mazzakk.eth @MatthewMetaCoin

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.

Some of my perspective on where the @ethereumfndn is going. First of all, this is only my own view. The board is not just me, and I have no extra special powers on the board that the other board members do not. @aerugoettinea is the one executing much of this transition. My input has been largely on technical questions. The board is in the process of expanding, and my own power within the org will continue to decrease, which is honestly what I want. The 2025 era brought many important improvements to EF and its ability to execute. Many issues were resolved, and EF continues to benefit from its improved efficiency and greater focus on concrete goals to this day. And so with those problems resolved, early this year, the largest remaining hole that I perceived was something different nagging at me: I would regularly spot people saying things like "vitalik says these beautiful things about ethereum needing to be decentralized, and have privacy, and be a sanctuary technology, but why do the EF's actions not reflect that?" Now, you may have been hearing something different. You may not have been sensing a feeling of crisis at all, and maybe were hearing people saying that finally we were taking execution and BD seriously and the main task for us is to keep going that way and be even better and faster. Then probably there is genuine difference between you and me, in what kinds of criticism I take most seriously, and what kinds of critics through their criticism are most able to make me feel pain. As an analogy, let's briefly switch over to a different domain. One belief you can have about Google is that it is a success story, and has brought a lot of good to humanity in organizing the world's information. Another belief you can have about Google is that they had a beautiful idealistic beginning, but at some point the corruption of mainstream corporate attitudes seeped in, and they slowly bit by bit completely abandoned the "don't be evil" slogan. My belief on Google specifically is probably somewhere between the two. BUT, if you had taken me back in time to ~2008, and offered me a button to press to make Google one or two standard deviations more "dogmatic", eg. give Richard Stallman permanent veto power over some key policies, I would immediately press it. Why? Because a choice for one company is not a choice for the world, or even one country. Google existed and exists in the context of a technology industry generally drifting away from early idealistic don't-be-evil roots and toward greed for financial gain, totalizing visions of accelerated superintelligence, infiltration by sociopaths, and craven capitulation to (or worse, active participation in) government pressure for ideological control, surveillance and war. And so *one company* doing something different, positioning itself to be what George Bernard Shaw calls the Unreasonable Man, resisting the trend of the times, would have been better for freedom, balance of power and stability of society as a whole, than *all* large companies bending to dominant trends. This is a part of my version of pluralism. This line of thinking is not just mine, but I also is not too far off from what Aya and others had in mind with the Mandate. Now how does this all get to the role of the EF? EF is not a "center of Ethereum", rather EF is "one node, with a defined purpose, alongside other nodes". We've always said that the EF should be the latter, but many in the Ethereum ecosystem (and even within the EF) wanted us to be the former. Now, we are taking action to ensure that we will be the latter. This is particularly important because EF is a limited organization, with limited resources and limited organizational capacity. The EF has only ~0.16% of all ETH (less than many other individual ETH holders), whereas among other blockchains it's common for "the central foundation" to have 10-50%. Fiscally, the EF was originally designed to fulfill a limited work scope defined in the token sale docs and other pre-launch materials (building the chain software; getting through Frontier, Homestead, Metropolis, Serenity), which was fully completed in 2022; it was not designed to be an eternal steward. And so today, the EF is choosing to use its remaining resources to pursue longevity over breadth (yes, this means we sell less ETH). The EF focuses *specifically* on those activities critical to the success of ethereum as a censorship/capture-resistant, open, private and secure system, that would not happen otherwise. This means making hard choices, and in some cases even activities that we highly approve of and people that we highly respect becoming outside of the EF. People of great technical talent, public respect and even alignment with the mission and CROPS being outside of the EF is in fact necessary if we want important tasks to be able to attract outside capital. This also means the EF taking opinionated stands culturally. This is all intended in cooperation with all other parts of ethereum. We recognize that many other parts of the ethereum world highly respect CROPS and related values. But highly respecting is not the same as choosing to specialize and totally dedicate to a domain (Compare in a different domain: I think reducing animal cruelty is important, and I like vegan food, but am not full unconditional vegan myself) EF is still in a transition period, and we expect its new long-term form to stabilize over the next few months. What are the guiding principles of this new form? Again, I am only one person, but I can give my answer from a technical perspective (there are also critical non-technical aspects). At the core, *Ethereum must be impressive*. We are living in an age of highly intelligent AI and all kinds of other technological acceleration. "Status quo EVM, with a hard fork or two a year to optimize for short-term needs of users" is not interesting. To some, "impressive" means: 250ms latency and 1M TPS. I think Ethereum trying to go that route is a mistake. Being as fast and as scalable as possible, and only a small epsilon more decentralized than the others, is a route to mediocrity, and if we try it we will lose. I think Ethereum should scale. But I think Ethereum should strive the hardest to be deeply impressive in a different dimension: the CROPS dimension. This means things like: * Provably bug-free Ethereum. This is a goal that all cybersecurity researchers would have thought is absurd and impossible, up until roughly 6 months ago. Now, it's on the cusp of being possible, thanks to AI-assisted formal verification. So we should be frontrunners in doing this. * Available chain consensus. Ethereum is, and with lean consensus will cotninue to be, the ONLY chain that has both (i) traditional-BFT style properties that it's safe under asynchrony up to a high level of fault tolerance, and (ii) the bitcoin PoW-style property that under synchrony it's safe up to 49% attackers. As far as I can tell, literally no other chain has this or is planning for it; bitcoin goes for (ii) only and most other chains go for (i) only. Some will remember I fought hard for this, Unreasonably insisting that it is not OK for ethereum to rely on social consensus and hard forks to rescue ethereum from 34% of nodes going offline. It's OK for chains like hyperledger, bnb, solana, tempo, etc. It's not OK for bitcoin or ethereum or eg. zcash. * Intermediary minimization. The fact that smart contract wallets, protocols like railgun, etc have to send transactions through intermediaries to get included onchain is honestly embarrassing, and it's a constant point of fragility. Hence the work on FOCIL and EIP-8141 (and 7701 and years of work before) to make transaction sending intermediary-minimized with public mempool and strong inclusion properties, in a truly general-purpose way, that covers not just eg. secp256r1, but also privacy protocols and much more. Kohaku is pushing intermediary minimization at the user layer, pulling Ethereum away from the dystopian status quo world where our wallets don't even verify the chain, send our private data out to a dozen third-party servers, and toward a brighter CROPS future. Some of these goals are Unreasonable - maybe Ethereum would be "fine" getting only 50% of the way - what if we depend on intermediaries, but make it easy to switch? But going 50% of the way would not make Ethereum Deeply Impressive in the CROPS way. So we push for 100%. Fortunately all these goals are compatible with high TPS, this is a major focus of research (esp. on scaling the state). Well-designed L2s can also help, especially L2s optimized for specific applications (eg. high-volume trading, privacy...). These goals are even compatible with significantly lower slot times, thanks to Raul's work on erasure-coded P2P, and many other optimizations. The most high-value "product" of the ethereum blockchain, financially speaking, is ETH the asset. Ethereum secures $250 billion of ETH. The types of properties of Ethereum that I mentioned above are very good for ETH the asset. Nearly 90% of my net worth is in ETH, and most of the remainder is ~$40m of onchain fiat of which every dollar has already been allocated for some open-source biotech or software or hardware initiative. That said, there are aspects of supporting ETH the asset - *necessary* aspects even - that are outside the scope of the EF. This is where we need other heroes (some of whom hold more ETH than the EF does) to step in and help. EF has been recently thinking more about how it will relate to other such organizations, and give them needed initial support. EF will be a smaller ship than in previous years, a more opinionated one - in some cases more opinionated in ways that might be difficult to comprehend - but a longer-lasting one, and one suited to making sure that ethereum brings something meaningful to the world. We are grateful to all those inside and outside the EF who are helping to make this happen.

