Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

I made a visualization of EIP-8288 aka "recursive mempool aggregation," my new favorite EIP of all time because it perfectly encapsulates the thesis of the "cryptographic world computer" -- a system whose scalability *increases*, not decreases, with the level of decentralization. In a previous tweet I explained how EIP-8288...

18,181 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Say hello to Boojum 👋: zkSync Era’s new high-performance proof system for radical decentralization. Boojum is an upgrade that will transition zkSync Era to a STARK-powered proof system, providing world-class performance on consumer-grade hardware. 💡 Learn more: TL;DR 👇 Boojum is the name of our Rust-based cryptographic library, which we use to implement the upgraded version of the ZK circuits for zkSync Era and the ZK Stack. The name Boojum was inspired by Lewis Carroll's poem "The Hunting of the Snark," where the Boojum represents the most fearsome kind of Snark. We intentionally designed zkSync Era in a way that cryptographic upgrades can be made without a regenesis, meaning that the Boojum upgrade won’t cause any user disruptions. Why Boojum❓ From day one, zkSync’s mission is to advance personal freedom for all — making digital self-ownership universally accessible by building a blockchain network that is trustless, secure, permissionless, affordable, easy to use, resilient and limitlessly scalable. Boojum plays an important role in advancing this mission by delivering: 1. World-class performance zkSync Era’s current SNARK-based proof system is effective today, but it won’t scale to the volume that we envision for hyperchains. zkSync Era’s sequencer can already process over 100 TPS; Boojum orders of magnitude improvements to performance complements this well. 2. Reduced hardware requirements for decentralization Our long-term goal is to enable user-powered, decentralized proof generation. Boojum represents a breakthrough in this direction — with the prover running on consumer-grade GPUs requiring only 16 GB GPU RAM. Boojum’s Journey to Mainnet 🚴🏽‍♀️ Boojum is now live on Mainnet, generating and verifying ‘shadow proofs’ today with real production data so that we can carefully test the system ahead of fully migrating. Today, we’re also open-sourcing the repo; if you’d like to take a look, you can find it here 👇 This is the first of a series of posts on Boojum. We will provide updates on our progress, including more details on implementation, security, and performance. Watch here for more, anon ∎

ZKsync

828,340 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

Canton Network vs. Ethereum: What's the Difference? Ethereum (Ethereum) is a general-purpose public blockchain where transactions and smart contract activity are broadly visible across the network. Validators use proof-of-stake to agree on the chain’s state. Canton Network (Canton Network) takes a different approach, focusing on privacy, interoperability, and institutional financial workflows. Here are the key differences: (1) Privacy Ethereum is transparent by design. Addresses, balances, transactions, contract calls, and events can generally be inspected publicly. Ethereum is now researching additional privacy technologies, including private reads, private transactions, and zero-knowledge proofs. Canton uses sub-transaction-level privacy. Participants only receive the transaction data relevant to them, while sensitive information is shared on a need-to-know basis. (2) Network Structure Ethereum operates as a public blockchain with a shared global state maintained by its network of nodes and validators, plus layer 2 networks that settle back to it. Canton is designed as a network of networks. Applications can operate across different participant nodes and synchronizers while remaining interoperable, connected through the public Global Synchronizer run by super validators. (3) Consensus Ethereum’s proof-of-stake system uses validators to propose and attest to blocks, with validators staking ETH to participate in network security. Canton separates transaction validation from transaction ordering and confirmation. The participants involved in a transaction validate the relevant smart contract state, while synchronizers coordinate ordering and commits. (4) Smart Contracts Ethereum uses the Ethereum Virtual Machine, allowing developers to deploy programmable smart contracts across a broad public ecosystem. Canton uses Daml-based smart contracts and gives applications control over privacy, governance, permissions, and operating policies. This makes Canton particularly suited to workflows where different institutions need to interact without exposing every transaction to the entire network. (5) Main Use Cases Ethereum has developed into a broad platform for DeFi, NFTs, stablecoins, decentralized applications, and other permissionless applications. Canton is focused heavily on financial infrastructure, including tokenized assets, payments, institutional markets, and workflows requiring confidentiality. So, Ethereum emphasizes public verification and permissionless composability, while Canton emphasizes privacy-preserving interoperability between institutions on a public network.

