Fuel Mainnet is now posting blobs on @eigen_da. We’ve officially migrated Data Availability from Ethereum to EigenDA, unlocking dramatic improvements in throughput and cost efficiency. By removing the final constraint on our stack, this milestone unleashes the full potential of Fuel - bringing our 150K TPS vision closer to reality.

Looking for the best takes on bitcoin’s security budget Or just inflation of anything in general Confused

Debunking economic security myths. Self-enforcing vs committee chains (Libra?). Myth 1) Economic security is a meme because "delegation" implies we anyway only have a non-staked committee and thus no security. But delegation in the presence of slashing means - you chose your operator carefully - otherwise you will get slashed. So in fact the reasoning is totally misplaced. Myth 2) Economic security is a meme because forking can solve all problems. Forking a blockchain takes time (~week) so if you rely on forking for all security then you should NEVER accept any transaction instantly - because it could get forked out. You need economic security to carry the economic load of any transaction finalized BEFORE the forkability period. Myth 3) Economic security is a meme because users dont get any measurable protection. This is because slashed funds are burnt rather than given back to harmed users. If users can self-buy their own security demand, then we can have a purely automated market for economic security. Myth 4) Economic security is a meme because it doesnt protect against liveness attacks. Thats because your chain doesnt understand how economic security works and is not designed to penalize liveness attacks. Stopping chain growth clearly leads to penalties in Ethereum. Censoring transactions for a long period will also lead to penalties by repurposing the inactivity leak. Myth 5) If economic security is a meme, why incentivize stake at all? Should just use a committee. In which case we just get back Libra - except chosen by internet anons. Myth 6) Since the PoS reward curve is arbitrary, economic security dont mean anything. Right now, reward curve is abitrary which sucks. But using stakesure, users can declare and buy their own security against invalid behavior and price for security. In that case, the amount staked will be market-emergent rather than system designed. Myth 7) We should just go back to PoW. Proof of work is just staking by buying mining devices. Otherwise the cost of attack is zero. You cant burn (or redistribute) the mining devices of misbehaving miners to the harmed parties, but in proof of stake you can. Myth 8) Blockchains charge for compute or mev not security. This is the most pernicious, as no one is going to provision resources not paid for. Security pricing is what is going to lead to security provision. Again, stakesure (read the next tweet). Understand economic security properly and you can build a self-enforcing chain. Or declare economic security is a meme and build a bullshit committee chain.

VIBEscore is a glimpse of what only EigenCloud can unlock and one of the freshest takes on crypto apps in a while. Built by @ChrisMoller3 and @AdamZuck13. And we’re just getting started. Join the deep dive on how they built it👇

@ChrisMoller3 and @AdamZuck13 built VIBEscore to showcase what only EigenCloud makes possible and built one of the most original crypto apps we’ve seen in a while. And this is just the beginning. Join below to dive into how they built it 👇

My crypto revolutionary truth is that Multisig’s everywhere are crypto’s desperate cry for intersubjectivity. Blockchains must enable applications to access their social consensus in order to enable any interesting guarantees beyond web2. EigenCloud

thinking a lot about this at eigenda when you're moving data at 50MB/s, read costs can skyrocket fast figuring out the economics is crucial who's the expert at @shelbyserves? would love to learn more about their

Who doesn't like spray painting walls and playing grand theft auto?

Has anyone bridged mainnet ETH or stablecoins to sepolia? (Similar to @LayerZero_Core’s goerli bridge a couple years ago) Some testnet services have real costs that need to be paid for with real money…

Fun seeing this work in prod - like many things, the constraints of not having G2 precompiles necessitated a bit of an unnatural approach, namely the “key switching” from G2 to G1, which ended up being pretty efficient Props to @jeffburdges, @OanaCiobotaru, Syed and Alistair for their concurrent work ( that while aimed at a different verifier (native vs EVM in my case), also wanted to lighten the load on verifiers with almost the same methods, together with more formal treatment and proofs After Pectra, EIP 2537 and the relative cost of G1 and G2 additions, it’s worth reevaluating at what number of aggregated keys this method becomes cheaper again