Pinned Tweet
📋Withdrawing EIP-8363 from consideration for Hegotá.
EIP-8363 rapidly became one of the most commented-on EIPs in the history of the Ethereum-Magicians forum, with 200+ comments in a few weeks. As we progressed through the Hegotà CFI (Consideration For Inclusion) process, industry as well as core protocol and client contributors voiced that a fork scoping exercise was not the right venue to settle an issuance policy change.
We agree and we'd rather acknowledge this now than carry on towards Hegotà in this context. The topic is too important and raised too many concerns that it deserves its own process. We commit to giving issuance its own process and we thank the entities such as @LidoFinance who offered to help steer such an initiative.
We stand by the motivation of this EIP, in particular: “a very high staking ratio is undesirable for two distinct reasons (...), preserving Ethereum’s security, neutrality and resistance to capture, and protecting ETH’s role as money.” Not everybody immediately relates to both reasons and for others recognizing just one of these reasons is enough to justify a change. Nevertheless, we will all benefit from improving our understanding of the issue and what is at stake. The questions we have faced since we published EIP-8363 can be boiled down to 5 categories:
➡️Security: What does a lower ratio actually secure versus a higher ratio?
➡️Industry impact: What else is built on the yield and what will be the impact ?
➡️Curve specs and alternate tools: Is this curve even the right instrument?
➡️Composition: Who is left staking (the effect on the composition of the validator set) ?
➡️Decentralization: How will solo stakers be impacted by the reduction?
We already argued a lot, conceded some and adjusted a few points in the very long Ethereum-Magicians thread mentioned supra. For a broader consensus to emerge and a better issuance policy for Ethereum to be designed and adopted, we need a dedicated process. We call for all willing hands to help and contribute to this, please do reach out. Here’s our start at what a multi-node process would look like (table attached).
Onward and forward, let’s improve Ethereum.
EIP-8363 rapidly became one of the most commented-on EIPs in the history of the Ethereum-Magicians forum, with 200+ comments in a few weeks. As we progressed through the Hegotà CFI (Consideration For Inclusion) process, industry as well as core protocol and client contributors voiced that a fork scoping exercise was not the right venue to settle an issuance policy change.
We agree and we'd rather acknowledge this now than carry on towards Hegotà in this context. The topic is too important and raised too many concerns that it deserves its own process. We commit to giving issuance its own process and we thank the entities such as @LidoFinance who offered to help steer such an initiative.
We stand by the motivation of this EIP, in particular: “a very high staking ratio is undesirable for two distinct reasons (...), preserving Ethereum’s security, neutrality and resistance to capture, and protecting ETH’s role as money.” Not everybody immediately relates to both reasons and for others recognizing just one of these reasons is enough to justify a change. Nevertheless, we will all benefit from improving our understanding of the issue and what is at stake. The questions we have faced since we published EIP-8363 can be boiled down to 5 categories:
➡️Security: What does a lower ratio actually secure versus a higher ratio?
➡️Industry impact: What else is built on the yield and what will be the impact ?
➡️Curve specs and alternate tools: Is this curve even the right instrument?
➡️Composition: Who is left staking (the effect on the composition of the validator set) ?
➡️Decentralization: How will solo stakers be impacted by the reduction?
We already argued a lot, conceded some and adjusted a few points in the very long Ethereum-Magicians thread mentioned supra. For a broader consensus to emerge and a better issuance policy for Ethereum to be designed and adopted, we need a dedicated process. We call for all willing hands to help and contribute to this, please do reach out. Here’s our start at what a multi-node process would look like (table attached).
Onward and forward, let’s improve Ethereum.
🚨 New EIP: Tapered Issuance Burn
We just submitted an EIP to ethereum/EIPs: a minimal, market-driven fix to Ethereum's issuance policy removing the incentive for stake growth beyond 50% of ETH supply.
