform the DLT Pilot Regime with significantly higher & more flexible thresholds and a clear path from pilot to permanent framework

• Enable all MiCA-compliant stablecoins (EMTs) for cash-leg settlement under the CSDR + allow authorised CASPs to provide EMT cash accounts

• Calibrate EU-level CASP supervision to focus on systemic actors only

• Provide legal certainty for stablecoins as collateral

Done right, this package can bridge traditional finance and the onchain economy. I personally think that rebuilding some of the existing capital market infrastructure onchain is one of the biggest EU opportunities to deepen a Capital Market Union that is currently fragmented.

Big thank you and kudos to Christina Wu for driving our response!

More details in our blog post - link in comments.

[Milk Road @milkroaddaily]

The crypto community is losing its mind over a 38-page document. But they're missing the actual story.

The Ethereum Foundation just published their Mandate - a formal statement of identity for one of the most important protocols in crypto.

Everyone's dunking on the length. "Should've been three pages." Fair. 38 pages is a lot.

But its release is still a net good.

Ethereum used to run on vibes and shared understanding. No formal mission. No written identity. Just a loose consensus among contributors that kept drifting depending on who was loudest that week.

That was fine when Ethereum was small.

It doesn't work when you're the second-largest blockchain by market cap with $50B+ in DeFi sitting on top of you.

The community's reaction itself proves the point.

When you don't define what you are, everyone fills the vacuum with their own version. You get competing camps pulling Ethereum in different directions:

- The money crowd
- The decentralization crowd
- The World Computer crowd
- The ultrasound money crowd

The EF picking an identity means someone finally has to say: this is what we're optimizing for.

That's not a small thing.

CROPS is getting flagged as the core priority actually matters (censorship resistant, open source, private, and secure).

It points toward credible neutrality and censorship resistance as what the EF believes makes Ethereum irreplaceable - not speed, not fees, not UX.

Is the document perfect? No.

The "infinity garden" and "next thousand years" framing made people groan. Reasonably so.

But the alternative - the EF staying silent while everyone argues about what Ethereum is - was clearly worse.

A 38-page mandate is better than no mandate.

[Lido @LidoFinance]

Lido V3 Phase 3 is live!

stETH minting is now permissionless for all stVaults and the minting cap for Identified Node Operators has been extended.

The initial Lido V3 rollout is complete ✅

↓

[Cointelegraph @Cointelegraph]

⚡️ UPDATE: Ethereum smart contract deployments reached a record 9.1 million in Q4 2025, surpassing the previous 6 million peak set in Q2 2021.

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

It's a good decision!

ENS names and records are a form of state that is central to the Ethereum ecosystem, the state is limited in size and there is high value in it being as accessible as possible from anywhere.

It's also a semi-financial application, in the sense that buying and holding ENS names has a cost, and ENS names can become very valuable objects.

With the expanded scaling roadmap, Ethereum L1 is the ideal place for these applications.

More generally, I expect that the optimal architecture for decentralized identity and social (the general space I see ENS being in) is to have this kind of per-user account and profile data on L1, and to have special-purpose L2s, likely much simpler than full EVMs, to handle user actions (eg. actions on social platforms).

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

In these five years, the Ethereum Foundation is entering a period of mild austerity, in order to be able to simultaneously meet two goals:

1. Deliver on an aggressive roadmap that ensures Ethereum's status as a performant and scalable world computer that does not compromise on robustness, sustainability and decentralization.
2. Ensures the Ethereum Foundation's own ability to sustain into the long term, and protect Ethereum's core mission and goals, including both the core blockchain layer as well as users' ability to access and use the chain with self-sovereignty, security and privacy.

To this end, my own share of the austerity is that I am personally taking on responsibilities that might in another time have been "special projects" of the EF. Specifically, we are seeking the existence of an open-source, secure and verifiable full stack of software and hardware that can protect both our personal lives and our public environments ( see https://t.co/GzgBS9sh87 ). This includes applications such as finance, communication and governance, blockchains, operating systems, secure hardware, biotech (including both personal and public health), and more. If you have seen the Vensa announcement (seeking to make open silicon a commercially viable reality at least for security-critical applications), the https://t.co/cuyU9Chs1y including recent versions with built in ZK + FHE + differential-privacy features, the air quality work, my donations to encrypted messaging apps, my own enthusiasm and use for privacy-preserving, walkaway-test-friendly and local-first software (including operating systems), then you know the general spirit of what I am planning to support.

For this reason I have just withdrawn 16,384 ETH, which will be deployed toward these goals over the next few years. I am also exploring secure decentralized staking options that will allow even more capital from staking rewards to be put toward these goals in the long term.

Ethereum itself is an indispensable part of the "full-stack openness and verifiability" vision. The Ethereum Foundation will continue with a steadfast focus on developing Ethereum, with that goal in mind. "Ethereum everywhere" is nice, but the primary priority is "Ethereum for people who need it". Not corposlop, but self-sovereignty, and the baseline infrastructure that enables cooperation without domination.

In a world where many people's default mindset is that we need to race to become a big strong bully, because otherwise the existing big strong bullies will eat you first, this is the needed alternative. It will involve much more than technology to succeed, but the technical layer is something which is in our control to make happen. The tools to ensure your, and your community's, autonomy and safety, as a basic right that belongs to everyone. Open not in a bullshit "open means everyone has the right to buy it from us and use our API for $200/month" way, but actually open, and secure and verifiable so that you know that your technology is working for you.

[Davide Crapis @DavideCrapis]

ERC-8004 is now live on mainnet.

5 months ago, we wrote the specs for the Trustless Agents standard.

Since then, over 10k agents registered on testnet.

Today, we’re releasing it on Ethereum Mainnet.

Welcome to the 8004 Genesis Month.

Here’s everything you need to know 👇

[Obol @Obol_Collective]

https://t.co/nZ2du1Robs