CifChef

Crypto Maxi

[CifChef @cifchef]

@CronosApp @zainbacchus @cryptocom Congratulations on the beta launch! One question I have is: will our perpetual liquidity be able to compete with Hyperliquid's?

[CifChef @cifchef]

@Yargniathus Before adding more features, let's fix the basics. The current FE/UI/UX on https://t.co/ShA0Ug5fPX has too many obvious issues. First impressions matter, and UX is just as important as the product itself. I think we need a stronger QA/testing team. @Fwiz

[CifChef @cifchef]

@base $BRIAN @brian_armstrong

[CifChef @cifchef]

Coinbase to zero

[Brian Armstrong @brian_armstrong]

Regarding the recent buzz around my profile picture changes and some feelings that the Base community isn’t being supported enough: I appreciate the feedback (even if tough to hear) and I realize you wouldn't take the time to respond unless you cared.

It seems I wasn't clear enough setting expectations for all of you, so let me try and do that now: please don’t follow my personal X account for investment advice or signals around individual coins. I’m simply posting things I find interesting or funny on the internet. I may not even be aware if there is a coin or project attached to the content I'm posting (you should assume I'm not, to be safe). My posts and profile pics are also not endorsements or commitments to anything.

Base is our shot at building foundational infrastructure for financial services where we can all innovate together. That includes tokenized stocks, borrow/lend protocols, stablecoin payments, etc and yes even meme coin trading. I believe in economic freedom, and support you trading whatever you want. Just realize that if you're treating my X account as alpha, you are doing so at your own risk, against my wishes. I would never recommend this.

On the topic of “support” from the Base team or Coinbase, there seems to be confusion around this too. There are many tokens we would like to list on our centralized exchange, but can't for compliance and regulatory reasons. If you want Jesse or me to pump your bags or shill certain coins, we're also not going to do that.

Here is what we are committed to on support: we run in-person Base Batches and issue grants to high potential builders, Coinbase Ventures and the Base Ecosystem Fund also invest in the most promising companies building on Base, and we periodically integrate promising Base defi protocols into our products at Coinbase which enhances distribution. I might even mention something on X if I think it's interesting, but again, this is not investment advice. In general, we bias toward supporting projects that we believe will create long term customer value.

You may like this approach or you may not, but either way hopefully it creates clarity going forward, so you can decide what you want to do. I respect your choice, either way.

P.S. I still might post memes if I think they are funny! It's still not investment advice.

[WinnΞng @Winning0x]

@jessepollak $jesse bring back Base

[kartpsyc @kartpsyc]

i've accumulated @base ecosystem.

no FOMO, my decision was based on the fact that $jesse it's low marketcap, while @jessepollak continues to show strong commitment to building BASE ecosystem etc.

markets move in cycles, but builders keep building.

[Pawmacist 💎🕊️ @pawmacist]

I heard $Jesse Airdrop is coming

Are you aware?

[Ethlabs @ethlabs_org]

Announcing Ethlabs: a non-profit R&D lab for Ethereum and ETH

Our mission is to make Ethereum the settlement layer of the global economy.

The internet became global because shared protocols created a common language between networks. Private systems remained useful, but bounded. Finance is approaching a similar moment. As value, assets, and markets become digital, the world needs shared settlement infrastructure.

Ethereum is uniquely positioned to become that shared base layer, the neutral foundation on which users, institutions, and agents can transact without intermediation.

What we believe:

• We believe credible neutrality matters. Ten years of uptime and the lowest counterparty risk. Ground that cannot be pulled away by any one country, institution, company, or person.

• We believe ETH matters. The most valuable, programmable store of value. A decade of broad distribution, deep liquidity in onchain markets, and maximally trustless asset on Ethereum.

• We believe DeFi matters. Markets, liquidity, credit, exchange, and coordination, open to anyone.

• We believe adoption matters. Principles do not change the world until people benefit from them.

We sit between two worlds: real usage from the builders at the frontier, and the protocol that has to support it. We work with users, applications, wallets, L2s, infrastructure teams, institutions, ETH holders, core devs and researchers, then turn what they actually need into protocol work, shared standards, infrastructure, and shipped products.

Ethlabs is independent but Ethereum is a shared project. We are one node in a much larger network of stewards. This is the multi-node future.

We have spent the better part of the past decade contributing to Ethereum core research and development.

We are opinionated and transparent. We move with urgency, learn in public, and course-correct when we’re wrong.

We are building a lean, talent-dense team for people who want to do the most important work of their careers: [email protected]

[⟠ @ryanberckmans]

Postquantum is more urgent and important than ever. Ethereum's investments here (begun years ago) are playing a key role in growing the L1 to global ubiquity and ETH to multi trillion

[William Mougayar @wmougayar]

Yessss!

[Justin Drake @drakefjustin]

Today a crazy quantum story just got wilder.

On March 31, the Google Quantum AI team published a landmark result on Shor's algorithm for elliptic curve cryptography. Technically, the paper was a bombshell: a dramatic 10x improvement over the state-of-the-art. As a stunt and wakeup call to the blockchain space, those optimisations were illustrated on secp256k1, the elliptic curve underlying Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures.