I do not see the problem. 87k is next. Then 144k. The bottom already happened. It’s time. PIGEON

As we scale L1 after Glamsterdam to a 600M gas limit, there's a couple things to keep in mind about how it affects ETH, tokenomics, and how it's viewed by the world: 1. As L1 gas limits increase, the deflationary threshold decreases proportionally. For example, right now the L1 gas limit is at 60M and the deflationary threshold it 12.9 gwei. At a 300M gas limit the deflationary threshold becomes 2.58 gwei (12.9gwei*60M/300M). 2. As it becomes cheaper to use L1, that scaling creates potential/opportunity for new/different usecases which increases demand. For example, recent games where every action is onchain is a new possibility that will fill in 𝗹𝗼𝘄 cost blockspace. Unbanked usecases like subscriptions and payment streams such as access to games, blogs, licensing (music, shows, patents, trademarks), services (food delivery, hosting), rentals (physical goods), etc will consume 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘂𝗺 cost blockspace. Complex compounded defi strategies and arbitrage will consume 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵 cost blockspace. All under one composable chain with no need for bridging. 3. As Ethereum scales and gas prices become lower, the willingness to pay a demand premium increases. For example, if normal gas prices are $0.01 a user will be much more willing to pay a 100% demand premium ($0.02) at times of higher congestion than they would pre-Glamsterdam ($1 -> $2). The lower prices get, the more price insensitive people become to congestion pricing. 4. These previous 3 points will lead to a substantial increase in burn rate, increasing scarcity and demand of ETH. Increased acceptance and usage of defi will further increase demand for ETH as a credibly neutral and permissionless collateral. 5. 30% of ETH supply is locked in staking to secure the network and the activity on top of it, further increasing scarcity and demand for ETH. 6. As Ethereum scales and the world comes onchain, this increased demand for ETH will secure it's place as a store of value and carry immense monetary premium, especially as it becomes the only quantum-proof chain and home for AI. See you at 6-digit ETH.

CRAZY: 🇺🇸Over 120 crypto organizations are now pressuring the Senate Banking Committee to move the CLARITY Act NOW.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

We have bipartisan support. We have the president’s support. This is our moment. Let’s get this done.

Club for Growth @club4growth

2 months ago

Momentum is building for CLARITY. Club for Growth sent letters to Senate Banking members urging immediate markup of the CLARITY Act. Over 100 crypto firms also urged the Senate to move forward on market structure legislation. It’s time to move from uncertainty to clarity. The

33 156 955 281K 35

CLARITY Act passing unlocks a supercycle bull run. Bankers are trying to stop it! Get LOUD! We demand CLARITY NOW!

Aave is my life's work and we're working nonstop to find the best possible outcome for users. I’m personally contributing 5000 ETH to DeFi United as we continue working together with partners on formalizing more commitments. I’m working to see this resolved and market conditions normalized as soon as possible. DeFi United.

This Productive Money thesis by @mikemcg0 and @Etherealize_io is the best thing on ETH in years. A synthesis of Menger and Buffet. A cousin to the triple point asset thesis. ETH is productive money. The most bullish thing for ETH is to be understood. Share it widely.

Bankless @Bankless

3 months ago

LIVE NOW - Productive Money: The Most Bullish Case for Ethereum ($250K) @ethereum may be one of the most underappreciated assets. @mikemcg0 and @VivekVentures of @Etherealize_io lay out the case for ETH as “productive money”: A monetary asset with the store-of-value

25 47 263 257K 122

Almost 5 years of a consolidatory prison. The future rails of modern finance. $ETH's asymmetric upside is unfathomable for most. Believers will win.

