If everyone agrees, why does nothing get done?Learn why leaders mistake consensus for alignment and how this quietly undermines strategy and results. https://t.co/HZXDmOemfu https://t.co/7fauTFjCf9 ...

⚡️ LATEST: Vitalik Buterin calls PeerDAS in Fusaka upgrade "literally sharding," allowing consensus without any single node needing to see more than a tiny fraction of the data. https://t.co/zGHYMRR6Td ...

Oh my fucking god.The consensus might have been wrong!!WeAreSoBack https://t.co/XDxszeGRWyEasy (@EasyEatsBodega):Oh my fucking god.The consensus was right.I’mSoFucked https://t.co/7bZyyVR8R6 ...

Protocol Violation - Version 30 (v30) was implemented despite failing to achieve consensus, violating the Bitcoin protocol [1] - Supporters of v30 cannot criticize other consensus violations [1] - Core no longer has a vote on consensus due to prior contract violation [1]

RT Totally Depraved Boomer (@UglyOldGoat1)The Core/Knots debate is only the opening act. It’s not about code — it’s about control of settlement. If custodians freeze, miners hesitate, and users can’t redeem, consensus doesn’t matter. A fork where half the supply can’t move is not a fork. It’s a rerun on rails.@NickSzabo4 @GrassFedBitcoin @Excellion @LukeDashjr @Rob1Ham @giacomozucco @ToneVays @jimmysong ...

Watch the pod.It covers our tech and ecosystem philosophies.Also, because it's Solana-centric, it's a good time for me to pull this visual back out.The constructions are really (really) similar. We just outsource consensus to Ethereum and will use (much) bigger leaders. https://t.co/6vV9wsa2zdLightspeed (@Lightspeedpodhq):New episode with @yangl1996 @NamikMuduroglu out now!We discuss:- L2 performance- @megaeth_labs ICO- Ethereum's advantage- Not launching as an L1- Are L2s parasitic & more!Timestamps:00:00 ...

RT mert | helius.dev (@0xMert_)dear noobsthe point of blockchains is not transparency, and it never has beenthis is a psyop that early crypto people told the feds when they kept being accused of doing crimethe point is quite literally consensus without central truste.g., a bunch of computers agreeing with each other on balances without needing someone in the middle like a bankin other words, the point is public verifiabilityback in the day, the only way to achieve this was for everyone to see everythingsato ...

within 15 or so yearsmost blockchain ledgers will be encryptedwe will look back on the era of unencrypted, public blockchains as a bugassuming FHE and ZK make exponential increases in latency, I don't see how this doesn't happenonly exception is HFT-type chainsmert | helius.dev (@0xMert_):dear noobsthe point of blockchains is not transparency, and it never has beenthis is a psyop that early crypto people told the feds when they kept being accused of doing crimethe point is quite literally consensus without ...

Core Argument - The primary purpose of blockchains is consensus without central trust, not transparency, which was initially a defense against accusations of criminal activity [1] - Public verifiability, achieved through consensus, is the key aspect of blockchains, eliminating the need for intermediaries like banks [1] - Transparency should not be considered a core feature of blockchains except in specific performance-oriented cases [1] Technological Evolution - Early blockchain technology required full transparency to achieve public verifiability [1] - Zero-Knowledge (ZK) technology now enables verification without exposing all data, evolving beyond the need for complete transparency [1] Future Perspective - The focus of crypto and blockchains should be on verifiability and distributed trust, which no longer necessitates transparency in 2025 [1]

RT Camina Drummer (@CaminaDrummer4)It seems like Nick is proposing what I have been thinking lately, so let me write it up as a thread to see if he and others agree. Not worried about method here, just want to have a goal we can agree on.1. 80 or some reasonable OPRETURN enforced by consensus. ...