EIP-8361 by @pintail_xyz, @jdetychey, @dapplion, @Pa7x1, @ladislaus0x & @drakefjustin 🧵
33
36
203
46,744
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Pre-IPO perps continue to draw traders ahead of major listings. Within an hour of Anthropic publishing its S-1 today, trailing 24h volume on its pre-IPO perps jumped 159%.
@binance led the move, with trailing 24h volume up 233% to $35.2M since 12:00 UTC and open interest up 6.8%.
@binance led the move, with trailing 24h volume up 233% to $35.2M since 12:00 UTC and open interest up 6.8%.
7
2
12
1,120
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Speaker applications are open for EthCC[10]! 🎤
Our programme is carefully curated to bring forward original thinking, technical expertise and perspectives that challenge how we think about the future of the industry.
It's what has made the EthCC stage a place where ideas are arried beyond the conference.
Think you have something worth bringing to the stage?
We'd love to hear it!
April 12–15, 2027 | Cannes, France
Our programme is carefully curated to bring forward original thinking, technical expertise and perspectives that challenge how we think about the future of the industry.
It's what has made the EthCC stage a place where ideas are arried beyond the conference.
Think you have something worth bringing to the stage?
We'd love to hear it!
April 12–15, 2027 | Cannes, France
2
1
11
1,055
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
defensive accelerationists
we have a YT playlist coming together to keep you busy for weeks
we have a YT playlist coming together to keep you busy for weeks
Today I call upon the blockchain industry to calmly begin planning for "bunker mode". My personal recommendation is to set in motion a controlled mass migration of assets to fresh addresses, i.e. addresses whose pubkeys remain hidden behind a hash.
Holders, starting with large and sophisticated ones, should consider moving the bulk of their funds to addresses that have never signed a transaction. And when they do sign one, they should also move remaining funds to a new address (possibly generated from the same seed phrase).
Don't rush. While I believe there is cause for action a rushed migration would do more harm than good. Don't panic either. Moving assets to protected addresses is a simple, preventative step which does not require new cryptography or new wallets.
IMO it is now reasonable to brace for the possibility that ECDSA breaks before qday, in the worst case in months not years. By "break" I mean fast private key recovery (e.g. in one week) on available hardware (e.g. a large GPU cluster).
Recent days have been humbling for human mathematical intuition. Long-held, unquestioned hypotheses have fallen. This includes the n log(n) bound for integer multiplication and the 3SUM conjecture. In hindsight, May's unexpected disproof of the Erdős unit distance conjecture was our warning shot.
Yesterday's OpenAI drop made it clear that mathematical superintelligence is upon us. They say there are weeks where decades happen. We are about to live through weeks where centuries of mathematical progress happen. Could our magic 64-byte ECDSA signatures be too good to be true? Was it just security through obscurity all this time?
Elliptic curves feel especially vulnerable to superintelligence. Curves carry rich structure, with room for fancy tricks like Schoof, Frobenius, pairings. (By contrast, hashes are designed to minimise algebraic structure.)
Separately, as Ewin Tang can attest, an efficient quantum algorithm sometimes foreshadows an efficient classical one. We should be open to the possibility of a classical counterpart to Shor that breaks elliptic curves and RSA at once.
Also noteworthy is the striking under-representation of cryptographic breakthroughs among the 722 mathematical results OpenAI published. I've witnessed first-hand the US government censoring academic quantum cryptanalysis results. Backroom interventionism is my base case.
I urge large, sophisticated actors to lead by example. Project11's "risq list" (bitcoin-risq-list.projecteleven[.]com) is a great tracker of exposed BTC pubkeys. Binance, Bitbank, Robinhood, Bitfinex, and Tether have an opportunity to harden their cold storage. Next month I'll address institutions in London in a live Q&A (forum.ethereuminstitutional[.]org/london-2026).
Again, please do not rush. Wallets holding under 50 BTC enjoy partial cover from "Satoshi's shield", i.e. his 20K exposed addresses that hold 50 BTC each. Load-bearing signers like oracles and L2 security councils should consider rotating ECDSA pubkeys with every signed message and/or multi-signing with a hash-based schemes like SPHINCS.
Exiting bunker mode safely will require post-AI cryptography. My inclination is to go all-in on hash-based cryptography and avoid structured mathematical assumptions entirely, whether from curves, lattices, or isogenies. A single battle-tested hash (e.g. from the SHA or BLAKE families) yields plausible post-AI security.
The Ethereum roadmap on strawmap[.]org fully embraces hash-based cryptography with end-to-end formal verification as a response to the quantum threat. Those timelines must now be revisited and accelerated in light of mathematical superintelligence. I'll be pushing for maximum defensive acceleration.
0
2
30
1,080
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
This was one of the Day 2 sessions I was most looking forward to at Ethereum Korea One, on one of the most contested debates in Ethereum right now:
How much should Ethereum pay for its security?
A co-author of EIP-8363 and Lido's Chief of Staking took opposite sides on ETH issuance. Key takeaways:
1. The math behind the fight
Validators earn about 2.5%. New issuance dilutes holders by about 0.85% a year, heading toward 1% within 12–24 months. Issuance grows with the square root of ETH staked. If all ETH were staked, yield and dilution would both be about 1.5%, for a real return of zero.
2. The case for cutting
Jerome de Tychey (@jdetychey) 's red line: the staking ratio should not cross 50%. EIP-8363 pays less as staking approaches that level. His reminder: Ethereum has changed issuance seven times, always downward.
3. The case against
Isidoros Passadis (@IsdrsP) argued stakers aren't necessarily net sellers. stETH holders can borrow against it instead of selling. And yield is something Bitcoin doesn't have, a real edge for ETFs and DATs. The net effect of cutting issuance, he said, is understudied.
4. Is the ratio even the problem?
About 85% of new stake over the last year and a half was pent-up institutional ETH. Passadis expects growth to flatten, noting other PoS networks settle at 50–70%. What matters more to him is who runs the stake: Coinbase, Kraken and Binance won the most, and Coinbase custodies 8 of the 9 US ETH ETFs.
5. Both sides claim
Lower issuance makes MEV a bigger share of rewards. De Tychey's reply: the current curve already squeezes solo stakers, especially after tax.
6. Where it goes next
EIP-8363 didn't make it into Hegotá. De Tychey hopes for a mechanism by 2027 that sharply cuts yield above a certain staking level. Passadis wants people to stop conflating issuance with inflation.
My takeaway for Korea:
Korean institutions looking at staking products are pricing in today's yield. But issuance is a policy, not a constant. It has changed seven times, always down. Any staking product built here should hold up in a lower-yield Ethereum.
And the question Passadis raised, who runs the stake, is one Korean institutions can help answer.
How much should Ethereum pay for its security?
A co-author of EIP-8363 and Lido's Chief of Staking took opposite sides on ETH issuance. Key takeaways:
1. The math behind the fight
Validators earn about 2.5%. New issuance dilutes holders by about 0.85% a year, heading toward 1% within 12–24 months. Issuance grows with the square root of ETH staked. If all ETH were staked, yield and dilution would both be about 1.5%, for a real return of zero.
2. The case for cutting
Jerome de Tychey (@jdetychey) 's red line: the staking ratio should not cross 50%. EIP-8363 pays less as staking approaches that level. His reminder: Ethereum has changed issuance seven times, always downward.
3. The case against
Isidoros Passadis (@IsdrsP) argued stakers aren't necessarily net sellers. stETH holders can borrow against it instead of selling. And yield is something Bitcoin doesn't have, a real edge for ETFs and DATs. The net effect of cutting issuance, he said, is understudied.
4. Is the ratio even the problem?
About 85% of new stake over the last year and a half was pent-up institutional ETH. Passadis expects growth to flatten, noting other PoS networks settle at 50–70%. What matters more to him is who runs the stake: Coinbase, Kraken and Binance won the most, and Coinbase custodies 8 of the 9 US ETH ETFs.