BSCN

27,469 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce

Destra Network| True decentralized Storage solution How Destra Decentralized File Storage solves the centralization issues in Filecoin & IPFS Filecoin and IPFS have become synonymous with decentralized file storage, highly hyped alternatives to traditional centralized data storage systems. However, a deep dive into their architecture reveals a crucially centralized component: both networks rely on a set of centralized bootstrap nodes. Whenever a new node wants to join the Filecoin or IPFS network, it must first communicate with these bootstrap nodes to obtain information about other peers, placing complete trust in the provided information. The Filecoin team operates these bootstrap nodes on centralized cloud servers. These nodes serve as the initial points of contact for new nodes entering the network, acting as directories to facilitate the network's mesh topology, and thus are critical components of the architecture. Major Centralization Concerns: 1. Surveillance: Centralized nodes offer a concentrated point for surveillance. Authorities or malicious actors could target these nodes to gather data on user activities, node interactions, and network dynamics, posing significant privacy risks. 2. Central Control and Censorship: The operators of bootstrap nodes potentially wield significant control over the network. They can influence which parts of the network are more discoverable or enforce certain network rules, leading to a form of gatekeeping. This centralized control contrasts with the decentralization ethos of blockchain and peer-to-peer technologies. 3. Single Points of Failure: Bootstrap nodes act as central hubs through which traffic and connections are often routed, especially during the initial connection phase. This setup can create single points of failure. If these nodes are compromised, go offline, or experience technical issues, new nodes may struggle to integrate into the network, potentially taking down the whole network. At Destra, we are building the Destra Decentralized File Storage to ensure that such centralization or pseudo-decentralization has no place in our architecture. As always, we are committed to our vision of 100% decentralization, delivering an unprecedented level of decentralization to our users and the broader ecosystem. As we continue developing the Destra Decentralized File Storage, we will keep on publishing regular updates to our community.

Destra Network

10,985 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

To finish the series: - Deterministic chain-seeded genetic computation. We ran a chain-seeded genetic optimiser for 32 generations and proved every single step in zero-knowledge, then folded all 32 proofs into one. The whole lineage verifies on Kaspa in a single transaction, post-quantum. You can open the tx and check it yourself. What it is: a tiny program, an evolutionary search over a 16-value genome , that mutates and selects for a lower-cost circuit design, seeded by the Kaspa chain. Over 32 generations it drove its target circuit's scored constraint count down (best target ~72 → ~50; trending down, though it's a sawtooth it rotates through three circuit types). The part that matters: every one of those 32 steps ran inside a zero-knowledge VM and was proven correct a step that didn't compute correctly simply won't verify. Then all 32 step-proofs were folded into ONE. That proof is 222 KB exactly the size of a single step, and it stays that size no matter how many generations you add. (The catch, stated plainly: folding more generations costs the prover more time; only the final proof size is constant.) Kaspa verified the entire 32-generation lineage in one transaction: 7504fa32f74aa028301290299276a707cf98ffc2766b1be0daed4c5c41883f15. Flip a single byte of the proof and the network rejects it, we tried; it's rejected. And the verification path is post-quantum: hash-based the whole way (FRI/Poseidon2 + SHA-256), no elliptic curves or pairings anywhere nothing Shor's algorithm targets.* What this is and isn't: It's a feasibility experiment on testnet. It's deterministic, chain-seeded genetic computation not AI, not intelligence. We drive each step and proved a fixed lineage we chose; it does not yet run itself on-chain (that's the next build). The core, though, is real and checkable: a program's entire computational lineage 32 generations proven correct, post-quantum, verified by Kaspa in a single shot. *STARK security rests on hash assumptions plus the Fiat-Shamir heuristic, not on any pre-quantum hardness.

Kaspa Kii

22,185 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce