Mercek
@WorldOfMercek • 119,063 subscribers
Alpha Content & Threads 🧵 Let's get lost together in this big Web3 space... 🦅
Videos
L2s inherited Ethereum's speed. The sequencer never made the trip. Arbitrum, Base & Optimism each run on ONE sequencer: a single node orders every transaction. That node can censor a wallet, reorder any trades, or halt the chain. Which L2 decentralises its sequencer first?
Mercek17,997 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
Glamsterdam is the performance upgrade, I've already talked about it. But Hegotá is something different: scheduled for H2 2026, it's Ethereum's "cleanup and hardening" fork. 3 problems. 3 technical solutions. All shipping in one fork 👇 1️⃣ The problem Hegotá is actually solving Glamsterdam targets throughput: 10,000 TPS, 200M gas limit, parallel execution. The performance gap with Solana narrows materially. Hegotá targets something harder to quantify but more fundamental. After Glamsterdam, Ethereum will be fast. The question Hegotá answers is: fast and controlled by whom? The Tornado Cash sanctions in 2022 exposed the vulnerability. OFAC-compliant block builders (the entities that construct Ethereum blocks under MEV-Boost) began filtering Tornado Cash transactions entirely. Legitimate users with sanctioned addresses couldn't get transactions included. The block builders, sitting between validators and the mempool, had the practical ability to censor at will. ePBS (shipping in Glamsterdam) brings block building onchain and removes the external relay dependency. But it doesn't solve the censorship problem at the transaction inclusion level. A block builder onchain can still refuse to include specific transactions. FOCIL solves that. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2️⃣ FOCIL: anti-censorship mechanism EIP-7805. Fork-Choice Enforced Inclusion Lists. The mechanism: every block slot, 17 participants are randomly selected from the validator set. Each one can submit a short list of transactions they want included in the next block. The block builder, even the onchain builder introduced by ePBS, must include those transactions or the block is invalid. 17 random validators per slot. Statistically, any attempt to censor a transaction requires controlling enough of the validator set to dominate every random selection simultaneously. At Ethereum's current validator count accounting for over 1 million, that requires controlling a supermajority of stake. In practice, FOCIL makes censorship at the block production level computationally and economically prohibitive for any entity that doesn't control an implausible share of staked ETH. → Block builders can no longer selectively exclude transactions → OFAC-compliant relays lose their censorship leverage at the inclusion layer → The Tornado Cash scenario becomes structurally impossible at protocol level → FOCIL prototype has a runnable implementation, entering multi-client devnet validation now This is the most significant censorship-resistance improvement in Ethereum's history. It's also the least discussed upgrade in CT because censorship resistance doesn't generate price speculation the way throughput numbers do. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3️⃣ Verkle Trees: the node operator revolution Currently, Ethereum nodes use Merkle Patricia Trees to store and verify state. To verify any piece of state, a node needs a "witness": a proof that includes all the intermediate hashes along the path from the root to the target data. For Ethereum's current state size, witnesses are large, bandwidth-heavy, and require the node to store significant local data. Verkle Trees replace this with a cryptographic structure that produces dramatically smaller witnesses. The same proof that requires kilobytes under the Merkle Patricia Tree model requires only hundreds of bytes under Verkle Trees. The consequence: → Node storage requirements drop by approximately 90% → Witnesses become small enough to transmit in real time during block propagation → "Stateless clients" become possible thanks to nodes that can verify the chain without storing full state locally → The hardware and bandwidth requirements to run a full Ethereum node drop to consumer levels permanently The long-term threat to Ethereum's decentralisation is not a 51% attack but the quiet centralization of the validator set as node hardware requirements creep upward with state growth. Verkle Trees break that trend structurally: → Anyone with a laptop and residential internet can run a full node post-Hegotá → The validator set becomes more accessible, not less, as Ethereum scales → Home stakers that represents the most decentralisation-aligned validator category stop being priced out by state growth The transition requires migrating every account and contract on the network from the Merkle Patricia Tree structure to Verkle Trees. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4️⃣ Account Abstraction ERC-4337 account abstraction has existed as an application-layer standard since 2023. Hegotá brings native protocol-level account abstraction: the scope has been defined and the multi-client devnet validation phase is beginning now. What protocol-level AA enables that ERC-4337 doesn't: → Any Ethereum account can have programmable spending rules without deploying a separate smart contract → Social recovery becomes a native feature → Gasless transactions, batched operations, and custom signature schemes work at the protocol level rather than requiring wrapper contracts → The UX gap between crypto wallets and traditional financial apps narrows at the infrastructure level For DeFi specifically, account abstraction at the protocol level means liquidation bots, yield automation, and portfolio management strategies can be encoded directly into wallet logic. The current pattern of deploying separate smart contract accounts for every user who wants programmable behaviour disappears. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5️⃣ The thesis The Glamsterdam piece ended with a thesis about performance re-rating and monetary premium recovery. Hegotá's thesis is different and in some ways more durable. Ethereum in early 2027 (post both upgrades) will be a structurally different network from the one that exists today. Not only faster. Harder to censor. Cheaper to secure. More accessible to home validators. Native smart account functionality for every user. The market prices upgrades for what they do to throughput and fees because those metrics are immediately visible. Censorship resistance, node decentralisation, and wallet programmability compound over years rather than showing up in 30-day fee data. Hegotá is the upgrade that determines whether Ethereum is still genuinely decentralised and censorship-resistant five years from now... ...or whether it quietly became something controlled by a small set of sophisticated block builders and large node operators. That question doesn't generate CT threads. But if think about it is the one that actually matters!
Mercek18,052 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
This scene always makes me think about what markets do once a simple asset story is no longer enough. At first people buy the thing itself. Then, at some point, that stops being exciting enough. So the market starts building layers around it. A structure. A wrapper. A more financial version of the same idea. That is why MSTR comes to mind for me here. Not because it is the same as a synthetic CDO. It obviously is not. But because the instinct feels familiar. If you believe in Bitcoin, the clean path is simple. You buy Bitcoin. If you want a more traditional route, you buy the ETF. That should be enough. But MSTR is something else entirely. It is Bitcoin, turned into a corporate vehicle, then turned into a capital markets machine, then turned into a narrative people are willing to value differently from the asset underneath it. And that is where it starts feeling less like pure exposure and more like financial engineering built around exposure. We have seen this movie before in different forms. Markets love taking a real asset, wrapping it in a new story, and then assigning the wrapper a value that starts drifting away from the thing it actually holds. As long as that premium stays alive, the machine keeps working. More demand for the structure. More capital raised. More accumulation. Bigger story. More believers. On the way up, it all looks brilliant. That is always the seductive part. In strong markets, even very simple reflexive loops can look like genius. The real question only shows up later, when the mood changes and people start asking whether the value was in the underlying asset all along, or in the extra meaning the market temporarily assigned to the structure built around it. That is why I find this clip so relevant. It is not just a reminder of 2008. It is a reminder of a deeper market habit. People rarely stop at owning the thing. They almost always find a way to build another layer on top of it. And to me, that is the more interesting question around MSTR. Not how much more Bitcoin it can buy. But how long the market will keep rewarding the wrapper more than the thing inside it.
Mercek14,644 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад
Больше нет контента для загрузки