5. Both sides claim
Lower issuance makes MEV a bigger share of rewards. De Tychey's reply: the current curve already squeezes solo stakers, especially after tax.
6. Where it goes next
EIP-8363 didn't make it into Hegotá. De Tychey hopes for a mechanism by 2027 that sharply cuts yield above a certain staking level. Passadis wants people to stop conflating issuance with inflation.
My takeaway for Korea:
Korean institutions looking at staking products are pricing in today's yield. But issuance is a policy, not a constant. It has changed seven times, always down. Any staking product built here should hold up in a lower-yield Ethereum.
And the question Passadis raised, who runs the stake, is one Korean institutions can help answer.
2
4
9
332
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Is Ethereum Printing Too Much ETH? With @jdetychey
Ethereum pays validators with newly issued ETH but how much is actually needed to keep the network secure?
In today’s episode, we’re joined by @jdetychey to explore whether Ethereum could reduce issuance without compromising he debate around EIP-8363, why it was withdrawn from consideration for Hegotá, and what changing staking rewards could mean for ETH holders, solo stakers, and DeFi.
We discuss:
- How Ethereum’s issuance and fee burns work
- The case for changing staking rewards
- EIP-8363 and the pushback it received
- Ethereum’s transition toward post-quantum security
- Whether staking competes with productive DeFi activity
- Could lower yields push capital into other chains?
- How excessive staking could make network capture harder to contest
- What dilution and taxes mean for solo stakers
- And much more—enjoy!
—
Timestamps:
(00:00) Introduction
(02:50) How Ethereum creates new ETH
(06:52) ETH issuance versus fee burns
(10:04) EIP-8363’s proposed rewards curve
(11:36) Why EIP-8363 was withdrawn
(12:06) Ethereum’s post-quantum transition
(23:19) Staking through market cycles
(34:43) Is staking competing with DeFi?
(35:47) Could lower yields drive exits?
(41:30) Security, centralization, and network capture
(47:51) Solo staking, taxes, and dilution
(58:11) Ethereum’s long-term trade-offs
—
Ethereum pays validators with newly issued ETH but how much is actually needed to keep the network secure?
In today’s episode, we’re joined by @jdetychey to explore whether Ethereum could reduce issuance without compromising he debate around EIP-8363, why it was withdrawn from consideration for Hegotá, and what changing staking rewards could mean for ETH holders, solo stakers, and DeFi.
We discuss:
- How Ethereum’s issuance and fee burns work
- The case for changing staking rewards
- EIP-8363 and the pushback it received
- Ethereum’s transition toward post-quantum security
- Whether staking competes with productive DeFi activity
- Could lower yields push capital into other chains?
- How excessive staking could make network capture harder to contest
- What dilution and taxes mean for solo stakers
- And much more—enjoy!
—
Timestamps:
(00:00) Introduction
(02:50) How Ethereum creates new ETH
(06:52) ETH issuance versus fee burns
(10:04) EIP-8363’s proposed rewards curve
(11:36) Why EIP-8363 was withdrawn
(12:06) Ethereum’s post-quantum transition
(23:19) Staking through market cycles
(34:43) Is staking competing with DeFi?
(35:47) Could lower yields drive exits?
(41:30) Security, centralization, and network capture
(47:51) Solo staking, taxes, and dilution
(58:11) Ethereum’s long-term trade-offs
—
1
2
7
1,881
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Roll out the red carpet 🎬
The Agora by Kaiko returns to Cannes on April 13, 2027, as the first official in-side event of EthCC[10].
One day for institutional DeFi at the Palais des Festivals 🇫🇷
The Agora by Kaiko returns to Cannes on April 13, 2027, as the first official in-side event of EthCC[10].
One day for institutional DeFi at the Palais des Festivals 🇫🇷
2
1
9
1,031
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Speaker applications for EthCC[10] are officially open.