But perhaps the most striking part of the paper was sociological, not technical. Instead of following standard academic process, the optimisations were kept secret, hidden behind a zero-knowledge (ZK) proof. Google's accompanying blog post mentions they "engaged with the U.S. government". The ZK proof demonstrates the existence of algorithmic improvements without leaking details. Academic censorship with ZK, a historic first!

As a co-author of the Google paper I witnessed some of the context surrounding this censorship. To be honest, multiple aspects of that context don't sit well with me. As much as I believe the general public ought to know more, I am limited in my ability to whistleblow. Though let me be clear about one thing: the Google team's professionalism has been absolutely exemplary, and they deserve nothing but praise.

Censorship has a way of backfiring. The Streisand effect, where an attempt to bury something only draws more attention to it, is exactly what's unfolding today. First, Google's key optimisation has been rediscovered by the French. And in a thrilling turn of events, a collaborative Shor-at-home challenge just launched. The initiative, available at ecdsa[.]fail, breached a new Shor world record in a matter of hours.

Let's start with the rediscovery. Just two months after Google's paper, French quantum expert André Schrottenloher cracks the main secret optimisation. His paper, titled "Optimized Point Addition Circuits for Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithms", landed on the arXiv today. Big congrats to André, who beat several other nerdsnipped experts to it. In a blog post also published today, Craig Gidney, the world expert on Shor optimisations, revealed that he'd been sitting on this very optimisation for a whole year under censorship pressure.

Interestingly, André missed a handful of minor optimisations, both from Google's original publication and from improvements found since. It's plausible there's still plenty of juice left to squeeze out of Shor, and this is exactly what the ecdsa[.]fail challenge is about. The verifier program developed for the ZK proof does double duty, automatically filtering for valid submissions. Dozens of compounding small and micro improvements are rolling in. As of the time of writing there's an 8.4% improvement to Google's circuit, as measured by the product of logical qubit count and Toffoli gate count. Nice!

The nerdsnipping ran deeper than anyone expected. Over the last few weeks it became clear it extended well beyond André and other quantum experts. Behind the scenes, a small army of amateurs quietly got to work. Inspired by Karpathy-style autoresearch, they turned AI on Shor. Ironically, the verifier program for the ZK proof makes an ideal reward function for AIs. The barrier to entry for this modern style of research is refreshingly low, with several non-experts, even a teenager, finding nice optimisations. Get in touch if you'd like to join a Telegram group with fellow autoresearchers :)

Part 2: neutral atoms and qday

The story doesn't end with Google. On the same day Google went public, a stealthy startup called Oratomic published its own Shor paper in a coordinated release. It made a splash, ultimately becoming the most upvoted paper on scirate[.]com, a website ranking arXiv papers.

Oratomic's claim was wild. By building on Google's logical optimisations and applying custom physical optimisations for neutral atoms, they claimed just 10K physical qubits were sufficient to run Shor's algorithm on secp256k1. That number is mind-bogglingly low.

Knowing essentially nothing about neutral atoms when Oratomic's paper landed, I was intrigued and decided to learn more about the tech. I fell straight down the rabbit hole and spent a couple hundred hours on the topic. I got a little obsessed and watched every YouTube video I could find and spoke to a bunch of experts.

My conclusion? The tech is real, very real. Even Google recently decided to start a neutral atom lab, a notable pivot from their sole focus on superconducting qubits. If you care about qday, i.e. the day a quantum computer will break the first piece of cryptography in production, neutral atoms demand your attention. I shared some of my learnings on Shor and neutral atoms in a 30min talk at the ZKProof cryptography conference. You can find it on YouTube by searching "zkproof neutral atom".

Here's an interesting observation about this duo of breakthrough papers: neither Google nor Oratomic say a word about what their results mean for qday. No timelines. Zero. Nada. That is especially baffling given that the whole point of whitehat quantum cryptanalysis is to inform qday estimations and help the general public make good decisions.

So let me attempt to partially fill the silence, similarly to what Scott Aaronson did in his April 29 post. Given everything I know, including scary non-public information, I now put the odds of qday by 2032 at 50%. 10% by 2030.

Anecdotally, the US government has its own date: 2035. Originating at the NSA and later adopted by NIST, it's when branches of the US government will be disallowed from using quantum-vulnerable cryptography. In plain language: with hindsight, that date is a joke and should be discounted entirely. I don't see how NIST avoids being forced to pull it forward by years.

Part 3: post-quantum cryptography

There are good reasons to sound the alarm today, but please do not panic. Rushing carelessly towards immature post-quantum cryptography is a recipe for disaster. IMO a good target date for migration is 2029, roughly 3.5 years out. 2029 happens to be the date selected by Google, Cloudflare, and the Ethereum Foundation.

These days most of my time goes to safely migrating Ethereum towards post-quantum cryptography as part of the broader lean Ethereum effort. There's a lot to do. We need to rip out and replace BLS signatures at the consensus layer, KZG commitments at the data layer, and ECDSA signatures at the execution layer.

