Razel

What you ignore shapes you more than what you know.

#CryptoPres 💎 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Razel @magicwind888]

@cz_binance @GiggleAcademy Nice adaptation! Just hope it can be lightweight enough for cheap phones. Kids using Giggle Academy globally need it to run smoothly on low-spec devices and data🛰️

[Razel @magicwind888]

@cz_binance 😂

[James Lucas @JamesLucasIT]

Van Gogh made this in the last months of his life, while he was living in an asylum. It’s a picture of a man at the very bottom, and yet, somehow, one of the most defiant answers to human suffering he ever painted...

It’s called At Eternity's Gate, made by Vincent in 1890. An old man sits by a fire, dressed in worn blue, his fists pressed hard against his face, his whole body folded over in grief. There is no scene or story around him, only a person who has run out of strength, left alone with something too heavy to carry.

Van Gogh knew this man from the inside. He was in the asylum at Saint-Rémy when he made it, worn down by his own illness, and he had known this exact posture himself. He was not looking down at suffering from a safe distance: he was painting something he had survived...

But look at the title he chose: not “despair” or “the end,” but “At Eternity's Gate.” Years earlier, when he first drew this figure, Van Gogh wrote in a letter that in a broken old man like this, at his lowest, there was proof of "something on high," something noble and eternal that even the deepest grief could not reach or destroy. He was making a claim: that a man crushed by sorrow is not a man abandoned and that the person hunched over in the dark is sitting, without knowing it, at the very threshold of the eternal.

It hits me every time I look at it because it never tries to soften the sorrow or pretend it isn’t there. The man is genuinely at the bottom, and Van Gogh, who would be dead within months, does not look away from that for a second. Yet he insists, against all of it, that something in this man cannot be broken. That grief is not the final chapter. And that even here, at the lowest point a life can reach, eternity is not far off but close, right at the gate.

It’s an astonishing thing to paint while your own life is coming apart: a man with every reason to despair, looking straight at the pain and declaring that it does not get to win…

[Razel @magicwind888]

@cz_binance 🙏

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

Now, account abstraction.

We have been talking about account abstraction ever since early 2016, see the original EIP-86: https://t.co/E4xJymAxiH

Now, we finally have EIP-8141 ( https://t.co/YD9nIpsxcC ), an omnibus that wraps up and solves every remaining problem that AA was intended to address (plus more). Let's talk again about what it does.

The concept, "Frame Transactions", is about as simple as you can get while still being highly general purpose. A transaction is N calls, which can read each other's calldata, and which have the ability to authorize a sender and authorize a gas payer. At the protocol layer, *that's it*.

Now, let's see how to use it.

First, a "normal transaction from a normal account" (eg. a multisig, or an account with changeable keys, or with a quantum-resistant signature scheme). This would have two frames:

* Validation (check the signature, and return using the ACCEPT opcode with flags set to signal approval of sender and of gas payment)
* Execution

You could have multiple execution frames, atomic operations (eg. approve then spend) become trivial now.

If the account does not exist yet, then you prepend another frame, "Deployment", which calls a proxy to create the contract (EIP-7997 https://t.co/sIQrtJDXLt is good for this, as it would also let the contract address reliably be consistent across chains).

Now, suppose you want to pay gas in RAI. You use a paymaster contract, which is a special-purpose onchain DEX that provides the ETH in real time. The tx frames are:

* Deployment [if needed]
* Validation (ACCEPT approves sender only, not gas payment)
* Paymaster validation (paymaster checks that the immediate next op sends enough RAI to the paymaster and that the final op exists)
* Send RAI to the paymaster
* Execution [can be multiple]
* Paymaster refunds unused RAI, and converts to ETH

Basically the same thing that is done in existing sponsored transactions mechanisms, but with no intermediaries required (!!!!). Intermediary minimization is a core principle of non-ugly cypherpunk ethereum: maximize what you can do even if all the world's infrastructure except the ethereum chain itself goes down.

Now, privacy protocols. Two strategies here. First, we can have a paymaster contract, which checks for a valid ZK-SNARK and pays for gas if it sees one. Second, we could add 2D nonces (see https://t.co/1cRegaXpHM ), which allow an individual account to function as a privacy protocol, and receive txs in parallel from many users.

Basically, the mechanism is extremely flexible, and solves for all the use cases. But is it safe? At the onchain level, yes, obviously so: a tx is only valid to include if it contains a validation frame that returns ACCEPT with the flag to pay gas. The more challenging question is at the mempool level.

If a tx contains a first frame which calls into 10000 accounts and rejects if any of them have different values, this cannot be broadcasted safely. But all of the examples above can. There is a similar notion here to "standard transactions" in bitcoin, where the chain itself only enforces a very limited set of rules, but there are more rules at the mempool layer.

There are specific rulesets (eg. "validation frame must come before execution frames, and cannot call out to outside contracts") that are known to be safe, but are limited. For paymasters, there has been deep thought about a staking mechanism to limit DoS attacks in a very general-purpose way. Realistically, when 8141 is rolled out, the mempool rules will be very conservative, and there will be a second optional more aggressive mempool. The former will expand over time.

For privacy protocol users, this means that we can completely remove "public broadcasters" that are the source of massive UX pain in railgun/PP/TC, and replace them with a general-purpose public mempool.