For nearly a decade, the EthCC stage has hosted the industry's most important conversations. In 2027, join the ranks of industry leaders and share your insights at the iconic Palais des Festivals in Cannes.
Have a ing to the stage? We want to hear it.
5
2
16
318
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Speaker applications for EthCC[10] are officially open.
For nearly a decade, the EthCC stage has hosted the industry's most important conversations. In 2027, join the ranks of industry leaders and share your insights at the iconic Palais des Festivals in Cannes.
Have a ing to the stage? We want to hear it.
For nearly a decade, the EthCC stage has hosted the industry's most important conversations. In 2027, join the ranks of industry leaders and share your insights at the iconic Palais des Festivals in Cannes.
Have a ing to the stage? We want to hear it.
5
7
35
4,257
Speaker applications for EthCC[10] are now open!
Every year, we look for talks that go beyond the obvious trends and bring something new to the conversation. Some of the best talks we've hosted explored ideas long before they became mainstream.
Be specific, go deep and surprise us! See you next April !
Every year, we look for talks that go beyond the obvious trends and bring something new to the conversation. Some of the best talks we've hosted explored ideas long before they became mainstream.
Be specific, go deep and surprise us! See you next April !
Speaker applications for EthCC[10] are officially open.
For nearly a decade, the EthCC stage has hosted the industry's most important conversations. In 2027, join the ranks of industry leaders and share your insights at the iconic Palais des Festivals in Cannes.
Have a ing to the stage? We want to hear it.
7
0
44
2,131
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Ten editions of EthCC added up:
30K+ visitors
7,500+ companies
2,600+ speakers
2K+ side events
108 countries
The 10th is in Cannes, April 12–15, 2027. If your company should be part of the next chapter, let's talk 👇 (link in Bio)
30K+ visitors
7,500+ companies
2,600+ speakers
2K+ side events
108 countries
The 10th is in Cannes, April 12–15, 2027. If your company should be part of the next chapter, let's talk 👇 (link in Bio)
2
2
10
1,088
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Kaiko has joined the industry Taskforce supporting the UK’s Wholesale Digital Markets Champion, the initiative led by @hmtreasury to build a leading tokenized wholesale financial markets ecosystem in the UK.
As part of the Task Force Action Group 2, Kaiko will contribute its nal-grade market data and data infrastructure to the development of practical secondary-market use cases.
Read the full announcement here 🔗 kaiko.com/news/kaiko-joi…
As part of the Task Force Action Group 2, Kaiko will contribute its nal-grade market data and data infrastructure to the development of practical secondary-market use cases.
Read the full announcement here 🔗 kaiko.com/news/kaiko-joi…
2
3
6
1,154
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
give yourself a wedgie!
it's a DIY hardware wallet
use it as a signer on a @safe
three common parts _wedged_ together
3d print your own case
everything is MIT
wedgie.dev
it's a DIY hardware wallet
use it as a signer on a @safe
three common parts _wedged_ together
3d print your own case
everything is MIT
wedgie.dev
48
64
385
32,172
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
That's a wrap on Ethereum Korea One 2026 Day 2: The Builder Voice
Core contributors, protocol teams, and Korean builders shipping the real path forward.
Philosophy over price, code over narrative. See you next year in Seoul 🩵
Core contributors, protocol teams, and Korean builders shipping the real path forward.
Philosophy over price, code over narrative. See you next year in Seoul 🩵
1
7
27
1,485
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Popping in to share a quick update on the Ratspeak Ethereum PoC and where my head's at.
The original PoC only covered Ethereum. Now I'm building verifiers for OP Stack and Arbitrum Nitro chains into my experimental fork.
$Ratspeak @ratspeakorg 🐁
The original PoC only covered Ethereum. Now I'm building verifiers for OP Stack and Arbitrum Nitro chains into my experimental fork.