The plan to get there is compelling, and is based on hash-based cryptography. Within the Ethereum Foundation we've developed a Swiss army knife called leanVM (github[.]com/leanEthereum/leanVM) powered by the magic of hash-based SNARKs. Thanks to truly exceptional work by Emile, Thomas, and others, its performance is derisked. Regarding security, leanVM is a jewel, a minimal zkVM crafted for end-to-end formal verification and maximum security.

Want to help? There are two $1M initiatives. First, the Proximity Prize (proximityprize[.]org). Solve a long-standing mathematical conjecture in coding theory, improve hash-based SNARKs, and go home a millionaire. Second, the Poseidon Initiative (poseidon-initiative[.]info), offers $1M for breaking Poseidon, the SNARK-friendly hash function.

[Sonic @SonicLabs]

L1 > L2

[CoinList @CoinList]

$7M+ committed to Flying Tulip in 24 hours on CoinList 🌷

• 100% unlocked at TGE
• 100% refundable at any time
• Equal terms across all rounds
• Funded by revenue & yield, not inflation

Sale closes Friday at 21:00 UTC

Participate ➡️ https://t.co/Vahb7MJDSG

[CifChef @cifchef]

@AndreCronjeTech Would it make sense to position Sonic as the core execution layer for FT, even if deposits are multichain?
This way, Sonic becomes the main hub we build around.

[Mitchell Demeter @MitchellDemeter]

Great to be invited to spend the day at the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum in D.C. Honored to represent Sonic and be in a room with some of the brightest minds and business leaders in the world.

[CifChef @cifchef]

@SiloFinance @avax @GetYieldFi @re @USDT0_to @nine_summits @avantprotocol Silo scam

[CifChef @cifchef]

@SiloFinance Rug

[CifChef @cifchef]

@stacy_muur @SiloFinance Lfg

[Stacy Muur @stacy_muur]

Dear @SiloFinance team,

Thank you for the detailed response.
I appreciate the clarifications on protocol design and legal actions taken. However, several critical concerns remain unaddressed:

1️⃣ DAO Governance vs. Unilateral Decisions

You state that Silo operates as a DAO where SILO token holders have voting power over treasury management and protocol decisions . Yet, the decision that "the DAO will not compensate lenders" (Point 7) appears to have been made unilaterally without community vote.

On behalf of the community, I request:

Formal DAO proposal on @SnapshotLabs presenting multiple options:
– Option A: No compensation (current stance)
– Option B: Partial treasury-funded compensation (e.g., 25-50% haircut)
– Option C: SILO token dilution to create compensation fund
– Option D: Revenue-sharing from future protocol fees until affected users are made whole

Let SILO token holders decide through governance, not the core team.

2️⃣ Reputation Damage ≠ Legal Liability

While I understand Silo's legal position, users will associate the Silo brand with this $60M loss regardless of ToS disclaimers.

This is already evident:

• TVL down 22% in 5 days ($143.7M → $111.7M)
• Affected users will never return without resolution
• New users will choose competitors (Aave, Morpho, Compound) with clean track records
• Every DeFi community discussion about Silo will mention "the $60M incident"

The question isn't "Are we legally liable?"
It's "Can Silo survive reputationally without proactive action?"

3️⃣ Weekly Legal Updates

You mention legal proceedings have been initiated, and it's very much appreciated. Transparency requires regular updates:

• Weekly or bi-weekly public updates on:
• Legal proceedings status (filings, responses, court dates)
• Negotiations with Stream Finance/Stable Labs
• Recovery timeline estimates
• Any settlements or repayments received

4️⃣ UI Transparency

Hiding affected markets while promoting new vaults creates perception of cover-up, regardless of intent.

I strongly advise to:

– Restore UI visibility with clear red warning banners:
"⚠️ This market is affected by the Stream Finance incident. Withdrawals are currently frozen. [Learn more]"

– Dedicated status page showing exact frozen amounts per market, recovery progress, legal action updates

5️⃣ The Permissionless Protocol Paradox

You correctly note that Silo's markets are permissionless and immutable.

However:

• Uniswap doesn't promote specific pools. Users create them independently
• Silo actively promoted Managed Vaults through official channels
• This creates implied endorsement, even if legally disclaimed

If Silo wants to maintain "neutral infrastructure" positioning, it must:

• Stop promoting specific vaults/markets
• Implement risk ratings (A/B/C/D) for all markets
• Require independent audits for any vault featured on official UI

***

The DeFi community values protocols that acknowledge mistakes and let governance decide on solutions. Hiding behind terms of service while promoting new products will permanently damage trust.

This is your chance to either build a strong community by proactively seeking ways to compensate users or risk destroying your reputation entirely.

Assisting affected users will provide long-term value, even if your compensation covers only a fraction of the loss - such as through vested or staked tokens, for example.

PS: Appreciate that you reply to my messages publicly, this is a green flag for the entire community.

[Navigator Exchange💥 @NaviExSonic]

And @NaviExSonic -> @SonicLabs