Danilo Tuler 🐧

Open-source developer, entrepreneur, blockchain engineer. @cartesiproject contributor.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

2026 World Cup is approaching and I'm excited for it 😀 4 years ago I wrote a simple betting dapp for 2022 WC, and now I was curious what I could do with AI without manually writing a single line of code. This is Tifo. https://t.co/sWMVitXrLu

[Tifo @tifocards]

The 2026 World Cup, on cards. ⚽
Predict scores. Collect the art. Trade your way up the leaderboard. Split the prize pool.
Tifo is coming. → https://t.co/xXdxsxlolJ

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@GiulioRebuffo @gakonst The experience is great. But there may be decentralization compromises along the way of having that kind of experience, no? Passkeys for example are great, but attached to domains.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

This once again corroborates to @cartesiproject thesis, a L2 framework with a real differentiation, a powerful alt-VM for powerful applications. Stay tuned.

[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.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

In my childhood Greenland was the way to invade Europe from the US, or vice-versa. (War is the Brazilian version or Risk)

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@elonmusk Not a lucid decision

[Cartesi @cartesiproject]

GM @EFDevcon and GM to everyone at Devconnect!

Our contributors are on site, so here’s who you can meet IRL to talk all things Cartesi: @felipeargento, @bmaia_expat, @GCdePaula_, @carlofragni, @guidanoli, @henrimarlon_, @miltonjonat, @PedroArgento8, @dtuler 🫡

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

Buenos dias 🇦🇷 Devconnect

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@jessepollak @baseapp More centralizing power to https://t.co/4a9LTnuZJV 🫤

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

Curious about what kind of centralized infrastructure @baseapp depends on.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@davidtsocy @baseapp Me

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

Welcome @tezos to RISC-V bandwagon. Come and take a look at @cartesiproject mature RISC-V emulator at https://t.co/qifGbiFZPT
@ArthurB @trilitech

[bartek.eth @bkiepuszewski]

Study @cartesiproject , IMO this is how projects should be launched. Honeypot to test their proof system, immutable contracts. Such a different way to launch a product. I hope bounty will increase and there will be enough hackers/researchers to look at their proof system👇

[L2BEAT 💗 @l2beat]

New project on L2BEAT: @cartesiproject PRT Honeypot.

Stage 2 Appchain with a (major) twist. ⚫
Before you ape into this, reconsider: You will lose all your funds. Why? 👇

[Cartesi @cartesiproject]

Meet the Cartesi PRT Honeypot 🍯🐝🐧

Our first rollup application equipped with the PRT fraud-proof system, putting the appchain stack to the test.

It’s a key milestone toward decentralization and trustless security, in line with @l2beat’s standards.

➝ https://t.co/DwLrcll4vt

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@felipeargento @l2beat @cartesiproject Just one caveat. Even though the TVL is compartmentalized, potential software vulnerabilities can affect all rollups of the same codebase in a coordinated attack.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@lukaisailovic @reown_ @coinbase It's nice @MetaMask and @MetaMaskDev are working on 7715 and 7702, but it's quite odd they don't support 5792, even for the classic wallet in production (and not snap and flask)

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

I created @OnChessProject mostly as a demo application to experiment with EIPs that tackles UX issues. The code is based on EIP-5792 and ERC-7715.
Unfortunately very few wallets support EIP-5792, @zerodev_app Kernel dropped support, @Alchemy Smart Accounts don't support.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

@bmaia_expat @OnChessProject @zerodev_app @Alchemy No, EIP-7702 adds more capabilities, but all those other EIPs still need adoption.

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

Another annoyance is how no ERC-4337 provider support local development, and rely on testnets for development. Testnet is for testing, not for development.

I hope Porto by @ithacaxyz helps to improve the dev experience for ERC-4337 (and EIP-7702).

[Danilo Tuler 🐧 @dtuler]

And ERC-7715, initially proposed by @reown_ does not seem to get enough traction. @coinbase wallet gave up and went to another direction with ERC-7895.