It’s hard to get over how much solano bros hated on ETH when it under performed in 2024 Now they’re quietly exiting stage left as if they never said anything in the first place. CT might have goldfish memory but I don’t. Look at guys like Santi. He doesn’t even mention Solano anymore. Too busy writing essays on why tokens were a mistake. Many such cases actually. All of them either pivoted to HL shills or pure crypto cynics in general. Just a bunch of tourists with work visas.

Every major BTC volatility compression since 2020 has resolved with a minimum 40% move. Four instances. Three resolved to the upside. Current bandwidth is now tighter than all of them. The spring is fully loaded.

Today is Good Friday Today is the day Jesus died for our sins, to save us Matthew 27:45-46 “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

🚨 AAVE DOUBLES DOWN ON ETHEREUM Aave DAO just voted near unanimously to move V4 to Ethereum mainnet. Over 645,000 votes in favor. The biggest DeFi protocols aren’t leaving Ethereum. They’re building deeper into it. $ETH

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Yesterday we hosted the Institutional Ethereum Forum in NYC. A private, closed-door, invite-only for institutional execs. $250T+ in combined assets represented. Attended by leaders at: → DTCC → Swift → Euroclear → BlackRock → Morgan Stanley → Fidelity → JPMorgan → State Street → Mastercard → Visa → Stripe → PayPal → Nasdaq → LSEG → Broadridge → S&P Global → Moody's → Microsoft → EY → Invesco → Franklin Templeton → T. Rowe Price → Baillie Gifford → CoinFund → WisdomTree → VanEck → U.S. Bank → Western Union → Paxos → Consensys → Aave → Uniswap → Chainlink → Securitize → Ondo Finance → Paradigm → a16z → Dragonfly → Anchorage Digital And many more. Co-hosted by our friends at → @aave → @zksync → @arbitrum → @Optimism → @chainlink The institutions aren't coming. They're here. Ethereum.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Ethereum will be the world’s neutral global settlement layer the need for which has never been more clear in modern history and ETH will be the most important censorship-resistant programmable collateral and store of value asset on that network book it

BlackRock Head of Digital Assets says the new ETH staking ETF is the silver bullet for institutional investors The initial launch of their Ethereum ETF was already the 3rd fastest ETF in history to reach $10B in aum $ETH up 17% in the past week outpacing BTC

This is MASSIVE for ETH. $14 trillion BlackRock just launched the first Ethereum Staking ETF with ticker $ETHB. This is bigger than most people realize. $IBIT: Bitcoin spot ETF. Zero yield. Just price exposure. $ETHA: Ethereum spot ETF. Zero yield. Just price exposure. $ETHB: Ethereum staking ETF. 3% annual yield. Institutional money now earns directly from the blockchain. This is the first time in history a $10 trillion asset manager is plugging institutional capital directly into a proof-of-stake network and earning rewards from it. Why this is bullish for Ethereum: Every dollar flowing into $ETHB removes ETH from circulation and locks it into staking. Less supply. Same or growing demand. Price goes up by basic math. A 3% annual yield makes ETH compete directly with treasury bonds for institutional allocation. Pension funds and endowments that could never justify holding a zero-yield asset can now justify $ETHB. BlackRock priced the fee at 0.12% for the first year to capture market share before anyone else launches a rival product. They are building a moat while competitors are still filing paperwork. Fidelity and Invesco will follow. That is guaranteed. But BlackRock moved first. Again.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

🇺🇸 JAMIE DIMON, CEO OF CHASE, GOES ON NATIONAL TV AND SAYS: "CRYPTO IS BETTER THAN THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SYSTEM!" THE "EXPERIMENT" PHASE IS OVER. THIS IS THE PIVOT OF THE CENTURY 🔥

Here is your daily reminder of what I still believe will happen...Gooooo ETH gooooooooo boyyy

RickUntZ @chrono_chartist

4 months ago

I am personally very excited here. These levels are high level of demand imo, I do not think $ETH will be at these levels again in a very long time- if ever, I also believe this V shape will be faster than the one before and 2026 will be the year that resets Crypto X

63 42 635 78K 76