$Ratspeak @ratspeakorg 🐁
2
7
18
1,518
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Today I call upon the blockchain industry to calmly begin planning for "bunker mode". My personal recommendation is to set in motion a controlled mass migration of assets to fresh addresses, i.e. addresses whose pubkeys remain hidden behind a hash.
Holders, starting with large and sophisticated ones, should consider moving the bulk of their funds to addresses that have never signed a transaction. And when they do sign one, they should also move remaining funds to a new address (possibly generated from the same seed phrase).
Don't rush. While I believe there is cause for action a rushed migration would do more harm than good. Don't panic either. Moving assets to protected addresses is a simple, preventative step which does not require new cryptography or new wallets.
IMO it is now reasonable to brace for the possibility that ECDSA breaks before qday, in the worst case in months not years. By "break" I mean fast private key recovery (e.g. in one week) on available hardware (e.g. a large GPU cluster).
Recent days have been humbling for human mathematical intuition. Long-held, unquestioned hypotheses have fallen. This includes the n log(n) bound for integer multiplication and the 3SUM conjecture. In hindsight, May's unexpected disproof of the Erdős unit distance conjecture was our warning shot.
Yesterday's OpenAI drop made it clear that mathematical superintelligence is upon us. They say there are weeks where decades happen. We are about to live through weeks where centuries of mathematical progress happen. Could our magic 64-byte ECDSA signatures be too good to be true? Was it just security through obscurity all this time?
Elliptic curves feel especially vulnerable to superintelligence. Curves carry rich structure, with room for fancy tricks like Schoof, Frobenius, pairings. (By contrast, hashes are designed to minimise algebraic structure.)
Separately, as Ewin Tang can attest, an efficient quantum algorithm sometimes foreshadows an efficient classical one. We should be open to the possibility of a classical counterpart to Shor that breaks elliptic curves and RSA at once.
Also noteworthy is the striking under-representation of cryptographic breakthroughs among the 722 mathematical results OpenAI published. I've witnessed first-hand the US government censoring academic quantum cryptanalysis results. Backroom interventionism is my base case.
I urge large, sophisticated actors to lead by example. Project11's "risq list" (bitcoin-risq-list.projecteleven[.]com) is a great tracker of exposed BTC pubkeys. Binance, Bitbank, Robinhood, Bitfinex, and Tether have an opportunity to harden their cold storage. Next month I'll address institutions in London in a live Q&A (forum.ethereuminstitutional[.]org/london-2026).
Again, please do not rush. Wallets holding under 50 BTC enjoy partial cover from "Satoshi's shield", i.e. his 20K exposed addresses that hold 50 BTC each. Load-bearing signers like oracles and L2 security councils should consider rotating ECDSA pubkeys with every signed message and/or multi-signing with a hash-based schemes like SPHINCS.
Exiting bunker mode safely will require post-AI cryptography. My inclination is to go all-in on hash-based cryptography and avoid structured mathematical assumptions entirely, whether from curves, lattices, or isogenies. A single battle-tested hash (e.g. from the SHA or BLAKE families) yields plausible post-AI security.
The Ethereum roadmap on strawmap[.]org fully embraces hash-based cryptography with end-to-end formal verification as a response to the quantum threat. Those timelines must now be revisited and accelerated in light of mathematical superintelligence. I'll be pushing for maximum defensive acceleration.
Holders, starting with large and sophisticated ones, should consider moving the bulk of their funds to addresses that have never signed a transaction. And when they do sign one, they should also move remaining funds to a new address (possibly generated from the same seed phrase).
Don't rush. While I believe there is cause for action a rushed migration would do more harm than good. Don't panic either. Moving assets to protected addresses is a simple, preventative step which does not require new cryptography or new wallets.
IMO it is now reasonable to brace for the possibility that ECDSA breaks before qday, in the worst case in months not years. By "break" I mean fast private key recovery (e.g. in one week) on available hardware (e.g. a large GPU cluster).
Recent days have been humbling for human mathematical intuition. Long-held, unquestioned hypotheses have fallen. This includes the n log(n) bound for integer multiplication and the 3SUM conjecture. In hindsight, May's unexpected disproof of the Erdős unit distance conjecture was our warning shot.
Yesterday's OpenAI drop made it clear that mathematical superintelligence is upon us. They say there are weeks where decades happen. We are about to live through weeks where centuries of mathematical progress happen. Could our magic 64-byte ECDSA signatures be too good to be true? Was it just security through obscurity all this time?
Elliptic curves feel especially vulnerable to superintelligence. Curves carry rich structure, with room for fancy tricks like Schoof, Frobenius, pairings. (By contrast, hashes are designed to minimise algebraic structure.)
Separately, as Ewin Tang can attest, an efficient quantum algorithm sometimes foreshadows an efficient classical one. We should be open to the possibility of a classical counterpart to Shor that breaks elliptic curves and RSA at once.
Also noteworthy is the striking under-representation of cryptographic breakthroughs among the 722 mathematical results OpenAI published. I've witnessed first-hand the US government censoring academic quantum cryptanalysis results. Backroom interventionism is my base case.
I urge large, sophisticated actors to lead by example. Project11's "risq list" (bitcoin-risq-list.projecteleven[.]com) is a great tracker of exposed BTC pubkeys. Binance, Bitbank, Robinhood, Bitfinex, and Tether have an opportunity to harden their cold storage. Next month I'll address institutions in London in a live Q&A (forum.ethereuminstitutional[.]org/london-2026).
Again, please do not rush. Wallets holding under 50 BTC enjoy partial cover from "Satoshi's shield", i.e. his 20K exposed addresses that hold 50 BTC each. Load-bearing signers like oracles and L2 security councils should consider rotating ECDSA pubkeys with every signed message and/or multi-signing with a hash-based schemes like SPHINCS.
Exiting bunker mode safely will require post-AI cryptography. My inclination is to go all-in on hash-based cryptography and avoid structured mathematical assumptions entirely, whether from curves, lattices, or isogenies. A single battle-tested hash (e.g. from the SHA or BLAKE families) yields plausible post-AI security.
The Ethereum roadmap on strawmap[.]org fully embraces hash-based cryptography with end-to-end formal verification as a response to the quantum threat. Those timelines must now be revisited and accelerated in light of mathematical superintelligence. I'll be pushing for maximum defensive acceleration.
5,960
6,259
25,549
6,659,713
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
Atomic synchronous composability is no longer a promise. History made on mainnet: the first atomic cross-chain L1->L2 transaction ever 🔥 And this is only the beginning for EEZ ... 🚀 @etheconomiczone
83
132
735
123,178
Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 retweeted
The first Ethereum testnet forks to Glamsterdam tomorrow!
A smooth fork will be followed by a fork to Glamsterdam on the Hoodi testnet, then mainnet. After this fork, we'll have a pretty good idea of when we're going live on mainnet.
The headliners are enshrined proposer-builder separation (ePBS, EIP-7732) and block-level access lists (BAL, EIP-7928), and some other highlights are an increase in the max contract size and faster consolidation queues.
When: Tuesday October 6, 13:40 UTC
Join the YouTube livestream to watch the fork go live, and bring your questions to the chat.
youtube.com/watch?v=T9sXJY…
A smooth fork will be followed by a fork to Glamsterdam on the Hoodi testnet, then mainnet. After this fork, we'll have a pretty good idea of when we're going live on mainnet.
The headliners are enshrined proposer-builder separation (ePBS, EIP-7732) and block-level access lists (BAL, EIP-7928), and some other highlights are an increase in the max contract size and faster consolidation queues.
When: Tuesday October 6, 13:40 UTC
Join the YouTube livestream to watch the fork go live, and bring your questions to the chat.
youtube.com/watch?v=T9sXJY…
1
13
55
20,562