For quantum-resistant signatures, we also have to solve one more problem: efficiency. Here's are posts about the ideas we have for that: https://t.co/xzG3Jp7Yky https://t.co/WikL7gJ5qg

AA is also highly complementary with FOCIL: FOCIL ensures rapid inclusion guarantees for transactions, and AA ensures that all of the more complex operations people want to make actually can be made directly as first-class transactions.

Another interesting topic is EOA compatibility in 8141. This is being discussed, in principle it is possible, so all accounts incl existing ones can be put into the same framework and gain the ability to do batch operations, transaction sponsorship, etc, all as first-class transactions that fully benefit from FOCIL.

Finally, after over a decade of research and refinement of these techniques, this all looks possible to make happen within a year (Hegota fork).
https://t.co/p7XOgId5NN

[Razel @magicwind888]

@cz_binance @teresagoody Looking forward

[Razel @magicwind888]

@DjPrestigeUk Constant beginnings 😁

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

This is what I worry Europe will get negatively polarized into: an ideology taking pride in a neat, sanitized online environment free of evil corporate and fascist pathogens.

I hope European govs do not go this way, and instead take a Pirate Party approach of user empowerment.

First, what's wrong with the tweet I'm quoting:

The idea that there should be "no space" for something you dislike is fundamentally a totalitarian and anti-pluralistic impulse. It's incompatible with being in an environment that you do not fully control.

This is especially true for categories that are subjective and controversial, because you end up trying to fully remove things you think are pathogens, when other people have good faith disagreements, and because you give yourself the maximalist goal of not even giving them breathing room, you create conflict and end up building the machinery of technocratic authoritarianism to impose your victory in the conflict.

So sorry, if you want to be a free society, you have to bite the bullet that some people, somewhere, will be selling things that you consider dangerous and saying things you consider disinformation and vicious lies.

What is the goal to shoot for?

You want to create an environment where those things don't dominate. This is the problem with twitter today: not that it's a safe space where 1000 people talk to each other in a corner about how heritage americans are the master race and putin is good or whatever, but that that crap gets shoved in our face on a mass scale, and the algorithms actively favor it.

The right metaphor is not castles and walls, but biological - think, why European forests don't have tropical lizards.

Having incentives for social media platforms to have less of those things instead of more is fundamentally reasonable, @audreyt has talked about how Taiwan has done something similar.

You also want to do this in a way where it's clear what the underlying principle is, so it's not a vehicle for imposing arbitrary and frequently changing expert-consensus agendas.

You also want to empower users, rather than working against them. People want to see and buy good things instead of bad things. Often the problem is that competition is too difficult in the current market. I actually supported the USB-C standardization mandate; it created more interoperability and thus improved competition and convenience. I would support incentivizing social platforms to be more open, and to be more transparent (eg. my proposal to require algorithms to be continuously published with a 1-2 year delay, with zk-proofs to ensure that the algorithm being used in real time exactly equals the one that gets published later)

Being able to better identify what messages are coming from what communities is also good, though I don't support the direction of banning anonymity of individual posters, rather I would want to see more macro-scale analytics, eg. seeing what communities are most strongly saying and amplifying content that semantically matches a particular idea; this can be done in privacy-preserving ways.

There is a real opportunity to reaffirm freedom of speech in a unique and different way, that emphasizes pluralism and pushes against unbalanced attempts to manipulate the discourse by individual powerful actors. We want to do this, not go down the dark path of having something that claims to support fundamental rights but actually is not trusted by anyone to be anything other than the fundamental right to follow the footsteps of a few technocratic experts.

[Razel @magicwind888]

@LLuciano_BTC Crypto doesn’t reward belief,
it rewards judgment.

[Razel @magicwind888]

Thank you 'te.

[Razel @magicwind888]

@JamesLucasIT Nature really immeasurable ❣️

[James Lucas @JamesLucasIT]

This perfectly timed photo by Daniel Bieber captures the moment a flock of starlings took the shape of a giant bird

[MOON ADDICT @MOONXADDICT]

Perfect shot 📸

[Razel @magicwind888]

@DjPrestigeUk 🫶✅

[Crypto (DJ) Prestige @DjPrestigeUk]

Swap instantly. Zero fees. No slippage.

#MEXC Convert gives you fixed-rate, frictionless token swaps — no order book, no stress. Simplicity is the key!!
https://t.co/Hlxb86uf3p

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

He waited for the sun to set but the tree got there first.

[📸 孫士傑 eric66699999]

[Razel @magicwind888]

@GiggleAcademy Thank you, deeply appreciated 😇
My storybook #2
https://t.co/TX9FWniMZB

[Giggle Academy @GiggleAcademy]

🎉 Storybook Creation Challenge — Yesterday’s Daily Winner

“Bibo and Mischievous Mess”
Bibo, a little rabbit who hates cleaning up toys, suddenly meets a magic dustpan — and chaos becomes adventure!
A playful and imaginative story that gently encourages responsibility while keeping the fun alive. 🧹🐰✨ https://t.co/ylXFvRYHsA

#GiggleAcademy #picturebooks #storybooks #illustration #LearnEnglish #illustration #Education #art

[Razel @magicwind888]

@elonmusk ⚖️ Abundance alone won’t make everyone wealthy [Premium tier]
💎 Wealth is created by tech, but shared (or not) by politics.👀
Is your vision SMART? 🤔